Canada's CC-150 Polaris Replacement Problem
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 09. 2024
- The CC-150 Polaris - essentially a militarized version of the Airbus A310 - is Canada's strategic long-range airlifter, transporter, and air-to-air refueling tanker.
The 5 aircraft flown by the RCAF were built in the 80s for Wardair, and are now over 30 years old. In mid-December, the federal government put out an Invitation to Qualify (ITQ) for suppliers to offer a replacement.
In this video, I talk about the potential replacements for the Polaris, and some options on the second-hand market!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Become a Channel Member:
/ @alexpraglowskiaviation
Website: www.alexpraglo...
Instagram: / alexpraglowskiaviation
Twitter: / alexpraglowski
Facebook: / alexpaviation
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
SOURCES:
The CC-150 Fleet: www.planespott...
CC-150 background information: ottawacitizen....
CC-150 Replacement Invitation to Qualify: buyandsell.gc....
About the A330 MRTT: www.airbus.com...
About the KC-46: www.boeing.com...
Boeing's KC-46 bid to Canada: skiesmag.com/n...
Qantas A330s converted to MRTT: www.flightglob...
The second-hand market: ca.news.yahoo....
Air Transat's fleet information: www.planespott...
Cargojet's fleet information: www.planespott...
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Outro song - "Take Flight" by Nyhtian: • Nyhtian - Take Flight ...
© Alex Praglowski Aviation 2021
This video is the property of Alex Praglowski Aviation and may not be used for any purpose without prior permission. Contact me at the email in the "About" section of my channel for usage.
As a Canadian I think we will go for the A332 as Boeing tried to bury our Bombardier C-Series
@sebastianfloyd9705 I don't know what an "A322" would be. The "A332" was a proposed model which was not built; the "A322" above is presumably intended to mean the Airbus A330-200, which is the aircraft which was chosen.
@sebastianfloyd9705 what do you think an "A322" is? There is no such aircraft.
@@brianb-p6586 i think they mean a330-200. Just an abv
@@steve11263 Do you read the comments to which you are responding? 6 months ago I said _the "A322" above is presumably intended to mean the Airbus A330-200, which is the aircraft which was chosen_ . And the original comment said "A322", not "A332", which would not be an abbreviation for A330-200.
In any case, the Canadian political circus will screw it up.
Come 2044 the new replacement Piper Cubs will enter service at a cost, after other contract mess ups and cancellations, of a mere $261 Billion per unit.
As usual
@@jasonmcconnell9419 Come to Norway and you will see our states ministers release turds in the same loo from consultation fees.
They drink from the same succubus, heresy and dining table - partying all on tax payers bill.
I was going to make a similar comment... The government is dammed if they do and dammed if they don't due to the unpopularity of our current PM.
The A330 MRTT is the only one that fits all requirements as listed in the ITQ. The RAF currently uses it, designated as VOYAGER, and would work well. It can do both drouge or probe refueling, has global range (Brize Norton to Falkland Islands), and is currently in production. It would also be a painless conversion for current CC-150 pilots & crew. I'd propose 1 A330-300 NEO for VIP transport, and 4 of the A330 MRTT.
A330 neo is 800 and 900, 300 is ceo, btw all current MRTT are based on 200 as shorter plane with same engine thrust can go longer range and carry more cargo or fuel, the only reason go 300 is you want to carry more passenger which is not the case of VIP flight but regular airline
@rcl998 true, the actual purchases of used aircraft (in 2021) and orders (in 2023) for four new aircraft are all A330-200s.
how about a total of 9
Boeing really shot themselves in the foot with their response to the CS100/CS300.
How so?
yes, and now it's starting to hurt
The court with its ham sized penalty: But I thought I was helping you.
Was short sighted of them.
They felt extremely emboldened with daddy trump at the helm, but after-all they paid a good chunk of his campaign.
If the government takes as long as it did with the Sea King helicopters, who knows what will be available when they finally get around to replacing the CC-150’s!
Really disgusting isn't it one42chrisp. A friend of mine was in two Sea King "crashes". Politicians just want to cancel whatever the other guys did. And in the interim, our guys are flying 30 plus year old fighters and helicopters that needed 178 hours of maintenance for every hour in the air. Ship replacement programme seems lost in direction. Liberals will order JS39-E Gripens and Conservatives will cancel and try to get in line for the F-35's, or change the parameters for the quote for aircraft which will require rebids and more time. And so it goes on...
That was on account of them not wanting to embarass Prime Minister Cretain they bought the CH-148 Cyclone The RCAF wanted The EH-101 like before but he wasnt having it he had been embarassed as he had promised the RCAF he would purchase what they wanted for SAR so they bought the EH-101 check your history remember the original Canadian Helicopter Program for up to 50 Helicopters to replace the Sea King and The Sea Knight with a single type The EH-101 was selected Cretain said it was a waste of money so when he was elected he cancelled it they had to pay massive Penalties to Augusta Westland there was to be 15 EH-101 for SAR called The CH-146 Chimo and The ASW CH-147 Petrel 35 Helicopters
I’m on the A330 MRTT. Also a very good chance I flew on one, if not many, of the current A310 (CC-150). Was on a lot of Wardair A310 back in the day!
I'd be very disappointed to see Canada select the KC46. With the treatment Bombardier received from Boeing it'd be flat out stupid to reward them with 1.5 Billion additional dollars. I sure hope Canada selects the MRTT, it has so much commonality across the globe, and is a tried and tested aircraft.
Boeing had ligitiment concerns with dumping.
But of course in true Canadian fashion, we have to find a scapegoat to complain about.
The real issue there was an uncompetitive Bombardier that couldn't withstand a basic trade dispute with a single nation.
Bombardier is a dieing company, being kept alive far too long on Liberal/Quebec party life support.
@@TheOwenMajor I'd argue that Bombardier banked a lot on the CS series aircraft, which absorbed a lot of their finances. Bombardier was competitive and has been so for a good while, the Dash programme and CRJ's were good aircraft which brought the company profits for many years. That single nation is the US, which is exceptionally tough to operate in.
It'd be very naive to say Boeing hasn't spent much of its existance being kept alive by US Gov funding. Both Airbus and Boeing have benefitted many times over the years from Government support. So it is very hypocritical of Boeing to accuse Bombardier of dumping, because I'm sure Boeing is currently doing the same with the Max, selling them at close to break even price, if not for loses.
@@TheOwenMajor No Boeing had marketing concerns and tried to use the Trump Administration to gain an advantage. Happily domestic sense prevailed. Boeing has also used the WTO to beef about Airbus marketing performance as it has beaten Boeing in 16 out of 20 years. It can't beat them fairly so it uses other means.
Of course the WTO found mostly against Boeing getting illegal State and Federal Aid (like free use of NASA) but also found fault with commercial loan interest rates at Airbus.
So as regards Boeing Canada has a very fair beef .
@@1chish Welcome to the big leagues, you want to play with the big boys one ought to be ready for big boy games.
Did Bombardier really not expect any regulatory push back(And they were dumping btw)?
@@TheOwenMajor I am British so no lectures on 'Big Boys Games'. Bombardier broke no laws or regulations and still made a huge sale. Boeing as usual ran to the US Government for action (as it always gets what it wants often illegally) and while at first Trump said yes the independent part of the US Government said no it was perfectly legal.
Boeing 'pushed back' because it was beaten fairly. And even the US regulators knew it was. So go suck that up.
And now those aircraft are made in Alabama along with A320 and A321s for the huge sales Airbus has made in the USA.
Boeing is f*cked by its own doing. Its lucky its directors aren't going to jail for murdering 346 people in that MAX boondoggle.
I suspect it will be the A330 MRTT.
Likely so until Brexit. Not sure now. Yes, the UK still influences these decisions, indirectly.
@@afcgeo882 What?
@@HMSDaring1 The UK was pressed by the EU on what should be purchased, and the one thing the UK still has some control over is the Canadian military. After Brexit, the UK has no interest in blind support of European manufacturers.
How many?
@@afcgeo882 Why do people throw 'Brexit' into everything? 😡
The UK does have considerable influence in many areas but has never had 'blind support' of European manufacturers even when in the EU. Ask Dassault. The UK will support whatever is in its own interests as it always has. As regards this choice of aircraft given the UK supplies all Airbus' wings and most of the undercarriage systems (amongst many systems) it would clearly offer support for the A330 MRTT especially as it is currently the largest operator of this aircraft.
A solution without a problem. Perhaps new fighters first so the tankers have jets to refuel?
I don't think the Canadian military is under any illusions that these will be used outside NATO commitments. If NATO was fine with Canada using old tankers to refill coalition aircraft then the Canadian government would keep using the Polaris for as long as possible.
No if you want to keep Fighters on station longer returning them to base to refuel is bad strategically having Tankers nearby makes sense Canada has two main Fighter Bases CFB Cold Lake in Alberta and CFB Bagotville in Quebec look at the distance between those Two Bases also Cold Lake has to cover the border area with Alaska hence why you have Tankers of your own so you don't have to ask The USAF too often
I'm pretty sided on the A330 MRTT, since training from an A310 to an A330-200 is not that hard.
From yoke to side stick......bit of a transition
MRTT. Canada does deserve a new build. I think Airbus would make a solid deal.
I don't think that Canada should buy anything from Boeing, ever, unless there's absolutely no other choice. That said, even if I didn't feel that way, I think the A330 MRTT would be the best choice for the RCAF. Given the Canadian government's usual procurement process, I look forward to seeing the replacement in service by 2050.
way behind the times huh! decision
made April 21,2021 before your post and the mrtt was chosen
@@alpearson9158 Nowhere in my post is there any reference to when or if the decision has been made. My remark about Boeing wasn't limited to tankers. My reference was to "procurement". That's the actual process whereby the "decision" is implemented. In Canada, that can take decades. The F-18, for example. The Sea King replacement, for example. The F-35, for example. Ships, for example. All these acquisitions were "decided on", then the acquisition bureaucracy took years and years in our fucked-up procurement process.
@@paddy1952 unfortunately as we have seen over the years the big difference between desire and acquisition is simply money; a perfect example was the neocon cancelling of the f-35 just before the election in 2010 as they couldn't be seen to spend the money in an election year. Not a big fan of the f-35 but at least the ones just purchased are a far far better a/c than the earlier model.
oops 2023 !
They should go with a fleet of three A330 MRTT tankers, 1 A330-200 VIP, and two A330-200F freighters with added wing mounted hose and drogue pods for a secondary tanker ability. This would add to the airlift capability of the wing at Trenton, allowing the C-177 and C-130 to carry vehicles while the freighters carried General cargo at much less cost per flight hour .
I think A321XLR might be better for VIP tasks for economics reasons🤔 And to keep a low profile too, we are not America.
Apparently "it must work" isn't on Canada's list of requirements. Cause that would eliminate the KC-46.
👍thank you for profiling the needs and opportunities for our RCAF. There is growing public support in providing our forces with modern, competitive kit.
The A330MRTT is the most obvious choice. The KC-46 is plagued with problems, and is based on an older airframe design. Furthermore, considering there are far more A330MRTT users than KC-46, it would play well with inter-operability capabilities.
The KC-46 isn't plagued with many problems. It'll be a great tanker for decades to come once they work the camera kinks out. Just like the C-17 had problems initially, and look at it now. USAF will be flying almost 200 KC-46's once they're all delivered. I believe there are only about 46 MRTT's delivered today. So the KC-46 will be more widely used. Plus the A330 is a 30 year old design.
@@Jack3md The 767 is a decade older than the A330... And read again what I said: "there are far more A330MRTT users than KC-46". I'm not talking about the individual number of planes; I'm talking about the number of operators. And yes, it has been plagued with problems, to the point that Boeing has lost over 5 billion dollars on the program.
Your content has come a long way. Excellent work!
I think the A330 would be a better option. We have a good relationship with airbus and converting an Air Transat one would be a good idea.
Lack of Government action is an understatement if ever there was one. I hear there’s still a couple DC-9’s kicking around. When other countries say it’ll cost more to fix than replace, we say “perfect”. We’ll take 30.
grow up little boy
ACJ Two Twenty is corporate jet version of A220-100. I suggest two because of so many govt flights to Europe lately. This aircraft is fine for VIP role. Or one standard A330-200 airliner.
4× A330 MRTT for the multifunction militarty transport tanker role.
I just thought of how cool an RCAF KC-10 would look, but of course that will never happen.
nope and we are not interested period
The RAAF MRTT A330 fleet is a mixture of predominantly new build frames and the former Qantas frames. One MRTT is configured for VIP use. The RCAF needs to seek advice from the RAAF as the MRTT is a mature platform but was not without the usual delays, cost overruns and technical issues. That has been sorted out by the RAAF and as Australia and Canada are moving towards procurement and operational cooperation and coordination with C17, FA18 and the Type 26 frigate, there is a wealth of information available to Canada from Australia’s deployment of MRTT into the Middle East theatre, and integration with US Forces and NATO.
The RCAF could do an AirTanker PFI agreement with a Canadian company to run a converted Combi-cargo fleet of 6 surge planes and have 4 new build AAR-MRTT's and 2 converted MRTT with VIP fit-out (in the name of economy!!) that can be re-tasked when required, otherwise have a mix of conversions and new build MRTT's.
As far as the PM's VIP transport and aerial tankers, the best option would be the purchase of the Airbus A330-800neo. It has the same length of the -200 but with increased capacity, so it would be a perfect replacement for the CC-150 Polaris
just not convertible to mrtt
Hopefully the government won't throw the RCAF under the bus and leave them lacking like they did with
1. The F18 replacement failure
2. The Sea King replacement debacle - 1983 to 2018
I hope the politicians won't mess this one up. Sigh. Not holding my breath
you mean like the neocons cancelling the first f-35 order by the way the US , Spain and the UK just to name a few still use Sea Kings; ours much like most of our airframes just get too much usage
I hope this isn't a priority over the replacing the Hornets? It just keeps dragging on behind the scenes. The US flies 50 year old aircraft refuelers. The KC10 & KC135 (707) is still in service. We replaced our 707's with the CC150 in 92. So an Airbus lifespan cant pass 30 years? Wow...... What good are new refuelers if we have barely have a 1/4 of our fighter aircraft available in service? Lets get the fighter replacement done first!
And if they need spare parts, Transat just finished retiring their fleet of A310s
hornet replacement is at the whim of Lockheed unfortunately
I spent many Years at CFB Trenton on the CC150 maintenance (L-3 MAS). I've been involved with these aircraft since the Wardair days. Great aircraft in great condition. They are special because they are multi roll, including cargo. It will be tough to replace. It sounds like the replacements will be strictly a mid air refusing roll. They will likely keep the VIP aircraft in service. I think the replacement will be Airbus but, it depends on who gives the best under the table rebates (wink). Blue sky to all.
The A330 MRTT that the French are buying has probe and drogue, boom and a cargo door with reconfigurable cargo floor inside.
well, I guess the A330-200 MRTT will be a better choice since KC46 still have issues unsolved such as software and sensor issues. and Airbus is testing its auto air-to-air refuel system, which will make A330 a strong competitor too.
MRTT is the logical choice. Especially since the new aircraft would have to fulfill dual roles of passenger/cargo and refueling.
I'm not the KC-767 is actually capable of doing the former
A330 MRTT seems like the best option, the KC46 has been plagued with technical and quality control problems from what I've read.
true but the performance aren't as good as the KC46. That plane has more range, capacity and without the problems a cheaper plane. Due the less transport capacity of the mrtt you need a C17 or something like that to transport big cargo like a engine.
@@jouniairplanevideos The A330 fuselage is LARGER than the 767s.
The MRTT isn’t without problems itself. By the time Canada can even take delivery, the KC-46 will be in full health, but it will be cheaper and parts availability, cross-training, costs and longevity are real concerns for the air force as well. The A310 is also not that similar in operation to the A330. An A320 is FAR more similar, actually. The 310 is from the older 300 family. No fly-by-wire.
Kc-46 is a bucket of bolts. I wouldn't trust it sitting on the ground
@@afcgeo882 A330 MRTT does pretty damn well what it was made to do. Customers nations do enjoy the full spectrum of its capabilities
We already know the Bombardier/Quebec will get the contract. Why even bother with "bids".
Amen.
A330 MRTT seeing as how boeing treated Bombardier, the KCs are having software problems, (cant trust after the max) and it matches the other “royal” fleets.
I think the MRTT would be the ideal solution here. Very good platform with many air forces using it and using it successfully.
The raaf could help train them as they use boom and drogue system.
Another great video Alex. The A330 MRTT would be the perfect option for the RCAF, but just how they go about acquiring them either new from Airbus or through a conversion programme could be up for debate.
They've definitely performed well in all roles since first arriving in service with the RAF, and proving to be a reliable platform that can quickly be put to use.
Let's see what happens. Either way, the Polaris will be missed when it does exit service.
Great video and thanks to Mark for the footage too. Liked 👍
They should do the Canadian thing when it comes to aircraft...
design and build a Canadian tanker/freighter at gigantic cost to Canuck taxpayers.
Build the planes in Quebec to bribe Francophones to not leave.
Then sell the whole thing at a massive loss to Boeing or Airbus.
better do a little investigation of where the A220's are actually built ; not where finished off before delivery
After what Boeing did to bombardier and our aviation industry, I don’t think Boeing should be allowed to sell anything in Canada to anyone. Government or airlines!
You got it all wrong. The government let Boeing screw Canada.
@@av8tor261 the US Government you mean? I would agree, Mr.Trumps buy American! The second time the US has done damage to our aviation industry, the first being the Arrow.
@@cherifbar u nailed it.
@@av8tor261The "Arrow" screwed itself. For that matter? The politics/optics of the mid/late 1950's have SFA to do with the current situation.
I am soooooo...tired of this goddamned pipe dream project insinuating itself into every discussion about our CURRENT military.
Avro Canada's project would have survived if we were not Canada. See the F-106A and how that all went for the USAF. Dumping hundreds of additional Millions into an asset to meet a speculative requirement?
At the same time (i.e. when we were looking for a replacement for the 9 Sqdn's of CF-100's) we were also looking at funding a new tactical transport (C-130) aircraft, replacing the machines (CL-13 "Sabres") in 9 squadrons of 1 Air Division meeting our NATO commitment, procuring a fleet of LRMPA (Argus'), a fleet of strategic transports (CC-106). Plus the Navy (RCN) had an ongoing production program concurrent. This saw 7 St. Laurent class DDE, 7 Restigouche class DDE, 4 MacKenzie class DDE and 2 Annapolis DDE. These Navy programs were all funded (by the St. Laurent Government) prior to the whole "Arrow" fiasco.
There wasn't any money to build our own "F-106".
If I have a regret about the money spent on the CF-105? It's all about the PS.13 powerplant.
In this regard?
We dropped the ball. We had performance numbers that beat the RR Avon and the Bristol "Olympus" and in light of the US industry's abysmal performance? We really shit the bed in this regard.
We had the best turbojet engine on the test stand at Orenda and we trashed all of this as a part of the CF-105 cancellation business.
The "business" with regards to the CS-100/300 and Boeing's bullshit is not indicative of an overt "plan" to throttle Canada's aviation industry.
They had some legitimate concerns in regards to the "knock-down" prices that Bombardier was offering to DAL for the 75 unit agreement.
In my opinion? Bombardier dug their own grave and willingly walked to the side of the pit, and waited for the bullet to the base of the skull...
@@ronschock6545
About BBD selling its CS too low to Delta?
You do realise that Boeing was undercutting Bombardier in every sale compaigns so to kill the program and bankrupt Bombardier, right?
Like a couple years before, Boeing pitched to United B737-700s at $23M each to ensure Bombardier did not set foot there.
Once the duopoly sees you as a threat, YOU ARE TOASTED.
BBD thought the CS300 was in a market that was vacated by both Airbus and Boeing. But those saw an eventual CS500 coming with unbeatable CASM (same wing, but trading range for more capacity) that would affect their A320 / B737 cash cows.
I predict replacement will happen in mid 2088!! Especially how our government has knack of bungling any purchase into a much higher price or waiting till something is obsolete then paying top dollar for it. You probably take it I am not overly optimistic that the government will ever get this figured out.
good thing you didn't make a bet
The fact these buckets of bolts are even flying is a tip of the hat to the ground team that keeps them functional year after year.
Why can't the RCAF just purchase new A330 MRTT like the UK did?
As much sense as this makes, and the end result is basically inevitable, the F-35 debacle establishes what happens when a government just "pulls the trigger" on a purchase like this, regardless of how good a fit the actual plane is.
@@gmitchellfamily what was the F-35 "debacle" ?
@@mikemill7115 Under the previous Conservative government, Canada was intending to replace their aging RCAF F/A-18s, which are decades old, with new F-35s. However, the project kept getting delayed and the costs ballooned out of control. The debacle here was twofold; firstly, the PM's cabinet repeatedly downplayed the exact costs and it took several investigations by officials like the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) to uncover the true bid and logistical costs, and secondly, the current Liberal government just pulled out of that deal entirely almost upon being sworn in, and opted to buy more F/A-18s (most of which were as old or older than the RCAF's current fleet).
@@Gameflyer001 The Conservatives also took a lot of flak for what was essentially a "no-bid" contract for the planes rather than going through our tortuously long bidding process like we are doing now, which will in all likelihood arrive at the same conclusion. I don't vote Conservative but feel like the F-35 is still the inevitable choice.
@@gmitchellfamily they ultimately need a larger fleet in general, as there's no way a small fleet of F/A-18s can patrol the second largest country on the planet. Now at least, F-35s are in use in other countries, so it's less of a pipedream and more of a cash-strapping issue.
I don't think one aircraft is suitable for all these roles. The A220-300 (or -500 if available) is the only choice for the VIP role. It makes a statement about Canadian aviation. Then Airbus can give us a deal on some lightly used A330's for cargo and tanker use.
Airbus wont let us make the -500 they will want us to just buy a318-19..NEO if ever, the whole reason why they took it was to prevent it from ever getting to the -500 variant. It fits prefectly and conveniently in their lineup and it was free!
They should ask the USAF how much they "LOVE" the KC46
they don't the A330 was the origonal wish but politics always gets in the way
Maybe a departure from the "one plattform" approach is an option. A dedicated head of state aircraft fleet, which could include the A220, for continental and even trans atlantic travel, and maybe a second hand, but state-of-the-art long-haul airliner. In that case the KC46 would probably be the better aircraft, given it's ability to load proper main-deck cargo pallets. Question remains how high of a priority Boeing would give them in terms of delivery times and modifications, compared to the gigantic USAF order backlog for the aircraft. Of course a multi type option comes with more maintenance training, more staff and a bigger parts logistics task. There is no easy solution to this problem.
i agreed with you. They need to choose the KC46 but Boeing need to fix there 767 problems first before Canada could buy some.
No, our A310s and before that our 707s were multi-purpose. They can be passenger aircraft one week and then converted to all-freighter for cargo, then to air to air refuellers and converted for VIP travel. Waste of money to have a large aircraft sitting around for VIP only. When I was posted to Trenton our 707s were busy all the time but seldom used for VIP, except for Royal visits.
The MRTT can load main deck pallets just fine, but I agree on most of what you say. I just don’t see the A220 here though. Too small for VIP needs, given the existing business jets in the fleet. Configurable aircraft are a good compromise. The real question is, does the RCAF need additional heavy lift capability?
@@afcgeo882 so were is the big cargo door for main deck freight? That door isn't on that plane so IT can't transport it. So I didn't get it, why you keep telling that.
@@jouniairplanevideos The MRTT CAN transport pallets, when it is equipped with a cargo door. If a country chooses not to buy that option, then it’s the country’s problem, not the MRTTs. How can that not make sense to you? You get what Brussels tells you to get. The MRTTs were purchased without cargo doors for one reason only: to protect A400 sales.
MRTT hands down. The KC 46 is plagued with QC issues
Since the video, the decision has been made. As described in Wikipedia:
"In April 2021, Airbus was declared the only qualified supplier to replace Canada's RCAF CC-150 Polaris refuelling and VIP transport aircraft, beating out Boeing's KC-46 Pegasus. In July 2022, a $102M deal was finalised to acquire two used A330-200s from the International Airfinance Corporation for passenger/cargo only use that is expected to be converted into MRTTs by Airbus in the future; it is anticipated that up to four more MRTTs will be acquired, for a total of six aircraft."
what I said in my comment up above as The A330 has beaten The KC46A apart from two Japan they have 4 KC767 so there would be some commonality and Israel up to Eight then again they only buy from America if possible
I absolutely love this type of content and right here in Canada, too!
I think that the RCAF should purchase the A330 MRTT. Because the RCAF already operates an Airbus plane that is somewhat similar to the A330.
From a layman’s perspective that makes sense, but a lot more is in play than that. Money and politics are complex.
@@afcgeo882 obviously. The Canadian Government doesnt have the best relationship with boeing (like what was said in the video). I still think that the RCAF should go with the A330 MRTT
@@ryandymond2195 Interesting. The Canadian government is very happy with the 787s and C-17s. They also got destroyed for the Bombardier fiasco. My guess is that the Canadian government is unhappy with Trump, not Boeing, but that’s changing in a few days. The discounts on MAXs, 787s and KC-46s far outweigh any political “feels.” In the end, capability and price control government contracts. Also, the MRTT lacks cargo floors. If that is a requirement, EADS cannot meet it. It all depends on strategic lift capability.
Nice video Alex! My cousin flies (well, used to fly) the CC-150s, and I've been on them twice. Once as a more private tour as the CYEG executive area, and once at the Summerside airshow.
Why would one buy a 1970’s airframe/engine combination (with modern avionics), B767, when a more modern, efficient and 20 years newer alternative exists, A330?
It is important to note also that the A330 won the USAF competition originally but it was political intervention that changed the award. That speaks volumes about the relative merits of the two choices.
A330 seems MUCH more likely, but a 767 would be very unique! I don't think there are many gov't VIP 767s out this, if at all.
why limit yourself to second hand canadian A330's. Theres heaps avaible world wide due to covid. Now would be the time to buy
Definitely the A330 MRTT.
FYI the aircraft shown at 2:27 is not a KC-46 but rather the older KC-767A which is a very different aircraft beyond being based upon a B-767. Only Italy and Japan operate the KC-767A/J with the latter buying the KC-46 recently as Boeing will not sell them more KC-767J. There is another B-767 based tanker the 767 MMTT based upon used B767-300 converted by Israeli Aircraft Industries Bedek Division for transport and tanking. Only operated by Columbia it was also ordered by Brazil in 2013 who have now cancelled that order as Boeing threatened to withdraw IAIs type certificate on the 767 if they went through with a deal that undermined KC-46 sales.
why Brazil went for A330 they bought Two last Year to fill a gap created when they retired the KC137 Tankers
Looking at the comments it never ceases to amaze me just how much Canadians are willing to mix politics into their defense procurement. Specifically their anti American culture.
It's good to be independent and self sufficient but at the same time you really have to take an honest look at the fact that your defense strategy is always going to rely upon American support, so buying EU weapon systems only to spend more money to properly integrate them into North American defense network is quite stupid.
And either way the A330 MRTT is superior
Military procurement has been politicized for years - mostly because of the liberals who are more into greasing their hands and style over substance and functionality.
you need a little more research
2 years later and turned out it is the A330 (CC-330 Husky)
Operationally, the MRTT is a smarter choice. Maintenance and operation-wise, it’s the easiest to transition from the A310 to A330. However, the 767 may be more practical and cheaper to procure as that program is getting expensive, and selling additional tails would be highly desired.
Retrofitting used aircraft can only work as a stop gap measure, but that’s a very expensive undertaking, long-term.
Most of this comes down on the strategic mission needs of the RCAF and international politics though.
If and when, I'd bet on the MRTT before the KC-46 -- however knowing the over-politicization of procurement in this country it'll be a while. Wouldn't it be fun though if the government jumped on those 787's Norwegian is immediately removing from service?
Stay with Airbus. Let transport minister fly the 737-Max. 😉
Dassault is willing to let us build the Rafale. Go for the Grippen or the Euro fighter.
I have flown and would happily fly a max tomorrow , Dassault will not match Norad standards nor will the Eurofighter thus Gripen
UNINFORMED@sebastianfloyd9705
Does the A319 ASW also have a cargo and an air to air variant. We need all three of these.
No plans for an A330 Neo MRTT? Damn, it's such a fine aircraft.
Loved the Polaris, if flew me to many hot and sandy places. 😉
I think the KC-46 would be neat to see.
@TRD yt A330 MRTT is a far better option
Lol, they take months and years and go past multiple desks just to get something signed, I can't see anything happening this decade.
This is even more interesting now that Canada will be operating the CF-35 or as I like to call it the CF-355.
that id number may very well change as almost all Canadian a/c purchases have some kind of change to the design or capability to match Canadian needs
Given the fact that Air Transat has some A330-200. These would fit well and blend well with the RAF, RAAF and others. As you made comment that these aircraft of AT are approaching 30 years or are close to it. 5 years from now the planes will be too old. Knowing the CDN gov, I see them buying for sure 2nd hand aircraft.
True. I won’t suprised if RCAF got a330s from Air Transat, send the aircraft to Airbus Military to refurbish, and potentially got a new pair of engines and winglets, aka getting special treatment from Airbus.
The airbus a330 MRRT could be an option but I am not holding me breath
i don't think so. that plane is not as good as they all say
Spend the money and go with the A330
They could have gotten A-350-900 from Latam that went up for sale, all less than 4 years old and one had not yet performed a commercial flight.
The Airbus CC-330 Husky has been selected
it will probably be a330MRTT, KC-46 is kinda small
I prefer the looks of the kc46 but the A330 MRTT is the logical choice here
The 310 and 330 are essentially a common crew qualification as such training and logistics would be reduced by choosing a 330 variant to replace the Polaris. Essentially a 330 or 330 MRTT would be my choice. Keep in mind the first jets in this category were the 707 and they were gone rather quickly. Whatever is purchased needs to be sustainable for up to 40 years.
Absolutely not a common crew qualification. The a330 and a340 have essentially a common type rating (although there are some differences) the a310 was a generation prior, look at flight deck photos, the a310 has a Boeing style yoke, the a330 is fly by wire with a side stick like all other modern airbus aircraft. Completely different systems, so no simple transition from a310 to a330 from a pilots perspective.
@@stellert69 Both the fundamental design of the A310 and the A330 is a derivative of the A300. The objective in the development was to minimize all costs including the crew training. They may not be fully considered common type rating but the fact is it is less costly to stay with as much commonality as possible. The best illustration of this is the 737 max and the A320 NEO crew commonality. We all know what happened with the 737 common certification.
Boeings offer is powered by older gen engines like the CF6-80C2 family of the PW4000 which gets more and more rare. If you get standed with an A330 spares are easier to get.
Not only that but the CC-150 uses the same generation CF6-80C2 engines, just with the A suffix for Airbus, versus the B suffix on the Boeing models. Buying the KC-46 would be like buying 5 A310s from Airbus again today new. Same generation airplane. Both are from the 80s. Kind of amazes me how people have their blinders on with the 767 and get the impression it's much newer than it really is.
Why replace when we shortly will not have any flyable fighters....
Just buy all Germany's remaining A310 MRTTs and refurb them all with centre booms ( A German A310 was in fact the prototype flying example for the A330 centre boom design in the first place ). Use the extra airframes to expand the current A310 fleet so you don't have to work them as hard and they'll last the same amount of hours as a new small order plus it gives you surge capacity when you need it. Strength in numbers. Plus, why invest so much when they haven't even decided on the F35 which can only refuel via centre boom. Granted there would be a NATO/NORAD friend request to lend a helping hand once in a while but...
Also you can always buy a separate A220-300 for VIP transport. You just might want to try and promote successful Canadian Engineering when you are aboard. Just a thought.
You diplomatically point to the hopeless politics of procurement in Canada (do the requirements speak to gender-intersectionality?). Until we actually have CF18 replacements ordered, considering how we refuel them midair is like considering when a Canadian will set foot on the moon.
The way this country is heading, the CF188 and CC150 replacements will come from China
@@h.j.bouzek606 - China has not produced anything that lasts except COVID
fear of females hmmmm
Hopefully the A330, but I agree with Nybotor......if they were still building them, KC-10s would be awesome!!! The KC-46 is behind schedule and hasn't been officially cleared for re-fueling.
I miss the old 707s even if they were ment for Western air lines
Nit Pick: Canadian originally kept the Wardair 310s but when it hit financial difficulties, the Canadian government bought them as a means to help CP without giving them a grant/subsidy/bailout.
The 767 is a much older aircraft from a design point of view. And less fuel efficient unless re-engined. So it would make sense to get the 330. The 310 was already bigger than the 767 so going back to a 767 is scale down.
It would be interesting to see if the A220 might be considered as one of the 2 VIP aircraft. It has range and can land at smaller airports. (though from your video it looks like the government is wanting a single aircraft type (which simplifies spare parts /maintenance/crew training).
One last thing. Often, the decision is made in advance, and they they shape the RFP accordingly and let others bid but the weighting to evaluate RFPs has pre-determined outcome. So it is quite possible that they already have the planes in sight, and perhaps they have to delay the process waiting to see what happens to Air Transat.
RCAF would be REALLY stupid not to go with the MRTT....
A330 MRTT seem to be the best fit for the RCAF. Yes, this plane is bigger than the KC-46 and our actual CC-150, but it still a good fit. More fuel to tranfert isnt a bad thing, or more pax/cargo. The A330 MRTT could be a great add to the RCAF logistic fleet of CC-130J-30, CC-130H and CC-177.
Where’s that hangar sporting Canadian airlines colours at 5:03?
Give Justin a Twin Otter for his official transport. No risk of him flying to any more cringey photos dressing up overseas.
Actually I was thinking more of a Piper Cub!
too many kids here
They are asking for boom capability which shows you which fighter they intend to acquire......
Not necessarily, you guys act with coalitions, makes a more useful platform if you can refuel both types of receivers
@@dhc4ever the correct answer
I'd go with the KC 46.
Can't wait until I am allowed to visit CFB Trenton again. I love the fact they repainted one the Polaris in 70's livery... That hadn't happened yet when I was there last time. The newer swoopy livery is not very inspired. My gut says Canada will eventually buy the Airbus, but I am hoping for the 767 variant.
Awesome video mate, Ive managed to catch all the RCAF Polaris at Prestwick. I did a bit of similar research for my compilation video last year with all 5, and looks like the A330 might the front runner as a replacement. Although the RCAF are known for getting their monies worth, the Polaris has a few yrs left yet, although a difficult choice on wither to repair 15001 might need to be made.
How many would they purchase though?
@@afcgeo882 If I were a betting man I would say probably somewhere around the 2 - 4 mark
It seems the CAF is finalizing the Airbus 330 as the replacement aircraft.
First of all, age of the aircraft is not the big issue: air frame hours are more critical. I doubt that they have as many hours on them as comparable commercial aircraft of the same age. They are not using them like the old 707s and banging them up and down several times a day across Canada. Wore out the undercarriages.
Second, these aircraft can only be upgraded on a limited basis since they have little in the way of avionics to upgrade civilian or military. Most likely the majority of on board military avionics would be an ECM suite, flares and maybe some comms.
Third, it is nice to see them thinking about replacing these aircraft in a timely manner. Too bad they can't decide other weapon systems in a timely manner. I think that one of the required aircraft, being the PM's plane will be a driving factor.
You’d think with all the unwanted A380s out there, they could make a tanker to rule them all.
Too Expensive A380 cost far too much to operate Iran in the 70's purchased 4 KC747 tankers yeah a Tanker version of The 747 they have 2 still available but they couldnt refuel their F14 Fleet only The KC707 they only have 5 operational now Twin engine Aircraft like A330 use less fuel which means more for transfer
They were used to bring home Canadian troops from chinas military exercise last year.
Bonus? They also brought home the chicom virus.
hmm a grade two education might help you !
plain-vanilla A332 MRTT new from factory is what makes the most sense. Simple, will last 30+ years. Done
If I were to have to guess I will place my money on the Airbus KC-30. Aside from the USAF calling the KC-46 a "lemon" (see www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39047/air-force-says-kc-46-is-a-lemon-that-its-trying-to-make-lemonade-out-of ), there is also the fact that the Airbus KC-30 has solved the remote vision system with which Boeing is still having trouble. On top of that, it would allow the RCAF to choose either the KC-30 (minus boom and drogue) or the A350 for VVIP lift. Getting rated from the A330 to the A350 cabin only takes about a week or so since they share a common cockpit.
Air Canada Rouge has some 767's
Who would convert them? Boeing will only sell new KC-46 now and they are blocking any other company like IAI-Bedek converting used 767 by threatening to remove their 'Type certificate' on the type.
They are ex Air Canada aircraft....they must be old by now.
The KC30 aka A330 as operated by the RAAF seems to serve our forces well.
If second hand Airbus 330-300/200s are the replacements, then it would be wise to purchase an Airbus Corporate Jet (ACJ) 330-800 for the VIP role. It would save plenty on fuel & maintenance.
How about a Piper Cub for Trudeau?
@@rldukes4 lol
The aircraft the pm flies in had a large amount of damage but I guess that is what happens when a plane rolls into a wall
yup cannot trust services at some airfields
The most likely choice: the A330 MRTT. But only if they upgrade ground facilities to handle the larger plane.
330 being ‘too big’ isn’t a factor when talking long range tanker/Freighter, but Boeing will be tough following yrs of experience with this type
We first need to upgrade our much older, much more out of date fighters.
and if Lockheed would deliver we would have
It'd be cool to see local produced CS series modified for these duties.
not big enough
The Boeing KC-46 and one passenger VC-46 would be the best long term solution as it is the newest , and will be in service with the USAF for along time and therefore parts will not be a problem!
already a problem for USAF