Does anyone have any idea what percentage of the 600 or so new hires at AC will be taken from the Airforce ?
There are rumours that AC contacted the Airforce in regards to hiring, precipitating the opening of the CEOTP training plan which accepts pilot applicants without degrees. In other words, AC was kind enough to let the Forces know that they were about to take a lot of their pilots.
Airforce to AC
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
hercdriver
- Rank 1
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 7:49 pm
As many as possible?
I believe AC likes to maintain a fairly strong base of ex airforce pilots to ensure high experience levels. I have heard that 30-50 % is a desirable number. However keep in mind that senior CF pilots are now making over 100 K per year and many may be hard pressed to give up that kind of coin to jump over the fence and make 38K for the first 2 years. With a pension not so bad but without, its a hard move to make.
I know that many are keeping their options open and perhaps in 6 mths to a year we may see a massive exodus of CF pilots. If this happens the CF "it aint goin be purdy" for pilots. As it stands now the Herc community is overtasked and pilots are deployed much longer ever year then desired (and always to the same sh*thole) Long gone are the days of hoping over the globe in the mighty Herc. The glamour is gone and AC is looking better and better every day for many. Time will tell.
I know that many are keeping their options open and perhaps in 6 mths to a year we may see a massive exodus of CF pilots. If this happens the CF "it aint goin be purdy" for pilots. As it stands now the Herc community is overtasked and pilots are deployed much longer ever year then desired (and always to the same sh*thole) Long gone are the days of hoping over the globe in the mighty Herc. The glamour is gone and AC is looking better and better every day for many. Time will tell.
-
Herc_Driver
- Rank 3
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 1:48 pm
- Location: Ontario
- Contact:
WJ Flyer:
I'll believe it when I see it.
More Liberal empty promises that are thrown around just prior to an election.
But 16 new J models would be nice though!!
As for any exodus from the Air Force towards AC ... well, only time will tell.
Much like my other name sake mentions there have only been a few from the C-130 community who have just crossed over, and only a small handful from the CP-140 (P-3) world from what I am told.
After ~ 50 or so ACA guys came banging on the CF door to get "back in" after being furloughed in 2001/2002 timeframe, and then having watched the bankruptcy issues (which now appear to be resolved) I would say that the majority of the military pilot community is a little leary about making the jump to Big Red.
As the other herc driver mentioned the senior guys are making some good coin and are close to a nice, secure, government annuity that they do not wish to gamble. The young guys are still locked into obligatory service to pay back for their training/wings. Granted, while the long term salary benefits and pension looks fantastic once you get old and grey with ACA, very few are willing to jump from >$105/year down to $37 and then $42 for those first couple of years. Most guys also don't want to live and work out of Toronto .... but lifestyle is another thing altogether (personal issues for many).
However, that being said, watch closely the next 2 years as I hear that ACA is planning on another 700 new hires over the next 2 years (350 per annum). There's been, what ~80-90 so far for 2005?? We may very well see a mass exodus from the CF and this will be a nightmare since we are already "under-manned" as it is. The issues mentioned by herdriver in the earlier thread hold very true. Morale is low and guys are burned out and tired.
But to answer the original question ..... so far things have been pretty quiet as far as military guys going over to ACA. We may see more in the near future. And Yes, CEOTP has been reopened for new applicants, but read the fine print verrrrrrryyyyy carefully.
I'll believe it when I see it.
More Liberal empty promises that are thrown around just prior to an election.
But 16 new J models would be nice though!!
As for any exodus from the Air Force towards AC ... well, only time will tell.
Much like my other name sake mentions there have only been a few from the C-130 community who have just crossed over, and only a small handful from the CP-140 (P-3) world from what I am told.
After ~ 50 or so ACA guys came banging on the CF door to get "back in" after being furloughed in 2001/2002 timeframe, and then having watched the bankruptcy issues (which now appear to be resolved) I would say that the majority of the military pilot community is a little leary about making the jump to Big Red.
As the other herc driver mentioned the senior guys are making some good coin and are close to a nice, secure, government annuity that they do not wish to gamble. The young guys are still locked into obligatory service to pay back for their training/wings. Granted, while the long term salary benefits and pension looks fantastic once you get old and grey with ACA, very few are willing to jump from >$105/year down to $37 and then $42 for those first couple of years. Most guys also don't want to live and work out of Toronto .... but lifestyle is another thing altogether (personal issues for many).
However, that being said, watch closely the next 2 years as I hear that ACA is planning on another 700 new hires over the next 2 years (350 per annum). There's been, what ~80-90 so far for 2005?? We may very well see a mass exodus from the CF and this will be a nightmare since we are already "under-manned" as it is. The issues mentioned by herdriver in the earlier thread hold very true. Morale is low and guys are burned out and tired.
But to answer the original question ..... so far things have been pretty quiet as far as military guys going over to ACA. We may see more in the near future. And Yes, CEOTP has been reopened for new applicants, but read the fine print verrrrrrryyyyy carefully.
Hhhmmm, is this thing on?
They didn't say they would buy Hercs... the current short listed runners are the Airbus A400M, Boeing C-17, and the Lockheed C-130J. Right now, from my sources, the Airbus and the Lockheed planes are the favourites (due to price), with the Lockheed proposal looking very interesting. Apparantly, Lockheed is offering a lease structure that is totally up to us to figure out, so a lease to own deal with factory fresh airplanes is possible. Also the British are chopping about 10 C-130J's for lease to any NATO member, as they want to replace the C-130's with more C-17's. But with Airbus known to give significant discounts on their airplanes, I would not be surprised if the CF buys A400M's because they can just carry more (they can fit the LAV III APC, the primary CF land vehicle, with turret unlike the C-130).Herc_Driver wrote:WJ Flyer:
I'll believe it when I see it.
More Liberal empty promises that are thrown around just prior to an election.
But 16 new J models would be nice though!!
As for any exodus from the Air Force towards AC ... well, only time will tell.
Much like my other name sake mentions there have only been a few from the C-130 community who have just crossed over, and only a small handful from the CP-140 (P-3) world from what I am told.
After ~ 50 or so ACA guys came banging on the CF door to get "back in" after being furloughed in 2001/2002 timeframe, and then having watched the bankruptcy issues (which now appear to be resolved) I would say that the majority of the military pilot community is a little leary about making the jump to Big Red.
As the other herc driver mentioned the senior guys are making some good coin and are close to a nice, secure, government annuity that they do not wish to gamble. The young guys are still locked into obligatory service to pay back for their training/wings. Granted, while the long term salary benefits and pension looks fantastic once you get old and grey with ACA, very few are willing to jump from >$105/year down to $37 and then $42 for those first couple of years. Most guys also don't want to live and work out of Toronto .... but lifestyle is another thing altogether (personal issues for many).
However, that being said, watch closely the next 2 years as I hear that ACA is planning on another 700 new hires over the next 2 years (350 per annum). There's been, what ~80-90 so far for 2005?? We may very well see a mass exodus from the CF and this will be a nightmare since we are already "under-manned" as it is. The issues mentioned by herdriver in the earlier thread hold very true. Morale is low and guys are burned out and tired.
But to answer the original question ..... so far things have been pretty quiet as far as military guys going over to ACA. We may see more in the near future. And Yes, CEOTP has been reopened for new applicants, but read the fine print verrrrrrryyyyy carefully.
But for the most part, most pilots want to remain in the CF. Better job security and pay are the primary reasons, plus your training is already payed for by the government, and you are being payed during training.
-
Herc_Driver
- Rank 3
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 1:48 pm
- Location: Ontario
- Contact:
WJFlyer:
Yup - so far no confirmed actual "tail" mentioned yet in the ACP.
The Boeing C-17 has been pretty much shelved as it is just too expensive. The CDS has managed to get the Airbus A400M taken off the bid since they do not even have a prototype in the air made out of metal yet. Their dates just keep sliding further and further to the right - we don't expect to see anything from Airbus industries as far as the A400M is concerned until 2010/2011. Also, the CDS wants his airlift "yesterday". That pretty much pushes us towards the J model C-130. The leadership knows that if they want a new aircraft they have to do the dirty work NOW so that we can have the rubber on the ramp by late 2009. They will not wait around for the Airbus product - although it may come back into the picture for sure at a later date.
The C-130 is a great machine but it doesn't fit some of the equuipment into it that the army requires. The LAV III doesn't fit by a scant 4". Sucks. You are absolutely correct in that we require airlift like the C-17 or the A400M to provide us with "outsized" airlift capability. We won't see these with a Liberal/NDP coalition.
Like many of my brothers and sisters in uniform I am a real sceptic and cynic. I doubt I will see anything new and shiny in my career timeframe - but we'll see. Then there's the next election which may be either weeks or months away. It's been 15 years and the politicians have done little to get the Sea King replaced.
Yup - so far no confirmed actual "tail" mentioned yet in the ACP.
The Boeing C-17 has been pretty much shelved as it is just too expensive. The CDS has managed to get the Airbus A400M taken off the bid since they do not even have a prototype in the air made out of metal yet. Their dates just keep sliding further and further to the right - we don't expect to see anything from Airbus industries as far as the A400M is concerned until 2010/2011. Also, the CDS wants his airlift "yesterday". That pretty much pushes us towards the J model C-130. The leadership knows that if they want a new aircraft they have to do the dirty work NOW so that we can have the rubber on the ramp by late 2009. They will not wait around for the Airbus product - although it may come back into the picture for sure at a later date.
The C-130 is a great machine but it doesn't fit some of the equuipment into it that the army requires. The LAV III doesn't fit by a scant 4". Sucks. You are absolutely correct in that we require airlift like the C-17 or the A400M to provide us with "outsized" airlift capability. We won't see these with a Liberal/NDP coalition.
Like many of my brothers and sisters in uniform I am a real sceptic and cynic. I doubt I will see anything new and shiny in my career timeframe - but we'll see. Then there's the next election which may be either weeks or months away. It's been 15 years and the politicians have done little to get the Sea King replaced.
Hhhmmm, is this thing on?
Herc_Driver:
Pretty much the fault of slow procurement belongs to the idiots at NDHQ. In the past, Air Staff moved at a sluggish pace. When NDHQ was instructed to replace the CC-130Es individually, staff begged off on the basis of there being no suitable “fleet” available. Ignoring the irrationality of this reply, it reveals a suburban mall mentality at NDHQ (the point of the plan had not been convenient ‘one-stop shopping’). Had an easy ‘fleet’ of newer Hercules been the goal, one wonders why NDHQ didn’t snap up retiring low time Dutch or Italian C-130Hs. The reason why NDHQ hasn't moved on the British offer of 10 C-130J's on lease is because apparantly, the C-130J's on offer are much too small; despite the fact that the offered aircraft are exactly the same length as all but two of the existing CF fleet of Hercules. Of that fleet, 19 are the very crotchety CC-130Es bought between 1964 and 1967 (the ones most in need of replacement).
Already of note about the RAF Hercs is that they are already probed for air-to-air refueling. With 2 CC-150's being fitted out in Dresden to be tankers, this will make operations for the RAF Hercs easier.
What can be proposed over C-130J's is buying Westernized Ilyushin IL-76MF's.
The fully Westernized version of this Russian strategic airlifter features Rolls Royce RB211-535's or the Pratt & Whitney PW2000 engines, Rockwell Collins avionics (the same found on our Hercs), and costs about the same as a brand new C-130J. The IL-76 carries around 50 tons (compared to the Herc's 17 tons), has a taller and longer cargo hold, can hold the biggest of CF equipment (save the Leopard tanks that are going to be phased out), has excellent short field and rough field operation, and can stand the toughest of Arctic weather (as it was designed for operating in Siberia and the former USSR). And they are true strategic lifters, unlike the CC-150's we have been using. The only issue is still lingering Western prejudice against Eastern bloc equipment, and the CF's fixation on the big AN-124's (and C-17's for that matter) for lifting.
And the Sea King replacements: That was a fully political matter. Jean Chretien promised to cancel the original EH-101 order... We then spent half billion dollars in cancelation fees just as the choppers were about to be delivered, the entire contract costed 4.5 billion for 33 ASW choppers and 15 SAR choppers. After we cancelled the order, we then spent another half billion dollars for 15 EH-101's (this time the utility models for SAR work), this time with the planes being built in Europe, not Canada as the previous contract stated. We then finally spent 5 billion dollars to buy 28 Sikorsky H-92 Superhawks (now CH-148 Cyclone's). In total, we spent 6 billion dollars to buy a total of 43 new choppers ( 15 EH-101's, 28 Superhawk's); 10 years later. If we just stayed with the original order of 43 EH-101's (or perhaps renegotiated the contract to switch to using utility model airframes instead, dropping the price), we would have saved 1.5 billion dollars, a lot of headaches, a couple of lives (due to crashes), and a whole whack of money for maintainence of the Sea King fleet... the original contract stated that we didn't have to pay till 1995, giving us plenty of time to find the money... you should have seen the MHP contract... we first had the AgustaWestland EH-101, Sikorsky H-92, and the NHIndustries NH-90. We then elimated the NH-90 because apparantly, the cabin size was too short (realistically, the rejection of the NH-90 was seen as a jab by Jean Chretien towards France over trade relations, so this rejection was in essence, purely political), even though NHI had a heightened version in the works for Denmark (they went EH-101 instead). It was then a competition between the EH-101 and H-92, with the EH-101 appearing to be the better chopper, as we already had the type in service (and parts and support was already there), production lines were virtually empty for the military versions as AgustaWestland just finished delivering the last of the military versions, and can promise quick delivery, and that it was the bigger, more capable chopper. But Mr. Chretien and the Liberals was still against the EH-101, so MHP project dragged on until he left office as PM. We then selected the H-92's, a plane that has nothing in common with the EH-101's, is not fully ready yet for military use, and delivery is iffy; if Sikorsky runs into a snag with the military H-92's, we will be still be stuck flying Sea Kings past 2008, unless Sikorsky finds a way of getting SOMETHING to us; ie. SH-60 Seahawks until we get the H-92's. Either way, going either EH-101 or H-92 requires that our 12 frigates be modified; their hangars are just too small to handle either of the choppers.
What a saga of procurement at NDHQ, eh?
Pretty much the fault of slow procurement belongs to the idiots at NDHQ. In the past, Air Staff moved at a sluggish pace. When NDHQ was instructed to replace the CC-130Es individually, staff begged off on the basis of there being no suitable “fleet” available. Ignoring the irrationality of this reply, it reveals a suburban mall mentality at NDHQ (the point of the plan had not been convenient ‘one-stop shopping’). Had an easy ‘fleet’ of newer Hercules been the goal, one wonders why NDHQ didn’t snap up retiring low time Dutch or Italian C-130Hs. The reason why NDHQ hasn't moved on the British offer of 10 C-130J's on lease is because apparantly, the C-130J's on offer are much too small; despite the fact that the offered aircraft are exactly the same length as all but two of the existing CF fleet of Hercules. Of that fleet, 19 are the very crotchety CC-130Es bought between 1964 and 1967 (the ones most in need of replacement).
Already of note about the RAF Hercs is that they are already probed for air-to-air refueling. With 2 CC-150's being fitted out in Dresden to be tankers, this will make operations for the RAF Hercs easier.
What can be proposed over C-130J's is buying Westernized Ilyushin IL-76MF's.
The fully Westernized version of this Russian strategic airlifter features Rolls Royce RB211-535's or the Pratt & Whitney PW2000 engines, Rockwell Collins avionics (the same found on our Hercs), and costs about the same as a brand new C-130J. The IL-76 carries around 50 tons (compared to the Herc's 17 tons), has a taller and longer cargo hold, can hold the biggest of CF equipment (save the Leopard tanks that are going to be phased out), has excellent short field and rough field operation, and can stand the toughest of Arctic weather (as it was designed for operating in Siberia and the former USSR). And they are true strategic lifters, unlike the CC-150's we have been using. The only issue is still lingering Western prejudice against Eastern bloc equipment, and the CF's fixation on the big AN-124's (and C-17's for that matter) for lifting.
And the Sea King replacements: That was a fully political matter. Jean Chretien promised to cancel the original EH-101 order... We then spent half billion dollars in cancelation fees just as the choppers were about to be delivered, the entire contract costed 4.5 billion for 33 ASW choppers and 15 SAR choppers. After we cancelled the order, we then spent another half billion dollars for 15 EH-101's (this time the utility models for SAR work), this time with the planes being built in Europe, not Canada as the previous contract stated. We then finally spent 5 billion dollars to buy 28 Sikorsky H-92 Superhawks (now CH-148 Cyclone's). In total, we spent 6 billion dollars to buy a total of 43 new choppers ( 15 EH-101's, 28 Superhawk's); 10 years later. If we just stayed with the original order of 43 EH-101's (or perhaps renegotiated the contract to switch to using utility model airframes instead, dropping the price), we would have saved 1.5 billion dollars, a lot of headaches, a couple of lives (due to crashes), and a whole whack of money for maintainence of the Sea King fleet... the original contract stated that we didn't have to pay till 1995, giving us plenty of time to find the money... you should have seen the MHP contract... we first had the AgustaWestland EH-101, Sikorsky H-92, and the NHIndustries NH-90. We then elimated the NH-90 because apparantly, the cabin size was too short (realistically, the rejection of the NH-90 was seen as a jab by Jean Chretien towards France over trade relations, so this rejection was in essence, purely political), even though NHI had a heightened version in the works for Denmark (they went EH-101 instead). It was then a competition between the EH-101 and H-92, with the EH-101 appearing to be the better chopper, as we already had the type in service (and parts and support was already there), production lines were virtually empty for the military versions as AgustaWestland just finished delivering the last of the military versions, and can promise quick delivery, and that it was the bigger, more capable chopper. But Mr. Chretien and the Liberals was still against the EH-101, so MHP project dragged on until he left office as PM. We then selected the H-92's, a plane that has nothing in common with the EH-101's, is not fully ready yet for military use, and delivery is iffy; if Sikorsky runs into a snag with the military H-92's, we will be still be stuck flying Sea Kings past 2008, unless Sikorsky finds a way of getting SOMETHING to us; ie. SH-60 Seahawks until we get the H-92's. Either way, going either EH-101 or H-92 requires that our 12 frigates be modified; their hangars are just too small to handle either of the choppers.
What a saga of procurement at NDHQ, eh?
-
Herc_Driver
- Rank 3
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 1:48 pm
- Location: Ontario
- Contact:
-
Herc_Driver
- Rank 3
- Posts: 103
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 1:48 pm
- Location: Ontario
- Contact:
