RCAF Challenger Fleet

[Darkwing Duck]

Here are a couple links on a bit the CBC did regarding the CC144s and government official's use.
I want to know from you folks if you think there is a need to reduce the CC144 fleet, disband it completely or is there justification in it's use? Or should they upgrade to something newer and more economical to operate as these birds are getting long in the tooth?

http://video.ca.msn.com/watch/video/gov ... c%7c%7c%7c

http://video.ca.msn.com/watch/video/low ... c%7c%7c%7c

Personally I do not have an issue with MPs, government officials and military heads flying around on official business. I do have an issue on flights down to the Caribbean on fact finding missions (i.e how many margaritas can we consume in a weekend?). From what I gather on both these videos is that the CBC has no substantial proof as to the justification of these aircraft being used. All the government is doing, according to CBC, is throwing away taxpayers money recklessly on a frilly perk. Being in the aviation industry for as long as I have been, as most of you too, we know that these aircraft are a tool. For those of you in corporate flight departments, your CEOs and executives could fly commercially as well but choose to fly in a corporate aircraft because of reasons I do not need to explain here. I think the CBC is just getting their nickers in a knot because this is money that could fund some artsy fartsy tv show no one gives a damn about as opposed to flying government officials around on official business. I am sure there is some misuse but I am also guessing it is not to the extent the Communist Broadcasting Company is bitching about.

These aircraft supposedly sit in the hangar 70% of the time anyway. Ohh the horror. They are flying too much. No, they are flying too little. When they do fly it costs $12000 / hr. Give me a fricken break. Complain about 1 thing, not 2 on opposite ends of the spectrum. I have no idea what the utilization of this fleet is at any one time. Or when Mr. MaKay went up for a spin in a Cormorant to see what a search and rescue mission is like. Here is the Minister of Defence trying to get an idea as to the things our military goes through to accomplish a mission. I hope every minister would take an interest in what goes on in the department they are responsible for to make it more efficient like Mr MaKay did. Or when the 3 Challengers went for Trenton to Ottawa within minutes of each other. Have these people any common sense? What if all three were on 1 aircraft and it went down? Oh we would hear a lot about why 3 high ranking officials were on the same aircraft.

Anyway, there is so much more I could say but I would be interested in what your comments are.

[LegoMan]

Who cares? Canadians whine and bitch about everything anyways, this isn't something new. We have bigger problems lurking in our economy and trade, who gives a f*** about a couple of millions of dollars wasted. The government has wasted much more than that before.

[kevind]

People bitch when we dont have the assets,

People then bitch when we use the assets when we get them,

then bitch when we dont use them

[KK7]

I'm no Conservative and don't support them, but seriously this is not an issue to complain about.

CBC even reported that there are 6 aircraft available, which collectively flew only 165 hours in June. Frankly finding people to use the damn planes for anything appears to be a challenge for them. I would expect if we have six of them, two should always be available for the PM and the Governor General since they are required by the RCMP to use these aircraft. The other four should be constantly busy bussing ministers and other top officials around to meetings. These should be work related of course and not a booze cruise for some department. That being said, these are all people who have families and need to spend time with their families. If their planned holidays get interrupted due to an emergency, then by all means the jet should be used to minimize the impact on their families.

What CBC should really be looking into is not how the jets are being used, but due to their lack of use, why do we need six of them? Maybe we do need six of them, I don't know, but I would be more interested in that direction of an investigative report.

[fish4life]

at least we use challengers and not a 747 ...

[linecrew]

I find it odd that they neglected to mention the flights 412 sdn does flights overseas and back with the Challengers completely empty for training purposes. You'd think that would raise an eyebrow or two.

[Nark]

chAir Force One is a lot more than just a taxi for the President. Although the fair share have used it as their personal plane.

I highly suggest watching National Geographic's documentary on the bird. It's a good watch.

Not many head's of State are able to function like POTUS can on AF1.


Linecrew:

It's no surprise because the 412 doesn't have an MP seat associated with their missions.

[Gino Under]

I thought it was pathetic reporting and of not much interest to me personally.

If it's a VIP squadron then their primary role should be to transport VIPs. If MPs (particularly Ministers) aren't considered VIPs then who is? They didn't say.
If the Canadian Taxpayer buys aircraft for our military, why should anyone be surprised or indignant when those aircraft are used? Sparingly, I might add.
We bought 5 A310s for the military and Cretien swore he'd never fly in them. Well, for my dollars, when the Prime Minister of Japan or the United States roll up in their 400s, how does it look when our man shows up in a Challenger? Canadians may not care but I can tell you overseas it is viewed quite differently.

Canadians generally have a funny attitude when it comes to persons of status or stature. We are not all equal when it comes to rank and status, and regardless of opinion, rank DOES have its privilige. For some reason, many Canadians don't seem to get it.

Certainly not the press. This was just a distraction for journalists on a slow news day.

Gino Under

[onederwoman]

Here are a couple links on a bit the CBC did regarding the CC144s and government official's use.
I want to know from you folks if you think there is a need to reduce the CC144 fleet, disband it completely or is there justification in it's use? Or should they upgrade to something newer and more economical to operate as these birds are getting long in the tooth?

http://video.ca.msn.com/watch/video/gov ... c%7c%7c%7c

[url]http://video.ca.msn.com/watch/video/low ... c%7c%7c%7c

These aircraft supposedly sit in the hangar 70% of the time anyway. Ohh the horror. They are flying too much. No, they are flying too little. When they do fly it costs $12000 / hr. Give me a fricken break. Complain about 1 thing, not 2 on opposite ends of the spectrum. I have no idea what the utilization of this fleet is at any one time. Or when Mr. MaKay went up for a spin in a Cormorant to see what a search and rescue mission is like. Here is the Minister of Defence trying to get an idea as to the things our military goes through to accomplish a mission. I hope every minister would take an interest in what goes on in the department they are responsible for to make it more efficient like Mr MaKay did. Or when the 3 Challengers went for Trenton to Ottawa within minutes of each other. Have these people any common sense? What if all three were on 1 aircraft and it went down? Oh we would hear a lot about why 3 high ranking officials were on the same aircraft.

Anyway, there is so much more I could say but I would be interested in what your comments are.

$1200 per hour seems pretty cheap to me.

[longjon]

Same B.S when Lyin Brian took power, he switched the 4 Challengers to the Militaty and the info was no longer open to the media.
John Cretien then gave them back to T.C when he took over and now the useage are once more open to public scruteny.

Maybe giving the 214 fleet back to the Military would be best, its Military crews so why are they with Aircraft Services?

[Siddley Hawker]

The leftards who are jumping around on their hind legs screaming bloody murder about wasting money all get around 50 trips per year on the public dime. 25 of the trips are apparently anywhere in Canada for whatever reason. Bob Rae bumped some guy out of 1st class on Big Red a few weeks ago because he's a Super Elite. Is there no level of hypocrisy below which a politicain will not fall?

[Rockie]

I think the CBC is just getting their nickers in a knot because this is money that could fund some artsy fartsy tv show no one gives a damn about as opposed to flying government officials around on official business. I am sure there is some misuse but I am also guessing it is not to the extent the Communist Broadcasting Company is bitching about.

The CBC is doing their job by reporting inappropriate use of government resources, and they aren't stupid enough to think the money saved would get redirected toward them. Be realistic, and be thankful they're doing their job.

Also the nominal misuse of those resources is a lot more common than the CBC is reporting and has been for many years. MacKay's little sojourn to a certain fishing camp has been going on for probably decades and everyone involved (you'd be surprised) have always been flown in/out by military helicopter. It's just little perk combining military flight hours that will be flown regardless with something else, some of which I've participated in myself. Nothing to get really upset about, but every now and again it has to come out in public to keep it under control.

[teacher]

Like the fighter pilots taking jets on booty calls to far flung places. What they didn't mention (years ago when the "story" came out) was that these were cross country training flights that had to be done anyway so WHY NOT go somewhere like I don't know, BACK HOME. Like when Prince Philip did a training flight near his now wife's family farm. Who cares, they were on a training flight. Gotta get it done whether it's in sight of someone you know or not.

A former airforce pilot once told me years back that at the time an order came down that they could NOT fly anywhere they knew somebody because it looked bad in the media. What F'n BS. 2 pilots have family in 2 different places, they can visit the other guys folks but not his own. Not sure if the rules have changed however, I've seen tutors (back in the day) and harvards on cross country trips in the recent past being met by friends and family. If the hours have to be flown, fill your boots.

Oversight is needed to make sure it's not abused but come on people, lets focus on what's important.

[SAR_YQQ]

an order came down that they could NOT fly anywhere they knew somebody because it looked bad in the media.

No such official direction exists. It remains our decision to use discretion on the destinations that we choose. As a former flight instructor, we had access to a huge pool of flying hours outside of instruction that we were expected to use. We were directed to take the plane away on weekends and fly into destination airports that challenged us - all in order to keep and maintain our level of skill. Destinations such as LGA, SFO, MIA, LAS, etc were all on our lists of places to fly into. These hours on the plane are apart of the contract the CF has with AW - if we didn't fly the hours (ie fuel, airframe hours, oil, etc), then we would be wasting taxpayers dollars. I truly wish that reporters from the MSM would do a little research before typing.

[Rockie]

an order came down that they could NOT fly anywhere they knew somebody because it looked bad in the media.

No such official direction exists.

Maybe not right now. But every now and again some Commander gets embarrassed and issues an edict like the one above (I remember this particular case well) then gets replaced by someone who is a little more reasonable. It's a cycle that I've seen many times.

[Canuck223]

I view this issue like any large corporations travel policy.

The decision to purchase and maintain the fleet has been made. The decision to continue that policy is always up for review.

In the mean time, as long as the criteria for use is followed, and uses pushing those limits are explained and approved up front, I don't have a problem.

So if the Chief of Defense Staff has to take a Challenger to make a previously approved vacation schedule altered due to the demands of his office, I'm OK with that. Quite frankly, in that circumstance, I would not take issue with his family flying with him if the situation made that use reasonable. In such a case, I could see him paying back the gov't the equivalent of his families commercial fare, but his own use isn't an issue.

[privateer]

fish4life

at least we use challengers and not a 747 ...

A big +1

[structurespilot]

I've been inside one of the Challenger's that we have, and they are nothing great. They are very plain and ordinary for a "Corporate" Jet. The interior was plain grey cloth, not leather. No shinny stuff either, just the grey military look.
Most oil company corporate jets are a lot nicer than these. I think the reason they fly the Challenger is because they are made in Canada. Bet you when the C series comes out, we get a couple of those instead. Gotta support Canadian jobs.
I have no problem with the current use of the A/C, but a report like this just makes all the public worker drones angry. Anger or Jealousy, not sure which one actually? Rank should have privileges,thats how the real world works.

S.P.

[AaronP]

Would it not be cheaper for them to sell/get rid of the Challengers and just use charters?

[D_Thissen]

^ It might be, but should the PM and high ranking officials fly Porter if they want to go to Toronto? No, its a perk of their job, its no different than a President or CEO of a company using the company jet. For example... http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-t ... -500-mph-1

[DanJ]

Bob Rae bumped some guy out of 1st class on Big Red a few weeks ago because he's a Super Elite. Is there no level of hypocrisy below which a politicain will not fall?

Not quite. He used his SE status to get the gate agent (who had no idea who he was, other than an SE) to open the door to the just closed flight, and the GA still could have said no. The "some guy" who made the fuss didn't have a ticket for that flight in the first place, he was trying to get on an earlier flight, which as said, was already closed.

[Siddley Hawker]

Not quite. He used his SE status to get the gate agent (who had no idea who he was, other than an SE) ...

So in other words show up at the gate for a closed flight with a SE card, with no other id, and it'll magically reopen.

...and the GA still could have said no.

Right.

[DanJ]

We bought 5 A310s for the military and Cretien swore he'd never fly in them. Well, for my dollars, when the Prime Minister of Japan or the United States roll up in their 400s, how does it look when our man shows up in a Challenger? Canadians may not care but I can tell you overseas it is viewed quite differently.

It was even worse than that. Chretien did use the A310 (CC-150), but he just wouldn't fly in the so-called "Taj Mahal" version, which anyone who ever saw it says it's anything but luxury. This caused the military problems because they were trying to transport CF personnel back and forth to Bosnia and Kosovo. When Chretien would take one of the regular 150's, the military would have to use the VIP version, which didn't have enough seats for many of the flights.

I certainly had no issue with our PM, whomever that may be, travelling around with a bedroom-equipped plane, instead of stretching out across 3 or 4 Y seats. We can be so "small-town" sometimes LOL. Funny though that the left didn't seem to have a problem with the money spent for a state funeral for Jack, even though he was not technically "entitled" to one.

[DanJ]

Not quite. He used his SE status to get the gate agent (who had no idea who he was, other than an SE) ...

So in other words show up at the gate for a closed flight with a SE card, with no other id, and it'll magically reopen.

Not always or maybe even very often, and probably depends somewhat on how recently they closed the flight. But if any situation is going to allow someone to get on a closed flight, it's an SE asking. Not some reporter, who, it was apparent in reading the article, didn't have any idea what an SE was.

[it'sme]

Have you ever noticed that the CBC has three times the personnel on site to cover an event as compared to their private broadcaster brethren? Ahhhh, to be supported by the public trough and then bash other recipients of said trough. How Canadian!