Possible additional purchases
63. Given the good performance of the C-17 aircraft
and the continuing high tempo of operations, and the fact that
it will be some years before the A400M aircraft comes into service,
we asked if the MoD had enough C-17 aircraft and whether consideration
should be given to purchasing additional C-17 aircraft. AVM Leeson
said that the MoD was reviewing whether the balance between the
air-lift capacity provided by the MoD's air-lift assets and the
air-lift capacity it required from the marketplace was right.[88]
He acknowledged that the MoD had "configured a programme
for a situation that is now being exceeded" and that "causes
a number of stresses and stretches in the programme".[89]
We pressed AVM Leeson further on whether the MoD needed another
C-17 aircraft. He said that it was not a simple "yes or no
answer", but acknowledged that "there is a need for
analysis of the risks faced in future and the cost-effectiveness
of the operations and whether or not one has the right balance".[90]
64. In its submission, The Boeing Company said that
the United States Department of Defense had not requested funding
for additional C-17s in the Fiscal Year 2008 budget. Boeing and
its suppliers had been spending their own resources since late
2006 "to protect the option for production of additional
C-17s". Based on the 34 month lead time necessary to build
a C-17, and in the absence of any US Government commitment to
procure additional C-17s in the future, Boeing directed its suppliers
on 2 March 2007 "to stop work on aircraft beyond current
customer commitments….the production line heads towards complete
shutdown in mid-calendar Year 2009".[91]
This position was also highlighted by the Royal Aeronautical Society
who noted in its submission that the production of C-17 aircraft
was at risk of termination because of a lack of orders.[92]
65. AVM Leeson told us that Boeing's closure date
for the C-17 production line had been delayed very slightly after
a recent re-order by Congress, so that there was "no longer
the need to have a decision tomorrow morning, as it were".
He added that:
Clearly, there is a complex dynamic between the A400M
balance, the C-130J balance, the commercial balance and the C-17
which is why we must get that answer right.[93]
66. We asked General Figgures whether there were
any plans to purchase any further C-17 aircraft in addition to
the five already being purchased. He said that:
I am looking at all options as part of this constant
review of how we deal with the risk of the strategic airbridge,
so I am in the process of producing advice for ministers. In due
course they will decide and all this will become apparent. That
does not say we are going to buy x, y or z.[94]
67. MoD
officials are producing advice to ministers setting out options
for addressing possible risks relating to the MoD's future air-lift
requirements. Given the performance of its C-17 large transport
aircraft, the MoD must give consideration to the acquisition of
additional C-17 aircraft. Such a decision needs to be taken quickly
given that the C-17 production line may be closing in the near
future.
68. On 20 June 2007, NATO Allies agreed to set up
a new NATO agency to acquire and manage C-17 strategic transport
aircraft on behalf of a group of 15 NATO nations (the UK is not
one of the 15) and two Partnership for Peace countries. NATO Secretary
General, Jaap de Hoope Scheffer, welcomed the decision and said
that:
The Strategic Airlift Capability (SAC) initiative
will help address NATO's, and Europe's, critical shortfall in
strategic airlift. This capability will support our current operations,
including in Afghanistan, and will be a pillar of the Alliance's
long-term transformation".
The SAC plans to acquire 3-4 C-17 aircraft, the first
is expected to be delivered in mid-2008. The SAC aircraft are
to be configured in a similar way as the C-17 aircraft flown by
the US Air Force, Canadian Air Force and the RAF. [95]
74 
