|
|
Post by beagle on Oct 4, 2011 11:29:36 GMT 12
So how many do we need. How advanced do they have to be.
Is there room at Ohakea to base them.
In the press this morning they gave an example of the PC-9 costing 7.8 million each
|
|
|
|
Post by luke6745 on Oct 4, 2011 14:11:53 GMT 12
Considering 3 & 4 hangars will soon be empty, space won't be an issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwiscanfly on Oct 4, 2011 14:21:22 GMT 12
5-8 Super Tuccano's would do just fine thank you Mr Mapp  And all jokes aside there is something that came out of the Defence Capability Paper yesterday. quote "innovative practices, including spiral development, whereby a modest capability is purchased initially but the possibility of future enhancement is left open, allows investment to be spread over time." I would relate this to the Tuccano or any other advanced trainer as in the future the aircraft could be armed and used to train weapon handling and JTAC training in NZ. Im sure the navy would like some fake air threat to pretend to shoot!! |
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Oct 4, 2011 14:28:52 GMT 12
Based on capital cost alone, an upgraded Macchi (new engine and updated avionics) would still work out cheaper than the new aircraft option for 12 aircraft. Why isn't the upgraded Macchi an option? It would also solve the JTAC and fleet support problem at the same time!
They are also available now (already at Ohakea) and 8 could be returned to service with very little work using the existing engines and avionics until the upgrade is sorted. The infrastructure (including the corporate knowledge to operate them) is already here, it just needs dusting off and getting a few key people back to get it up and running.
Interestingly I hear Aermacchi are are one of the bidders looking at buying the Macchis... maybe to lease back to NZ! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Oct 4, 2011 14:28:54 GMT 12
we could carry on our orphan way of existance and get a turbine powered, glass cockpit CT-4
as the billboards say "yeah right"
|
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Oct 4, 2011 16:01:41 GMT 12
I thought we were talking only a small number of pilot trainees being streamed onto the multi-engine stuff. I read the briefing paper and assumed it was seeking input from industry... I would have thought a multi-role aircraft or off-shore sourced advanced training. Are we utilising any of the Australian aircrew training resources at the moment ? I agree with the Macchi comments..... if the Macchi can't be suitable then why purchase something almost identical ? I don't see the RNZAF buying new aircraft for this role, - it was not that long ago that we were using Devon's as the lead in trainer for the Heavy streamed guys. Admittedly they normally did time on the DC3 and B170 before being let loose on the P3 or C130. A few years after that the progression was from bluntie via Andover or F27. It seems the rotary streamed guys are doing the sim and A109 as the advanced phase of their course. Naturally the multi-eng guys need a similar and parallel path. My money is on a Twin multi-role machine with local simulator access. Take your pick.. www.plane-training.com/airlines/fc_training.php?id=20Possibly combined with an initial Turbine /Turbo-prop introduction in Aussie. Do I see Q300 on the list ? Politicians need a taxi, - Tucano, Macchi, PC9 just don't cut it guys. Obviously there is not enough room on the King Air for the liquor cabinet. Simulators are the training aircraft of the future.... The guys in Darwin will tell you how risky multi and asymmetric training is. We chewed through C421 engines trying to train in them. Politicians choice once again. I am lead to believe the RNZAF have been harsh on King Air engines also. |
|
|
|
Post by guest on Oct 4, 2011 16:59:51 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Oct 4, 2011 17:51:14 GMT 12
The way I read the official statements and some not so official comments I have heard is they are looking at both (new) single engine and twin engine trainers. If they can get other Gov't agencies to contribute towards the twin engine aircraft for inshore maritime patrol then we may be able to afford both, especially if they only lease them. Time (and I suspect money) will tell.
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Oct 4, 2011 18:47:38 GMT 12
Yes as Don says and from the official report I read, a replacement for the B200 and new faster more agile training aircraft for advanced training.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Oct 4, 2011 19:13:12 GMT 12
This must all be going in the right direction because today Labour was complaining that Mapp was taking defence in the wrong direction.
|
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Oct 4, 2011 19:25:31 GMT 12
Politicians do the buying guys, where were you fellows in 1980 when this topic came up then ? Cessna were not happy with the choice and even stated that the RNZAF should not be buying that particular type... Naturally the politicians knew more than the manufacturer. The Govt of the day realised they could buy 3 Golden Eagles for the price of one Conquest. Deal done.. I reckon a replacement for the Golden Eagle was sought about a day after a Minister (Matt Rata ?) was taken through the fence at the end of the strip at Wairoa. hmm Koro Wetere '''''''''''''The government has given the NZDF the green light to begin the acquisition process for the Air Force’s advanced pilot training aircraft. ‘A tender is being prepared for release next year seeking submissions from industry to supply aircraft, a training package – including a simulator and other modern training devices – and maintenance and support,’ the Defence Minister says..''''''' www.airforce.mil.nz/operations/airforce-news/archive/88/green-light-advanced-training-aircraft.htmWho was the Minister of Defence saying this ? Phil Goff 5 Years ago.. The RNZAF knows it is difficult to maintain a fleet of 3 or 4 aircraft. The F27 was easy as it was in the Air NZ spares pool and included a maintenance contract. I say they are not going to get funding to buy a simulator and 4 or 5 Turbo-prop trainers. How many pilots per year are we thinking of training for the proposed fixed wing fleet of 2020 ? |
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Oct 4, 2011 19:29:36 GMT 12
Should we look at the TAI Hurkus. digital glass cockpit, tandem ejection seats. 250kt cruise Do we have open free market with Turkey  |
|
|
|
Post by nige on Oct 4, 2011 21:16:54 GMT 12
They are also available now (already at Ohakea) and 8 could be returned to service with very little work using the existing engines and avionics until the upgrade is sorted. The infrastructure (including the corporate knowledge to operate them) is already here, it just needs dusting off and getting a few key people back to get it up and running. Interestingly I hear Aermacchi are are one of the bidders looking at buying the Macchis... maybe to lease back to NZ! ;D Hmmm, could the pollies' minds be whirling away, as in: ... a sale would be icing on the cake after 10 years of trying to flog them off (and it would stick one up to Labour, oh just before the election too, good timing eh what), the Govt saves some face over the whole debarcle they inherited, gets some long awaited cash. ... a winning of the training contract could see them back (naturally supported by Aermacchi) but sporting kiwi roundels  , tie-in with SAFE and jobs for the industry (and there must be many ex-RNZAF MB339 maintainers around. Even CFS pilots who once flew the type would still be serving surely?). ... PPP infrastructure development at the air base. (Aermacchi rents space at Ohakea to train overseas pilots as well, keeps kiwis employed in support, bean counters now like defence ....  ... in time (requirements may dictate) the RNZAF may have to upgrade (eg the MB346 may have the capabilities for that future need) ;D Is this too good to be true?  |
|
|
|
Post by luke6745 on Oct 4, 2011 21:45:54 GMT 12
True. But there will be space at Woodbourne after the C-130 upgrade is done? |
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Oct 4, 2011 22:51:24 GMT 12
I read the 2011 Defence Capability Plan and that states that a twin engine aircraft will be investigated to do EEZ MP, twin engine training, transport etc. From the way it was worded it looks all in the one airframe. Secondly the advanced turbo prop trainer is a separate buy. Ok Airbus Military were in Canberra last week trying to get the ADF to hurry up the Caribou replacement and airbus want a competition for the C295 against the C27J Spartan. Airbus are getting a bit panicky because they have only 10 aircraft and 6 months of production left of orders before the C295 production line screams to a halt. The extra 3 A109s will not be acquired until around 2019 and will be commercial stock standard and only used for training. The Seasprites are either going to be replaced or upgraded. No decision has been made yet.
Back to the Capability plan it also said the C130H would be replaced like for like or better around 2020 with a procurement plan being in initiated in 2015. Incidentally it also stated that a new DWP will be done in 2015. One very interesting sentence in the plan was that lost capability would be restored but it never said what service or hinted at what capability. However the new plan is a refocusing of all 3 services into a Joint Amphibious Task Force and one would think that some kind of air strike capability must be envisaged because the plan stipulates that this Amphib force must be able to operate independently of allies if required.
The P3K2 replacement will not occur until about 2025 and the plan hasn't made any commitment to whether its P8 or some other fixed wing or UAV or a combination. that will be for the 2015 DWP. Oh yeah they are looking at whether or not to keep Woodbourne. Closing Woodbourne was suggested in the 2009 VfM report.
|
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Oct 4, 2011 23:59:40 GMT 12
Having lived and worked within a 15 degree latitude band from the Equator for over 10 years it is pretty obvious where the strife is going to be in coming years. The Maldives think they are saving money to be able to buy land when the time comes... whether it was tongue in cheek or not the vast Australian landmass was mentioned. We have to forget India, Indonesia and China.. the major players in Asia and all possible sources of regional turmoil. The Pacific region extending from Nauru all the way over to the Phoenix and Line Islands all fall into our political concern. Sure they would be at the Northern most range but do illustrate the immense area. Some of these locations are actually islands and relatively immune from the direct consequences of rising sea levels. However many land masses are nothing more than scattered or joined coral reefs and are already experiencing difficulties. In recent days both Tuvalu and Tokelau have requested fresh water and food aid. Crops will fail as the salt water contaminates the soil... already occurring in Kiribati and I am sure other countries also. For the next decade, possibly two or three, I can see NZ being involved in more and more of these aid missions. What equipment would be required for that task ? Naturally as the situation gets more desperate there may be some forms of conflict. Again which country is portraying itself as the peacemaker ? We have other major players, France has interests and it's affiliated countries face similar risks. Populations are going to have to move, - relocate.... Perhaps both aid and peacekeeping roles may dictate a forward base of operations... would Fiji be suitable still ? Maybe Tonga or Samoa but the NZ military has had minimal activity operating there to date. In any case what would be more useful ? Fixed wing aircraft, either land based or ship deployed.. I would think a variety of rotary wing machines may be more capable. Some can be ship based, some transport optimised and possibly even an attack capability thrown into the mix also. We may even see boat people so effective surveillance could be required, combined with effective intelligence gathering and other detection and intervention measures. rnzaf.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=world&action=display&thread=2938&page=1The pics at the bottom of the page show the situation pretty well. Lots of water and some very low lying land masses. I have actually spent a night on Canton Island, and we dined on breadfruit from possibly the only tree on the island. If you do a Google Earth you can see there is not much there. Not much in the way of sustenance for the locals at least. The airfield obviously has a strategic value but that may just be the last thing left in the end. There are many atolls about without the luxury of an airfield, - the Air Force airlifted the desalination plant to Funafuti this week. How do the people in Tokelau receive their aid ? I would be getting prepared for more deferrals and changes in these White Papers. The NZ military may have some real work ahead of them and I doubt fast jets or fancy trainers will be of much use. |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Oct 5, 2011 0:22:02 GMT 12
Maybe NZ can make some money by selling those low lying islands a few of our excess mountains. We can transport all the dirt to them but take out the gold, silver and coal as we dig.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris F on Oct 5, 2011 7:31:40 GMT 12
My pick in this will be that they go with one company for both types.
Hawker Beechcraft with the T-6A II in single engine and the Kingair 350i to replace current Kingair fleet which will continue multi engined duties and VIP.
I did see somewhere the numbers talked about where 6 single engined and 3 multi.
Anyway both aircraft are well proven and are off the shelf platforms that should be straight forward to get into service.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Oct 5, 2011 8:27:22 GMT 12
Is the Kingair 350 capable of martime patrol duties? They would be very silly not to purchase a more utility type aircraft, with a cargo hold and a ramp.
|
|
|
|
Post by Naki on Oct 5, 2011 10:30:24 GMT 12
Is the Kingair 350 capable of martime patrol duties? They would be very silly not to purchase a more utility type aircraft, with a cargo hold and a ramp. Yes many Armed Services around the world use King Airs for surveilance and martime patrol missions. |
|
And all jokes aside there is something that came out of the Defence Capability Paper yesterday. 
, tie-in with SAFE and jobs for the industry (and there must be many ex-RNZAF MB339 maintainers around. Even CFS pilots who once flew the type would still be serving surely?). 
