|
|
Post by Mr.Orion on May 12, 2012 14:58:03 GMT 12
Get back to the thread topic... Which is the Herc's replacement, not getting rid of the 757's (which is not happening).
|
|
|
|
Post by skywarrior on May 12, 2012 15:34:10 GMT 12
Yes but im sure they will look closely at the 757s when making the decision on the C130 replacement
|
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on May 12, 2012 15:56:37 GMT 12
Guys, I hardly think so.
The average cycle time for a domestic turbo-prop or turbine engine in NZ has always been 40 to 50 minutes.
I have no ideas what these rumours are founded on but we as a country have been operating turbine aircraft on these routes for decades.
Look at Europe and the carriers there and see what their cycle times are, and yes I have worked there also, indeed as a Tech Services Engineer for an airline.
To suggest a turbine engine does not like short sectors, ie.
''''for the engines, going from cool to hot to cool in a short time frame etc. ''''
Isn't that what engine maintenance is all about. That is why we count cycles and obviously the components are calendar and cycle lifed accordingly.
Are you sure you are not confusing short cycle times with some form of engine damage ?
Indeed with the 757 it may well be that the longer international legs actually bring the average cycle time up over the one hour point.
Have you guys never operated jets within England ?
And yes I am well aware of the Aussie operators also, even flights into Darwin can be short sectors for some of the carriers, ie Darwin - Gove- Cairns. Those aircraft are still just over the hour on average cycles.
I would like to know more about your theories on low utilisation and it's affect on jet engines also.
|
|
|
|
Post by skywarrior on May 12, 2012 16:15:02 GMT 12
Im not talking about short leg trips. Im well aware alot of routes around the world are short trips. Im talking about sometimes flying as little as 5 hours in a week and having an aircraft sit around and have its engines exposed to the high humidity air of auckland. Sure, they are gashly dehumidified but it doesn't stop the corrosion. GTEs are built to operate often, and when you stop operating them for extended periods of time you get problems.
|
|
beagle
Air Commodore
oh my god, it shows my age
Posts: 4,692
Member is Online
Karma:
Exalt | Smite
|
Post by beagle on May 12, 2012 17:44:52 GMT 12
5 hours a week sounds a bit on the light side.
This relates to other parts of the aircraft as well as I remember on 5 Sqn if a P3 sat for a few days, there was always things found on a pre flight that needed fixed, especially lights or something tricial like that.
Yes i agree, keep it going and it won't break, but as others have said as well, they won't be getting rid of these very capable platforms untill they decide what transport requirements will be needed in 5-6 years time.
Although I have flown twice around the world on a C130, the options of it against a B757 would see most people choose the later due to it's speed and range, but I would still prefer the herk for the 1 reason of having more stop overs at remote places, plus each trip I took we had the big comfy seat pallet so lots of leg room etc etc with some enthusiastic loady filling us up on cooked breakfasts etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on May 12, 2012 18:08:19 GMT 12
You do know that 5 hours a week is far from low utilisation. I have many aircraft on my books that fly much less than that. Most private owners try and do an hour a week as a target. It is difficult to achieve and many come in at around the 25 hours per year mark.
The covers placed on turbine engines are nothing to do with humidity but are generally there to minimise rotation. The bearings are not lubricated with a windmilling stage.
Does anyone here actually know the utilisation and cycle times of the RNZAF 757's ?
I am also of the opinion that they provide an essential role in the Defence structure. If the RNZAF was to do away with them then the proposed new Transport aircraft would have to fill the void.
What do the defence White Papers have to say about that ?
Our tasking for the fleet of RNZAF transport aircraft was 600 hours per year per airframe. We achieved that easily and that was for a small fleet at that.
The RNZAF are very good with engine wash programmes and I am sure the B757 engines would be water washed regularly.
I am also King Air rated and have worked on that type all over the show, including a stint on the RAAF ones at Sale. Personally I prefer the 200's with the Dash 41 or Dash 42 engines.
|
|
beagle
Air Commodore
oh my god, it shows my age
Posts: 4,692
Member is Online
Karma:
Exalt | Smite
|
Post by beagle on May 12, 2012 18:36:29 GMT 12
instead of the thought of going to the 350, what about the 1900D ?
|
|
|
|
Post by chis73 on May 12, 2012 19:01:23 GMT 12
Most of the criticisms of the RNZAF 757s described above are in the Value for Money review by Rod Deane and his bean-counter minions. The main thrust, iirc, was that if RNZAF is going to operate an essentially commercial aircraft type, then the type should dovetail into Air NZ's logistic support structure. RNZAF should try to avoid operating small numbers of rare-to-NZ types. So, that would apply to the 757s (and the King Airs)?
Maybe the 1900D would be a better choice for the future MEPT and/or coastal MPA role than the B350 or B200 - at least you can sort of stand up in it and it's got a loo. Out of production ages ago though.
But, to get back on topic, what report is the newstalkzb story in the original post referring to? Can someone point me in the right direction to it? Is the 2020 timeframe still relevant due to the LEP delays?
Chis73
|
|
|
|
Post by nige on May 12, 2012 19:10:56 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by chis73 on May 12, 2012 19:52:15 GMT 12
Thanks for the link. Crikey, that report was depressing! It reads like it was held five minutes before lunchtime. Defence Force answers very obtuse.
I wonder who the complete nonce was who suggested cancelling the Phalanx upgrade? Talk about dropping the cheapest & most easily achievable project. I wish someone had asked something intelligent, like how they're planning to afford all the projects they've kept piling up into the 2015 - 2035 timeframe (National have themselves stalled the Endeavour & Resolution replacements & the advanced pilot training aircraft just since they have been in).
So, looks like the 2020 timeframe still stands then. Better hurry up with that LEP, or they will be out of service before they are finished.
Chis73
|
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on May 12, 2012 20:10:43 GMT 12
BRIEFING ON MAJOR DEFENCE PROJECTS
(Pages 3 and 4)
Planning
The five C-130H Hercules aircrafts operated by the Royal New Zealand Air Force are due to be replaced in about eight years’ time.
Defence said that planning for the replacement process had already started. It is considering two principal options: replacing the Hercules with aircraft of similar capabilities, or with craft that offer differing capabilities.
The first step in this process will be determining needs and priorities.
|
|
beagle
Air Commodore
oh my god, it shows my age
Posts: 4,692
Member is Online
Karma:
Exalt | Smite
|
Post by beagle on May 12, 2012 20:30:07 GMT 12
"differing capabilities"
what would be differing capabilities.....
1, carriage of NH-90
2, higher speed / longer range than C130,
3, able to act as a refueller
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on May 12, 2012 20:53:18 GMT 12
Get back to the thread topic... Which is the Herc's replacement, not getting rid of the 757's (which is not happening). Surely the topic should be RNZAF Airlift as a whole. I'm sure the project team would be looking at the future Airlift capability for the RNZAF and this will mean the 757 will be looked at (either for retention or replacement). Air forces don't replace aircraft in when they do these sort of projects they replace (or retire) capability (of course the aircraft is a big part of that) |
|
|
|
Post by skywarrior on May 12, 2012 21:50:28 GMT 12
You do know that 5 hours a week is far from low utilisation. I have many aircraft on my books that fly much less than that. Most private owners try and do an hour a week as a target. It is difficult to achieve and many come in at around the 25 hours per year mark. The covers placed on turbine engines are nothing to do with humidity but are generally there to minimise rotation. The bearings are not lubricated with a windmilling stage. Im sorry but 5 hours a week is extremely low utilization for a passenger jet aircraft, and a mid sized one at that. Also the blanks and dehumidifier carts are fitted due to the relative humidity and salt products in the air. Windmilling is not a concern. |
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on May 12, 2012 23:08:47 GMT 12
Also they should definitely look at getting rid of the boeings because you would have to think operating only two aircraft is pretty uneconomical At the end of the day we dont need the 757s. Operating only two is ridiculous. And they dont get used enough. In fact that get used so little, we spend a fortune just trying to get them going again. Passenger jet aircraft are designed to fly all day everyday, and when you stop flying them they shit out. At least 3 of the guys replying to your comments have been in the RNZAF and been about these or similar aircraft. Some have been Officers, Engineering Officers at that. I also have a number of jet engine ratings on my engineering licences, - while I have much experience in the tropics and also on lower utilisation aircraft I have not encountered the problems you describe. Perhaps the answer is to operate the aircraft more rather than phase them out. That utilisation is going to be 5 to 10 hours a week I would suggest. It is heaps when compared to Bernie Ecclestone's jet and many other like it that I have been associated with. Is there really a marked difference between the B727 and B757 operations ? I don't know, I guess I am assuming they are similar in many respects. |
|
