|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 7, 2007 18:56:50 GMT 12
Ok, the Herks are just getting an upgrade that shouldtake them out another 10 or so years before they require replacement, but as with normal replacement issues, they start looking at replacements years in advance.
So for the RNZAF and the people of NZ what should we be looking at when the time comes.
A400. in construction phase, not tested, bigger, cost more to purchase and operate, not sure on it's tactical ability, ie, able to land in same length as herk etc.
would it be too big.
could we get some, say 3 for use in overseas deployments and have some C27's for local tactical use.
C17 in service, now used by neighbour aussie, proven in field, again would it be way too big for our needs. Cost would be prohibitive, then again if the RAAF bought another 2 could we say pay for 1 and use it together.
C130J in service, some initial teething troubles, would the J mode give us any more options than the current H model, ie being if we got the stretched model.
Definately the cheapest option, would they go for 6, say 3 standard length, 3 stretched.
Then again there is the AN70 or the brazilian twin jet herk replacemant they are looking at.
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jun 8, 2007 22:57:34 GMT 12
If A400 turns out OK, then it would be a good buy for NZ.
I'd favour a Split A400 C27 or C235 buy. 5 of A-400 and 6-9 of the C-27/C295.
I did like C-17 originally but it's just to expensive for the RNZAF.
|
|
|
|
Post by rotoruian on Jun 9, 2007 15:09:15 GMT 12
I was lucky enough to have visited the Antonov Design bureau a few years back. I was given the AN70 sales pitch while I was there a truely feel that this plane should be a serious contender for any Air Force looking for a new tactical style lifter.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Jun 9, 2007 16:05:06 GMT 12
The A400M looks very good on paper (see www.airbusmilitary.com/ ) and hopefully it can match it in reality. I think 3-5 A400Ms and 6-8 C27 / CN235 type medium freighters would be extremely suitable. The range of the A400 is ideal for the long haul sorties that our airlifters are regularly tasked with, and its a useful size - not too big for us. With first deliveries due in 2009 (all going to schedule - which Airbus sometimes struggles with) so by the time we look seriously at C130 replacement it should be shaken down enough. |
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 14, 2007 16:07:49 GMT 12
On the A400 site is says it can almost match turbo fan transports.
300 Knot CAS
cas ??is that calculated air speed
300 is what the herk does nowand that does not match a C17 etc, well pretty sure it doesn't.
Yes they would be ok, not too big, take the bigger things that the herk won't, ie LAV and maybe the NH-90.
I would say that we would only need about 3 at the B757 would supplement smaller cargo around the world at faster speeds.
As for internal use, we don't want to have too many different types and it would besad to see the herk go..
Would the C27 be able to handle most of the current army tasking and tactical stuff around the islands.
Love the herk too much to see it go.......................
|
|
|
|
Post by FlyNavy on Jun 14, 2007 16:11:34 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 14, 2007 16:15:48 GMT 12
yeah, I got sc maths etc but that went in and is still going round and round.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 14, 2007 16:27:49 GMT 12
Another consideration in replacing the Hercules is can the airstrips on islands around the Pacific, as well as here in NZ, handle the size and weight of the bigger machines? It's all very well having great aircraft but if they cannot land in the places they go, not a lot of point in it.
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 14, 2007 16:30:46 GMT 12
I think if they went for the A400, it would be for strategic transport, rather than internal tactical, although it says it has a tactical landing length of only 680 metres, pretty empty I'd say
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Jun 14, 2007 16:38:35 GMT 12
C-130Js might be the go then? Anyway, by the time the NZ Govt makes up their mind to replace the C-130Hs, the RAAF might be able to offer NZ some cheap second-hand Js.  |
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 14, 2007 16:46:14 GMT 12
I see the RAAF have started repainting their J's in a new scheme.
looks darker on the top and same or lighter on the bottom.
Straight deviation line along the length aligning with the hinge of the MLG doors, plus lighter colour under the wings and over the wing root fairings.
looks utterly horrible if you asked me and also with 2 colours and in the those areas, makes for painting maintenance hassles.
Not sure how many they have done, but have seen image sof one in a hangar on looks like a "D" check already.
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Jun 14, 2007 18:03:34 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 20, 2007 17:02:18 GMT 12
just checking out the new scheme and again there is a panel at the base on the leading edge of the tail fin. It appears to be only on the J models. a special avionics item  |
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Jun 20, 2007 17:47:40 GMT 12
Beags, I think it's an antennae of some sort.
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 21, 2007 11:26:19 GMT 12
must be one that cannot be painted, as most now are painted into the what ecver scheme the a/c is in.
There was no panel there on the H model unpainted, not ours anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Jun 21, 2007 13:30:32 GMT 12
Yeah, I've only ever seen it on the J models; none of the RAAF H models have it either.
I have a feeling it's a VHF or UHF aerial, but not 100% sure. Maybe one of our Avionics tradies can answer that for sure?
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnsey on Jun 21, 2007 18:45:50 GMT 12
It's a de-icing boot. The changes to the airflow around the vertical stab, thanks to the updated engine/prop combo, led to undesirable handling characteristics in icing conditions. Lockheed also certified the aircraft to FAA standards, which led to more stringent testing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rat Fink on Jun 21, 2007 19:22:31 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 21, 2007 19:58:26 GMT 12
So why is it not painted like other parts that are deicing panels, like the leadinging edges of the wings, tail planes and fin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Barnsey on Jun 22, 2007 14:15:55 GMT 12
My thoughts - It's an inflatable boot (which you obviously can't paint as it'd crack off), and all the other areas are thermally anti/de-iced.
So after a bit googling.... a quote stolen from another site about that area:
"It's an independent inflatable de-icing boot system which operates in either Anti-ice or De-ice mode. 6 seconds inflation @ approximately 20 psi, 54 seconds vaccum. The bleed air is tapped from the aft transverse manifold, has two pressure/regulator relief valves, two water separators, two check valves, an ejector flow control valve, two de-icing timer units. The panel is Aramid Fabric (Kevlar) and the boot is glued to it. There is an HF antenna inside the leading edge of the panel."
|
|
