|
Post by ErrolC on Dec 14, 2015 14:53:56 GMT 12
I'm sure AirNZ will dispose of them on the open market when it suits them. DoD can buy suitable secondhand airframes (of whatever type) from the open market whenever it suits them.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2015 15:12:49 GMT 12
Suthg, I was only correcting you as you said they would only be able to transport one '90 at a time on the Canterbury. From memory we can chuck 4 on board. Using the Canterbury has the advantage of being able to take the pack up and full support team in one hit.
|
|
|
Post by No longer identifiable on Dec 14, 2015 15:56:31 GMT 12
And another advantage: If a natural disaster resulted in the need for a deployment of NH90s, then it's also entirely possible that the same natural disaster may result in the temporary loss of an airstrip or two. If this were the case, then air-carried NH90s may not be an option but sea-carried certainly would be.
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Dec 14, 2015 17:20:10 GMT 12
sorry but a complete waste of time and money. What would they use them for. carrying pax and freight both strategically and domestically ? That's what the B757 does and does well. The only difference between the 2 would be the range. Both still would require ground support equipment to load /unload cargo which is one reason the B757 is being replaced.
|
|
|
Post by Swingtail on Dec 14, 2015 19:51:08 GMT 12
sorry but a complete waste of time and money. What would they use them for. carrying pax and freight both strategically and domestically ? That's what the B757 does and does well. The only difference between the 2 would be the range. Both still would require ground support equipment to load /unload cargo which is one reason the B757 is being replaced. Are you talking 767 v 757 ?
|
|
|
Post by nzjet on Dec 14, 2015 20:32:04 GMT 12
The RNZAF would be foolish to pass up a couple of the Air New Zealand 767-300s when they are retired from the fleet. They were offered and declined.
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Dec 14, 2015 20:33:24 GMT 12
Yes. oh yes there are other small differences as well but why spend money on something to replace what you more or less have.
|
|
|
Post by madmac on Dec 15, 2015 10:11:19 GMT 12
Both still would require ground support equipment to load /unload cargo which is one reason the B757 is being replaced. It is not that hard to build a fly away pallet loader for the 757, dam sight cheaper than using buying a strategic transports. Mind you the 757's would have been a lot cheaper to operate if they were put on the ZK reg and not the military reg (parts pool issues etc).
|
|
|
Post by kiwirob on Dec 18, 2015 20:57:31 GMT 12
When the 767's leave the ANZ fleet next year they will all be over 20 years of age, with high hours, why would the RNZAF want them? There's even talk of ANZ keeping them around a little longer due to the low price oil.
|
|