|
Post by Calum on May 9, 2023 15:24:51 GMT 12
No helicopter can be used against an "adversary with state of the art AAW capability", Ukraine is the best example of that. The ITAS was never reliable enough (for the RAN) period. Plus the cancellation of the OPV's meant the Sea Sprite didn't really have a small ship to play with. Back in the mid 1990s though, most ships carried RIM-7 or equivalent, which are pretty short ranged by today’s standards. Even the USN used AGM-119 on Seahawks. Up against a ship with ESSM or equivalent, it is a different story. No doubt those changing realities helped the RAN make up its mind whether to persevere with the Sea Sprite. Sure, against ESSM or similar that is basically true. That said there were plenty of Russian vessels with longer range SAM's. Whether they were ever a realistic threat to the RAN is another matter. The inability of the ITAS to meet the RAN's reliability requirements for a single pilot (2 crew) helicopter was by far the main factor. Add in the OPV cancellation and some institutional dislike but the ITAS / single pilot was the biggie. The Missile was the one part of the programme that appeared to work as advertised. There was some thought of integrating it on the S-70B2. Once the OPV went there was really no point in Seasprite as the ANZAC could operate the S-70B2. Integrating Penguin on S-70B2 (if you still wanted the standoff range) and buying more (or the USN variant) would probably have been better
|
|
|
Post by Calum on May 3, 2023 16:06:09 GMT 12
The changes to the SH-2G(I) from the RAN configuration was purposefully kept as minimal possible, RAST was replaced by Decklock being the main one. Almost everything else was kept the same, including the ASuW capability. The NH90 can't replace the Seasprite, it wont fit on most of our surface fleet, and has no ASuW or ASW capability, which are the two primary roles of the Seasprite. Wasn’t the troublesome fully automated ITAS flight control system also deleted, or disabled? That was the primary reason the RAN walked away from the aircraft. It was never reliable enough to allow the aircraft to be used against an adversary with state of the art AAW capability. No helicopter can be used against an "adversary with state of the art AAW capability", Ukraine is the best example of that. The ITAS was never reliable enough (for the RAN) period. Plus the cancellation of the OPV's meant the Sea Sprite didn't really have a small ship to play with.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on May 3, 2023 15:13:42 GMT 12
A quick selection from my Classic Fighters 2023 Friday photos. Enjoy. Great set of photos Colin, having seen your photo by the Mossie I can say I was sitting by you up on the stands on Saturday - If I'd known who you were I'd have said hi. It was cold up there.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Apr 17, 2023 15:16:23 GMT 12
Excellent set of images Grant
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Mar 29, 2023 13:17:02 GMT 12
Some nice shots there Grant. I like a lot the low angle static or taxiing shots
I've given your Flicr a follow. Pity Australia seems to be uncooperative with decent weather for airshows in the past 3 to 4 years. Every one I've been to has been gloomy. Looks like this wasn't much different.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Mar 27, 2023 14:07:38 GMT 12
Any news on RNZAF participation at the show?
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jan 17, 2023 13:59:16 GMT 12
I hope it'll still be here for Classic Fighters in Omaka this year.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jan 17, 2023 13:58:11 GMT 12
CEAFAR is an excellent radar (designed and built here as well) but that's not the point. The point was it's specification complicates an already already time consuming process. Same with Type 26 specifying AEGIS and CEFAR... is it really a Type 26 now? How much time does the integrations of these Australian requirements add to the build? As for the ANZAC how top heavy do they look with CEAFAR on them... They look they will roll over in a storm The RAN never wanted the "Type 26," it was just the best hull to leverage off to build the full spectrum warship they wanted. Luckily the Brits decided to adopt the Mk 41 VLS and Mk45 Mod 4 gun, making things a lot easier. Better than the Hobart class? (Serious Question, I don't know)
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jan 17, 2023 13:57:17 GMT 12
But has it reached FOC yet (how long have they had it)? Have the underlying airworthiness issues been resolved or are they going to accept the risk and move (It should be later) You're the one who suggested C-27 is flying the types of missions it was always going to spend 99.99% of its flight time on. My point as many of those missions are civil aid to the community tasks, and could have been done by contracted civil aircraft of similar capability as they aren't core 'warfighting" roles. The "safety" upgrade is primarily the replacement of radios. No big issue. Similarly, FOC is due to the IRCM system issues. All the RAAF's transport aircraft spend a lot of time on civil assistance roles, as do the army's CH-47s. Right now its the floods in northern WA, last year it was flooding in NSW, prior to that it was the east coast bushfires. Recently a C-17 supported the Australian Antarctic Division by airdropping supplies: australianaviation.com.au/2023/01/in-pictures-globemaster-airdrops-in-antarctica/ www.defence.gov.au/news-events/news/2023-01-09/airdrop-system-assists-antarctic-scientistsI assume they have accepted the airworthiness issues with seating etc Well aware that ADF spend a lot time on Civil aid to the community. But the point remains the C-27J hasn't been a rollicking success. The RAAF have done a great job keeping it's issues under the radar and I will slip quietly into retirement in the next decade. This is ome time that buying an FMS platform hasn't worked out. That it's not truly a US platform and that it's not really used in any great numbers by the US hasn't helped.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jan 16, 2023 13:55:39 GMT 12
Indeed CEA and CEAFAR will be interesting and fingers crossed goes well in the Hunter Class. I’m assuming it’s doing OK with the upgraded Anzacs. Balance here is its good to have local industry in this space but needs to do the job. Not sure if there have been any other buyers? The upgraded ANZACs with CEAFAR seem to have performed well in test: www.australiandefence.com.au/news/sustainment-asmd-an-outstanding-success-adm-october-2014Teamed with the more capable AEGIS CMS the Hunter class should be pretty effective. If anything, the current CEAFAR set up is probably deemed overly capable (and expensive) by most navies. The Hunters, like the current ANZACs, will have 6 short range and 6 long range arrays plus CEAMOUNT illumination arrays. The UK type 26 makes do with a single rotating array, while the Canadian CSC will have 4 arrays for its AN/SPY-7(V)1. CEAFAR is an excellent radar (designed and built here as well) but that's not the point. The point was it's specification complicates an already already time consuming process. Same with Type 26 specifying AEGIS and CEFAR... is it really a Type 26 now? How much time does the integrations of these Australian requirements add to the build? As for the ANZAC how top heavy do they look with CEAFAR on them... They look they will roll over in a storm
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jan 16, 2023 13:52:09 GMT 12
Where is airdropping of vehicles and paratroops part of the civil aid to the community that is suppsoedily 99% of what they bought the C-27J for (which it isn't) All the things you mention are it's military role which is what it would struggles to do in a non permissive environment has it even reached FOC yet? last I heard there still a number of airworthiness issues that either couldn't or hadn't be resolved. lets not pretend it's been a stellar purchase.. It's probably the worst platform the RAAF has bought in ages from an airworthiness / introduction to service perspective. (OK Wedgetail nd KC-30 had major issues but they appear to have worked out) That they are replacing C-27J with C-130J's in the next decade tells the real story. How many western air forces would fly transport aircraft into non permissive environments, and how would a C-130J fare against a battery of S-300? Into environments where there may be a small number of MANPADS in use, possibly in critical situations. As I alluded to, if the region became "hot" quickly, resources would be found to address issues with the C-27J’s infra-red countermeasures (IRCM) system. The C-27J is not limited to civil assistance: australianaviation.com.au/2022/11/raaf-f-35s-and-spartans-to-train-with-malaysian-air-force/But has it reached FOC yet (how long have they had it)? Have the underlying airworthiness issues been resolved or are they going to accept the risk and move (It should be later) You're the one who suggested C-27 is flying the types of missions it was always going to spend 99.99% of its flight time on. My point as many of those missions are civil aid to the community tasks, and could have been done by contracted civil aircraft of similar capability as they aren't core 'warfighting" roles.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jan 11, 2023 13:59:28 GMT 12
They should have bought a civil aircraft to fly those C-27 missions then...... Would have saved lots of pain. It's not been a great purchase from what I hear. But what civil aircraft has the payload /range of of the C-27J with a rear cargo ramp for bulky items and vehicles, can airdrop cargo and paratroops, has rough field capability, and offers key system commonality with the C-130 for reduced operating costs? Where is airdropping of vehicles and paratroops part of the civil aid to the community that is suppsoedily 99% of what they bought the C-27J for (which it isn't) All the things you mention are it's military role which is what it would struggles to do in a non permissive environment has it even reached FOC yet? last I heard there still a number of airworthiness issues that either couldn't or hadn't be resolved. lets not pretend it's been a stellar purchase.. It's probably the worst platform the RAAF has bought in ages from an airworthiness / introduction to service perspective. (OK Wedgetail nd KC-30 had major issues but they appear to have worked out) That they are replacing C-27J with C-130J's in the next decade tells the real story.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jan 10, 2023 14:01:19 GMT 12
Sounds a great idea but one might expect the operations people will require changes. It could be room for extra crew members down to a different size of tyres which might mean different wheels and different final drives! The ADF will find a way to make it more expensive, not fit for deployment or obsolete by the time it gets to deployment. We are allies of the U.S. and therefore tinker with things that are perfectly fine, until we break them. Already done by requiring use of the CEA radar
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jan 10, 2023 13:59:23 GMT 12
Even the C-27 is flying the types of missions it was always going to spend 99.99% of its flight time on (if things heat up, there will be a quick resolution of the remaining issues). They should have bought a civil aircraft to fly those C-27 missions then...... Would have saved lots of pain. It's not been a great purchase from what I hear.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Nov 17, 2022 14:03:31 GMT 12
Fantastic photos Col, thank you so much for sharing! I've seen several videos of the F-35 display. Amazing, but I'd love to see it in person! You'll have plenty of time , it's going to be around for while . The RAAF display is excellent, better than what I saw in the US in 2017. That's why I ditched nearly all of my F-35 photos. The sky was so dark on the Saturday that it was hard to get a decent image that doesn't nead a heap of Post processing . Colin's are very good especially considering the conditions. I seen a few others that are quite dynamic but they have clearly had a lot of extra photoshop help as the light in them doesn't look like what I remember it If anyone is interested I'm slowly loading my images here
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Nov 17, 2022 13:58:53 GMT 12
Another view: From: www.traveller.com.au/traveller-letters-i-was-excited-to-fly-on-the-new-a321neo-but-now-ill-try-to-avoid-it-h27qlpTraveller Letters: I was excited to fly on the new A321Neo, but now I'll try to avoid it. Air New Zealand's Airbus A321neo gets the thumbs-down from one Traveller reader.IT'S A NO FOR NEO "After recently heading home to New Zealand I was a bit excited to be flying on the brand new Air New Zealand A321Neo. The plane seats more than 200 passengers but it is a single aisle plane with 37 rows and only three (yes three) toilets. Both flights were delayed and the boarding process was tediously long. Fortunately I was in the front of the plane so managed to escape quickly at the other end but the poor passengers at the rear of the plane would have waited quite some time. While the service from Air New Zealand staff was excellent, one must wonder how they feel about this plane. I will avoid the NEO where possible for future trips home. If you are going to squeeze that many passengers into a plane, airlines need to consider getting them on and off efficiently." I flew on the Neo from SYD-AKL and back this year and was pleasantly surprised how roomy and comfortable the seats were. I think I was near the front but I don't recall it being any worse / better than embarking /disembarking on a similar sized aircraft. Unless you're in the front, getting on and Off is always a faff regardless of the aircraft type and size.. It's just a feature of air travel
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Nov 16, 2022 13:25:44 GMT 12
Lovely set of photos Colin. I was there Saturday but my keepers aren't good as yours.
Typical for WoI the weather was pretty crappy for photography on the day (after the nice start to the morning,) despite 3 weeks of excellent weather prior to it. They just can get a break. That said the displays were excellent and everything on the program bar the C-47 flew.
I enjoyed seeing the tracker and, AP-3C and Connie fly. It's been a long time since I'd seen any of those in the air. The Spitfire IX and Fw-190 , along with the F-35 were the highlights for displays for me.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Nov 8, 2022 13:55:54 GMT 12
Last time I sat in one I found the seat had shrunk
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Oct 25, 2022 13:36:33 GMT 12
Can't see the elite politicians turning up to international events in a "VIP C17". The RAAF are getting great mileage out of the new BBJ What new BBJ? Do you mean the KC-30?
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Aug 16, 2022 17:47:45 GMT 12
Some of those figures are eyewatering. Why does the P-8 cost double that of a C-40 an hour when they are based on the same airframe? Is that taking into account the cost of the extra crew? Or perhaps maintaining the avionics? You should see the Helicopter costs..... The KC-46A figure looks a little optimistic
|
|