|
|
Post by beagle on May 31, 2013 20:02:20 GMT 12
We seem to be going off thread a bit but yes C295MPA is not a P3K2 replacement, but a basic 295 with a search radar woul be ok for EEZ SAR
Can anyone on 5 Sqn pass a run test or are they still on the walk test. Maybe a smaller galley might help.
Think I might get some flak here..
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on May 31, 2013 20:13:47 GMT 12
HUGE Atlas fan here
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on May 31, 2013 20:14:21 GMT 12
boeing and LM have nothing to offer us that we need. Have the RNZAF's future airlift requirements been published? Whilsit I agree, that on paper, and to many, the A-400 would seem to be a good fit for the RNZAF (I'm coming around to that view myself) we all seem to be assuming the A400 will deliver the capabilty it is supposed to... And to me that is still unprovn (plus there is my inbuilt bias against European aircraft, IMH experience generally overpriced and under supported) |
|
|
|
Post by beagle on May 31, 2013 20:27:12 GMT 12
we've broken you. you will convert.
When you go to bed tonight, just keep dreaming A400's flying around.
|
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on May 31, 2013 20:35:05 GMT 12
So you reckon not replace frigates with another frigate I do not think we will replace our ANZAC frigates with the same vessel as what the ADF will replace theirs. It will come down to aspirations and costs. The RAN will want a fragte that has all the bells and whistles. It will have CEAFAR radar, at least 48 ESSM, Harpoons, ASROCs, light weight torpedos and everything else they can fit on it. they had and still have trouble with their ANZACS being top heavy (to much weight above water line)and ours don't because we don't have all the bells and whistles. Apparently the VLS (Vertical Launch System)on the ANZAC is reasonably highup in the hull and when you load it up with Harpoons, ASROCs & ESSMs it gets quite weighty. Then the RAN also have a lot of heavy stuff up the mast as well. We haven't because we to stingy which for once worked in our favour. In 15 years time two frigates will be expensive to replace and by rights we should be operating a minimum of three to ensure we always have one operational, one handy and one in programmed maintenance / refitting. I think we need a multi role frigate along the lines of the Danish Absalom class. But it has been suggested on a recent Strategist blog that NZ may not buy two frigates and instead may replace the two frigates with corvettes getting more corvettes for the same amount of money. It is something that may not be silly but I'll have to do some research. The ANZAC replacement could be upwards of 5 - 6,000 tonnes. Te Kaha is 3,600 tonnes and the Leander frigate Canterbury was 2,945 tonnes. The frigate Otago was 2,577 tonnes and the current OPVs are 1900 tonnes. Note to mods: Sorry for being off thread. Maybe you couldd move the appropriate posts to the RNZN thread please if you feel so inclined. |
|
|
|
Post by nige on May 31, 2013 20:40:00 GMT 12
We do not have a need for the type of capability that the C17 offers and we could not justify the expenditure. One C17 on its own would not provide enough capability. Integration with the ADF would create issues both for them but more for us. The procurement of the A400 by NZDF would be of more use to the ADF than NZDF acquiring one or two C17s. I am sure this has been discussed earlier in this thread so I suggest you have a read back through. Disagree again, (re reply post on pg13)! How can you say that we do not need the type of capacity the C17 offers? A C17 can carry two LAV's direct from NZ to Darwin (staging area) whereas an A400 can only carry one (and if memory serves correct, not as far as Darwin). So which would be more efficient and effective for heavy lift? Re: Intergration into the ADF - their's are flat out, so one (or two) NZ C17's would give ADF additional capacity when required. Similarly when NZ's 1 (or 2) C17's are in maintenance (or off on a deployment) then NZ can legitimitally ask the Aus Gov to free up a C17 for a tasking (assuming an ADF C17 is free) without being "bludgers". Then we integrate training and maintenance etc. Win-win surely? For most NZ needs, the C130 (say 6-8 stretched J's) should meet many of our needs in the SWP, backed up with C295's or equiv. Anyhow this is all theoretical- I'll leave this to the Defence planners and their air mobility review to decide  |
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on May 31, 2013 20:42:08 GMT 12
boeing and LM have nothing to offer us that we need. Have the RNZAF's future airlift requirements been published? Whilsit I agree, that on paper, and to many, the A-400 would seem to be a good fit for the RNZAF (I'm coming around to that view myself) we all seem to be assuming the A400 will deliver the capabilty it is supposed to... And to me that is still unprovn (plus there is my inbuilt bias against European aircraft, IMH experience generally overpriced and under supported) Then study is being done at the moment. It was started last year and is due for completion next year, not 2015 as some claim. The reason for a 2014 completion date is so that it will inform the 2015 Defence White Paper and I have that in writing from the current Minister of Defence. That is why I am very sceptical of the claim about the herc replacement being pushed back to 2025. |
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on May 31, 2013 21:01:19 GMT 12
Disagree again NM, how can you say that we do not need the type of capacity the C17 offers? A C17 can carry two LAV's to Darwin whereas an A400 can only carry one (and if memory serves correct, not as far as Darwin. So which would be more effective for heavy lift? Re: Intergration into the ADF - their's are flat out, so one (or two) NZ C17's would give ADF additional capacity when required. Similarly when NZ's 1 (or 2) C17's are in maintenance (or off on a deployment) then NZ can legitimitally ask the Aus Gov to free up a C17 for a tasking (assuming an ADF C17 is free). Then we integrate training and maintenance etc. Win-win surely? For most NZ needs, the C130 (say 6-8 stretched J's should meet many of our needs), backed up with C295's or equiv. Anyhow this is all theoretical- I'll leave this to the Defence planners and their air mobility review to decide :-) The RAAF C17s are only flat out at the moment because of Afghan. What happens after they finish the Afghan pullout? Their taskings will drop. A C17 costs a bucket load of money to operate vis a vis an A400: pure jet Vs turbo prop. It' all about the right platforms for NZDF not the flashest, largest or fastest piece of kit. We cannot fit a NH90 into any version of the C130 and even though the NH90s can self deploy, would you like to fly one across the ditch or to Darwin or Singas? It's already been noted that the herc is to big for some of the taskings it gets, but does them because nothing else to do them with. We cannot always rely on the ADF and the USAF to pull our chestnuts out of the fire and the A400 gives us the opportunity to taskings, that we've had to go cap in hand to others to do for us. Combine the A400 with the C295 or C27J, we then have a very capable airlift capability that also fits a niche gap the the USAF and the RAAF don't have. That is also why I would like to see the B757 replaced with say three A321-200s modded the same way as the B757s have been done, because that combi mod really works and has served us very well. At the present point in time yes, this is theoretical, but theory leads to decisions and eventually a capability. What the capability is we'll have to wait and see. But one thing I've noticed recently is that the Europeans are far more conducive to price negotiations than the US firms. I don't think the RAAF C27J buy was a good deal. |
|
|
|
Post by nige on May 31, 2013 21:47:54 GMT 12
Last one from me, as a civee I do not mind what NZDF chooses to enable heavy lift (A400 or C17), as long as it happens!
Although C17 is a proven and mature product and can operate on rough and short airfields. Aren't the operating costs the same as the 757's (Ref VfM report or a UK Gov report?)? Didn't the Auditor General "recently" criticise the NZDF for purchasing unproven/new/immature platforms? Which is what the A400 is, it's already years behind schedule (didn't the UK pull out of their A400 purchase because of the delays)? Like many new delayed types (NH-90, F-35, F-111 back in the day etc), the A400 hasn't had its bugs ironed out yet....
Timing is everything. According to some reports I've seen the NZDF didn't select the C-130J back in 2001/02 because at that stage, it was still regarded as an immature platform with its bugs still to be ironed out. I'd imagine if the current Air Mobility review is to conclude by next year and if Airbus still don't have the A400 operational by then, then NZ is taking on a big risk. It's ok for the ADF to be thinking of the A400 when their C130J's are retired in another 15 or 20 years as by then the A400 will be mature! It seems to me that for NZ, the timing is out. Unless the Airlift Review is stretched out (which isn't a good idea when other major platforms need replacing from 2020-2030)?
I also read another defence report which suggested the C130H would last until (or replacements start to roll in) around 2017/18 (mind you not sure whether the original LEP delays may stretch those dates further).
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on May 31, 2013 22:22:29 GMT 12
Interesting about the risks inherent with buying a new, unproven type. When the RNZAF brought its Herks back in the 1960s, they were the very first export customer for the C130H. It was probably considered a bit of a gamble at the time, but it turns out the C130H was probably the second finest airlifter ever built (other than the C47...)
|
|
|
|
Post by htbrst on Jun 1, 2013 14:10:46 GMT 12
Last one from me, as a civee I do not mind what NZDF chooses to enable heavy lift (A400 or C17), as long as it happens! Timing is everything. According to some reports I've seen the NZDF didn't select the C-130J back in 2001/02 because at that stage, it was still regarded as an immature platform with its bugs still to be ironed out. I'd imagine if the current Air Mobility review is to conclude by next year and if Airbus still don't have the A400 operational by then, then NZ is taking on a big risk. Timing is everything - If we wait too long the C-17 will be out of production leaving the A400 as the only option anyway. Unless there are more orders the final C-17 rolls off the production line in about September next year. The C-17 seems like the logical choice to me and I particularly like the Global maintenance network that Australia has bought into - but unless we hop to it, we might be a bit late to the party |
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 1, 2013 14:26:20 GMT 12
RNZAF will never operate C17's, owned by the NZ MOD
|
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Jun 1, 2013 15:15:23 GMT 12
RNZAF will never operate C17's, owned by the NZ MOD Exactly. The above quote is what an Aussie on DT worked out for 3 x C17 and 5 x C27J. He knows his stuff but I disagree with him on the C17 and I'm not keen on the C27J. So if we went with the mix he suggests we would basically triple our airlift capacity, however at NZ$1.6 billion would it be value for money and more importantly would the platforms be the ideal platforms for the NZDF capability requirements? I think not because of the acquisition costs and ongoing term of life costs. |
|
|
|
Post by richard1098 on Jun 1, 2013 15:50:59 GMT 12
So you reckon not replace frigates with another frigate I do not think we will replace our ANZAC frigates with the same vessel as what the ADF will replace theirs. It will come down to aspirations and costs. The RAN will want a fragte that has all the bells and whistles. It will have CEAFAR radar, at least 48 ESSM, Harpoons, ASROCs, light weight torpedos and everything else they can fit on it. they had and still have trouble with their ANZACS being top heavy (to much weight above water line)and ours don't because we don't have all the bells and whistles. Apparently the VLS (Vertical Launch System)on the ANZAC is reasonably highup in the hull and when you load it up with Harpoons, ASROCs & ESSMs it gets quite weighty. Then the RAN also have a lot of heavy stuff up the mast as well. We haven't because we to stingy which for once worked in our favour. The ADF's ANZAC replacements will likely use the in-development AUSPAR radar, which is being developed under a joint US/Aus program aimed at developing a high powered, 3D multipurpose active phased array radar. CEA Technologes is the program lead, and will leverage off its CEAFAR/CEAmount technologies. The RAN mounts the Harpoon in quad cannister launchers forward of the bridge, rather than using the VLS. You're right about the direction of RAN planning, early concept planning is for frigates that are larger and much more capable than the current ASMD updated ANZACs. |
|
|
|
Post by bell407 on Jun 9, 2013 22:22:51 GMT 12
This video may be relevant to this thread.
|
|
fergi
Flying Officer
Posts: 55
|
Post by fergi on Jun 10, 2013 18:18:42 GMT 12
Nice report on the Grizzly me thinks. As long as the RNZAF don't go for the C130J and wait for the grizzly they should do ok. Don't think we will ever see the C17 here apart from on a visit. What news of our Herc fleet, have they got 3 operational yet? How are the other 2 going on their modifications?
|
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Jul 26, 2013 18:03:30 GMT 12
I have stated many times that the Air Transport Review is occuring now and will finish next year in time to inform the 2015 DWP. This assertion is based on the below excerpt of a 2012 letter I received from the Minister of Defence in February last year in response to some queries I had.
Recently I emailed the Minister regarding some questions I had one of which was about the Air Transport review. Below is the reply I received.
Having read that,I emailed back asking for some clarification with the below being part ofmy email.
So if the Air Transport Replacement Project goes ahead after the 2015 DWP it's still dependent upon mundane minor things such as the 2014 election, and / or earthquakes and other natural hazards.
|
|
|
|
Post by tfly on Jul 26, 2013 18:24:09 GMT 12
The A400M display at RIAT this year was nothing short of amazing! Just sayin!
|
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Jul 26, 2013 18:35:33 GMT 12
I am a big fan of the A400M. Also saw video of the C27J Spartan doing a barrel roll.
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jul 26, 2013 20:01:41 GMT 12
I have stated many times that the Air Transport Review is occuring now and will finish next year in time to inform the 2015 DWP. This assertion is based on the below excerpt of a 2012 letter I received from the Minister of Defence in February last year in response to some queries I had. Recently I emailed the Minister regarding some questions I had one of which was about the Air Transport review. Below is the reply I received. Having read that,I emailed back asking for some clarification with the below being part ofmy email. So if the Air Transport Replacement Project goes ahead after the 2015 DWP it's still dependent upon mundane minor things such as the 2014 election, and / or earthquakes and other natural hazards. typical answers in the first 2 replies. can see the C130H(NZ) being in service into the early 2020 years as for natural disasters first chch, now wellytown, isn't there another big place up north that could be next. |
|
