|
Post by foxcover on Dec 5, 2017 3:10:25 GMT 12
The recent news about the interest in the P8 suggests that NZ are looking at 4 Poseidon’s, I think a better use of money would be to buy 3 P8 and spend the change on 3 C295 equipped for short range MPA and SAR. So we’d have:
3 A400M 3 C295W 3 P8 3 C295 MPA/SAR 1 737 VIP/cargo
Beechcraft wouldn’t be replaced as C295 would take on training role
By as I said, can’t see it happening.
|
|
|
Post by madmac on Dec 5, 2017 12:00:21 GMT 12
It should be noted that C40 & P8 are very different airframes & that it would be cheaper to just buy a green P8 & stick seats in it if we can live without a cargo door.
It should be noted that it is harder to support different airframe types from different periods & countries than if you can get airframes from a single country & period (C130's & P3 have a lot more hardware in common than a P8 & a A400M or even possibly a C295 & A400M). I don't think there is any hope of three types to replace the P8 & C130 as it has been shown that we should consider a minimum of 5 airframes of each config to achieve the level of fleet reliability.
|
|
|
Post by snafu on Dec 11, 2017 3:11:15 GMT 12
The recent news about the interest in the P8 suggests that NZ are looking at 4 Poseidon’s, I think a better use of money would be to buy 3 P8 and spend the change on 3 C295 equipped for short range MPA and SAR. So we’d have: 3 A400M 3 C295W 3 P8 3 C295 MPA/SAR 1 737 VIP/cargo Beechcraft wouldn’t be replaced as C295 would take on training role By as I said, can’t see it happening. Too small a fleet, quantity has a quality all on its own even new aircraft go unserviceable from time to time.
I'd ditch the C295 for 5/6x A400 and along with the C295 mpa. if NZ follows the same upgrades and stay in lockstep with the RAAF and USN P8 is more than just an ASW aircraft, its your ASW/AEW & ISR bird.
if funds become available at a later date which it should I'd be looking at CH-47F as it will have more utility at home and in the islands for HADR and also for the future more robust JATF, hopefully the Canterbury replacement will have enough space for 6x NH-90 or 4x NH-90 and 1x CH-47. VIP can become a PPP with Air NZ which supplies the aircraft and government pays time much like the RNZAF would do with RAAF C17.
Ideally looking to the future for RNZAF I would like to see RNZAF grow,
12x NH-90 (4xextra) 6x A400M 12 MH-60R (as replacement for Sea Sprites) 6x CH-47F 6x P8 8x King airs 8x AT-6B (JATC weapons training and limited light attack)
As I mentioned the Canterbury replacement and with Singapore possibly basing fast jet capability in NZ I was hopping that might trabslate into a more open relationship with a pair of Endurance 170 LHD
www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/naval-exhibitions/2017/imdex-asia-2017-show-daily-news/5257-imdex-asia-2017-st-marine-unveiled-the-endurance-170-lhd.html
|
|
|
Post by foxcover on Dec 11, 2017 11:24:48 GMT 12
The recent news about the interest in the P8 suggests that NZ are looking at 4 Poseidon’s, I think a better use of money would be to buy 3 P8 and spend the change on 3 C295 equipped for short range MPA and SAR. So we’d have: 3 A400M 3 C295W 3 P8 3 C295 MPA/SAR 1 737 VIP/cargo Beechcraft wouldn’t be replaced as C295 would take on training role By as I said, can’t see it happening. Too small a fleet, quantity has a quality all on its own even new aircraft go unserviceable from time to time.
I'd ditch the C295 for 5/6x A400 and along with the C295 mpa. if NZ follows the same upgrades and stay in lockstep with the RAAF and USN P8 is more than just an ASW aircraft, its your ASW/AEW & ISR bird.
if funds become available at a later date which it should I'd be looking at CH-47F as it will have more utility at home and in the islands for HADR and also for the future more robust JATF, hopefully the Canterbury replacement will have enough space for 6x NH-90 or 4x NH-90 and 1x CH-47. VIP can become a PPP with Air NZ which supplies the aircraft and government pays time much like the RNZAF would do with RAAF C17.
Ideally looking to the future for RNZAF I would like to see RNZAF grow,
12x NH-90 (4xextra) 6x A400M 12 MH-60R (as replacement for Sea Sprites) 6x CH-47F 6x P8 8x King airs 8x AT-6B (JATC weapons training and limited light attack)
As I mentioned the Canterbury replacement and with Singapore possibly basing fast jet capability in NZ I was hopping that might trabslate into a more open relationship with a pair of Endurance 170 LHD
www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/naval-exhibitions/2017/imdex-asia-2017-show-daily-news/5257-imdex-asia-2017-st-marine-unveiled-the-endurance-170-lhd.html
You can realistically afford half of what you’ve listed, at best.
|
|
|
Post by snafu on Dec 11, 2017 19:08:47 GMT 12
You can realistically afford half of what you’ve listed, at best. Yes you can, its the politicians who refuse to recognise that the budget is to small and largely ineffective considering that as part of the budget there are a number of things can be done to increase the real dollar funding for defence. the last time I looked it was running at about 1% of GDP. take out costing for capital charge(18%) and asset depreciation charges(15%) and more than likely raises the defence about another 32% which works out to roughly 0.8 billion per year without even raising the budget which would give you a figure of 3.3 billion from its current 2.5Billion
better still yet how about 1.5% of GDP that will give you 4.9B
|
|
|
Post by madmac on Dec 11, 2017 20:18:54 GMT 12
Noting that i would love to see more money for defence.
What would we do with more defence money, divide it up equally between the services so as to not hurt anyones feeling (which would be criminally incompetent but principally what we do now). Part of the defence funding issue is we are not really clear on purpose, currently we seem to be focused on being a crap Expeditionary force rather than a defence force for New Zealand (even simple things like our uniforms are literary the wrong colour to be a defence force). We can't even mention China or the political stability issues in the US (which will likely continue for at least decade & Trump is only symptomatic) in the defence white paper. But its Ok because ISIS & Co can be made a bogey man that is extremely unlikely to show up anyones short comings (not to mention that they would actually need to kill 40 people a week to be more lethal than suicide in this country).
There is no point in adding more money to this mess without better leadership, principally civilian with foresight & no tolerance for crap.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Dec 12, 2017 9:25:48 GMT 12
What are the Russians producing at the moment and would we consider purchasing from them? We have the right coloured government to swing a deal with them now. Take a look at this footage that Stu Bain just sent me of an IL-76, I had no idea they were also bombers with air gunners onboard.
|
|
|
Post by saratoga on Dec 12, 2017 16:27:34 GMT 12
Dave, the clues would have been the bombadiers windows in the nose and the gun turret in the tail..
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Dec 12, 2017 20:12:40 GMT 12
I have never looked that close to by honest. One transport is much like another to me.
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Dec 12, 2017 21:05:01 GMT 12
I thought the glass nose was for the navigator to see landmarks. No actual bombing ability (although it looks like they played with this recently).
|
|
|
Post by saratoga on Dec 12, 2017 21:24:49 GMT 12
Landmarks , Targets , guess it depends if you fly over them or drop bombs as to what you call them.
And i think you need to be 2 sheets to the wind to qualify to fly these aircraft anyway.
|
|
|
Post by exkiwiforces on Dec 13, 2017 17:22:23 GMT 12
Noting that i would love to see more money for defence. What would we do with more defence money, divide it up equally between the services so as to not hurt anyones feeling (which would be criminally incompetent but principally what we do now). Part of the defence funding issue is we are not really clear on purpose, currently we seem to be focused on being a crap Expeditionary force rather than a defence force for New Zealand (even simple things like our uniforms are literary the wrong colour to be a defence force). We can't even mention China or the political stability issues in the US (which will likely continue for at least decade & Trump is only symptomatic) in the defence white paper. But its Ok because ISIS & Co can be made a bogey man that is extremely unlikely to show up anyones short comings (not to mention that they would actually need to kill 40 people a week to be more lethal than suicide in this country). There is no point in adding more money to this mess without better leadership, principally civilian with foresight & no tolerance for crap. I believe there is going to be a mini budget tomorrow by this current mob in government, so we might get a better idea where the $20 Billion upgrade is heading especially for the Future Airlift and MPA projects are heading. As my uncle said to me a couple of weeks ago while I was NZ a couple of weeks ago he said the P3 and C-130's are about to hit X hrs and he said while he was still in the RNZAF (about 18mths ago) Lockheed warned the RNZAF/MoD (one is hoping they told the Pollies this?) once the P3's and C-130 hit X hrs you are on your own as we (Lockheed) don't know what is going to fail or when. He was pity damming about how Labour refuse to take up the option for 8 J models back in 99 on top of the ACF being Disbanded and along with a few other decisions that Labour and National made in regards to the RNZAF post 99 until he left in 2015/16 If this is anything to go by ATM www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1712/S00133/government-resolves-defence-cost-blowout.htm then I think the NZDF/MoD are going to have a "Houston we have a problem" moment. A further update to this from Richard Harman's website Politik. From what I understand with the ANZAC Frigate upgrade blowouts its now making the Aussie option sound cheaper than this cockup and like what Richard Harman said I'm waiting to here what last MOD has to say on this. Anyway the mini budget is on today so fingers cross, but after what has happen in the last 24hrs I'm not sure now. politik.co.nz/en/content/economy/1253/The-38-per-cent-Defence-budget-blowout-HYEFU-Defence-budget-Anzac-frigates-cost-blowouts.htm
|
|
|
Post by isc on Dec 13, 2017 22:08:11 GMT 12
It's interesting to note that Russian airliners such as the IL-18, TU-114, TU-134, and a number of other aircraft from the USSR had glazed noses as you would expect in a bomber from WW2, these aircraft (presumably)weren't designed to drop anything, they were passenger planes. A heavy military transport, designed for airdrops could well make use of the glass ware. Perhaps the airliners grew fresh tomatoes for the passengers lunch. LOL.isc
|
|
|
Post by kiwirico on Dec 15, 2017 8:12:58 GMT 12
[/p] if funds become available at a later date which it should I'd be looking at CH-47F as it will have more utility at home and in the islands for HADR and also for the future more robust JATF, hopefully the Canterbury replacement will have enough space for 6x NH-90 or 4x NH-90 and 1x CH-47. VIP can become a PPP with Air NZ which supplies the aircraft and government pays time much like the RNZAF would do with RAAF C17.
Ideally looking to the future for RNZAF I would like to see RNZAF grow,
12x NH-90 (4xextra) 6x A400M 12 MH-60R (as replacement for Sea Sprites) 6x CH-47F 6x P8 8x King airs 8x AT-6B (JATC weapons training and limited light attack)
No need for 4 extra NH.90 if you will add 6 CH-47F Chinooks. The current Sea Sprites are good enough to fly another good number of years, so no money waste on another expensive helo (MH-60R). Add four to six more AW.109 to supplement the current fleet.I miss the medium sized transports here! 8 AT-6B would indeed a great idea... I have doubts about eight Super King Airs, or will some of them equiped for coastal patrol duties.
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by ZacYates on Dec 15, 2017 8:52:12 GMT 12
And i think you need to be 2 sheets to the wind to qualify to fly these aircraft anyway. So nice to see the old Cold War Western bias against Russian technology is alive and well.
|
|
|
Post by snafu on Dec 15, 2017 14:56:38 GMT 12
No need for 4 extra NH.90 if you will add 6 CH-47F Chinooks. The current Sea Sprites are good enough to fly another good number of years, so no money waste on another expensive helo (MH-60R). Add four to six more AW.109 to supplement the current fleet.I miss the medium sized transports here! 8 AT-6B would indeed a great idea... I have doubts about eight Super King Airs, or will some of them equiped for coastal patrol duties. Cheers. Post 2035 planning from what I can ascertain is that the JATF will become heavier in combat weight which in my veiw should be a mix of troop numbers and capabilty. By leaving the medium utilty lift as is it limited the operational capabilty at home and whilst the JATF is at sea,. Out of the 8 aircraft you would only have 3/4 airframes avalible the others should be in various state of maintenance, by increasing the capabilty to 12 Means you potencialy have 4x airframes for the JATF 4x airframes for domestic needs 4x various levels of maintenance, of course numbes can go up or down deepending on circumstances.[CH-47 should have 2x airframes avalible at any one time as a minimum,surge capabilty should see 4x aircraft at the most, using the Singaporean Endurance 170 LHD as a guide we could see at a maximum effort 6x NH-90 2x CH-47 and 2/3 SeaSprites for a JATF rotary task group. For NZ that is doing more with not much more expenditure over a period of time.
|
|
|
Post by saratoga on Dec 15, 2017 15:50:51 GMT 12
And i think you need to be 2 sheets to the wind to qualify to fly these aircraft anyway. So nice to see the old Cold War Western bias against Russian technology is alive and well. Not a bias, at best a logistical reality. And the comment about needing to be drunk to fly them was from observed behaviour!
|
|
|
Post by isc on Dec 15, 2017 21:21:04 GMT 12
I think the Russians have got past the wood burning stove that the IL-2/DC-3 used to use for cabin heating. isc
|
|
|
Post by snafu on Jan 13, 2018 9:14:10 GMT 12
there may be a fire sale coming up in the UK, take you pick over the carcass of UK Defence. Slightly used C130J just run in one owner!
/photo/1
|
|
|
Post by kiwiredley on Jan 13, 2018 9:50:52 GMT 12
problem is not slightly used, but nearly worn out.
|
|