|
|
Post by vs on Jun 16, 2020 22:09:25 GMT 12
Totally agree with Dave. 777 is far to much for the Air Force. Would only be able to operate it out of Ohakea. what a load of bollocks Are you a Performance Engineer? Could you please list all the airfields a 777 could take off from in New Zealand on a wet runway with 300 pax? |
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Jun 16, 2020 22:29:06 GMT 12
Totally impractical. And you're dreaming if you think any of Air New Zealand's 777's will end up with the RNZAF. Frankly if the RNZAF wanted to buy some second hand airliners that are currently being shed by the airlines they should get a couple more 757's. They are a bloody good platform, perfect for the role, they are used by a lot of Air Forces, heaps of power, and they can get into far more airfields than the 777. Keep the ones we have and add one or two more to the fleet so they do not have the issue of not enough planes when one is in maintenance. Spot on Dave... they are indeed a damn fine aircraft and suit the RNZAF very well... the problem is trying to get by with a fleet of 2... so as an interim option it would be worth looking for a 3rd which wouldn't need to be combi converted... their underfloor freight capacity is not insignificant for HADR etc. I certainly don't ever see a B777 in RNZAF service... ex-AirNZ A320/321 maybe but I'd plump for another B757 to get us to 2028(+) Trouble is NZ Govts of all persuasions have shown they don't really give a toss if the RNZAF can't field a transport... they probably just think of the $$$ saved... so once the 2 B757s are back in the air (September?) it'll all be forgotten again. |
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 16, 2020 22:43:00 GMT 12
well lets put it this way, if you were putting 300 pax into it and their baggage, it would mean that they are off on a deployment somewhere which would mean departure fields of OH, CHC, or AKL, ie being near the nearest army base. Even the B757 needs to go to AKL to top up if full pax and baggage to get max range out of it. I never said it could operate out of smaller airfields but for internal transport, wlg is not out of bounds and wp ok
|
|
|
|
Post by theengineer on Jun 17, 2020 0:43:08 GMT 12
The idea of the RNZAF taking over airliners such as Boeing 777's off the hands of Air New Zealand is pie in the sky utter fantasy. You would probably be surprised to hear how many Air New Zealand staff members read the dribble posted here on this thread that take the time to tell me what crap is being suggested here. They say some of you have really no clue about what you are talking about, so if you do not actually work for the Air Force or an airline and have an actual insight into how things really work, please just shut your gobs, as I am sick of it all, and I am one step away from permanently closing this thread now that the C-130J's have been purchased. |
|
|
|
Post by madmac on Jun 17, 2020 10:49:29 GMT 12
How many people here have experience with supporting old airframes on low utilization, NO ONE at Air NZ & probably no one suggesting more 757's.
It would be nice if the Air NZ people stop hiding in the shadows.
The comment was originally made somewhat tongue in cheek however that isn't to say it isn't illogical.
The B757 is an orphan fleet in this part of the world (sims, engineer training, parts), I am sure someone in blue will be screaming not another F****N orphan airframe type. Any 757 brought will be a different submodel to those currently used & unless already converted will take years to get converted for combi ops. Given a highly depressed aviation market the difference between buying lightly used and old isn't that great (only a mug would buy old airframes).
For a number of reasons buying Air NZ airframes make sense politically (reluctance to own AirNZ again but they need cash, government used a bunch of USD to bail out the banks so NZD purchases preferred, AirNZ need to get rid of airframes). Not hard to packout the purchase price with an upfront purchase of supporting training, one way access to parts etc etc.
AIrNZ has 3 airframes suitable (not knowing what ones they actually own).
The A320 / A321 are simply too small range lift wise, limited conversion options, why buy A320s when you buy 737 NGs & get some common parts with the P8.
B767 would be idea just like a B757 but bigger / longer range, AirNZ's ones are end of life as far as I know, to farther operate them on needs facing fleet leader issues with regard to flying hours (& likely recertify all existing repairs unless CAA has changed their approach to Widespread Fatigue Damage in the last 6 years). Plus it would be back to an orphan fleet.
Which simply leaves the B777. Yes its complete overkill, way too big but one doesn't have to operate them full. Without cargo conversion it would carry most of what the B757 already does (so we can wait to get them converted with limited impact). Would do ice trips with ease. Offers capacity our allies don't have. Nearest thing we can afford to a C17.
|
|
|
|
Post by vs on Jun 17, 2020 13:43:03 GMT 12
Air NZ have not operated 767’s for a number of years now. With regards to the 777, you don’t buy an aeroplane to operate them half full
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jun 17, 2020 19:40:10 GMT 12
Air NZ have not operated 767’s for a number of years now. With regards to the 777, you don’t buy an aeroplane to operate them half full how many tasks has the C130 done with stuff all on board. Have been on many flights where just one pallet was all that the tasking required, So yes the B777 is slightly on the big side for something we have not operated before. All about what the future dictates etc. Look at the RAAF, they never had C17's but found out how usefull they were and decided to get more,,, and nore. As for B777, Not sure if they did decide to purchase or get gifted that there would be a need for the costly addition of a upper freight door when the lower hold takes almost the same amount of 463 pallets as the B757 does, abet a few inches smaller in height. |
|
|
|
Post by machina on Jun 17, 2020 19:56:33 GMT 12
Is this why the 757 and two Hercs flew around the city in formation today, with an Orion lurking out in the Gulf? Does anyone have any info on this? Also noted two Hercs did a round trip from Whenuapai today to somewhere down the line. |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jun 17, 2020 20:42:18 GMT 12
It was noted on the RNZAF Alerts Facebook page as formation training.
|
|
|
|
Post by machina on Jun 17, 2020 23:07:21 GMT 12
It was noted on the RNZAF Alerts Facebook page as formation training. Thanks Dave. |
|
|
|
Post by joey05 on Jun 18, 2020 8:09:02 GMT 12
Southbound pair performed flypast for Officers graduation parade at Woodbourne
|
|
|
|
Post by tfly on Jun 27, 2020 5:06:08 GMT 12
Strategic Lift conundrum sorted! A330 MRTT! It’s in service defence partners (Australia, UK and Singapore), is a force multiplier in that it can refuel P8 Poseidon and C130J-30 (if AAR fitted) and can be utilised by PM & Ministers for VIP and Trade talks. Photo credit UK Defence Journal  |
|
|
|
Post by tfly on Jun 27, 2020 7:03:42 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Jun 27, 2020 12:10:41 GMT 12
It would be a great asset & tie in nicely with RAAF capability (so long as it had both boom & drogue AAR options) however there is a couple of points that I've touched on before (either here or on 'another' forum...can't remember). I'm fairly certain there has been no talk in the public domain that a tanker capability is required as part of a B757 replacement... if that were the case I think we would've seen a strong indication of that in the DCP. The key requirement is transport and like the B757 that will require a freight capability....either combi with pallets on the main deck, or if the aircraft is big enough, in the underfloor hold(s)... or a bit of both in reality. The A330 MRTT carries the AAR fuel in the underfloor area meaning there is, for the size of the aircraft, relatively limited freight capacity under there. AIUI the main deck floor is not cargo strengthened in the MRTT (and has no large cargo door) so in fact it is largely limited to AAR and pax transport. That limitation in capability isn't a problem for RAAF & other bigger operators... but it would be an issue for the RNZAF. If we do get an A330 derivative it'll most likely be a A330 combi freighter (eg: A330-200F - has the strengthened floor & cargo door, but obviously is not a tanker). A330-200F has the 'bump' under the forward lower fuselage to allow the aircraft to have an 'on ground' level main deck for freight (as against the nose down attitude of a standard A330, incl MRTT). Wayne Mapp is on record as suggesting 3x A321 (one assumes a combi although that's still a developmental version)... I would be comfortable with that as a 3rd airframe is logical and it allows RNZAF to have a modest capacity for smaller jobs with the 3rd airframe allowing a little surge capacity to move more at short notice. RNZAF might get 3 x A320/1 if lucky but due to size & cost only 2 x A330. |
|
|
|
Post by madmac on Jun 27, 2020 22:44:18 GMT 12
Below is the link to a plot of the payload range of the likely aircraft. Its a little rough non standardised data regarding reserves, no A321 as I couldn't find the data, but quite clearly the narrow bodies will not cut it as a B757 replacement (noting the B757 doesn't really do the job as it is). Looking at the plot, one has to ask why would Wayne Mapp think the A320 would do the job, it can't, its basicly its the same payload range as the C130J but a bit faster.
Can't get the image embedded, here's the link flic.kr/p/2jfGnoY |
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Jun 28, 2020 12:29:12 GMT 12
Below is the link to a plot of the payload range of the likely aircraft. Its a little rough non standardised data regarding reserves, no A321 as I couldn't find the data, but quite clearly the narrow bodies will not cut it as a B757 replacement (noting the B757 doesn't really do the job as it is). Looking at the plot, one has to ask why would Wayne Mapp think the A320 would do the job, it can't, its basicly its the same payload range as the C130J but a bit faster.
Can't get the image embedded, here's the link flic.kr/p/2jfGnoYVery interesting, good post... yes the A320/1 doesn't 'rate' much more than a C130-J30 but it's going to largely depend on what the identified requirement is for the strategic FAMC component. Yes the new Hercs are perfect for the tactical FAMC component as they meet the range & payload requirements for our main areas of concern... the South Pacific with Antarctica at a stretch. The key question to be answered by the project team is what will the key requirements for a B757 replacement be... and that will likely be driven by looking at the areas we will most likely be deploying to plus the ability of contender aircraft to access airports in those areas. It's plausible the A320/1 could still be considered to meet that requirement...depending on what that requirement is identified as. I do not see a tanker capability being seriously considered. If they decide bigger bulk over bigger distance with the potential trade-off of reducing the number of available airports in the Sth.Pac. that it can operate into (I'm just speculating on this latter point) then it could well be a larger aircraft... that would benefit Antartica operations significantly but they're still talking up using the new Hercs to the ice so I wonder how critical the need for having no 'ice PNR' is going to be considered by the project team. There's 2 objectives I'd like to see which are a factor in which type I prefer... I strongly plump for (1) 3 airframes (2) brand new versus another 10-15 year old airliner that needs expensive conversion to combi layout. I suspect the A330-200F is likely to be very high on the preferred aircraft list and can be bought new-build, but cost will likely limit such a purchase to 2 airframes. Of course the marketplace has now got very hazy with so many near new airliners about to flood the market and a growing demand for conversions to freighters... so maybe 3 larger, not so old airliners, may be possible. Damn hard to second guess what the final requirement will be, and what the Govt's desire to spend $$$ will be. I'd hate to be the one making the final call. As to why would Wayne Mapp think the A320 would do the job, well you're right in the sense that why would he?... with all due respect to him I suspect it was not due to any inside knowledge on the project but more a speculative suggestion. |
|
|
|
Post by madmac on Jun 28, 2020 23:01:36 GMT 12
Current requirements might be a moving target at the moment between the left considering that USA maybe going the way of a failed state (clearly not just yet but the leftys may be willing to stump up a bit more cash now),& the CCP going somewhat delinquent (well that's the optimistic possibility). Does the RNZAF make much use of ULD's, as the change from a Boeing Narrow body to anything else will allow them to use ULD's in the lower hold. A330 is quite bit more airplane than a B767 & would be a bit of an orphan given AirNZ doesn't operate any wide body Airbus aircraft. Is there likely to be any common hardware between the NH90 & Airbus aircraft, wouldn't expect some, while least if they get another Boeing they will already hold some hardware spares. Interesting article on the Airbus A330 freighter conversion process www.fzt.haw-hamburg.de/pers/Scholz/dglr/hh/text_2008_02_14_GMF.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by machina on Jun 29, 2020 12:18:46 GMT 12
A400  |
|
|
|
Post by kiwirob on Jul 3, 2020 1:28:48 GMT 12
Air NZ is 52% NZ government-owned. " The $900 million loan facility will be offered "..in two tranches, with interest rates ranging from 7% to 9% a year and on condition that Air New Zealand would cancel its interim dividend worth NZ$123 million ($69.78 million), which Air New Zealand said it would." source: www.reuters.com/article/us-air-new-zealand-debt-idUSKBN216464Comment: Air New Zealand is not only bone-yarding? air worthy aircraft (15x 777 at least) but the ongoing cost (storage and leasing) to doing so is being carried by its shareholders- of which the NZ public are 52% (excl. institutional NZ shareholders). So even if we put aside the loan facility and the job keeper subsidy, the NZ public will still be outlaying for aircraft that perhaps a couple might be better served now with the Air Force than sitting in the OZ outback if someone just thought about it. Sorry guys it infuriates me, to read someone talk about having to scrimp and save $300m-600m for 2028, when effectively the taxpayer already have paid for access to assets (B777/A320s). A number of countries lease their government transports from their national carriers - Japan, Korea, Germany come immediately to mind. Their air forces still operate them but the asset is owned, maintained and upgraded by the national carrier. Given our ownership stake in AirNZ, and the company is undergoing dramatic restructuring, this might be the opportune time to setup the Air force with Air NZ to access air assets that avoids the usual tortured procurement path we debate about. The govt leases cars why cant it be the same for our air transport needs? Much more fiscally sustainable, but like you said:- maybe its just too sensible. Air NZ has the NZG as a cornerstone shreholder but the ANZ isn't an SOE, the govt can't decide to take a couple of 777's and turn them over to the RNZAF, they would have to purchase them off Air NZ. In 2001 the Govt had an 82% shareholding in Air NZ, it's been very profitable for them, they have made significantly more in dividends and selling stock in Air NZ than they spent bailing out the company, I believe the same will also be true with the latest bailout, Covid19 was not Air NZ's fault, plus if we didn't bail out Air NZ after this is all over and done with who is going to provide air services in NZ and from NZ to the rest of the world? We are at the bottom of the world, it's expensive for any airline to operate to and from NZ, we need Air NZ more than most people realise. |
|
|
|
Post by kiwirob on Jul 3, 2020 1:44:34 GMT 12
Below is the link to a plot of the payload range of the likely aircraft. Its a little rough non standardised data regarding reserves, no A321 as I couldn't find the data, but quite clearly the narrow bodies will not cut it as a B757 replacement (noting the B757 doesn't really do the job as it is). Looking at the plot, one has to ask why would Wayne Mapp think the A320 would do the job, it can't, its basicly its the same payload range as the C130J but a bit faster.
Can't get the image embedded, here's the link flic.kr/p/2jfGnoYThe 757 is a narrow body, it's the same diameter fuselage as the 737, which is narrower than the A320/321. The A321LR or better the XLR would be the closest replacement to the 757 that's on the market today. |
|
