|
Post by 30sqnatc on Sept 3, 2017 19:30:43 GMT 12
Perhaps they were balancing the shared transport hours books or we will now have a big bill for it to fly over the Tasman just to do this task.
|
|
|
Post by isc on Sept 3, 2017 22:58:50 GMT 12
Was the whole thing just part of the exercise? isc
|
|
|
Post by frankly on Sept 4, 2017 19:06:22 GMT 12
But it is a partly capital expenditure masquerading as operational expenditure, once done you have the data to keep sticking them on trucks (it does raise the question why hasn't it been done already). that very rare thing you see in NZ, capital expenditure to drive down operating costs. Plus C17s just sit around all month waiting for a call. I think you need to shop around a bit more if you are paying $2.5K per day for an aeronautical engineers or stop using large defense contractors (that rate should get a very senior person full time when in reality they are going to fob it off to junior after a hour). Capitaliisaiton has a value threshold, so it isn't necessary a capitalisable expensive. Overlay this with the fact that load tie down schemes need to be approved by the OEM because they apply dynamic forces to the load, and it's far from simple. If the funding was available, the OEM resource would also need to be available. And given you'd need a truck with a non-rigid body, the load scheme wouldn't be simple, and it would be unique to the truck/trailer, and thus unusable to any NH90 user who isn't using the HX77 tractor with a bespoke trailer (i.e everyone in the world except NZ). This isn't the same problem as moving a broken down huey. SaveSave
|
|
|
Post by McFly on Sept 4, 2017 20:09:03 GMT 12
But it is a partly capital expenditure masquerading as operational expenditure, once done you have the data to keep sticking them on trucks (it does raise the question why hasn't it been done already). that very rare thing you see in NZ, capital expenditure to drive down operating costs. Plus C17s just sit around all month waiting for a call. I think you need to shop around a bit more if you are paying $2.5K per day for an aeronautical engineers or stop using large defense contractors (that rate should get a very senior person full time when in reality they are going to fob it off to junior after a hour). Capitaliisaiton has a value threshold, so it isn't necessary a capitalisable expensive. Overlay this with the fact that load tie down schemes need to be approved by the OEM because they apply dynamic forces to the load, and it's far from simple. If the funding was available, the OEM resource would also need to be available. And given you'd need a truck with a non-rigid body, the load scheme wouldn't be simple, and it would be unique to the truck/trailer, and thus unusable to any NH90 user who isn't using the HX77 tractor with a bespoke trailer (i.e everyone in the world except NZ). This isn't the same problem as moving a broken down huey. SaveSaveDoesn't seem that hard with the right rig... And this company appear to specialise in NH90 road transportation...
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Sept 4, 2017 21:14:44 GMT 12
So maybe the C-17 was flying over that truck from Aussie?
|
|
|
Post by snafu on Sept 8, 2017 10:14:37 GMT 12
geez that looks sexy in black reminds me of Blue Thunder
|
|
|
Post by camtech on Nov 13, 2019 17:47:33 GMT 12
Just bumbing this thread to see if anyone can tell me how NZ3306 got from Cloudy Bay to Wellington. If it had to be flown Wellington - Ohakea, surely it wasn't fit to fly Cloudy Bay to Wellington.
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Jan 16, 2020 15:11:08 GMT 12
So it seems ours are now qual'ed on the Canberra class. Wow! @nzairforce NH90 conducting deck qualification on @australian_Navy HMAS Adelaide during support to #OpBushfireAssist GALLERY: images.defence.gov.au/S20200337
|
|