|
Post by baronbeeza on Jan 25, 2014 18:08:21 GMT 12
Don't go bursting my bubble please Phil. I was kinda hoping someone would be listening to my choice of colour scheme if nothing else. Yellow or black for this kid..... Anyone listening .... Burgles ?
|
|
|
Post by jimtheeagle on Jan 25, 2014 18:35:38 GMT 12
I'm not suggesting that for a minute, but in most high-ticket defence procurements in western democracies, the government outlines a requirement, issues an open tender, narrows down the potential bidders and chooses one based on some sort of competitive evaluation - and keeps the public and parliament informed about the progress of it all. The sort of governments that announce after the fact they've spent piles of the taxpayers' money on something they didn't know they needed tend to be towards the bottom of the lists of democratic nations.
Do we know there were other bidders? Do we know the T-6C best suits the RNZAF's needs? What are the needs? What were the alternatives? Is it better, cheaper to buy, cheaper to run? Why now?
The reason the regular media hasn't covered this probably has something to do with the fact that nary a word has been said officially since 2011 on the subject and they have no idea there was a deal imminent, or even that there was a potential deal at all.
In the case of most other procurements (including the NH90 and A109) the government has provided information on the requirement and the alternatives. The Defence website is full of info on major projects, but under Current Tenders, it says "there are no current tenders".
I'm personally all for the purchase in principle, and soon we will know how much they are spending on how many of exactly what. Would have been nice to know what they wanted them for and if they shopped around before we got handed the bill, though.
JT
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jan 25, 2014 19:16:22 GMT 12
name will be either Texan or Harvard. no other stupid name needed.
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Jan 25, 2014 19:30:58 GMT 12
JT...Of the countries that belong to the OECD, sometimes called the rich countries' club, New Zealand is credited with the fourth highest level of civil engagement, a category that encompasses government transparency,confidence in public institutions and consultation on rule-making.That doesn't quite put us at the bottom of democratic nations; quite the opposite in fact!
The aircraft chosen in this case is already in service, fits the need, was selected by experts, agrred to by Treasury, and as we are not in the role of reinventing the wheel, what else would you have them do?
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Jan 25, 2014 19:34:43 GMT 12
Don't go bursting my bubble please Phil. I was kinda hoping someone would be listening to my choice of colour scheme if nothing else. Yellow or black for this kid..... Anyone listening .... Burgles ? I don't like black because the whole country is obsessed with the colour, an obsession incidentally that no one else in the world understands, and is quite frankly bloody dull! On the basis of see and be seen, I'm all for the traditional yellow.
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jan 25, 2014 19:47:58 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Jan 25, 2014 19:51:35 GMT 12
I don't mind conceding to a yellow finish but the 'new' hi-viz scheme could be black. The model in the Embassy photo was black also. I appreciate we are all surmising here but the scheme will be announced in double quick time, possibly within weeks or even days. That decision will also have been made already. Back in the day it would have been a Wellington decision, I doubt much has changed over the years. www.independent.co.uk/news/safety-first-as-raf-paints-planes-black-1146643.htmlAnd for Beagle, the Canadian one with pic from CanMilAir website.
|
|
|
Post by haughtney1 on Jan 25, 2014 19:52:25 GMT 12
The PT6 isn't full proof, unlike the screaming TPE331.....
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jan 25, 2014 20:12:13 GMT 12
They did trial regarding paint colours at Ohakea about 20 years ago and yellow won out then. Things have changed since then with no fast moving strike aircraft in camouflage, so maybe they will look at this again but I don't think so.
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Jan 25, 2014 20:16:50 GMT 12
And there is a big difference between the small, medium and large versions of the PT6 as well. The 60 Series are nothing like the medium sized 40 series as found in the King Air. They have been around a while now though and it is over twenty years since I did my PT6 course, the bigger engines weren't so common back then. I don't believe you are suggesting they should be considering a retrofit to Garrett powered donks... Fords and Holdens..
|
|
|
Post by jimtheeagle on Jan 25, 2014 20:28:18 GMT 12
Well, it's failed on the transparency front on this one.
The aircraft chosen in this case is already in service, fits the need, was selected by experts, agreed to by Treasury, and as we are not in the role of reinventing the wheel, what else would you have them do?[/quote]
Not act as if it was developing a stealth bomber. The PC-9, Super Tucano and Korean KT-1 and other turboprop trainers are in service and may meet the need, whatever it is. Did the tender specify hardpoints? If so, why? Why not the T-6A? Why not the AT-6? Will these aircraft ever be armed? Was a lease arrangement considered? The T-6C is certainly not the only aircraft in its class and while it may be absolutely perfect for the RNZAF, if we don't know what they were looking for, how can we say. Experts in various countries selected the F-35 JSF, after a lot of assurances from the makers it would be better and cheaper than the alternatives and replace their existing fighters before they wore out. Yeah, and indeed, right.
JT
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Jan 25, 2014 20:51:43 GMT 12
Decision has been made. Perhaps we should just wait and see what happens along the way.
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Jan 25, 2014 21:34:39 GMT 12
Aircraft capital purchases, butter and golf would have to be prime considerations. In my day the RNZAF had a core of specially trained Officers that had a hand in briefing paper preparation etc. The guys would normally have been expected to have done one of the various Cranwell courses and then served time on exchange with similar fleets. There would be numerous protocols on the Defence side and then there would be Treasury and Political considerations as well.
The Cessna 421 purchase would have to be a good example of what can happen when the weightings go wrong. Compromise is one thing but given the process and personalties and positions involved I doubt you are ever going to get transparency. Basically if you want to see a turbo-prop trainer of your choice it is easy. Just open the wallet and fork out the millions. I don't have the luxury of that cash nor does the RNZAF. In many respects you get what you are given.
The RNZAF do get a greater say in livery however. Given the planning and discussion that have gone on to this point I am sure the logistics and support packages are now well advanced as well. The Air Force has no obligation to show their hand at all, I am guessing the press release, when it comes, will answer many of the questions posed here.
|
|
|
Post by saratoga on Jan 25, 2014 21:53:52 GMT 12
Don't go bursting my bubble please Phil. I was kinda hoping someone would be listening to my choice of colour scheme if nothing else. Yellow or black for this kid..... Anyone listening .... Burgles ? check out the link in my earlier post.
|
|
chis73
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 86
|
Post by chis73 on Jan 25, 2014 21:58:06 GMT 12
If I remember correctly, there was a pilot training RFI released around Oct 2011, which had a fairly broad scope (it asked for a complete package to cover ab-initio to advanced & multi-engine training).
Also, I don't think there always has to be a tender, the Government can source materiel directly from suppliers if it wants to. Sometimes they go to tender anyway (eg the LAV purchase, where the LAV was considered so superior to the competition that the need for a tender was questioned - see the Auditor General's report on that one).
I'm just glad something finally appears to be happening. Didn't this go to cabinet under Goff way back in 2007 or 2008? If so, that's 5-6 years to make a fairly simple purchase. Isn't it somewhat ironic that the cat's out of the bag a few days early! Hopefully the CT-4s will be kept for ab-initio training (it's got to be safer / cheaper surely)
As for a paint scheme, how about something similar to the Fleet Air Arm post world-war-II (like the Sea Fury that used to be on the warbirds circuit here, though perhaps without the black & white invasion stripes). The Sea Fury always looked high class, stately, & elegant, wherever she went. I think we should go for something understated but timeless. For economy, I'd suggest using the light gray from the Seasprite for the under surfaces & fuselage sides, and the dark sea gray from the Iroquois / Hercules for the upper surfaces. Full-colour roundels (with RNZAF printed aft on the fuselage). Maybe a nice bright red or duck-egg blue spinner to help with esprit-de-corps. Anyone care to produce a drawing?
Chis73
|
|
|
Post by saratoga on Jan 25, 2014 21:59:14 GMT 12
I don't mind conceding to a yellow finish but the 'new' hi-viz scheme could be black. The model in the Embassy photo was black also. The model in the beechcraft tent at Ohakea was yellow,aka CT4, with checkers!
I appreciate we are all surmising here but the scheme will be announced in double quick time, possibly within weeks or even days. That decision will also have been made already. Back in the day it would have been a Wellington decision, I doubt much has changed over the years. www.independent.co.uk/news/safety-first-as-raf-paints-planes-black-1146643.htmlAnd for Beagle, the Canadian one with pic from CanMilAir website.
|
|
|
Post by haughtney1 on Jan 25, 2014 22:12:04 GMT 12
I flew the Tucano in various schemes, including the old red white and blue CFS scheme along with the black with go fast yellow stripes, I always thought the black and yellow looked the best.
Baron.......they aren't going to be building Holden's much longer........the Garrett's were much more economical from memory than the PT6 of a similar output. I think it's also why most big jet APU's (reliable..mostly...and economical) are essentially a TPE331 without the reduction gearbox :-)
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Jan 25, 2014 22:23:41 GMT 12
Yep, I see the yellow one. It may be close to the mark but in my day it would be an Air Staff decision, possibly nothing to do with the Squadron, the Base or even the manufacturer. It was actually an NZAP for the type if memory serves me correctly. I have never sat on the mod committee but had to prepare a number of submissions for it, always a nerve wracking time as you knew it would come under the closest scrutiny. Very rarely would anyone manage to get a mod through those guys first go. I did do a livery amendment for one of the types, indeed I think I did two of those. They were much easier as all you had to do was get your Staff Officer onside. I would imagine the livery would go before a similar committee after someone, at Staff level, had prepared the publication. You can only imagine who would have a seat at that table.. The draft document would have already been circulated through Base and Group for comments.
I am only guessing, as I say I have never served on such a committee. I think the Engineering Officer doing the Air Staff support for the type in Wellington would be the chap nominated to prepare the draft publication. It would be a detailed publication and include placards etc. - a lot of work would have gone in to it. The paint system and specification would also be included.
|
|
shane
Squadron Leader
Posts: 118
|
Post by shane on Jan 26, 2014 1:07:46 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by kiwirico on Jan 26, 2014 4:30:46 GMT 12
Come on guys, don't fight about the colour scheme..... black, yellow or camouflaged. Finally the RNZAF is to receive and fly a reliable and good fast trainer. As the T-6C is able to have some stores under it's wings, it might also be used for some ground support training. Only thing that I like to know is how many T-6's will RNZAF get? I read somewere 11 aircraft, but not sure. Congratulations to the RNZAF.
Cheers.
|
|