|
|
Post by conman on Mar 3, 2017 19:59:30 GMT 12
As the Japanese are the 2nd biggest P3 operator in the world I think they probably know a thing or two and are hardly likely to invest in a platform in significant numbers and then run down the logistics support, that's not how they operate.
|
|
|
|
Post by isc on Mar 3, 2017 21:16:24 GMT 12
It appears that the P-3s in desert storage in USA are already being raided for spares for "foreign" Airforces. isc
|
|
|
|
Post by pea032 on Mar 3, 2017 21:53:32 GMT 12
Funnily enough look what Janes is reporting,
"New Zealand has requested detailed cost and availability information from the US government for the Boeing P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft (MPA), the country's Ministry of Defence (MoD) confirmed to Jane's on 2 March.
The MoD sent a letter of request to the US government seeking these details "so that the option of the P-8A aircraft can be preserved due to the window of availability being limited".
A wide range of options for the country's Future Air Surveillance programme is currently being assessed in order to present a business case to the government in the second half of this year, the statement said."
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Mar 3, 2017 22:19:22 GMT 12
I won't say any more.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 3, 2017 22:55:38 GMT 12
No-one will buy the Orions, they will be orphans themselves without any parts supply to keep them going. Sadly the magnificent P-3 Orion will very soon be a thing of the past like the Boeing 747 and Concorde.
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Mar 4, 2017 4:59:19 GMT 12
Going to be pretty hard to land one at Wigram for the musuem
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 4, 2017 9:04:02 GMT 12
As the Japanese are the 2nd biggest P3 operator in the world I think they probably know a thing or two and are hardly likely to invest in a platform in significant numbers and then run down the logistics support, that's not how they operate. And because the large operators have bought up all the remaining spares, the smaller ones like us and others are now stuffed. Think about it! Look, I got all this info directly from the CO, SENGO and others on No. 5 Squadron, it's not scuttlebutt. The Orions are on their way out and they are looking toward the P-8 as their desired replacement. |
|
|
|
Post by dutchkiwi on Mar 4, 2017 9:04:33 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by pepe on Mar 4, 2017 9:30:54 GMT 12
We don't have a requirement for that type of air craft at the moment, but if we did, I would imagine Pacific Aerospace could whip a modified Cresco or P-750 XSTOL to do the job ....  Actually I seem to recall seeing a "Strike Fletcher" design somewhere? |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 4, 2017 10:51:39 GMT 12
Avalon is a trade show, manufactures put out all sorts of spin to help market their products around such events. Most of it is wishful thinking.
|
|
|
|
Post by frankly on Mar 4, 2017 11:04:59 GMT 12
So its only a concept aircraft , who would pay for all the development and systems integration ? Can't see it being a serious contender It's not really a concept aircraft. The data and battle management system is substantially based on the Saab AWACS system that is in service in several countries. Saab has an excellent pedigree in systems integration and battle space management software. If killing submarines isn't the prime purpose, it's a serious contender, especially in pure ISR roles. |
|
|
|
Post by saratoga on Mar 4, 2017 11:07:50 GMT 12
Why would you even look at that when you can put an 'A' infront of the T-6 and fit it with hardpoints,same job.Already in service. |
|
|
|
Post by nuuumannn on Mar 4, 2017 11:39:00 GMT 12
Whilst it might yet be the final choice based on factors mentioned, like the P-1's lack of appeal due to being new and NZ's good relations with Boeing, etc, I would say the P-1 was better suited to NZ's needs than the P-8A; firstly, the P-8A doesn't have a mad boom; the P-8I does though, also, the P-8 is designed for high altitude use with less reliance on visual ops and more on long range sensors, totally different scenario to how we conduct maritime patrol today. No winged torpedoes or drones to fill capability gaps on the airframes in RNZAF service. The P-1 is better configured to the way the RNZAF does things at the moment; it's a direct replacement for the P-3 and how it does things, and arguing that Japan's P-3 usage is different to ours, how different? That's not to say the P-1'll get purchased, but it is configured along traditional sub hunting lines, unlike the P-8, which is an entirely new approach to an MPA and how the entire scenario is managed.
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Mar 4, 2017 13:51:03 GMT 12
If you have read the RFI, you would note that the requiremnts are not just for a MPA. It's a Future Air Survelliance Capability.
The definition of land ISR2 capabilities that are of interest to the FASC project are the same as those provided for the maritime domain and defined in Annex C. An additional ISR capability that may be sought within the land domain is ‘Land Surveying and Mapping’ capability which is also defined within Annex C. For the purposes of this RFI, land ISR capabilities are not considered with respect to any specific areas of interest. Instead, the FASC project team is interested in the delivery of land ISR capability from a Forward Operating Base (FOB) located within NZ or deployed globally as part of an expeditionary force
|
|
|
|
Post by nuuumannn on Mar 4, 2017 15:16:37 GMT 12
To be honest with you I haven't, but that doesn't change what I stated with regards to MPA. The P-1 is closer to how 5 Sqn operates today than the P-8A. Like I said, the P-8A might well be the final choice...
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Mar 4, 2017 17:00:26 GMT 12
So you are saying that the P8 aircraft will operate at higher altitude levels than the current P3K2 regime ?
“The employment will be very similar [to the P-3],” Buck counters. “A myth that I’d like to bust is that the P-8 is not able to fly low. This initial lot of aircraft with the Mk.54 torpedo system will fly a very similar profile to the P-3. They’ll go down low. We fly the P-8 in a very similar flight regime to the P-3, and we will employ the Mk.54 from low altitude.”
How does it fly down in the waves?
“It’s quite a bit more comfortable,” Boron says. “With the [more] flexible wings, the crew isn’t getting bounced around as much as in the P-3. It flies very smoothly down low.”
|
|
|
|
Post by foxcover on Mar 4, 2017 19:46:27 GMT 12
If NZ chooses the P8 over the P1 they'll miss a trick, the P1 is far better suited to the job and cheaper, so NZ will choose the P8 😂
|
|
|
|
Post by beagle on Mar 4, 2017 20:27:12 GMT 12
Yes it will as it is far superior. Remember, it maybe in your eyes better suited but think about the future and cost is not the only presumption regards procurement.
|
|
|
|
Post by isc on Mar 4, 2017 22:35:49 GMT 12
In USN service MAD is not fitted(also RAAF), as the normal operating altitude envisaged is too high for it to be effective. The P-8Is ordered For the Indian Airforce are fitted with MAD.
In normal service the P-8 is designed to operate with the Northrop Grumman MQ-4C Triton UAV.
Personally I'm not over fussed by the lack of windows, but I wonder if that lack could be made up by cameras and screens to allow observation by crew other than the flight crew up front. In the USN some call the two little windows the "Night & Day" indicators, because they are the only visual indication of the time of day.
I can see that the elimination of fuselage openings must add to the strength of the aircraft, windows must be a B****Y pain to the design team, and these days could be got rid of in civil A/C and replaced by flat screen TV, most people on board wouldn't notice. isc
|
|
|
|
Post by dutchkiwi on Mar 5, 2017 3:00:27 GMT 12
Yes it will as it is far superior. Remember, it maybe in your eyes better suited but think about the future and cost is not the only presumption regards procurement. In what time the P-3 replacement has to be delivered? Four years, six years? Any idea if it's posible to see any former RAAF P-3C to RNZAF? Just a question ! |
|
Actually I seem to recall seeing a "Strike Fletcher" design somewhere? 
