|
|
Post by fiftythree on Aug 19, 2022 22:07:10 GMT 12
Do the Americans have C-17s more or less permanently based here for runs to the ice? If so let’s offer to buy them and part of the deal is we keep giving them a lift when required. The U.S. Air Force C-17s that operate from Christchurch to Antarctica are from the 304th EAS based at Joint Base Lewis McChord in Seattle. The crews are a mix of Active Duty and Reserve Command. They fly Antarctic missions through October and November, then February during the Summer Season, then usually one flight in June plus 3 - 5 flights in August, commonly known as the winter fly in. U.S. Military Support Forces Antarctica is actually headquartered at Joint Base Pearl Harbour Hickam in Hawaii though. During the Antarctic Summer Season it's not uncommon to see a C-17 from another U.S. Air Force Squadron in Christchurch at the same time. These ones are referred to as "Guard Lift" and are there in support of the New York Air National Guard LC-130s. They drop off/pick up maintenance and mission equipment, parts and personnel. In the last four years Guard lift aircraft have come out of Charleston, Stewart, Hickam, McChord and Elmendorf AFBs. |
|
|
|
Post by fiftythree on Aug 19, 2022 22:20:58 GMT 12
With the production of the C-17 all finished, is Boeing actually working on a project for a replacement type in the future? Is Lockheed working on a new design tp replace the Starlifter or Galaxy? Or are the only options in large tactical transports of the future going to be the Embraer, Kawasaki or the Airbus? I think in the U.S. it works the other way around. U.S. Air Force or the DoD put out a design brief and Aerospace companies bid for the opportunity to fill it by providing their idea of what the design brief is asking for. I expect that the big players don't sink capital into something that doesn't have specified demand. |
|
|
|
Post by alanster on Aug 20, 2022 0:44:25 GMT 12
I know we probably can’t afford it as a capability but I think refuelling would be good to have given the amount of ocean we fly over/monitor and the connection with Antarctica. Bingo! NZ has one of the biggest EEZs in the world patrolling as far north as Tokelau (an actual NZ colony really) and as far south as Antarctica. A refuelling capability would be very nice to have seeing as the new Hercs wouldn’t be able to make it to Antarctica and back in one fuel tank (sone one correct me if I’m wrong here). |
|
tnos
Warrant Officer
Posts: 32
|
Post by tnos on Oct 6, 2022 16:11:51 GMT 12
I’m definitely no expert but I’ve always felt the lifter/vip mission of the 757 was wrong.
I think the airforce should have military aircraft for military logistic work extra c130J’s or A400s C17 something like that to replace the 757s
And for VIP some sort of long range private jet type. That would be used for pilot training/vip work. A Cessna citation x or Gulfstream 650 something like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deane B on Oct 6, 2022 19:09:38 GMT 12
I’m definitely no expert but I’ve always felt the lifter/vip mission of the 757 was wrong. I think the airforce should have military aircraft for military logistic work extra c130J’s or A400s C17 something like that to replace the 757s And for VIP some sort of long range private jet type. That would be used for pilot training/vip work. A Cessna citation x or Gulfstream 650 something like that. The 757 followed the 727 which was had a primary role as a people mover, particularly for carrying troops med-long distance to places we were widely involved in at the time such as Singapore and the Middle East. Being a combi meant freight could also be carried. VIP is really a secondary role. At the time of the 757 acquisition the C-17 was not even an option, nor were larger wide body lets, which would limit where they could operate. That said, the C-17 would be a good aircraft. We should have leapt at the two C-17s which were available a few years back. Potentially we could have operated them as an extension of one of the Aussie Sqns. |
|
|
|
Post by tfly on Oct 24, 2022 2:05:23 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by machina on Oct 24, 2022 7:42:19 GMT 12
We should just beg the Americans for 4 used C-17s.
|
|
|
|
Post by tbf2504 on Oct 24, 2022 8:50:37 GMT 12
Can't see the elite politicians turning up to international events in a "VIP C17". The RAAF are getting great mileage out of the new BBJ
|
|
|
|
Post by tbf2504 on Oct 24, 2022 9:13:10 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Oct 24, 2022 9:43:45 GMT 12
OMG I wish media (and others who should know better!) would stop referring to the B757 as 'VIP aircraft'... the VIP role is only a smallish part, albeit higher profile, of what they do. Wayne Mapp once stated in a 'Line of Defence' article they should be replaced with 3 x A321... the most important take-way from that is not the type nor the possible roles that would offer, but an important acknowledgement that 2 airframes is not enough. The narrative needs to move away from VIP & start looking at the other work they more-often do... deployment support; Antarctic support; freight transport (on and/or below main-deck); strategic options etc. Let's face it, they won't get a military lifter as a replacement, it'll be airliner based, but if everyone keeps talking VIP then the RNZAF won't get the all important 3rd airframe nor will they likely get something with combi capability. So one wonders does this indicate the B757 replacement is being brought forward, or does this still sit within the 2028 timeframe!?! |
|
|
|
Post by machina on Oct 24, 2022 12:20:17 GMT 12
OMG I wish media (and others who should know better!) would stop referring to the B757 as 'VIP aircraft'... the VIP role is only a smallish part, albeit higher profile, of what they do. Wayne Mapp once stated in a 'Line of Defence' article they should be replaced with 3 x A321... the most important take-way from that is not the type nor the possible roles that would offer, but an important acknowledgement that 2 airframes is not enough. The narrative needs to move away from VIP & start looking at the other work they more-often do... deployment support; Antarctic support; freight transport (on and/or below main-deck); strategic options etc. Let's face it, they won't get a military lifter as a replacement, it'll be airliner based, but if everyone keeps talking VIP then the RNZAF won't get the all important 3rd airframe nor will they likely get something with combi capability. So one wonders does this indicate the B757 replacement is being brought forward, or does this still sit within the 2028 timeframe!?! I’d wondered the same thing Gibbo. I think if we can’t have C-17s then maybe it should be A400s. |
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Oct 24, 2022 19:27:53 GMT 12
OMG I wish media (and others who should know better!) would stop referring to the B757 as 'VIP aircraft'... the VIP role is only a smallish part, albeit higher profile, of what they do. Wayne Mapp once stated in a 'Line of Defence' article they should be replaced with 3 x A321... the most important take-way from that is not the type nor the possible roles that would offer, but an important acknowledgement that 2 airframes is not enough. The narrative needs to move away from VIP & start looking at the other work they more-often do... deployment support; Antarctic support; freight transport (on and/or below main-deck); strategic options etc. Let's face it, they won't get a military lifter as a replacement, it'll be airliner based, but if everyone keeps talking VIP then the RNZAF won't get the all important 3rd airframe nor will they likely get something with combi capability. So one wonders does this indicate the B757 replacement is being brought forward, or does this still sit within the 2028 timeframe!?! I’d wondered the same thing Gibbo. I think if we can’t have C-17s then maybe it should be A400s. C17 would be great but there doesn't look like anyone willing to part with theirs, and due to their size we'd never get 3. A400M... no thanks, RNZAF will be looking for something off the shelf (new or 2nd hand) that are as reliable as possible & has a proven servicing & parts supply chain in our part of the world to back it up... that kind of kills off the A400M I'm afraid. I also assume the RNZAF is going to be realistic about their expectations (of Govt) and will most likely look at another ex-airliner, hopefully still with a combi config. Not a lot that ticks every box but the RNZAF has now had B727 / B757 capability for 40 years and they seem fairly ok with that. I'm picking the need for the ability to get to & from Antarctica without landing is more a 'nice to have' than a 'must have' otherwise they'd have stopped C-130 & B757 flights by now. |
|
|
|
Post by shorty on Oct 24, 2022 19:58:27 GMT 12
And we still need something to take over the tasks that the Andovers used to do!
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Oct 25, 2022 13:36:33 GMT 12
Can't see the elite politicians turning up to international events in a "VIP C17". The RAAF are getting great mileage out of the new BBJ What new BBJ? Do you mean the KC-30? |
|
|
|
Post by tbf2504 on Oct 25, 2022 13:56:01 GMT 12
The RAAF is operating two leased B737 BBJ's A good friend of mine in Australia owns a company that refitted the interiors of the two aircraft to meet RAAF requirements
|
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Oct 25, 2022 15:52:49 GMT 12
The RAAF is operating two leased B737 BBJ's A good friend of mine in Australia owns a company that refitted the interiors of the two aircraft to meet RAAF requirements IIRC the RAAF BBJ's are specifically fitted out for PAX/VIP work...not a luxury NZ can afford as we have political parties that don't give a rats *rse about Defence...very unlike that in Australia. I do see merit in a leased VIP /occasional PAX aircraft with a mil Spec lifter alongside...but I just don't see the project brief going in that direction. Mind you the planned defence review & likely capability plan to follow may re-visit that...but that's going to be 3-4 years... just in time to replace the B757 in 2028 that was most recently touted! I must admit I'm guilty of putting more importance on a 3rd operational aircraft for the sake of greater availability but what's other's thinking on this? Is 2 of a bigger type (longer range & greater capacity) better than 3 of a slightly smaller (less range & less capacity) type? Here's my thinking... the first point being I assume it's a given the RNZAF get another ex-airliner or airliner based type... with combi capability. Given we need more aircraft and much of that work will be regionally focused...and that the B757 often doesn't fly with all it's seating and/or freight holds full (also factoring in clearly the RNZAF is still prepared to fly Antarctica without the range to have a PONR over the ice)... would 3 x new C40 (one of sub-types) offer better outcomes than 2 larger types? if a job requires greater capacity send 2 of them... (assuming tasking can be organised around maintenance downtime). If commonality with P8A engines is an option that would help but I appreciate the 2 types are light-years apart otherwise. Dunno, just seems a logical way to meet a higher % of 40 sqn's taskings needs whilst affording greater availability. |
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Oct 25, 2022 16:43:50 GMT 12
I thought that the B757 now goes to the ice with limited load so it can return without landing?
|
|
|
|
Post by machina on Oct 25, 2022 18:44:58 GMT 12
It seems a bit rich that the very people who are responsible for running the military down should have an expectation of VIP transport capability. Maybe if they gave the armed forces proper respect and resource that capability might exist. Until then it should be either commercial flights or the back of a Herc.
Anyway, in my mind there’s a good chance we’ll be trading islands with the Chinese in the near future and we should prepare for that. We’ll need as much capability as possible to move men and kit around and combi airliners won’t get into short dirt strips, never mind with a chopper in the back (even if stripped down). We can’t get C-17s so A400 is the only option to me. We’d likely be under US command as well so C-17-level strategic airlift might not even be a concern!
|
|
|
|
Post by gibbo on Oct 26, 2022 20:18:10 GMT 12
It seems a bit rich that the very people who are responsible for running the military down should have an expectation of VIP transport capability. Maybe if they gave the armed forces proper respect and resource that capability might exist. Until then it should be either commercial flights or the back of a Herc. Anyway, in my mind there’s a good chance we’ll be trading islands with the Chinese in the near future and we should prepare for that. We’ll need as much capability as possible to move men and kit around and combi airliners won’t get into short dirt strips, never mind with a chopper in the back (even if stripped down). We can’t get C-17s so A400 is the only option to me. We’d likely be under US command as well so C-17-level strategic airlift might not even be a concern! Yes agreed my 'should have' list would look very different to my musings on a B57 replacement which is from my 'what's realistically likely' list.  |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Oct 31, 2022 7:14:29 GMT 12
B57 Canberra?
|
|
