|
|
Post by nige on Dec 22, 2010 7:40:10 GMT 12
Why are the alternative engines "unviable"?
C'mon RNZAF top brass get it together, after an initial spark by Phil Goff as defmin to get the Macchis flying again, and now Wayne Mapp allowing this option to be seriously reconsidered, you've almost reached the finishing line, so don't give up now!
|
|
|
|
Post by strikemaster on Dec 22, 2010 11:12:28 GMT 12
I would guess the cost of purchase, upgrade and /maintenance repair would make it enviable. Does the RNZAF even have ground crew left that could do the work?
What irks me more is even tho they were mothballed they let RR walk all over them. As a consumer I'd be a little more than demanding satisfaction. Sounds like Tenex too. I wonder if that was another consideration for canning 14 and 75?
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Dec 22, 2010 11:29:13 GMT 12
While the engine is the biggest issue, the rest of the aircraft isn't much better off in terms of OEM support and spare parts. The aircraft and everything in it are nearly 20 years old. RR stopped supporting the engine years ago, this isn't a recent development. I heard back in 2003 that RR wanted 20M Pounds from the RNZAF to support the engine for another 10 years. Unsurprisingly the RNZAF didn't take them up on the offer!
Aermacchi support for the aircraft back in the late 1990s was questionable even then, especially for the avionics.
If you were going to bring them back into service now you would need to do an upgrade and bring them back to a supportable state. You could fly a small number unsupported for a few years, using the rest as a source of spare parts, but your pool of serviceable aircraft would continue to deminish as time went on. The Macchi would be at best only an interim option, but it would get us back in the game and for that reason alone it should be done. But without a longer term committment from Government to the role it isn't going to happen I don't think.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris F on Dec 22, 2010 11:56:03 GMT 12
In the current economic climate I would not expect much if anything at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by nige on Dec 22, 2010 15:54:01 GMT 12
If you were going to bring them back into service now you would need to do an upgrade and bring them back to a supportable state. You could fly a small number unsupported for a few years, using the rest as a source of spare parts, but your pool of serviceable aircraft would continue to deminish as time went on. The Macchi would be at best only an interim option, but it would get us back in the game and for that reason alone it should be done. But without a longer term committment from Government to the role it isn't going to happen I don't think. As an interim option, despite the hurdles from RR and Aermachi/Finmecca, surely it would be cheaper than buying the alternative turboprops (which don't come cheap)? In terms of longer term committments (to Macchis and eventually a more modern type), it is interesting the Defmin recently said: "While the White Paper does not rule out the possibility of high-intensity, inter-state warfare in the period to 2035, it judges that intra-state warfare and inter-state conflict, short of war, will remain the most common forms of conflict. Our forces should therefore be optimised for intra-state conflict in weak or fragile states, while also maintaining some high-end capabilities. The White Paper sets out a pathway to retain and enhance existing NZDF capabilities. No cuts to front-line capabilities are proposed". www.beehive.govt.nz/speech/defence-white-paper-speech-new-zealand-institute-international-affairsThinking outside the box, what about alternatives to restoring the Macchis, such as are the RAF disposing some of their training Hawks (seeing they are chopping some of their fast jets etc)? |
|
|
|
Post by corokid66 on Dec 28, 2010 22:28:50 GMT 12
Here is a technical question for those who have had under the hood time with the Macchi.
Could the latest variant of the Adour Mk951 - the F405-RR-402 which is to go into the USN Goshawk upgrade fit under the hood of a Macchi and replace the Viper 680-43?
They dont seem all that different in dimensions - only seems to be a couple of cm's width and lengthwise between the two powerplants.
What are the other powerplant options?
|
|
|
|
Post by madmac on Dec 29, 2010 17:56:09 GMT 12
The Adour is a turbofan with a BP rate of .8 thus the airflow rate is about 1.8 x the viper & the Adour is 500 lb more in weight. The General Electric J85 is probably the only other engine in the class.
The 339's are basically free (no one is going to buy them), that allows a lot of scope for supporting them by manufacturing the required parts, etc. So we trade capital cost for an increase in operational costs but at the same time increase the aerospace ability of the country, for less than the cost of buy new airframes.
|
|
|
|
Post by nige on Jan 13, 2011 10:10:03 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris F on Jan 13, 2011 10:39:07 GMT 12
In my view only the RNZAF 757 should be ditched and not replaced.VIP's can use Air New Zealand which is very capable of doing this role.
The RNZAF should stick to primary military roles not VIP transport with an airliner.
|
|
|
|
Post by nige on Jan 13, 2011 11:12:04 GMT 12
But ... but ... but the 757's have a nice aero-medic evacuation module - perfect way for the pollies to sleep off the effects of a heavy drinking session and they can wake up refreshed at their destination :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris F on Jan 13, 2011 11:39:51 GMT 12
So true...I forgot about that.
|
|
|
|
Post by lesterpk on Jan 13, 2011 16:53:30 GMT 12
You forget the AME module has already been used once to care for and bring back to NZ combat injured NZ soldiers.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Jan 13, 2011 18:57:15 GMT 12
The 757s (like the 727s before them) are a great asset, especially since they had the cargo door added (and other mods) which have made them highly capable and flexible strategic airlifters. Using them for flights to the ice is another good use for them. Takes the pressure of the Hercs and allows them to do what they are designed for.
|
|
|
|
Post by nige on Jan 13, 2011 19:09:15 GMT 12
In all seriousness, yes I agree lesterpk & skyhawkdon.
It's odd that the Value for Money review was critical of the 757
It seems to me that the reviewers only considered the 757's worth on known history/usage .... and it stuck out that the authors didn't consider that the 757 will very soon be proving its worth and justify the investment to make it more multi-role incl. AME etc. A number of these specialist roles can't be replicated by Air NZ.
There was also another irony noted, that the 757 could easily contribute the Coalition duties (eg AStan etc) and thus get usage up etc. The only trouble is, RNZAF might need, eg, 3-4 757's in the fleet to provide operational flexibility and reliability etc. Perhaps that is the real answer, and would be politically and publically acceptable to increase the fleet, seeing the pollies and public notice that only 2 aircraft cannot guarantee availability if there is a minor engineering issue.
Not unless, there is a much better solution out there pre-2020 etc ...
|
|
|
|
Post by nige on Jan 13, 2011 22:51:31 GMT 12
Back to Raptor's point about 757 VIP usage versus Air NZ. I would have assumed that mostly, esp. internal flights, Air NZ carried the bulk of NZ VIP's anyway (eg Govt ministers, MP's, GG etc). So in relation to the 757, surely the majority of its VIP usage is for overseas VIP work, yes? Which would be limted further presumably to PM, official Govt delegations, and Royal visitors etc. I hazard a guess the bean counters would not think this lower usage (in the wider scheme of 757 overall usage) was justifiable? But what about the 'fact' that for official Govt business (incl. royal protection) there must surely be other advantages, somewhat intangible perhaps to bean counters, such as the provision for special secured comms (already wired & in place), perhaps if ever required - counter measures systems, perhaps an armoury of sorts for protection staff etc. (Imagine the paperwork and redtape required for Air NZ to mod their aircraft to similar extent if they were to be pressed into serious VIP work or to AStan etc. Would their insurance cover Air NZ's aircraft and what does their employee contracts say)  Anyway, what important 757 aspects could the Value for Money reviewers not realised? Aspects that have a very, very likelyhood of happenning, maybe in 2011 & but otherwise certainly very likely in the short term (next 5 years)? * Natural disaster in South Pacific (earthquake, tsunami, cyclone etc) that caused mass casualties, overwhelming Island hospitals, thus requiring urgent AME back to NZ hospitals - be they NZ nationals or Island locals etc? * Terrorist, explosive or industrial incident that causes mass injuries (S.Pacific, SE Asia), perhaps to NZ diplomatic staff/embassay, NZ tourists, locals etc, again requiring AME to NZ (perhaps the less critical, as presumably critical patients will evac. to closer hospitals be that Aust, Singapore etc). * NZ Antarctic programme (are the 757's starting this summer or next?) and assisting US efforts, to fly personnel and cargo, freeing up the slower C130's for bulky items, perhaps reducing C130 usage ultimately (and ensuring greater availability for what they were primarily meant for i.e. military deployments in hazardous areas or even NZ/Pacific 24-hour civil defence emergency stand-by etc). * Further NZDF deployments to the next lot of trouble spots, as the Defence Review recognises as very likely to continue to happen etc. Etc. * Possible usage for UN/Coalition functions a la occassional C130 postings etc. A nice option for Govt to earn intl. brownie points, whilst minimising risk etc. * Any more? It's almost like the VFM reviewers didn't notice that the 757 is now multi-role (ok, I jest for a mo) :-) Save Our 757's, and buy at least one more! |
|
|
|
Post by Chris F on Jan 14, 2011 13:29:08 GMT 12
The way I look at the 757 role(my view only) is it is not a true military role as in VIP.The PM can fly air New zealand and I would not mind betting he prefers it aswell.I was just two weeks ago on a flight from Christchurch to Wellington which had several Air force and Army officers on it,and yes this was an Air NZ flight,so it beggs debate this VIP role.
Why not do away with it and place your limited funds towards getting a more reliable and bigger C-130 replacement and a multi role trainer capable of a dual transport and short range maritime patrol role aswell as multi engine training.
Had we replaced the Andover at the time of retirement and replaced the C-130 we would not be in this mess in the first place.
Just my thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Jan 14, 2011 14:07:45 GMT 12
The way I look at the 757 role(my view only) is it is not a true military role as in VIP.The PM can fly air New zealand and I would not mind betting he prefers it aswell.I was just two weeks ago on a flight from Christchurch to Wellington which had several Air force and Army officers on it,and yes this was an Air NZ flight,so it beggs debate this VIP role. Except VIP is not the 757's main RNZAF role. As mentioned elsewhere in this thread amonst others its primary tasking is strategic airlift. VIP taskings I would wager don't take up much time; they are just highly visible. |
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on Jan 14, 2011 14:09:43 GMT 12
Raptor I think you would be surprised how little of the 757's hours is actually dedicated to the VIP role. I don't have the exact figures but it would be in the single figures as a percentage of their total flying hours (i.e. it is very small). Most of the flying they now do is military airlift tasking - taking the load off the Hercs and allowing them to concentrate on tactical tasking and training. The 757s are a great asset to the NZDF!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deane B on Jan 14, 2011 14:28:50 GMT 12
Yes I agree that the 757 is a great asset in a proven role. One of the reason the 727 (which the 757 replaced) was procured in the first place was to provide medium to long range transport faster than a C130 can achieve. People keep forgetting that RNZAF aircraft are not there for the RNZAF, but to support the Army and Navy as well. So the best way to move masses of troops to Singapore in the 80's then later, places like Timor and now Afghanistan etc, is by these aircraft not C130's. If you have ever spent 2 days and 20 hours flying in the back of a C130 to Singapore, you'll agree !!
|
|
|
|
Post by davekiwi on Jan 14, 2011 17:57:49 GMT 12
Do the 757s do the SATS run that the 727s used to do? Spent more than a bit of time flying from Wigram to Whenuapai on the 727 via Wellington & Ohakea.
|
|
