|
|
Post by obiwan27 on Nov 7, 2010 11:53:53 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by Naki on Nov 7, 2010 15:39:10 GMT 12
Do you think the Poms will have the same issues now that they have signed up to borrow French aircraft carriers to put their jets on, after scrapping their own carrier? They havent scrapped their carriers - their future ones anyway. Two are still under construction, although one may only be used as a helicopter carrier. It seems they have scrapped everything else including their current carriers to pay for the new ones - soon all the UK defence will consist of are will be one or two carriers  The French only have one carrier - they would like another but can't afford it so thats why there is going to be some co-operation beween the French and Royal Navies. So its just as likely that we will see French jets using a UK carrier as UK jets using French carriers, especially now that Poms are getting convetional take off/landing F-35Cs and not VSTOL "B"s. All this talk about C-17s - by the time the RNZAF make a decision on replacing the Hercs the C-17s will be long out of production unless Boeing get a big order real soon. We could get a second hand one but my bet no Air Force will be willing to give theirs up. |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Nov 7, 2010 15:45:57 GMT 12
Those new carriers are years away from service though Paul.
There was something on the German news on DW-TV last night saying that the A400 is in big trouble with issues around avionics problems with the engines and they are looking at cutting back the production line from 180 to be built to 170. I diodn't catch it all and am not sure if that is total production or if it is just an order for Germany?
|
|
|
|
Post by Naki on Nov 7, 2010 15:50:56 GMT 12
That would be total production (excluding exort orders). The Germans are getting around 50 A400s.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Nov 7, 2010 15:56:55 GMT 12
So if they are already quoting a total production line, we must have missed the boat?
|
|
|
|
Post by Naki on Nov 7, 2010 16:42:22 GMT 12
Nah still open for exports...porduction aircraft are yet to fly and production will run into the 2020s I would expect
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Nov 7, 2010 22:11:32 GMT 12
All this talk about C-17s - by the time the RNZAF make a decision on replacing the Hercs the C-17s will be long out of production unless Boeing get a big order real soon I think India ordered 10 yesterday. That'll make them the 2nd biggest user. |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Nov 7, 2010 22:47:00 GMT 12
Back in the olden days when places like India and Pakistan were poor, NZ used to donate them free aeroplanes. Now that they are rich and we are poor, maybe they could buy us some.
|
|
|
|
Post by adzze on Nov 7, 2010 23:03:38 GMT 12
Back in the olden days when places like India and Pakistan were poor, NZ used to donate them free aeroplanes. Now that they are rich and we are poor, maybe they could buy us some. The sad thing is that India is still poor - relatively speaking. Their GDP is about the same as Australia's but with 50 times the population. Yet they spend 2.6% of GDP it on defence (more than China, percentage-wise). |
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Nov 8, 2010 19:46:49 GMT 12
They do have definite enemies though
|
|
|
|
Post by nige on Nov 9, 2010 21:44:09 GMT 12
From today's DomPost letter's to the editor, written by someone well known to some here I believe. Letter: Which version of the Defence White Paper did you read? Last updated 12:00 09/11/2010 OPINION: Reading the editorial on the army in the Defence White Paper 2010 (Nov 3), I wondered if the Government had published two versions of the document. The version I read was as far removed from the army-focused, introspective and head-in-the-sand defence documents of the Helen Clark era as the Key-led Government could go without the Greens and their ilk having fits. The version I read included a global map centred on Wellington, which clearly showed that, apart from Australia and South Pacific islands, the only other landmass was Antarctica - visual proof that we're a maritime nation. Indeed, the paper includes a line stating that 99 per cent of trade, by volume, is transported by sea. There are some intentions in the paper that might or might not come to fruition, notably the expansion of Ohakea to include army units. There are some notable omissions - nothing about the mothballed jets, for example - but, essentially, this is the first document of its type I've seen in more than 25 years that appears to be written by people who take defence seriously and appreciate the maritime dimension. NICK LEE-FRAMPTON New Zealand correspondent, Australian Defence Magazine and US Defense News www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/4322763/Letter-Which-version-of-the-Defence-White-Paper-did-you-read |
|
pablo
Warrant Officer
Posts: 30
|
Post by pablo on Nov 27, 2010 17:59:34 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by Naki on Dec 14, 2010 11:56:37 GMT 12
Theres a small article in the latest Aviation News commenting that the RNZAF is considering either Pilatus PC-7/9, Raytheon T-6s or Embraer Tucanos to partly replace the King Airs and supplement the CT-4s.
It also mentioned that resurrecting the Aermacchis just wasn't financially possible as they had to be repowered (as mentioned on this board before) as RR arent supoorting the Vipers they currently have.
|
|
|
|
Post by shorty on Dec 14, 2010 22:01:43 GMT 12
It also mentioned that resurrecting the Aermacchis just wasn't financially possible as they had to be repowered (as mentioned on this board before) as RR arent supoorting the Vipers they currently have. So that can't do much for their resale prospects |
|
|
|
Post by timmo on Dec 15, 2010 8:13:59 GMT 12
It also mentioned that resurrecting the Aermacchis just wasn't financially possible as they had to be repowered (as mentioned on this board before) as RR arent supoorting the Vipers they currently have. I wonder if RR has some Trent 900's going cheap?  |
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Dec 15, 2010 9:21:58 GMT 12
It also mentioned that resurrecting the Aermacchis just wasn't financially possible as they had to be repowered (as mentioned on this board before) as RR arent supoorting the Vipers they currently have. I wonder if RR has some Trent 900's going cheap? If they can replace certain bits and get them to 'mod C' standard, then most definately not!! Even Qantas' Trent 972's (which need scrapping after 75 uses of full 72,000lb) can be run at 70,000lb without issue. |
|
|
|
Post by kiwirico on Dec 18, 2010 5:24:27 GMT 12
Theres a small article in the latest Aviation News commenting that the RNZAF is considering either Pilatus PC-7/9, Raytheon T-6s or Embraer Tucanos to partly replace the King Airs and supplement the CT-4s. It also mentioned that resurrecting the Aermacchis just wasn't financially possible as they had to be repowered (as mentioned on this board before) as RR arent supoorting the Vipers they currently have. Hi Naki, can you scan that article? I would like to read that one... Cheers, KiwiRico |
|
|
|
Post by Naki on Dec 21, 2010 12:47:48 GMT 12
Here it is - theres also small articles on future RNZAF airlift capability with the Minister favouring the A400 to replace the C-130 and how the PAC-750XL could be used by the RNZAF.  |
|
|
|
Post by Chris F on Dec 21, 2010 14:51:28 GMT 12
Interesting read there Naki.....looks like thats why the Aermacchis were crated up....because they are lemons! Another great military purchase.
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwirico on Dec 22, 2010 6:34:36 GMT 12
Very interesting reading Naki, thanks for your reply and scan... It seems that RNZAF is taken seriously the option for a trainer aircraft (like PC-9/T-6B etc)... would be awesome to see some in 14 Sqn markings  About those Macchi's; a shame that those aircraft are now marked for ending up in museum, as it will be hard to sell them with those engine problems  KiwiRico |
|
The French only have one carrier - they would like another but can't afford it so thats why there is going to be some co-operation beween the French and Royal Navies. So its just as likely that we will see French jets using a UK carrier as UK jets using French carriers, especially now that Poms are getting convetional take off/landing F-35Cs and not VSTOL "B"s.
