Thanks Thanks:  276
Likes Likes:  569
Dislikes Dislikes:  16
Page 43 of 48 FirstFirst ... 334142434445 ... LastLast
Results 1,051 to 1,075 of 1183
  1. #1051
    Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    86
    Post Thanks / Like
    Britten-Norman Defender:
    http://www.britten-norman.com/media/...r-brochure.pdf
    ‘Typical Basic Airframe Price:
    Defender $2m.
    Caravan II $2.5-$3m.
    Casa 235 $6m.’
    Notes: Take-off/land (rough) c.365m/310m., Altitude 7,620m, 6 hr. missions to c.8 hrs., Max. cruise 326kph. Nose & 4x wing mounts, radar,. 2x 400hp turbo-prop.s (Rolls-R/Allison), 11 pax. max.
    http://www.spyflight.co.uk/defender.htm (notes £10m for 3, in 2003, w. ISR and defensive aids)


    *Cessna 208B/Caravan/EX:
    http://cessna.txtav.com/en/turboprop/caravan
    (note: prototype Cessna ‘Denali’ (pressurised?), 8-11 pax, altitude 9,449m, max. cruise 519kph)
    https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...rcraft-439437/
    (ISR aircraft, via US government, for countries with insurgencies - Chad, Cameroon, Niger, Philippines)
    https://www.defensenews.com/air/2017...sr-capability/
    (Note news item: c.$40m. Contract for ISR equipment and training for 6 aircraft and, c.$14m for extra ISR for same 6 aircraft... i.e. circa $6.6m, and $2.3m per plane, for ISR equipment & training).
    Note (EX): Take-off/land 658m/570m, Range 1,785km, Useful load 1,675kg, Max. cruise speed 361kph., Altitude 7,620m. Belly mounts, 1x 867shp (P&W) turboprop, 14 pax. max.
    <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

  2. #1052
    Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    86
    Post Thanks / Like
    Pilatus PC-12 NG Spectre:
    http://www.pilatus-aircraft.com/00-d...-Factsheet.pdf
    http://www.pilatus-aircraft.com/#150
    Note: ...basic Spectre ‘enabled’ PC-12NG from $0.65m... & EO/IR sensor quoted case-by-case.
    http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-ne...e-isr-platform
    (note news item: ability to operate from unimproved strips, retractable EO/IR in tail cone, loiter of +8hrs, ISR version c. $0.5m more in 2011 than standard plane).
    Note: Take-off/land 793m/661m, Range 3,417km, Max load 1,024kg, Max. cruise speed 528kph., Altitude 9,144m. Tail cone mount, 1x 1,200shp (P&W) turboprop, 9 pax. max.

    *Beechcraft King Air 350ER:
    http://beechcraft.txtav.com/en/king-air-350er
    http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/mc-liberty/
    https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...rcraft-427629/
    Notes: Take-off/land 1,237m/831m, Max +12 hrs, Ferry range 4,945km, Max. useful load 3,241kg., max. cruise 561kph., Altitude 10,668m. Nose mount (retractable EO/IR), belly, & wing tip mounts, 2x 1,150shp (P&W) turbo-prop.s, 11 pax. max.

    *Cessna and Beechcraft part of Textron that also includes Hawker (Citation) business jets.

  3. #1053
    Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    86
    Post Thanks / Like
    The Maths!... AC tender = €15m for three ISR planes (@ €5m p/plane).
    ...PC-12 @ c.€4.25m basic each = €12.75 for 3 = €2.25m surplus for ISR bits (€0.75m ISR per plane).
    Defender @ c.€2.5m(?) basic = €7.5 for 3 = €7.5m surplus for ISR bits (€2.5m ISR per plane).
    King Air ER@ €.8.25m basic each, is €24.75m for 3 = No surplus for ISR bits (€0 ISR per plane).

    Alternative ?: One King Air ER for c.€.8.25m, and c.€5m for two Defenders, total = c.€13.25m; with c.€1.75m surplus for ISR stuff (c. €0.58m ISR per plane) = still little leftover for ISR set-up.
    Last edited by WhingeNot; 17th September 2017 at 01:12. Reason: meant PC-12 (prop') not PC-24 biz. jet!

  4. #1054
    Sergeant
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    75
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by WhingeNot View Post
    As long as the secondary role (fancy transport) is of primary importance, the PC-24 looks like it would be best...

    Just very little money left over for ISR after that, when millions seem to be required for such, and the tender specification for single engine and pressurised aircraft seems to most, to be strangely specific, and more importantly out-of-character for ISR aircraft. Below is a list of the usual ISR suspects, and costs, for comparisons...
    I am really impressed with this aircraft from Pilatus.

    https://www.pilatus-aircraft.com/dat...Broschuere.pdf

    https://blog.forecastinternational.c...e-at-year-end/

    The Royal Flying Doctor Service has selected them to replace some of their King Airs and XP-8000's and they are a long standing organization who know what they are doing and what they are after. They fly 32 PC-12's by the way and have a fleet of 70 aircraft.

    If there had of been a proposal to consolidate IAC the fleet (Like what my lot are intending the next King Air lease to do) into a small multi-role platform that can swing through VIP, SAR, light airlift, MEPT, AWOT and tier 2 Maritime Surveillance / ISTAR - the special missions variant is a very solid contender.

  5. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  6. #1055
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    350
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Anzac View Post
    I am really impressed with this aircraft from Pilatus.

    https://www.pilatus-aircraft.com/dat...Broschuere.pdf

    https://blog.forecastinternational.c...e-at-year-end/

    The Royal Flying Doctor Service has selected them to replace some of their King Airs and XP-8000's and they are a long standing organization who know what they are doing and what they are after. They fly 32 PC-12's by the way and have a fleet of 70 aircraft.

    If there had of been a proposal to consolidate IAC the fleet (Like what my lot are intending the next King Air lease to do) into a small multi-role platform that can swing through VIP, SAR, light airlift, MEPT, AWOT and tier 2 Maritime Surveillance / ISTAR - the special missions variant is a very solid contender.
    They are still not flying over water

  7. #1056
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    6
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    They are still not flying over water
    If flying over water with one engine is a big problem, why is the Royal navy buying single engine F-35's to operate from aircraft carriers? And previously operated single engined Harriers in the same role?

  8. Likes DeV, CTU liked this post
  9. #1057
    Sergeant
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    75
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    They are still not flying over water
    Wrong. Do you think that it is somehow magically not possible or don't know that Australia with its 8000 island has ten populated islands offshore greater than 1000 km2 in size let alone Lord Howe, Christmas, Norfolk, Torres and Tasmania.

  10. Thanks DeV, pym thanked for this post
    Likes na grohmití, CTU liked this post
  11. #1058
    Captain Jetjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,723
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    They are still not flying over water
    He's advocating the PC24 not the PC12.

  12. #1059
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    350
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jetjock View Post
    He's advocating the PC24 not the PC12.
    sorry, that makes sense. 8.9 M$ a pop.

  13. #1060
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    350
    Post Thanks / Like
    I come back to the question: Why the insistence on Swiss? Did I not read on this forum that we can't deploy the PC-9s internationally because of contract restrictions with Pilatus? Why would we want that?

    Mind you, I just looked at the PC-24 and I agree with the impressedness. Especially at the price.
    Last edited by Graylion; 14th September 2017 at 11:22. Reason: update

  14. #1061
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,634
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    I come back to the question: Why the insistence on Swiss? Did I not read on this forum that we can't deploy the PC-9s internationally because of contract restrictions with Pilatus? Why would we want that?

    Mind you, I just looked at the PC-24 and I agree with the impressedness. Especially at the price.
    Afaik there is no contractual limitations from the Swiss as to their use. Swiss weapons sales legislation is very strict however
    (Which is strange considering they are one of the biggest arms exporters in the world), I seem to recall (possibly incorrectly) that the weapons integration on our PC9s was not done in Switzerland (Austria/Germany???).

  15. Thanks Graylion thanked for this post
  16. #1062
    Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,718
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    I come back to the question: Why the insistence on Swiss? Did I not read on this forum that we can't deploy the PC-9s internationally because of contract restrictions with Pilatus? Why would we want that?...

    Oh Graylion...

    Think about the attitudes of successive generations of Irish politicians and senior civil servants towards both the DF and the prospect of actually using them

    Then ask yourself whether an Irish politician would think it a good thing or a bad thing that every time some bright spark suggests doing something expensive, difficult, politically dangerous and possibly election losing, he or she can say 'i'd love too, but unfortunately our equipment suppliers have forbidden us from using this stuff overseas - how sad...'

    Personally I think that the likelihood of such a clause is zero - unless Pilatus are the only aircraft manufacturers in the world determined to go bankrupt.

  17. Thanks Graylion thanked for this post
    Likes Orion liked this post
  18. #1063
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,346
    Post Thanks / Like
    I recall something about an African country getting a finger wag from Pilatus, who said "thou shalt not use the PC-7 in a fighty manner!", at which they were politely told to eff off, as the Islamic jihadi hordes were being incomvenient and needed strafing. The Swiss would be raging hypocrites if they tried to ban combat used of an armed aircraft, given their willingness to sell SIGs to all and sundry.

  19. Likes Orion liked this post
  20. #1064
    Non Temetis Messor The real Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    3,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Just look at our procurement history:

    Mowag LAVs that are x% better than the middle of the road American/Canadian LAVs from General Dynamics for y% more € with parts and support costing z% more €

    Expensive Austrian rifles that were a mare to upgrade for x% more reliability than y% cheaper ARs from the US that'll go bang just as often as you need them to for 99.9% of the time.

    Then theres the swiss planes for training airbus drivers

    We're addicted to buying gold plated European kit made by low volume manufacturers!
    Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

  21. #1065
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    316
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    I recall something about an African country getting a finger wag from Pilatus, who said "thou shalt not use the PC-7 in a fighty manner!", at which they were politely told to eff off, as the Islamic jihadi hordes were being incomvenient and needed strafing. The Swiss would be raging hypocrites if they tried to ban combat used of an armed aircraft, given their willingness to sell SIGs to all and sundry.
    SIG is a German company

  22. #1066
    Non Temetis Messor The real Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    3,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie252 View Post
    SIG is a German company
    The warry weapons are made by their German subsidiary SIG sauer
    Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

  23. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  24. #1067
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,346
    Post Thanks / Like
    SIG is Swiss, always has been. Now, if those naughty, warry Germans want to copy the SiG under license and then sell them on to naughty people, who can blame the peace loving Swiss?!

  25. Likes Orion liked this post
  26. #1068
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,346
    Post Thanks / Like
    incidentally, when we bought the Steyr, we were the envy of the world and the Steyr was and is a very good weapon. Remember, it got rid of a legion of ancient, worn out FNs, that shook and rattled and were cobbled together from bits of older ones.

  27. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV, na grohmití, Turkey liked this post
  28. #1069
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    316
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    SIG is Swiss, always has been. Now, if those naughty, warry Germans want to copy the SiG under license and then sell them on to naughty people, who can blame the peace loving Swiss?!
    SIG was swiss, to get around the Swiss Export Laws they amalgamated with JP Sauer a German Company, the combined company is Incorporated in Germany.

  29. #1070
    Private 3*
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    32
    Post Thanks / Like
    Sig Sauer is a mostly American entity now, almost all production etc is in the US now...

  30. #1071
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    2,595
    Post Thanks / Like
    Did the Mexicans have a run in with the Swiss, suppliers of there PC9s after they used them to shoot at people.?

    Did the Swiss cancel an Mexican order for more PC9s, one of which we bought.?


    Here we are.

    https://flyinginireland.com/2017/01/...ame-confirmed/
    Last edited by sofa; 14th September 2017 at 19:20.

  31. #1072
    Sergeant Major
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    909
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by sofa View Post
    Did the Swiss cancel an Mexican order for more PC9s, one of which we bought.?
    No it was rumoured we were going to get that one, but I think are replacement was a new build.

  32. #1073
    Brigadier General
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    2,595
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky42 View Post
    No it was rumoured we were going to get that one, but I think are replacement was a new build.
    Just edited my 1071 post.

  33. #1074
    Sergeant Claudel Hopson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    84
    Post Thanks / Like
    Pilatus do not advertise their aircraft as armed aircraft as they are a neutral country. What customers do with the aircraft after they are delivered isn't Pilatus's fault, even though they can and do get grief from their government. We armed our PC9's, the Slovenes armed their PC9's, the Austrians, Mexicans, Chad etc armed their PC7's and PC9's. As for other Pilatus users I'm not sure about.

    The Mexicans ordered two PC9s for evaluation before they ordered the rest of their fleet, which were not used armed. They were found to be "unsuitable" after the US offered Texans to go with their Blackhawks, not unlike New Zealand who were to buy PC9s as well but then got the same offer as the Mexicans. Pilatus did not cancel a Mexican PC9 order as there wasnt one. They crashed one after that and the other is still used as a station "hack".

    The new IAC PC9 S/N 269 was a new build from the initial airframe built for Jordan, but was cancelled after they changed to the PC-21.

  34. Thanks DeV, Turkey, sofa thanked for this post
  35. #1075
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,346
    Post Thanks / Like
    The US would rather you bought Beech T6s, probably at fire sale prices, to deny the Swiss sales to people the US considers "their" friends. The downside is that the nearest PC-9 user is Australia and the aircraft are essentially incompatible...

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •