Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cessna Replacement - The Options

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • If you include pressurisation as a given, then that means that the aircraft will have a secondary function as a VIP aircraft. They don't have to worry about EU funding driving the work requirement for the aircraft, as is the case with the Casas, so if someone needs a quick shuttle to Brussels, a PC-12 will be popped up. I don't think offering a Minister a back seat in a Cessna Caravan would go down too well.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
      If you include pressurisation as a given, then that means that the aircraft will have a secondary function as a VIP aircraft. They don't have to worry about EU funding driving the work requirement for the aircraft, as is the case with the Casas, so if someone needs a quick shuttle to Brussels, a PC-12 will be popped up. I don't think offering a Minister a back seat in a Cessna Caravan would go down too well.
      Also more comfortable for the crew I'd imagine (on a long mission) and also AFAIK better for MEDEVAC

      Comment


      • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
        If you include pressurisation as a given, then that means that the aircraft will have a secondary function as a VIP aircraft. They don't have to worry about EU funding driving the work requirement for the aircraft, as is the case with the Casas, so if someone needs a quick shuttle to Brussels, a PC-12 will be popped up. I don't think offering a Minister a back seat in a Cessna Caravan would go down too well.
        You're nothing if not predictable.

        Yes, focus on the VIP aspect once again.

        Did you give any consideration to the fact that a faster pressurised aircraft would be better at transporting a patient to the UK or Europe or would rather them be bounced around in the back of a caravan in the middle of the weather with an inferior anti ice system.

        Or having crew loiter above the weather at 18,000/20,000 feet with a lower cabin alt would be far more comfortable than, again slogging it down in the weather with an inferior anti ice system.

        Then again, you probably think the Caravan is a better aircraft choice because the parachute club can spend the day at Clonbullogue.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
          If you include pressurisation as a given, then that means that the aircraft will have a secondary function as a VIP aircraft. They don't have to worry about EU funding driving the work requirement for the aircraft, as is the case with the Casas, so if someone needs a quick shuttle to Brussels, a PC-12 will be popped up. I don't think offering a Minister a back seat in a Cessna Caravan would go down too well.
          The need is for an ISTAR asset, a military mission to do reconnsance and intelligence gathering. This means low to medium level altitude. In todays world with EO, ESM, ELINT, SIGLINT, MTI, datalink, etc all having a higher ranking as pressurisation. If all the kit for the primary mission is onboard the the secondary missions can be added.
          As for shuttle to Brussels, complete BS! 40yrs ago it may have been a need but the growth in airline travel means today the are loads of connections out of our small island. And there are very few meetings that are not planned long in advance. And if the government thinks they need a flexible air service then they should sign up to something like Netjets, same for International air ambulance.

          The Air Corps should be the military air arm of the DF'S and not some private airline for Ministers. Except it it has already all the military missions covered, and this does not just include ISTAR!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by DeV View Post
            Also more comfortable for the crew I'd imagine (on a long mission) and also AFAIK better for MEDEVAC
            Most pressurisation systems have a cabin altitude of 8000ft. This means only when you go above this the benefit starts and you need to be above 18000ft to need it. For ISTAR you will normally be lower as the high up the less you can clearly define on the ground. Even good EO systems have limits and it is best to be able to have a decent mk1 eyeball to go with any EO picture.
            Not only does pressurisation add to the price of an aircraft but it has higher running costs both in terms of maintenance and fuel burn. An aircraft patrolling at 8000ft will have a higher endurance if it turns off any pressurisation system it has. And it is not insignifcant!

            Comment


            • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
              The need is for an ISTAR asset, a military mission to do reconnsance and intelligence gathering. This means low to medium level altitude. In todays world with EO, ESM, ELINT, SIGLINT, MTI, datalink, etc all having a higher ranking as pressurisation. If all the kit for the primary mission is onboard the the secondary missions can be added.
              As for shuttle to Brussels, complete BS! 40yrs ago it may have been a need but the growth in airline travel means today the are loads of connections out of our small island. And there are very few meetings that are not planned long in advance. And if the government thinks they need a flexible air service then they should sign up to something like Netjets, same for International air ambulance.

              The Air Corps should be the military air arm of the DF'S and not some private airline for Ministers. Except it it has already all the military missions covered, and this does not just include ISTAR!
              We are purchasing a utility aircraft capable of ISTAR, MEDEVAC, pax transport and cargo transport.

              It does make sense to have the capability to carry pax (doesn't necessarily have to be Ministers), as the only fixed wing backup to the Learjet (for either MATS or MEDEVAC) is the CASAs.

              The use of AC assets for MATS have reduced dramatically since FG came to power (not sure if FF started it). The default position is use an airline.

              At a time when talks are ongoing on decisions that will change the economic future of this island for the rest of time I think MATS could be important to have

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Rhodes View Post
                The P2+ model the Air Corps have is itself also no longer manufactured. Engine commonality isn't an issue anyway as the Air Corps don't maintain the GASU helis. 272 is only half way through its service life so would be a waste to get rid of it.
                An opportunity might be for the HSE to get a pair of its own helis for an expanded EAS in a joint tender with the Gardai.
                I'd thoroughly support that. EAS should not be more than 15 min of flight time away from any potential emergency.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Graylion View Post
                  I'd thoroughly support that. EAS should not be more than 15 min of flight time away from any potential emergency.
                  So probably 20 EAS helos (and bases)

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                    So probably 20 EAS helos (and bases)
                    And a major hospital in every large sized town in Ireland. At most I could see the call for 1 in each Province if a centralised set up wasn't a runner.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                      If you include pressurisation as a given, then that means that the aircraft will have a secondary function as a VIP aircraft. They don't have to worry about EU funding driving the work requirement for the aircraft, as is the case with the Casas, so if someone needs a quick shuttle to Brussels, a PC-12 will be popped up. I don't think offering a Minister a back seat in a Cessna Caravan would go down too well.
                      Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                      Most pressurisation systems have a cabin altitude of 8000ft. This means only when you go above this the benefit starts and you need to be above 18000ft to need it. For ISTAR you will normally be lower as the high up the less you can clearly define on the ground. Even good EO systems have limits and it is best to be able to have a decent mk1 eyeball to go with any EO picture.
                      Not only does pressurisation add to the price of an aircraft but it has higher running costs both in terms of maintenance and fuel burn. An aircraft patrolling at 8000ft will have a higher endurance if it turns off any pressurisation system it has. And it is not insignifcant!
                      The pressurisation system is being included so the aircraft can fly MEDEVAC missions across contested areas where ground forces may have MANPADS. Think Irish troops in Mali.
                      I don't think it's too unreasonable or too pricey to try to protect the safety of troops who if they are already being MEDEVAC'd ,are lets face it, in a bad way.Do you?
                      "Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by apod View Post
                        The pressurisation system is being included so the aircraft can fly MEDEVAC missions across contested areas where ground forces may have MANPADS. Think Irish troops in Mali.
                        I don't think it's too unreasonable or too pricey to try to protect the safety of troops who if they are already being MEDEVAC'd ,are lets face it, in a bad way.Do you?
                        In which case it will have a decent DAS - aircraft don't pootle along at 10,000ft then suddenly appear on the ground. It has to get from 10,000ft to the airfield, which, unless you have a massively concentrated force in the 15km or so surrounding the airfield, means overflying MANPAD's within their effective firing ranges.

                        I would in no way deny that your deployed forces need a rough field, ISTAR and light airlift capability - it's just that it looks to me like the on-island, more civilian aviation side of the wish list is rather overpowering the more warry stuff that the blokes in dusty shitholes need...

                        No DAS, no ELINT/SIGINT, no SAR/GMTI, no separate but related provision on a ground-based stand-off weapon system to take advantage of this new ISTAR source - but, you know, pressurised to do air ambulance work...

                        The cynical might think that the ISTAR label was something of a ploy to get an air ambulance - and conveniently, MATS - aircraft though in the defence budget...

                        Comment


                        • Is their an airfield in wexford capable of landing one?
                          For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                          Comment


                          • I can well understand the cynicism, but it's difficult to work out what the ultimate intentions are.

                            I get the impression the AC are in a never ending fight for survival and feel their surest bet is providing platforms for non military roles. So one arm is constantly tied behind their back.

                            At the same time, like the rest of the DF, they seem to be locked in continual battle with the DoD - the Naval Service requires extra deck stowage, not deck space for helicopters; the Air Corps needs an ISR capability, but strictly for on island roles.

                            Then there's a weak government and a public that knows practically nothing about the military other than "we're neutral". PC-9's are bought and a stink is raised because they'll use NATO compatible weapons. AW-139's are bought and there are constant questions in the Dáil as to whether they are "going to be used overseas" as though the DF are looking at getting into the business of carpet bombing.

                            But once that ship is in service and if that deck space just happens to be an ideal space for helicopter operations.... if that strictly on island ISR asset has become fully embedded in Army training and on-island operations and oh no, we can't really send them abroad without it...

                            Creep, crawl, creep, towards the ultimate prize of a bit of cop on.

                            But we've been here before with nascent capabilities never fully developed or just let wither and rot. Time will tell.

                            I still think the EU wielding a big stick and demanding baseline capabilities from all member states is the best hope of an adequately equipped DF.
                            Last edited by pym; 15 July 2017, 12:04.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by apod View Post
                              The pressurisation system is being included so the aircraft can fly MEDEVAC missions across contested areas where ground forces may have MANPADS. Think Irish troops in Mali.
                              I don't think it's too unreasonable or too pricey to try to protect the safety of troops who if they are already being MEDEVAC'd ,are lets face it, in a bad way.Do you?
                              Total fantasy Land if you really believe the Pressurisation system requirement is for anything to do with ManPads.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Charlie252 View Post
                                Total fantasy Land if you really believe the Pressurisation system requirement is for anything to do with ManPads.
                                PM inbound.
                                "Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X