Originally posted by Jungle
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Cessna Replacement - The Options
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Meatbomb View PostAt the risk of risking opsec by mentioning a radio system not even in use with the DF
Comment
-
Interestingly Cessna do produce a 'Turbo Skylane', C182 to you and me with a diesel engine which addresses the Jet A fuel issue. As a direct replacement for the Rockets, it fits the bill exactly. But it is a four seater and for the same money you can get an Airvan which takes eight even if it uses Avgas.
Like it or not it's going to cost at least half a million dollars per copy. If you want to move up to Caravan class the budget needs to be stretched quite a bit. One thing about Caravans is that until recently they were relatively underpowered. There is a bigger engined version but costs go up for that advantage. As singles go it is big. Maybe too big for the job the Air Corps wants.
No matter how you cut it, the Airvan keeps coming back into the frame. There is little enough out there to compete with it. Unless the Air Corps buys second hand. Then the field is open.
It's odd really there are so few utility aircraft out there currently in production. It seems Cessna and Gippsland have corned the market.
Comment
-
Good to hear, had trouble in the past speaking to the comcen from the ramp!
My comments related to an earlier post ref CIT and the 172, and it's role being comms, just saying the technology is there to operate without the Cessnas.
Reference roles Rhodes, what are the soley military roles that the 172's carry out? And I mean the ones that can't be done by civvys.Last edited by DeV; 12 December 2013, 01:42.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Meatbomb View PostGood to hear, had trouble in the past speaking to the comcen from the ramp!
Reference roles Rhodes, what are the soley military roles that the 172's carry out? And I mean the ones that can't be done by civvys.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rhodes View PostThat's not the fault of the radio, its the operator/s that's the problem.
Every role carried out by the Cessna's has be mentioned on this thread already.
As C252 said, you replace like with like, so 172 for 172. Unless you move into an area or an operation that can't be done by joe bloggs flight services you will always be compared to him by the bean counters.
Comment
-
Why put several State agencies in a position where they have to put out to (several) tenders to end up to several different operators flying less than 100 hours a year on each contract?
A State agency has aircraft, has crews, has spare capacity etc use the AC.
What about if a State body needs 1 x 5/6 hour flight annually, does that make sense.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
-
I agree, I'm not saying everyone needs their own asset, that would be madness. I'm just looking at it like this: if your doing general purpose ops then just update what's worked all along. If there is more specialised military specific ops, whatever they might be then tailor the future replacements towards those ops. If the same is to continue then what the IAC might get is irrelevant, the bean counters will give you the bare essentials to do the 5/6 hrs per agency that you mentioned.
Comment
-
You know, the more you read this thread, the more desperate are the arguments to justify a C-172...
Maybe, the AC needs to ditch the C-172, and it's roles, and find some more worthwhile Missions to get involved in.
Am I the only one that thinks that aerial escorts is a bit '70's...Last edited by DeV; 12 December 2013, 08:14.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Meatbomb View PostWas more interested in looking at the solely military roles, just to try and focus on these and what a/c would be the most suitable. I understand why you might not want to separate the military ones from the non military ones.....
As C252 said, you replace like with like, so 172 for 172. Unless you move into an area or an operation that can't be done by joe bloggs flight services you will always be compared to him by the bean counters.
Replacing like with like limits expansion of roles and its ability to ease the workload of other aircraft in the fleet. The Air Corps is a very small military air component and all aircraft need to be multi-role with modular configurations were possible.
There is always the possibility two or more aircraft types could be selected as replacements, ie 2x Pilatus PC-12's and 3x Cessna 206's. This would reduce operating costs, prevent overkill in primary roles but still have the ability to expand the Squadron's roles, and ease the workload of other aircraft.
Comment
Comment