Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cessna Replacement - The Options

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

  • Spares for 2 different aircraft to hold
    Higher price per aircraft as you cannot leverage the quantity
    Pilots and techs to train and maintain currency on 2 aircraft

    There are huge SCM and other costs associated with operating 2 aircraft types instead of 1

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Rhodes View Post
      The military roles have been mentioned and are listed on the DF website.
      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.
      Not a realistic solution. Reads more like a wish list than anything else. I agree that the AC is small and carries out varied roles, some military, many not. If it has been carrying out these missions with the 172's successfully well where's the argument for beefing up the replacement?

      If it works, don't fix it.

      Seeing as Rhodes suggested it:

      The role of the Air Corps under the Defence Act is to contribute to the security of the State by providing for the Military Air Defence of its airspace. However in times of peace it is more usual for the Air Corps to fulfil the roles assigned by Government through the deployment of a well motivated and effective Air Corps.


      If the majority of its roles are XXXXXXX for cash escorts to remote areas, and secure comms systems are available and in use with other state services how strong is the argument?

      Do I believe the cessnas should be done away with? Defiantly not, you need a stronger argument to ensure they are replaced.
      Last edited by DeV; 12 December 2013, 14:12.

      Comment


      • If going for a mix of aircraft, couldnt drones do a lot of the surveillance work and be multiroled for deployments overseas - with newer 172's to carry out the remaining jobs?
        "He is an enemy officer taken in battle and entitled to fair treatment."
        "No, sir. He's a sergeant, and they don't deserve no respect at all, sir. I should know. They're cunning and artful, if they're any good. I wouldn't mind if he was an officer, sir. But sergeants are clever."

        Comment


        • Hi all,
          If statics are done from helis, then I stand corrected. I was told that they were not done because of the risk of fouling the rotors.Either way, helis for parachuting is hugely wasteful.......the airstrip in the Curragh was never formally established, as far as I know.Tony K might confirm or refute this. The Donners have operated from grass strips such as Birr for years, so it's not an issue. Operating from unhardened runways is simply an acquired skill but organisations, not just individual pilots, have to learn how to deal with them. Actually establishing a permanent grass strip in the Curragh would be easy enough.........with regard to aircraft choice, a lot of the 172's tasks require a lot of time at low level and low speed, so whatever replaces it has to be able to do that. No-one is going to be dicking around in a PC-12 doing that!............... With regard to Govt depts hiring aircraft for routine tasks, it's really as simple as hiring a taxi.They get the company information at the start of each year and ring around until they get a suitable aircraft.You'd be surprised how many times the State hires in aircraft in a year, often just for ad-hoc one-off jobs.

          regards
          GttC

          Comment


          • Originally posted by morpheus View Post
            If going for a mix of aircraft, couldnt drones do a lot of the surveillance work and be multiroled for deployments overseas - with newer 172's to carry out the remaining jobs?
            Then there are extra resources required. Also they couldn't do all the jobs.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
              Hi all,
              If statics are done from helis, then I stand corrected. I was told that they were not done because of the risk of fouling the rotors.Either way, helis for parachuting is hugely wasteful.......the airstrip in the Curragh was never formally established, as far as I know.Tony K might confirm or refute this. The Donners have operated from grass strips such as Birr for years, so it's not an issue. Operating from unhardened runways is simply an acquired skill but organisations, not just individual pilots, have to learn how to deal with them. Actually establishing a permanent grass strip in the Curragh would be easy enough.........with regard to aircraft choice, a lot of the 172's tasks require a lot of time at low level and low speed, so whatever replaces it has to be able to do that. No-one is going to be dicking around in a PC-12 doing that!............... With regard to Govt depts hiring aircraft for routine tasks, it's really as simple as hiring a taxi.They get the company information at the start of each year and ring around until they get a suitable aircraft.You'd be surprised how many times the State hires in aircraft in a year, often just for ad-hoc one-off jobs.

              regards
              GttC
              The AC is the primary air agency in the State (like the NS at sea), they have the assets the State has/is paying for and they should be the primary port of call, for State agencies, if they have suitable assets available.

              They could also look at adding value by supporting industry (like the NS).

              Comment


              • Hi Dev
                The Don doesn't always step up to the plate when called upon, for many varied reasons. My contact had a pain in his fundamentals trying to use the State asset of the Air Corps for his Dept and eventually went with ad-hoc hired aircraft. In fact, several times, he has used his own aircraft, when hired aircraft didn't appear, so it's not just the Don's fault.

                regards
                GttC

                Comment


                • danno, the IAA only concern themselves with airstrips if they are to be licensed. If the Minister wants to build an airstrip, on his own property, he does not need to consult the IAA directly. He can ask for advice, of course......there are about 200 small airstrips in the country, from model aircraft sized places to airfields suitable for King Air operations. Now, a lot of them are tight enough and best used only by the experienced, but they are there and constitute an asset to the State in an emergency.

                  regards
                  GttC

                  Comment


                  • One other advantage of the Caravan is that it is well used by many existing air forces and as such, is routinely fitted with pylons for external loads. It can carry pretty much any kind of podded sensor fit that you can think of and can readily be reroled. It can also carry a belly pod for cargo, to supplement the cabin load. A Caravan or similar aircraft also knocks a helicopter out of the game as a parachute aircraft. I keep harping on about this, but you only have to look at hundreds of para centres and militaries worldwide who use Caravans and similar aircraft quite simply because they are cost-effective in so many ways and the job is tough on crew and aircraft. It's natural selection; only tough, suitable aircraft survive jump operations and the same applies to military ops. Jump aircraft have to survive rough airfields, outdoor living, rough handling (and jumpers, God, they drool and they smell!...and that's just the women)and the hardship of high power demands and the sheer work load imposed by steep climbs to drop height. It really winnows out the weak and unsuitable aircraft.
                    regards
                    GttC

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                      Spares for 2 different aircraft to hold
                      Higher price per aircraft as you cannot leverage the quantity
                      Pilots and techs to train and maintain currency on 2 aircraft

                      There are huge SCM and other costs associated with operating 2 aircraft types instead of 1
                      That's not really a big problem considering the variant of aircraft types currently in the Air Corps fleet. It'll actually cost considerably less to purchase, operate and maintain. Obviously every possible solution will have its advantages and disadvantage.

                      Originally posted by Meatbomb View Post
                      http://www.military.ie/air-corps/fleet/cessna-172/

                      If the majority of its roles are XXXXXXX for cash escorts to remote areas, and secure comms systems are available and in use with other state services how strong is the argument?
                      It doesn't say what the majority of the Cessna's roles are, stick to the facts and stop making stuff up.

                      Originally posted by morpheus View Post
                      If going for a mix of aircraft, couldnt drones do a lot of the surveillance work and be multiroled for deployments overseas - with newer 172's to carry out the remaining jobs?
                      UAV's are extremely expensive. They would be ideal in the surveillance and monitoring role as well for possible overseas deployments but I think the cost's would rule them out as a Cessna replacement.

                      Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                      Either way, helis for parachuting is hugely wasteful.......the airstrip in the Curragh was never formally established, as far as I know.Tony K might confirm or refute this. The Donners have operated from grass strips such as Birr for years, so it's not an issue. Operating from unhardened runways is simply an acquired skill but organisations, not just individual pilots, have to learn how to deal with them. Actually establishing a permanent grass strip in the Curragh would be easy enough.........
                      The use of helicopters for parachuting isn't the best on cost grounds but currently its either an AW139 or Casa. It wouldn't be a problem to run the parachute courses out of Baldonnel should they switch to fixed wing with a Cessna replacement.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                        My contact had a pain in his fundamentals trying to use the State asset of the Air Corps for his Dept
                        I had a similar pain trying to get them to do anything and I was IN the Defence Forces.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Rhodes View Post
                          That's not really a big problem considering the variant of aircraft types currently in the Air Corps fleet. It'll actually cost considerably less to purchase, operate and maintain. Obviously every possible solution will have its advantages and disadvantage.


                          From the link that you obviously didn't read or chose to ignore:

                          Although carrying out many different roles, the vast majority of operations in which the five Cessna FR172H aircraft are involved in, are aerial surveillance and monitoring of cash and prisoner & explosive escorts. Additionally, a vital secure communications link is provided to ground units which may not otherwise be achievable during operations in remote and mountainous areas. Excellent slow flight characteristics, high wing for ground surveillance, coupled with endurance in excess of four hours makes these aircraft an ideal platform for such operations. - See more at: http://www.military.ie/air-corps/fle....wnu3ls5B.dpuf


                          It doesn't say what the majority of the Cessna's roles are, stick to the facts and stop making stuff up.



                          UAV's are extremely expensive. They would be ideal in the surveillance and monitoring role as well for possible overseas deployments but I think the cost's would rule them out as a Cessna replacement.



                          The use of helicopters for parachuting isn't the best on cost grounds but currently its either an AW139 or Casa. It wouldn't be a problem to run the parachute courses out of Baldonnel should they switch to fixed wing with a Cessna replacement.
                          FAO Rhodes:
                          the link that you obviously didn't read or chose to ignore:

                          Although carrying out many different roles, the vast majority of operations in which the five Cessna FR172H aircraft are involved in, are aerial surveillance and monitoring of cash and prisoner & explosive escorts. Additionally, a vital secure communications link is provided to ground units which may not otherwise be achievable during operations in remote and mountainous areas. Excellent slow flight characteristics, high wing for ground surveillance, coupled with endurance in excess of four hours makes these aircraft an ideal platform for such operations. - See more at: http://www.military.ie/air-corps/fle....wnu3ls5B.dpuf

                          Also DeV has awarded me an infraction for mentioning something I shouldn't have, well DeV look at the link, in the crew composition it states signaller.
                          This info is public and well stated, the 172's speak to ATC on civil frequencies and say where that are and where they are going yet we daren't discuss it here cos if OPSEC!????
                          Last edited by Meatbomb; 12 December 2013, 18:27.

                          Comment


                          • Air Corps Equipment

                            25. Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn asked the Minister for Defence his plans to upgrade the range of aircraft available to the Defence Forces Air Corps. [52778/13]

                            Minister for Defence (Deputy Alan Shatter): There are no plans for the acquisition of new aircraft for the Air Corps at the present time. There has been significant expenditure on the Air Corps fleet in recent years. The comprehensive investment programme included the delivery of Pilatus training aircraft at a total cost of €60m, the acquisition of two light utility EC 135 helicopters at a cost of €12.8m, the acquisition of six utility AW 139 helicopters at a cost of €75m and a major mid life upgrade on the two CASA maritime patrol aircraft. The provision for the Air Corps in 2013 mainly relates to the maintenance and Power by the Hour contracts set up to keep the Air Corps fleet fully operational with specific maintenance work being carried out on the CASA Maritime Patrol Aircraft over the next two years, mainly related to the overhaul of engines on the aircraft.

                            I am satisfied that the equipment, aircraft and technology available to the Air Corps are of a high standard and commensurate with the tasks assigned by Government.
                            Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Meatbomb View Post
                              Also DeV has awarded me an infraction for mentioning something I shouldn't have, well DeV look at the link, in the crew composition it states signaller.
                              This info is public and well stated, the 172's speak to ATC on civil frequencies and say where that are and where they are going yet we daren't discuss it here cos if OPSEC!????
                              The job the signaller does in the air is not in the public domain.

                              Correct it is OPSEC

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                                The job the signaller does in the air is not in the public domain.

                                Correct it is OPSEC
                                Edited my post above for Rhodes,
                                DeV I think most people can work out what a signaler does but if we daren't say it here so be it

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X