Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cessna Replacement - The Options

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

  • Three aircraft seems like a pretty small number for the Cessna replacement / ISTAR aircraft, especially if overseas ops with them are being considered. Any advance on an initial 3 plus 2 or 3 options?

    Comment


    • Well the role that went to the vast majority of Cessna hours (approx 1000 hrs annual to CIT escorts) is gone

      Comment


      • Related article on Mexican Air Force -

        Mexican Air Forces Buying 12 Cessna 206H Aircraft to Form New Reconnaissance and Surveillance Unit
        The document states that the Cessna 206H Stationair was selected on the basis of cost, adding that at USD325,000 per unit, plus USD287,000 for the surveillance package, presented the lowest price at USD612,000 each (compared with USD916,000 and USD845,000 for the Cessna Corvalis TTx and the Diamond DA50 Super Star alternatives). Procurement of the surveillance package will take place later in 2015, with deliveries of the ISR-configured Cessnas scheduled to begin in 2016 and run through to the end of 2017. The Cessna 206H is expected to remain in service with the Mexican Air Force until 2042.

        Comment


        • According to a Dail question, there will be a Cessna replacement tender published by the end of this year.

          Comment


          • Towards commonality and all the advantages implicit...

            Would it not make a tremendous amount of sense to go for 3 (+2) of these?



            PC-12 NG

            Much commonality including the SAME ENGINE as the PC-9s. Kit out 5 of them with identical ISTAR/Surveillance equipment.

            Paint 3 of them in Air Corps livery, 2 of them in Garda 'lemon sandwich' to replace the unloved Islander and vastly improve provincial air support. Ideal for ISTAR/Surveillance, Co-op, Air Ambulance, Inland SAR, Transport and Special Missions.

            The most you have to do to adapt across missions is to move the seats around.

            Then order two of these to renew the Ministerial Air Transport Service...



            PC-24

            Again if these were fitted with the same electronic kit as the PC-12s they could carry out all the same tasks*, with the same degree of flexibility, but with extended endurance, offshore/cross channel capability, and continental range.

            In return for a less salubrious modular seating fit, surely a big political virtue in post 2008 Ireland, they could relieve the worst of the short-notice pressure that regularly falls on the CASAs. Short field ability could also reduce helicopter Ministerial Transport hours and the occurrence of two aircraft international journeys.

            Maybe 2 (+1) would be better?



            * Assuming Utility/Jump door (seen here on the PC-12 NG Spectre) will also be available on the PC24
            Last edited by The Usual Suspect; 20 April 2016, 17:01. Reason: Utility/Jump door note added

            Comment


            • I shudder to think of a multimillion dollar PC 12 creeping around, trying to do low 'n' slow like a 172. There's a reason why dozens of air arms and police forces and Govt agencies have used Cessnas for surveillance and other low altitude, low speed operations.....I suspect some people will push the PC 12 from within and the helicopter followers will push their agenda.....regarding the Defender, the aircrew liked it because it brought them lots of turboprop hours in their logbooks but it bored them to death, shunting around in it, but it soaked up pilot manpower and gave them something useful to do, whilst awaiting slots on nicer aircraft. It has been a mixed bag as regards serviceability, though. Given that it and the PC -9s are both Pilatus, it does give a strong pointer to a PC 12 purchase.

              Comment


              • Who Said the Aircrew Liked the Defender???

                This article might be of interest..

                Undaunted by aerodynamic reality, the design team at Pilatus/Britten-Norman has announced plans for the BN2-XL (Extra Loud), promising more noise, reduced payload, a lower cruise speed, and increased pilot workload.

                We spoke to Mr. Fred Gribble, former British Rail boilermaker and now Chief Project Engineer. Fred was responsible for developing many original and creative design flaws in the service of his former employer, and assures he will be incorporating these in the new BN2-XL technology under a licensing agreement.

                Fred reassured BN-2 pilots however that all fundamental design flaws of the original model had been retained. Further good news is that the XL version is available as a retrofit.

                Among the new measures is that of locking the ailerons in the central position, following airborne and simulator tests which showed that whilst pilots of average strength were able to achieve up to 30° of control wheel deflection, this produced no appreciable variation in the net flight path of the aircraft.

                Thus the removal of costly and unnecessary linkages has been possible, and the rudder has been nominated as the primary directional control. In keeping with this new philosophy, but to retain commonality for crews transitioning to the XL, additional resistance to foot pressure has been built into the rudder pedals to prevent overcontrolling in gusty conditions (defined as those in which wind velocity exceeds 3 knots).

                An outstanding feature of Islander technology has always been the adaptation of the 0-540 engine, which mounted in any other aircraft in the free world (except the Trislander) is known for its low vibration levels, so as to cause it to shake and batter the airframe, gradually crystallise the main spar, desynchronise the accompanying engine, and simulate the sound of fifty skeletons fornicating in an aluminium dustbin.

                Britten-Norman will not disclose the technology they applied in enhancing this effect in the XL, but Mr. Gribble assures us it will be perpetuated in later models and sees it as a strong selling point; "After all, the Concorde makes a lot of noise," he said, "and look how fast it goes."

                However, design documents clandestinely recovered from the Britten-Norman shredder have solved a question that has puzzled aerodynamicists and pilots for many years, disclosing that it is actually noise which causes the BN-2 to fly. The vibration set up by the engines and amplified by the airframe, in turn causes the air molecules above the wing to oscillate at atomic frequency, reducing their density and causing lift. This can be demonstrated by sudden closure of the throttles, which causes the aircraft to fall from the sky. As a result, lift is proportional to noise rather than speed, explaining amongst other things the aircraft's remarkable takeoff performance. In the driver's cab (as Gribble describes it), ergonomic measures will ensure that long-term PBN pilots' deafness does not cause inflight dozing. Orthopaedic surgeons have designed a cockpit layout and seat to maximise backache, enroute insomnia, chronic irritability, and terminal (post-flight) lethargy. Redesigned 'bullworker' elastic aileron cables, now disconnected from the control surfaces, increase pilot workload and fitness.

                Special noise retention cabin lining is an innovation on the XL, and it is hoped in later models to develop cabin noise to a level which will enable pilots to relate ear pain directly to engine power, eliminating the need for engine instruments altogether.

                We were offered an opportunity to fly the XL at Britten-Normans' developmental facility, adjacent to the Britrail tea rooms at Little Chortling. (The flight was originally to have been conducted at the Pilatus plant, but aircraft of Britten-Norman design are now prohibited from operating in Swiss airspace during the avalanche season).
                For our mission profile, the XL was loaded with fossil fuel for a standard 100 nm with Britrail reserves, carrying one pilot and nine passengers to maximise discomfort.

                Passenger loading is unchanged, the normal under-wing protrusions inflicting serious lacerations on 71% of boarding passengers, and there was the usual entertaining confusion in selecting a door appropriate to the allocated seat.

                The facility for the clothing of embarking passengers to remove oil slicks from engine cowls during loading has also been thoughtfully retained.
                Startup is standard, and taxying, as in the BN-2, is accomplished by brute force. Takeoff calculations called for a 250 decibel power setting, and the rotation force for the (neutral) C of G was calculated as 180ft/lbs of back pressure.

                Initial warning of an engine failure during takeoff is provided by a reduction in flight instrument panel vibration. Complete seizure of one engine is indicated by the momentary illusion that the engines have suddenly and inexplicably become synchronised. Otherwise, identification of the failed engine is achieved by comparing the vibration levels of the windows on either side of the cabin. (Relative passenger pallor has been found to be an unreliable guide on many BN-2 routes because of ethnic considerations).

                Shortly after takeoff the XL's chief test pilot, Capt. "Muscles" Mulligan, demonstrated the extent to which modem aeronautical design has left the BN-2 untouched; he simulated pilot incapacitation by slumping forward onto the control column, simultaneously applying full right rudder and bleeding from the ears. The XL, like its predecessor, demonstrated total control rigidity and continued undisturbed.

                Power was then reduced to 249 decibels for cruise, and we carried out some comparisons of actual flight performance with graph predictions.
                At 5000' and ISA, we achieved a vibration amplitude of 500 CPS and 240 decibels, for a fuel flow of 210 lb/hr, making the BN-2 XL the most efficient converter of fuel to noise since the Titan rocket.

                Exploring the constant noise-variable speed and constant speed-variable noise concepts, we found that in a VNE dive, vibration reached its design maximum at 1000 CPS, at which point the limiting factor is the emulsification of human tissue. The catatonic condition of long term BN-2 pilots is attributed to this syndrome, which commences in the cerebral cortex and spreads outwards.

                We asked Capt. Mulligan what he considered the outstanding features of the XL. He cupped his hand behind his car and shouted. "Whazzat?"
                We returned to Britten-Norman field convinced that the XL model retains the marque's most memorable features, while showing some significant and worthwhile regressions.

                Pilatus/Britten-Norman are however not resting on their laurels. Plans are already advanced for the three-engined Trislander XL, and noise tunnel testing has commenced. The basis of preliminary design and performance specifications is that lift increases as the square of noise, and as the principle of acoustic lift is further developed, a later five-engined vertical takeoff model is another possibility.
                Last edited by Charlie252; 19 April 2016, 18:37.

                Comment


                • Comment


                  • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                    I shudder to think of a multimillion dollar PC 12 creeping around, trying to do low 'n' slow like a 172. There's a reason why dozens of air arms and police forces and Govt agencies have used Cessnas for surveillance and other low altitude, low speed operations.....I suspect some people will push the PC 12 from within and the helicopter followers will push their agenda.....regarding the Defender, the aircrew liked it because it brought them lots of turboprop hours in their logbooks but it bored them to death, shunting around in it, but it soaked up pilot manpower and gave them something useful to do, whilst awaiting slots on nicer aircraft. It has been a mixed bag as regards serviceability, though. Given that it and the PC -9s are both Pilatus, it does give a strong pointer to a PC 12 purchase.
                    67 knot stall speed at gross weight for the pc 12!

                    Comment


                    • If I'm in a PC 12 and the pilot decides to try exploring the pre-stall regime, there will be a loud bang followed the thump of the pilot's head hitting the windscreen from inside the cockpit, as i remove my boot from his arse and take over and return the aircraft to a sensible flight condition. Just because a test pilot achieved 67 kts in ideal test conditions, doesn't mean it's big and clever to do it in a real world environment (imagine the nose up angle)....

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                        If I'm in a PC 12 and the pilot decides to try exploring the pre-stall regime, there will be a loud bang followed the thump of the pilot's head hitting the windscreen from inside the cockpit, as i remove my boot from his arse and take over and return the aircraft to a sensible flight condition. Just because a test pilot achieved 67 kts in ideal test conditions, doesn't mean it's big and clever to do it in a real world environment (imagine the nose up angle)....

                        Comment


                        • ...and first off the blocks is the PC 12, in today, showing it's wares to the crowd.

                          Comment


                          • ...the Defender is much-loved by pilots only in that it helps to fill the logbook with precious twin turbine hours. After that, it's a noisy, slow cramped, pain in the arse in which to while away the time dreaming of the big sky job in the airlines...

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                              ...and first off the blocks is the PC 12, in today, showing it's wares to the crowd.
                              What's the most likely timeframe are we looking at for a tender? Pre budget, or next year?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
                                What's the most likely timeframe are we looking at for a tender? Pre budget, or next year?
                                Published by the end of year so will be 2017 estimates

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X