Thanks Thanks:  259
Likes Likes:  536
Dislikes Dislikes:  11
Page 42 of 46 FirstFirst ... 324041424344 ... LastLast
Results 1,026 to 1,050 of 1140
  1. #1026
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    58
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by The real Jack View Post
    I've mentioned the king air a few time in this thread, it'd be a far better aircraft but it's not swiss
    KingAir 350ER's are a class act and proven but if you insist on going Swiss the Pilatus PC-24 with the Spectre ISR upgrade package from the PC-12 is in the developmental pipeline.

  2. #1027
    Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    85
    Post Thanks / Like
    In general terms in any sphere, only receiving one bid/quote, or qualifying bid is a worry.

    Unless, the requirement is for something amazing and unique for which it known there is only one supplier, then this is ok and should just be stated.

    However, seeing as the AC is not looking to purchase a ‘Death Star’, maybe the competition should be re-run, with the parameters broadened out, to get a better picture of what is available; including a mix bag of aircraft if required, to balance out aircraft and fit-out (surveillance equipment) costs and capabilities, and any tie-ins with existing and other potential future AC aircraft.

    (on another note, do the new PDF pals in Malta also have King Airs for surveillance/ maritime surveillance... how do they get on with it...they could be asked!?)

  3. #1028
    Captain Jetjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,719
    Post Thanks / Like
    At best it promotes bad value for taxpayers money. At worst it leaves the authors open to all sorts of accusations.

  4. #1029
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,546
    Post Thanks / Like
    Do you know how many tenders were received? Do you work in DoD?

  5. #1030
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    304
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Do you know how many tenders were received? Do you work in DoD?

    Does it matter how many were received?

    In reality its how many meet the required Spec!

  6. #1031
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,546
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie252 View Post
    Does it matter how many were received?

    In reality its how many meet the required Spec!
    No point submitting an application of you don't meet the specs

  7. #1032
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,904
    Post Thanks / Like
    Great contribution DeV, thanks.

    Regarding the King Air, I think given the choice, pretty much everyone would prefer a King Air in the overseas ISTAR role.

    From what I''ve read though, the PC-12 is significantly cheaper to operate and has better short field characteristics (I don't fly, so please correct me if wrong) so to me, it's being bought for a low/no threat environment - same as the AW139's were - not for overseas, or at least not a Chad/Mali environment anyway.

    Perhaps there's also a worry that if King AIr was bought to replace the Cessna's, that could end of any chance of replacing the Casa's with something bigger and better.

    Why they wrote it for the PC-12 specifically though - it could easily open a can of worms and be like the S92 debacle.

  8. #1033
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    330
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by The real Jack View Post
    A drawing on paper is not a step up in capability and it's not a PC12
    No, it is not a PC12 - it is a twin, which, l.iving on an island, makes a lot more sense. It is also flying, with a full set of Saab avionics: http://alsaifaviation.com/en/product...trol-aircraft/

  9. #1034
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    330
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by The real Jack View Post
    I've mentioned the king air a few time in this thread, it'd be a far better aircraft but it's not swiss
    Why are we so wedded to buying Swiss? Especially with the limitations they impose on usage? And I'd take the Kind Air. I prefer the Avanti, since it is made in the EU, as are its electronics. But TBH that would be for a tender.

  10. #1035
    Major General
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,238
    Post Thanks / Like
    The Avanti is an expensive toy. 7.7m each, and only a small number (200) produced in 27 years since it was certified?
    Well, there's good news and bad news. The bad news is that Neil will be taking over both branches, and some of you will lose your jobs. Those of you who are kept on will have to relocate to Swindon, if you wanna stay. I know, gutting. On a more positive note, the good news is, I've been promoted, so... every cloud. You're still thinking about the bad news aren't you?

  11. Thanks DeV, ias thanked for this post
    Likes EUFighter liked this post
  12. #1036
    Captain Jetjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,719
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    No point submitting an application of you don't meet the specs
    Whoosh.

  13. Likes ropebag liked this post
  14. #1037
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,546
    Post Thanks / Like
    We'll know when the contract is awarded how many submissions there were

  15. #1038
    Space Lord of Terra morpheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Metropolis
    Posts
    2,961
    Post Thanks / Like
    Is it a commonality issue with the aircraft and engines etc? PC12, PC9, EC135's?
    From what ive read about it, PC12 has better range, same size cabin but its completely flat in the PC12 so is better for cargo, King air has 2 engines v pc12's 1, but going by statistics and probability pc12 is equally at risk of falling out of the sky. also once above 1200ft from departure, apparently the pc12 can easily glide back to airfield and land safely, pilatus are training pilots in this technique in initial training, king air with 2 engines out glides like a brick. there are pro's and cons summed up here on pprune if anyone fancies trawling through it

    http://www.pprune.org/biz-jets-ag-fl...c90-200-a.html
    "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."

  16. Thanks na grohmití thanked for this post
  17. #1039
    Captain Jetjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,719
    Post Thanks / Like
    There is no doubting the PC12 is a fine niche aircraft. It excels in the continental United States and mainland Europe where you won't be flying over water and you are never far away from an airport. Perfect for many places but not an island with nothing but sea for at least 3000 miles west of it is not the place to be basing one.

    An ISTAR equipped twin would have capability to be tasked for anti smuggling or SAR when not supporting the army. You can forget that with a single engine up front.

  18. Thanks Graylion thanked for this post
    Likes ropebag liked this post
  19. #1040
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    304
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by morpheus View Post
    Is it a commonality issue with the aircraft and engines etc? PC12, PC9, EC135's?
    From what ive read about it, PC12 has better range, same size cabin but its completely flat in the PC12 so is better for cargo, King air has 2 engines v pc12's 1, but going by statistics and probability pc12 is equally at risk of falling out of the sky. also once above 1200ft from departure, apparently the pc12 can easily glide back to airfield and land safely, pilatus are training pilots in this technique in initial training, king air with 2 engines out glides like a brick. there are pro's and cons summed up here on pprune if anyone fancies trawling through it
    http://www.pprune.org/biz-jets-ag-fl...c90-200-a.html
    FWIW I believe the range in the real world is the same, the manufactures play with figures. The payload is also quite similar, the KingAirs DOC in the civil world is about twice that of the PC-12. So other then the BE-200's speed advantage it would appear the PC-12 has it, but,

    Any turbine powered aircraft having a total loss of power has very poor glide performance, the chance of both PT-6's failing are extremely remote. An engine failure in a turbine single is a catastrophic event.
    The idea of a glide turn back procedure at low level gives me the chills, the RAF used to teach this in the Hawk and stopped as it is extremely difficult and dangerous.

    Thats even before we consider that the single may have made a IFR departure and be in the Clagg..

    And no the King Air is not equally at risk of falling out of the sky, this is a myth and not supported by any statistics.

    Lets be clear in AC service a PT-6 failed on 240 and the aircraft flew a circuit and landed..

    No professional pilot taking off on a dark and dirty night will feel AS safe in a single, FWIW the BN-2T has marginal performance OEI and we were very cautious in the area of IFR departures.

    This discussion unfortunately is all for nought as the decision has already been made and the aircraft selected..

  20. Thanks Tempest, Graylion thanked for this post
    Likes GoneToTheCanner liked this post
  21. #1041
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,022
    Post Thanks / Like
    The king air fitted for the isr role as used by the raf and usaf would be overkill for our needs, and I doubt that Raytheon would actually sell the smarts it carries to a non NATO country, it might even be limited to five eyes.

    As I've said before the nearest comparator to the capability they want are the defenders and islanders used by 651 Sqn Aac, in aldergrove, a quick Google would show what they do. Essentially the aircraft is being bought to facilitate training initially on island and then hopefully overseas to the Istar task force in the EU battle group, and on Island tasks like vip visits and EU conferences. Plus they have aldergrove up the road where they can learn from lads who have done these sort of missions with defenders in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    As for overseas, the sort of thing they're aiming at developing a capability at is the bluffwaffe deploying two istar aircraft to an EU battle group exercise in rough field conditions for ten days or so and managing six hours in the air per day delivering FMV to battlegroup commanders. It's not exactly penetrating the SAM belts around Hanoi in 1972, and to be honest I doubt theyll have the capability to do that for some time. If they manage to develop and sustain a rough field deployment capability then it's more likely to be used in hadr missions like a refugee crisis.
    Last edited by paul g; 11th September 2017 at 13:44.

  22. Likes Tempest, WhingeNot liked this post
  23. #1042
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,904
    Post Thanks / Like
    The Casa's have declared PAN PAN while on Marpat after losing a PT-6. Would have been a MAYDAY in a PC-12.

    And before DeV says it, no I don't envisage a PC-12 operating at 400 ft 100 miles WSW of the Skelligs at 02:00.

    But losing an engine, say over in Mali while snooping on militants... that's got disaster written all over it.

  24. Likes Graylion liked this post
  25. #1043
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    304
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by pym View Post
    The Casa's have declared PAN PAN while on Marpat after losing a PT-6. Would have been a MAYDAY in a PC-12.

    And before DeV says it, no I don't envisage a PC-12 operating at 400 ft 100 miles WSW of the Skelligs at 02:00.

    But losing an engine, say over in Mali while snooping on militants... that's got disaster written all over it.
    CT-7

  26. Thanks pym thanked for this post
  27. #1044
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,904
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie252 View Post
    CT-7
    Derp! Thank you. Stupid mistake on my part.

  28. #1045
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    304
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by pym View Post
    Derp! Thank you. Stupid mistake on my part.
    Still proves the point, no matter how reliable modern Turbines are they CAN still fail, as I've said before the PC-12's OEI performance is eye watering.

  29. Likes Graylion liked this post
  30. #1046
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,322
    Post Thanks / Like
    The Avanti was a dead duck, sales wise, and nearly went out of production until the Italian military were pressed to accept a few and other "users" were practically given them for free, to sustain the Italian aviation industry. Their after sales service was regarded as crap compared to the likes of Cessna, Beech and Gulfstream, so corporate buyers stayed away in droves. The Avanti looks nice if you want to shift Formula 1 drivers but it's tiny inside and not designed for the hardship that a King Air can sustain. You buy a King Air and you have worldwide access to a first class spares and maintenance network, that will give you genuine 24/7/365 utility. that's not sales brochure shite, that's what's actually out there.

  31. Thanks DeV, na grohmití, pym thanked for this post
    Likes Charlie252, DeV liked this post
  32. #1047
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,322
    Post Thanks / Like
    You can take any aircraft manufacturers' sales brochure figures with a VW-emissions pinch of salt; cold, hard, real-world use of aircraft will tell you what you really can carry and how far you will go and how much runway you will need. What the manufacturer achieves when he conducts test flights in a new aircraft with new engines and systems, from a flat, level, dry runway at sea level, on a cool day with ten knots of wind with one or two people on board is streets away from what a loaded, tired aircraft can actually achieve. The AC has been stung in the past by manufacturers' spiel, promising all sorts of wonderful performance figures, that don't cut it in the real world. If anything, AC operations over the Atlantic will soon put manners on any aircraft, fixed wing or rotary and will sort out the genuinely capable from the also-rans. Right now, that's the hardest environment the Don fleet operates in, so anything you buy has to meet that benchmark. Apart from that, ISTAR is a comparatively new field for the Don to operate in and when you look at that, you see King Airs in the picture, unless you spend silly money and buy pimped up Gulfies or 737s.

  33. Thanks Turkey thanked for this post
    Likes Graylion, Turkey liked this post
  34. #1048
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    330
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmití View Post
    The Avanti is an expensive toy. 7.7m each, and only a small number (200) produced in 27 years since it was certified?
    King Air 350i is 8 M$ a pop, so nothing to choose really. I get the proven ruggedness argument though. The sensor suite from Saab that Piaggio stuck into their bird cost 15.5 M$.

  35. #1049
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    304
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    King Air 350i is 8 M$ a pop, so nothing to choose really. I get the proven ruggedness argument though. The sensor suite from Saab that Piaggio stuck into their bird cost 15.5 M$.
    So one aircraft with a credible ISR fit for $15.5M, sounds very similar to the King Air ISR costs for the RAF and USAF.. and the total budget given for the three aircraft for the AC is 15M.

  36. #1050
    Sergeant
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    85
    Post Thanks / Like
    As long as the secondary role (fancy transport) is of primary importance, the stated PC-12... 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...
    Last edited by WhingeNot; 17th September 2017 at 01:10. Reason: meant PC-12 (prop') not PC-24 biz. jet!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 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
  •