Cessna Replacement - The Options

[pym]

Don't forget the Cessna is a utility aircraft.

Think about, it say it is delivered at single use ISTAR aircraft and it is deployed overseas with the AC.

No-one is advocating a purely single use aircraft, so don't bother going down that line DeV. The discussion is about how much weight will be given to the different roles the aircraft will inevitably have to fulfill.

An aircraft designed for cruising at 300+ kts at 25kft is not going to be at home orbiting over a target at 2000 feet and 80kts, while sending a video feed down to troops.

The Air Corps desperately needs to offer a viable military function to the rest of DF -both at home and overseas - so is it right that characteristics more suited to civilian roles e.g. air ambulance, VIP transport, should be given anywhere near the same weight as military functionality?

[DeV]

agreed

[Pure Hover]

The Air Corps desperately needs to offer a viable military function to the rest of DF -both at home and overseas - so is it right that characteristics more suited to civilian roles e.g. air ambulance, VIP transport, should be given anywhere near the same weight as military functionality?

I don't know Pym! I'd say the Air Corps "desperately needs" to hold on to its pilots, technicians, air traffic controllers etc who continue to stream out the door without any effort being made to retain them in service. The same of course can be said of many areas of the wider public service such as the Gardai with the chickens now firmly coming home to roost in that area.

Remember the AC have been blocked by the DoD before when they tried to get involved in overseas service and i think they probably adequately meet the current DF needs at home.

However the level of procrastination involved in this project (i.e. Cessna replacement) is simply astounding as its been ongoing now for over twenty years in one form or another. You'd have designed a new aircraft yourself in the time its taken to go to tender. I hate to be cynical but the bean counters will see this project for what it is - a Cessna replacement only and seek to replace like for like with nothing that can be used to expand the AC's role especially overseas. I sincerely hope i'm wrong but I doubt it. The money would be much better spent invested into a strategic lift program or simply into the purchase of more helicopters.

[pym]

I'm not as cynical because the White Paper references bigger aircraft with an ISR fit to replace the Cessnas. The Air Corps have exercised with the Army using the Casa in the ground support ISR role - demonstrating willingness to take that role on and what air surveillance can bring to the table.

I'm not saying we'll see Cessna Caravans in the Leb, but I don't think it's a stretch to say if the Air Corps become a regularly useful asset to the Army at home, bringing a new dimension to training and making the lives of soldiers on the ground a bit easier - it won't just be the Air Corps clamouring for an overseas role, you'll have the Army backing them up too.

Yes that would mean there'd need to a CSAR capability, either brought by ourselves or a partner nation and that is a whole issue unto itself, but potentially this could be the first step towards a deployable IAC capability.

[EUFighter]

Is it not time to move on and join the rest of the world. If we need an ISTAR asset then get a few drones there are plenty to pick from affordable to mind blowing expensive. But they all offer longer endurance, lower fuel burn and everything 18yr old can fly them, gets rid of needing to retain pilots. No problem deploying overseas because even if one gets shot down, its only money.
As for the other mission the modern solution is that new invention the helicopter.
I might be wrong but I do believe that there is no landing strip available on the Golan Heights? Bit difficult for a Caravan, PC12 etc to Land without one, or?

[Pure Hover]

Maybe cynical is the wrong word on my behalf. Realistic or pragmatic might be fairer although cynicism is often the product of so many false dawns. However, I think that unless the AC and the NS to a greater or lesser degree gets to grip with its HR issues the it will continue to struggle to develop or rebuild sufficient operational capability, regardless of what new aircraft are being considered.

In relation to Army support, the Army essentially continues to concentrate on its overseas role which is primarily focused on a ground holding role in S Lebannon and the Golan. Troop numbers on these missions have been cut considerably (in comparison to previous Leb deployments) and it is doubtful whether or not the Army could meet a Bn + overseas commitment anymore. What little scope there remains for major exercises at home are adequately supported by the AC. In fact a lot of the "support" provided by AC assets to the Army on an annual basis is spent parachuting which has a highly questionable operational value to say the least.

There certainly is plenty scope to develop ISTAR capability but ISTAR can still be small but highly effective. I remain convinced that the DoD do not want the AC to develop an overseas deployment capability and will resist any attempts to expand the scope of any future tender. There is also little op requirement from the Army in its overseas role for aerial support and that doesn't look like changing in the near future. Hence the Cessna replacement may be just that - a Cessna replacement. Call me cynical or just realistic but It just might be ok.

[X-RayOne]

Is it not time to move on and join the rest of the world. If we need an istanbul Assen then get a few drohen there are plenty to pick from affordable to mindestens boring expensive. But they all offer longer endurance, lower fuel burn and everything 18yr old can fly them, geht's rid of needing to retten pilots. No problem deploying overseas because even if one gets shot down, its only money.
As for the other mission the modern sollten is that New invention the helicopter.
I mich be wrong but I do believe that there is no landing strip available on the Gelangen Heights? Bit difficult for a Caravan, PC12 etc to Land without one, or?

were you locked writing that or did your spell check have a seizure during it?

[GoneToTheCanner]

Forget the Leb. Italians have it sewn up and any armed or even fixed wing aviation is too politically sensitive out there. If the DF goes back to places like Chad, then it will need all the wings or rotors it can get, where it can genuinely use an aircraft like a Caravan for ISTAR or even supply/medevac,etc. Such aircraft can easily be shipped or ferried to places like Chad and operated off rough runways. The Irish in Chad were tied to dependence on N'Djamena, where as an FOB with a rolled, graded runway would have been invaluable....apart from that, the delay is disgraceful.

[EUFighter]

If the role is a multi role one with ISTAR and general utility, the Ruag Do228NG could be an option. It is an updated version of the Dornier Do228. It might not be as sexy as s Kingair or PC12 but has a high mounted wing ideal for ISTAR missions, has great STOL performance, can handle rough jungle strips and come with a nice large cargo door. http://www.dornier228.com

[GoneToTheCanner]

much less available than a King Air, low production numbers so higher purchasing and operating costs compared to a King Air. People are forgetting that if you have to do low-level stuff like the bog standard Cessna 172 does, with a turbine engine, you are going to guzzle fuel and throw official endurance figures out the window (which are about on a par with car manufacturer figures, for real world operation). Now, the Don has to rein in it's fuel burn like everyone else and has to consider the actual endurance it can offer a user, such as the Army or the Gardai.

[Jetjock]

There are very few offerings out there now that from an Army Co Op point of view can not only do what the Cessnas do but do it better, bring it into the 21st century from an ISR point of view, be deployable overseas and cost effective to buy and operate.

This is a South African machine that ticks all the above boxes.

https://youtu.be/gqyrftQUKkg

[Rhodes]

Forget the Leb. Italians have it sewn up

Not necessarily, the Spanish agreed last year to send two helicopters to Lebanon, now they are saying they will not send the helicopters because they didn't get the Force Commanders job which was given to an Irish General, the UN will now have to look elsewhere for the helicopters.

[GoneToTheCanner]

prima donnas!

[DeV]

much less available than a King Air, low production numbers so higher purchasing and operating costs compared to a King Air. People are forgetting that if you have to do low-level stuff like the bog standard Cessna 172 does, with a turbine engine, you are going to guzzle fuel and throw official endurance figures out the window (which are about on a par with car manufacturer figures, for real world operation). Now, the Don has to rein in it's fuel burn like everyone else and has to consider the actual endurance it can offer a user, such as the Army or the Gardai.

But look at fuel types in use

[EUFighter]

Do228 operating costs are actually below that of a Kingair due to low fuel burn as it has a much lower cruising speed, it was not designed as a status symbol for business execs but a regional low cost aircraft. The production numbers have no relevance on the price of the aircraft or the availability, Beech are no longer producing at the levels they were in the 70's. As for endurance it is more than 8hrs so a lot more than the Cessna, and it can take 21 troops or 4 stretchers.