Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ministerial Air Transport Service

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

  • The GIV had a larger capacity and longer range than the Learjet.

    What do you do if the Lear is U/S?

    Multi-role = flexibility = good VFM

    Comment


    • Originally posted by DeV View Post
      The GIV had a larger capacity and longer range than the Learjet.

      What do you do if the Lear is U/S?

      Multi-role = flexibility = good VFM
      All your achieving is forcing a Mission requirement on an aircraft that was not designed with that role in mind.

      You may get into the crazy situation where aircraft are sitting on the ground in case the Lear goes Tech!!

      The Lear is fine for Europe and ticks the short notice/high speed perceived requirement of EU membership, anything Long Haul is planned well in advance and there are many better and more cost effective options available.

      Buy three KingAir 350's have one in pax config, still cheaper then one C-295 airframe. Lots of flexibility, and VFM.

      Comment


      • Casa 295 cruising speed is 300mph, half that of a jet. Part of the purpose of a MATS flight is speed of delivery of the VIPs, who are not going t want to sit in a slow Casa on a regular basis.

        King Air 350, even the extended range version has a max endurance of 8 hours, insufficient for our extended maritime patrol zone. Casa 235 crews would probably resign en masse if they had to shift to a much smaller cabin with much fewer facilities!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Tempest View Post
          Casa 295 cruising speed is 300mph, half that of a jet. Part of the purpose of a MATS flight is speed of delivery of the VIPs, who are not going t want to sit in a slow Casa on a regular basis.
          King Air 350, even the extended range version has a max endurance of 8 hours, insufficient for our extended maritime patrol zone. Casa 235 crews would probably resign en masse if they had to shift to a much smaller cabin with much fewer facilities!
          True the C-295 is too slow for MATS work outside of short inter-island trips. When compared to the C-295 The 350ier has an endurance of 12 hours, much higher transit speed, longer ferry range and much lower acquisition and operating costs.

          The cabin is fine for many other military operators who carry out long endurance surveillance missions with the aircraft, why would our guys be any different. The days of flying around blocks of air should have passed.

          Operators who are buying the C-295MPA for ASW need the bigger cabin for the significant increase in mission kit and the requirement to carry weapons, neither of which are requirements of the AC.

          Comment


          • Does a King Air MPA have crew rest space and have headroom to stretch the legs during those 8 hours?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by DeV View Post
              Does a King Air MPA have crew rest space and have headroom to stretch the legs during those 8 hours?
              Cabin is quite spacious, similar to the SKA200 but longer. The Aircraft has become quite popular as a long endurance surveillance aircraft, it has been adapted in the ER model to be able to carry under Belly Radar, EO/IR and some other more esoteric type sensors on various aerials across the fuselage and on the wings and tail. They can even add a drop device for markers SAR etc.

              The ER has the gear of the 1900 to allow ground clearance for the radar and also has extended fuel tanks which provide the range/endurance.

              Given the possible extension of the EEZ, this extended range and higher transit speed would give it advantages over a C-295 type aircraft across the mission profiles.

              They quote ferry range of about 2400nm and endurance of up to 12hrs,

              Comment


              • Does it have the capability to do air ambulance, MATS, etc

                Can it drop life rafts ? Flares?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                  Does it have the capability to do air ambulance, MATS, etc

                  Can it drop life rafts ? Flares?
                  I am trying to make the point that by buying a jack of all trades you end up with a master of none.

                  How many times have the CASA's dropped flares or life rafts for that mater? how many times have they been dropped in anger? Were they always carried, were the crews always kept current in their employment?

                  Is the dropping of Life Rafts or Flares really a required function of the aircraft given that in the last 20 years the capability has NEVER been used?

                  The answer is that the 350 can drop flares/markers.. Rafts maybe more problematic but then as I have pointed out it may be a red hearing capability wise.

                  The aircraft would be a very capable MPA aircraft and would suit the top cover SAR role very well.

                  I would think that a fleet of two MPA and one std 350ier would be cheaper then a single 295 airframe, you could even reuse the current radars.

                  So you end up with a faster more role focussed aircraft and a fine General Transport, MATS sub aircraft for a reasonable outlay. You even reduce dramatically the training requirement on the MPA aircraft.

                  So the AC ends up with three very efficient airframes that tick the various mission profiles required.

                  if funding were available you can then look at either expanding the Heli fleet or looking at a capable airlifter.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                    Does a King Air MPA have crew rest space and have headroom to stretch the legs during those 8 hours?
                    Or have the capacity for 71 troops, 48 paratroops, 27 stretchers, five 463L Pallet's with all sorts of mission systems or cargo attached to carry out MPA (with rest area, galley and heads), long range (11 hours) Air Ambulance and ICU Transfers (with more than just patient, Doc and ICU nurse on board), HALO / HAHO etc. for the wing, in theater (Ireland) transport, humanitarian air drops (if you need a reason to go overseas with them) ,,,,,,, and a bit of VIP for good measure (use of the nations limited and expensive air assets is a privilege, not a right for those that serve the nation). Defo no need for ASW and AC 235 / 295 roles but it has plenty of other uses, military and civilian orientated.

                    That in my book is flexibility, capability enhancement and VFM. The kind you wont get with KA sized air-frames.

                    I am a huge fan of the KA and would love to see them employed by the DF, they have a lot to offer (especially in the Shadow R1 role) but its a borderline one trick pony and NOT very flexible at all if you buy them kitted out for MPA or any specialized role, and your very limited as to what an air-frame that size can do if not in a specalised role.

                    One on the books for MATS, twin engine / nav / observer training? Too right! But 295 is a superb mid range aircraft that can do much more than one job at a fraction of the cost (though not cheap) of some of its competitors.







                    Please note! Everything from this line onward NOT to be taken too seriously!!

                    Defo no need for ASW and AC 235 / 295 roles
                    Hmmmm you could then convert the 235's to AC 235!!! That would be fun! .
                    You know, far from being the poor mans Spectre the AC 235 / 295 almost carries as much firepower as the USMC Harvest Hawk which is a C 130, quiet impressive.

                    Dark hours top cover for a wing patrol after they HALO'ed from the same aircraft into "enemy territory" (The Curragh), recce and mark out a DZ and when dawn breaks in comes 2 x 295's (converted from MPA and AA / ICU in 45 mins) to drop off a company's worth of para's, then head back to the Don to fuel up and convert to MPA and Air drop Cargo in 45 mins.

                    I should send airbus a bill for this!!! .
                    We travel not for trafficking alone,
                    By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
                    For lust of knowing what should not be known,
                    We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

                    Comment


                    • Just because a capability is rarely (if ever) used doesn't mean it isn't a useful capability to have in a crisis (especially when no one else in these islands has that capability!).

                      The problem the AC has it has a large number of potential tasks/roles and a very small budget.

                      For that reason, it needs as much commonality in the fleet as possible, this means multi-role aircraft.

                      The CASAs are specialist aircraft and have proved good in their primary role. They can complete other roles, they may not excel at them but they can do them.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                        Just because a capability is rarely (if ever) used doesn't mean it isn't a useful capability to have in a crisis (especially when no one else in these islands has that capability!).
                        The CASAs are specialist aircraft and have proved good in their primary role. They can complete other roles, they may not excel at them but they can do them.
                        Agree they have given great service but the Latent Capability mentioned has not been used or routinely practised for 20 Years!

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Charlie252 View Post
                          Agree they have given great service but the Latent Capability mentioned has not been used or routinely practised for 20 Years!
                          Remind me how long ago they were involved in the Libyan evacuations or how they are relatively frequently used in the Air Ambulance role? They dont do Off Licence openings these days but they do utilise their "Latent Capability" as the Air Corps´ largest aircraft on a infrequent but much more recent basis than you suggest.

                          The Air Corps moved on from King Airs in the MARPAT almost a quarter of a century ago. Rightly. Now we can all agree that the modern SKA350 with proper MARPAT fit out that you mention is a completely different beast to the old SKA 200´s the AC operated in the past, but the reality is it is still a SKA. The CASAs are light years ahead in most areas not least of which is crew comforts. Now you might sniff at that but 8 hours in a King Air cabin will be hugely claustrophobic. You do not posses the ability to even stand up straight. There is no proper galley, decently sized lav or separate crew rest area. You end up with an aircraft where crew effectiveness is progressively reduced after 4 hours to such an extent that the aircrafts endurance is irrelevant to the argument. The suggestion of replacing the CASAs with King Airs is the aviation equivalent of suggesting that refitting the P20 class with modern systems and maintaining the same crew accommodations and hull is a perfectly acceptable solution to the needs of the Navy in today´s operating environment. It would be a retrograde step. Plain and simple.

                          If you are not sold on that idea yet consider this. The SKA350 has the relatively fine weather max demonstrated crosswind limit of 20kts. That is massively limiting operationally. 20 kts is really the stuff of light aircraft(probably winglet related). It may actually rule out all the west coast airports at a single stroke. Even two runway Baldonnel can be easily ruled out. You may be in a situation where an aircraft with potential SAR taskings cannot take off in the very weather a rescue job becomes more likely. For the record the C295 has a much more acceptable 30 knot limit.

                          The SKA is a fine ISTAR platform over battlefields with a benign threat profile. 200 feet over the Atlantic on your average winters day is anything but benign. There is a reason the Naval Service are going bigger with their ships. It is the same reason that the Air Corps should aim for at least for something similarly sized when the CASAs are replaced.
                          Last edited by Jetjock; 16 April 2015, 22:45.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Jetjock View Post
                            Remind me how long ago they were involved in the Libyan evacuations or how they are relatively frequently used in the Air Ambulance role? They don´t do Off Licence openings these days but they do utilise their "Latent Capability" as the Air Corps´ largest aircraft on a infrequent but much more recent basis than you suggest.

                            The Air Corps moved on from King Airs in the MARPAT almost a quarter of a century ago. Rightly. Now we can all agree that the modern SKA350 with proper MARPAT fit out that you mention is a completely different beast to the old SKA 200´s the AC operated in the past, but the reality is it is still a SKA. The CASA´s are light years ahead in most areas not least of which is crew comforts. Now you might sniff at that but 8 hours in a King Air cabin will be hugely claustrophobic. You do not posses the ability to even stand up straight. There is no proper galley, decently sized lav or separate crew rest area. You will effectively end up with an aircraft where crew effectiveness is progressively reduced after 4 hours to such an extent that the aircraft´s endurance is irrelevant to the argument. The suggestion of replacing the CASAs with King Airs is the aviation equivalent of suggesting that refitting the P20 class with modern systems and maintaining the same crew accommodations and hull is a perfectly acceptable solution to the needs of the Navy in today´s operating environment. It would be a retrograde step. Plain and simple.

                            If you are not sold on that idea yet consider this. The SKA350 has the relatively fine weather max demonstrated crosswind limit of 20kts. That is massively limiting operationally. 20 kts is really the stuff of light aircraft(probably winglet related). It may actually rule out all the west coast airports at a single stroke. Even two runway Baldonnel can be easily ruled out. You may be in a situation where an aircraft with potential SAR taskings cannot take off in the very weather a rescue job becomes more likely. For the record the C295 has a much more acceptable 30 knot limit.

                            The SKA is a fine ISTAR platform over battlefields with a benign threat profile. 200 feet over the Atlantic on your average winters day is anything but benign. There is a reason the Naval Service are going bigger with their ships. It is the same reason that the Air Corps should aim for at least for something similarly sized when the CASA´s are replaced.
                            Just FYI the CN-235 Cross Wind Limit is... 20Kts, the latent unused capability I was referring to is the Dropping of Flares and Rafts.

                            The 350 Makes a fine surveillance aircraft and would suit the straight forward mission profile of Fishery Protection. A std fit 350 would have been more then adequate for a Libya type mission and it has a larger cabin then the LR-45 so would be an excellent AA aircraft. As I said three airframes!

                            I hope you see my point is to not have the MPA requirement rule the possible Airlift Role. The C-295 is a fine aircraft and a good step up from the Cn-235, but given our peripheral location its real world range and speed would reduce its transport capability quite significantly.

                            I firmly believe that a C-130 class aircraft is the real future of the AC and its usefulness in the AC's primary role of support to the army. The same reason the Navy want there larger support type vessel.

                            It wasn't me that did the Off License run, but plenty of AA and SAR top cover missions and believe me I am well aware of what its like to at 200ft over the North Atlantic, the Fishery Protection mission is still quite straight forward. It is not ASW and does not need an aircraft in that class
                            Last edited by Charlie252; 16 April 2015, 22:52.

                            Comment


                            • I'll call your bluff on the Casa's alleged brilliance on crosswind handling. More than once we had to replace tyres after they scrubbed the tread off them in their sponsons in crosswinds. Big fat soft tyres, better suited to grass runways, in a tight sponson, was not a clever idea....If the weather's so shit that you can't land on any of the Don's runways, then you have no business being airborne and the sea state is going to be shit anyways. Best stay in bed...........with regard to alleged rapid role changes with pallets, in reality, they are a pain to change out, a pain to keep serviceable and a pain to store safely. It's actually easier when they wear a bit in service as the fittings loosen up and the alleged quick turn around can happen but manufacturers claimed change times are a joke. We had 737 Combis years ago that were allegedly changeable in 45 minutes. Not a hope. A good team, doing it every night of the week, with a ready supply of spares, got it down to a sustainable two hours, just to change out and replace the modules, even before loading it. You also need pallet loaders (hugely expensive, heavy and costly to maintain), safe and secure module storage and lots of well-trained manpower. We still do it with crew rest modules on A330s and it's still a pain to deal with and accomodate in the turnaround....Any DF person who wants to go down that route should spend a week in the cargo area of an airport and get their eyes opened. I've said it before; the Don should have a dedicated utility aircraft with a ramp for ass-and-trash jobs and not waste time, money and energy with palletising unless they are prepared to spend a great deal of money tooling up men and machines to have even a basic grasp of it. A ramp 295 only needs a flat bed truck on hand to be useful...........with regard to a Cessna replacement, it's more than past time for them to make a decision, regardless of politics. This has been on the go for at least ten years now.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Charlie252 View Post
                                Just FYI the CN-235 Cross Wind Limit is... 20Kts
                                I know I have commented on it here in the past. It is truly pityful for a high wing machine. And a reason to trade up not down.

                                I see where you are coming from re the C-130 option. It has to be a useful capability. I would like to see something like the KC-390 considered. Similar payload, smaller price. Those looking only in terms of 6 monthly crew rotations are missing the point. There is a multitude of other regular potential uses. If the DF had the capability to rotate a Mowag into and out of theatre after 6-12 months on deployment they would not end up with knackered machines sitting in a yard in the Curragh for a couple of years at a time waiting for some TLC. There are plenty of other useful regular roles. You would quickly find if a properly useful non token capability was available the utilisation would be surprisingly high.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X