Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Maritime Patrol

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

  • #91
    Good to see that the transport and air ambulance roles performed by the CASAs is noted in the WP. Gives extra weight to the need for a transport capability outside of that given by what is specifically supposed to be a MarPat aircraft.

    Although a specific number of current CASAs (2) is given in the WP, a definite number of replacements is not given. Might we see an extra one or two replacement aircraft added to those to replace the current CASAs?

    Also for those aircraft techs out there, if dual role MarPat / transport variants are purchased, how would operations from any rough field environments affect things like belly radar domes, radar dishes and items normally found on a maritime patroller, but not on a transport version? (If I remember correctly, that roll-on, roll-off maritime pallet only held the operator station and maybe some associated computers.) Could the radar dome etc be removed, and replaced by a "regular" "flat" floor panel?

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by meridian View Post
      Good to see that the transport and air ambulance roles performed by the CASAs is noted in the WP. Gives extra weight to the need for a transport capability outside of that given by what is specifically supposed to be a MarPat aircraft.

      Although a specific number of current CASAs (2) is given in the WP, a definite number of replacements is not given. Might we see an extra one or two replacement aircraft added to those to replace the current CASAs?

      Also for those aircraft techs out there, if dual role MarPat / transport variants are purchased, how would operations from any rough field environments affect things like belly radar domes, radar dishes and items normally found on a maritime patroller, but not on a transport version? (If I remember correctly, that roll-on, roll-off maritime pallet only held the operator station and maybe some associated computers.) Could the radar dome etc be removed, and replaced by a "regular" "flat" floor panel?
      Also supported by the rapid reaction inf coy

      Comment


      • #93
        @meridian; the radome could be removed and the associated bracketry easily undone and the belly returned to a normal profile easily enough. The allegedly roll-on,off module was anything but....but is essentially removeable within a short time span, like overnight by a night shift crew.

        Comment


        • #94
          Given the current and past behaviour by the DoD, the Casas would get an angle grinder put thru them rather than sell them off and there appears to be no motivation to strip them out as simple freighters/air ambulance/parachuting/emergency relief. they will have very high hours and airframe cycles in a maritime environment and will be essentially worthless.

          Comment


          • #95
            Thanks for that information GTTC. I thought that it would be something that could be done alright. I wasn't sure what the status of the current Casa systems fit was in terms of removing it - I was more thinking of the ro-ro equipment fit shown in a YouTube video I saw a while back. Can't track down that video, but it showed the mission equipment being rolled along the cargo rollers in the floor directly on to a pallet loader. Pretty much plug and play.

            With the roles listed for the the current Casa aircraft, and the increased capabilities the replacement aircraft will provide, those aircraft are to the Air Corps what the Multi Role Vessel(s?) will be to the Naval Service. Will be interesting to see what sort of equipment fit they are spec'd out with to fulfill those roles.

            Comment


            • #96
              The floor of the Casas is not a roller-mat floor, used in proper transport aircraft and the Mission equipment module is essentially bolted and clamped to embedded rails. It isn't as quick-detachable as a true ro-ro pallet. For the Don Casas to do that, the floor panels would have to be stripped out and a roller-mat floor fitted. As a routine example, we have such floors in our A330s as standard, in the hold, in the Former State Airline, for rolling in standard cargo bins and these floors have motorised rollers and locks. Aircraft like DHL's A300s have all of the floor space fitted with them.

              Comment


              • #97
                Don't think these aircraft will be in the class of a multi-role vessel to be honest, a C-295 with 9000kg payload only has a max range of 1300 km, Beirut for example or any other current or likely area of operations is 3900 km away with a flight time of over 8 hours at casa speeds! Also bear in mind it's limited to palletised cargo.

                A real "multi-role vessel" type would be a c-130 aircraft possibly equipped with a flir, two of these able to support overseas rapid deployment of forces, vehicles, Nordic battle group, sof etc and also long range maritime sovereignty patrols similar to uscg uses and leave the air ambulance, atcp, medium range marpat to a casa type hopefully with four aircraft to maintain 24 hr readiness.

                Or possible a fleet of say six or seven king airs for marpat, air ambulance, twin engine trainer, vip and again two c-130 types for very long range ops, also c-130 being a common platform for operating with partner nations or piggy backing on their training systems, sims etc
                Last edited by Spark23; 4 September 2015, 23:54.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by Spark23 View Post
                  Don't think these aircraft will be in the class of a multi-role vessel to be honest, a C-295 with 9000kg payload only has a max range of 1300 km, Beirut for example or any other current or likely area of operations is 3900 km away with a flight time of over 8 hours at casa speeds! Also bear in mind it's limited to palletised cargo.

                  A real "multi-role vessel" type would be a c-130 aircraft possibly equipped with a flir, two of these able to support overseas rapid deployment of forces, vehicles, Nordic battle group, sof etc and also long range maritime sovereignty patrols similar to uscg uses and leave the air ambulance, atcp, medium range marpat to a casa type hopefully with four aircraft to maintain 24 hr readiness.

                  Or possible a fleet of say six or seven king airs for marpat, air ambulance, twin engine trainer, vip and again two c-130 types for very long range ops, also c-130 being a common platform for operating with partner nations or piggy backing on their training systems, sims etc
                  Very nice but Government policy is now to replace the CASAs with larger aircraft with a transport capability (could be a C295 or a Herc).

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    I agree with you Spark23, the extra space a C-130 class aircraft would definitely be a game changer in terms of what the Air Corps and wider Defence Forces could provide both to national or multi-national requirements. (I say C-130 class aircraft, as we've gotten a few different aircraft types in that pool now - C-130, A-400M, Kawasaki C-1 and Embraer KC-390. Everything except the Herc is in some stage of development, and not in as widespread use, so the C-130 is probably what would be chosen if we were to go that big. But that's another story...)

                    However, I'm thinking that there are a few factors pointing towards the Casa option:

                    1. The roles and lift requirement of any potential Air Corps transport aircraft
                    2. It would be the first dedicated (along with it's Marpat role) transport aircraft flown by the AC - so no need to get ahead of yourself lads with something too big (covers point 1 and 2),
                    3. Air Corps familiarity with Casa aircraft, and therefore easier absorption,
                    4. Reasonably frequent visits of C-295s over the last few years (OK, based on that we could be getting C-17s but I think the Casa might be a bit more likely)

                    But, without the spec available for what is required of this aircraft, it's all just good natured speculation. And even if it's only the -295 they end up getting, it will still give the Air Corps the ability to conduct a larger range of roles with a greater amount of lift capability over longer distances. I'd be happy with that for a start, with a letter to Santa in my best handwritting for a few bigger machines in the future

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                      Ironic thing about Rhodes' pictures is that it shows two of the failed contenders of the original SAR aircraft competition, still going strong.
                      It also shows the tender winner going stronger , supported by a company that still exists and an aircraft still in production.

                      Not every DOD decision was a bad one. Strangely.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by meridian View Post
                        ...It would be the first dedicated (along with it's Marpat role) transport aircraft flown by the AC - so no need to get ahead of yourself lads with something too big...
                        this is the only thing i'd take issue with - there's very little difference between operating a C-295 sized aircraft and operating a C-130 or even C-17 sized aircraft - it has people in the front who fly it, people in the back end who manage the stuff/people in back end, it has engines on the wings and it flies from A to B. if you have the organisational ability to operate a C-295 flying from Baldonell to North Africa, you have the ability to operate a C-130 or C-17 from Baldonell to North Afrca, only with 2, 3, 4 or even 10 times the payload.

                        much as i believe that C-295 would probably get the nod because of cost and commonality - or perceived commonality - with the C-235, the C-295 needs a very hard, critical look as a 'transport' aircraft: the largest vehicle it can move is a stripped down Polish copy of a WW2 Jeep. no weapons mount, no ballistic protection, no IED protection, no nothing... realisticlly, the largest vehicles it would carry in Irish service are motorbikes and ATV's. it can carry people, 81mm mortars, Javs, HMG's, water, food and ammunition. thats a great improvement on right now, but its still only people moving from A to B.

                        this is a 30 year purchase - if the AC really is going into airlift to match the Armys' expeditionary capability/intentions, do you really believe that in 25 years the peak of its capability should be moving small, light, immobile things from A to B?

                        Comment


                        • True, an airplane is an airplane is an airplane. Even though this is the case, there is a bit of a difference between a C-295 and C-17 in terms of mission output, support infrastructure and cost (initial purchase and ongoing support). (I don't say "a bit of a difference" in any way sanctimoniously.) My question would be - what do we want to do, then how are we going to do it? (That bit might require the spending of some money; the clincher as always.)

                          However, I agree what you're saying, in that such assets need to provide the required current outputs, as well as being future proofed for whatever else may be required in future. In that light, I'd hope that the Government > DoD > DF > Air Corps set out a detailed requirement and role spec for the aircraft, and that an appropriate solution is procured. If they decide to go for a C-130 type, I'll be over the moon about it - just want to see the right machine/capability being put in place.

                          And until whatever it is that's selected is sitting in Bal with an Air Corps roundel and operating for at least six months, it's still a pipedream

                          Comment


                          • I would have thought that Maritime patrol would be going down the UAV / SAT route rather than limited Manned flight









                            All the above for €4 Million per Satellite with a life time of 3 Years. I know a few things I would chop to get this capability!

                            Comment


                            • It would be great to see Irish cube sats being developed for ocean surveillance

                              Boats can for example turn off their GPS receiver, which generates information about its position and speed,” admits Olsen.

                              “But to tackle such cases we have developed other methods for determining their position,” he says, without divulging any details.
                              The US Navy has utilised 3-sat formations for decades, by utilising TDOA/multilateration - they can detect and locate an RF emitter. It doesn't have to be AIS, it can be something as simple as a guy chatting to a RIB with a Motorola.

                              The Chinese have launched their own counterpart. Apparently the newer US sats are now using 2 ship formations.

                              Comment


                              • @JJ, the Casa failed as an airliner and the world bought ATRs and only mil sales kept it alive (probably a convenient arrangement for the various branches of EADS)..........@ropebag, I agree completely. A 295 as an airlifter would be a non-runner; it's too small, too thin for standard cargo bins, too short legged...the Don could ramp up to operate a C-130 in fairly short order if it had to but a C17 would be a leap too far. It has the logistic needs of an A330 or 777 and would chew up the budget in a heartbeat.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X