Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pilatus PC-9M

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

  • #31
    They can always train pilots (Officers and Enlisted) on new airframes such as this for the same or less money.

    http://www.uav-stol.com/

    Comment


    • #32
      To be a pilot you have to fly in the aircraft. Otherwise you are merely the operator.
      German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
      German 2: Private? I am a general!
      German 1: That is the bad news.

      Comment


      • #33
        Not according to the FAA and IAA

        Comment


        • #34
          What's the pathway like for a recently winged AC Lt to get a CPL/ATPL & become an airbus/Boeing driver? Are they many thousands of euro better off than the ppl licence holder who's being flying a Cessna around from grassy airstrips? Off topic I know mods move if necessary I'm just curious as to what the process is like.
          Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

          Comment


          • #35
            From the point of view of maintenance of hull numbers this is a good move. Leave the "the money would be better spent on X" arguments aside and see the bigger picture.

            The gradual erosion of active airframe numbers has been continual over the last two decades. Once you drop numbers and accept it as the norm, it's very hard to convince bean counters to even replace aircraft let alone increase fleet sizes. With newer aircraft being less maintenance intensive downsizing fleets past the point of tokenism has been the accepted practice. It would be nice to see a reversal of the trend for once.

            The do more with less bullshit just means aircraft get worn out quicker and replacement (with inevitably less numbers) becomes a necessity sooner than when operating at full fleet numbers. The AC always expected to lose hulls- it's a training aircraft. 26x serial numbers for attrition replacements were intentionally unfilled accordingly.
            Last edited by Jetjock; 3 November 2016, 16:13.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Jetjock View Post
              From the point of view of maintenance of hull numbers this is a good move. Leave the "the money would be better spent on X" arguments aside and see the bigger picture.

              The gradual erosion of active airframe numbers has been continual over the last two decades. Once you drop numbers and accept it as the norm, it's very hard to convince bean counters to even replace aircraft let alone increase fleet sizes. With newer aircraft being less maintenance intensive downsizing fleets past the point of tokenism has been the accepted practice. It would be nice to see a reversal of the trend for once.

              The do more with less bullshit just means aircraft get worn out quicker and replacement (with inevitably less numbers) becomes a necessity sooner than when operating at full fleet numbers. The AC always expected to lose hulls- it's a training aircraft. 26x serial numbers for attrition replacements were intentionally unfilled accordingly.
              if i recall correctly the PC-9M flying hours figures for the last decade showed that the AC was flying each airframe for about a third of the time that the orginal purchace was based on - that instead of the type getting to the 25/30 year point before being shagged out (though, as you say, attrition is an issue), the fleet would get to ninety years service before being shagged out.

              in that circumstance, how can anyone say that another airframe is needed? given the flying hours they actually do they could put two or three in storage as attrition replacements and the fleet would happily get to 2035...

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                if i recall correctly the PC-9M flying hours figures for the last decade showed that the AC was flying each airframe for about a third of the time that the orginal purchace was based on - that instead of the type getting to the 25/30 year point before being shagged out (though, as you say, attrition is an issue), the fleet would get to ninety years service before being shagged out.

                in that circumstance, how can anyone say that another airframe is needed? given the flying hours they actually do they could put two or three in storage as attrition replacements and the fleet would happily get to 2035...
                Like all arms of the defence forces, the Air Corps experienced a curtailment in flying hours as a cost saving measure during the recession. (the same one that reduced Naval Patrol days). This was not factored in when the aircraft were ordered.
                German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
                German 2: Private? I am a general!
                German 1: That is the bad news.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by The real Jack View Post
                  What's the pathway like for a recently winged AC Lt to get a CPL/ATPL & become an airbus/Boeing driver? Are they many thousands of euro better off than the ppl licence holder who's being flying a Cessna around from grassy airstrips? Off topic I know mods move if necessary I'm just curious as to what the process is like.
                  They study to ATPL theory standard not sure if they do the exams of if licences are recognised

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                    Like all arms of the defence forces, the Air Corps experienced a curtailment in flying hours as a cost saving measure during the recession. (the same one that reduced Naval Patrol days). This was not factored in when the aircraft were ordered.
                    The reduction in flying hours /patrol days was/is not anywhere in the region of 66% .

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by danno View Post
                      The reduction in flying hours /patrol days was/is not anywhere in the region of 66% .
                      What was it then?
                      German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
                      German 2: Private? I am a general!
                      German 1: That is the bad news.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by The real Jack View Post
                        What's the pathway like for a recently winged AC Lt to get a CPL/ATPL & become an airbus/Boeing driver? Are they many thousands of euro better off than the ppl licence holder who's being flying a Cessna around from grassy airstrips? Off topic I know mods move if necessary I'm just curious as to what the process is like.
                        You need between 30 and 50 thousand Euro to get your type certification, after you finish your first 12 years in the Air Corps, assuming you have not blotted your copybook or got your ass killed...
                        "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
                        Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
                        Illegitimi non carborundum

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                          What was it then?
                          10%

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            I usually get banned for 1 word answers. thats not even a word.
                            German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
                            German 2: Private? I am a general!
                            German 1: That is the bad news.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              So Aer Corp buy a decent trainer and plenty of them, and people are moaning.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I guess because they are trainers with no operational role, and there is no intention of buying anything for them to train pilots for. If we ever did buy or lease fast air, it would probably make more sense to have the fighter training conducted overseas anyway.
                                Last edited by expat01; 4 November 2016, 05:37.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X