Islander/Defender?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Cessna Replacement - The Options
Collapse
X
-
change of mind
Originally posted by The Blue Max View PostNews i heard on this subject the other day is that the PC-6 is ruled out of replacing the current cessnas 172s because of its bad safety record.
The IAC is going to procure two twin engine aircraft similiar in appearance to Cessna Caravan, I was told so I dont know what this will be anyone have any ideas?
BMax.
Comment
-
-
Ya thats what i would guess, I had more to discuss with him so wasnt really talkin shop, but i might be up there soon again and will see if there any progress with cessna replacments. I personnally was surpirsed with the information of the PC-6 having a terrible safety record did anyone else no this?British officer: You're seven minutes late, Mr. Collins.
Michael Collins: You've kept us waiting 700 years. You can have your seven minutes.
[As the British flag comes down]
Michael Collins: So that's what all the bother was about.
Comment
-
twin-engined STOL alternatives
The Polish PZL Skytruck is similar to the CASA C-212 but even cheaper, around €4 million. The Twin Otter is back in production, priced less than €3 million. AFAIK, the Defender comes in at around €6 million.
Comment
-
Reims Caravan II?
This is a Reims-Cessna F406 Caravan II, a twin turboprop aircraft. It's similar in size to the Cessna Caravan but has a low wing and would not be a STOL aircraft. However it is sold to Government agencies for surveillance-type work, and it's also used for target-towing.
Don't forget the Air Corps Cessnas are Reims machines: maybe they got a good trade-in deal?
Comment
-
Originally posted by carrington View PostThis is a Reims-Cessna F406 Caravan II, a twin turboprop aircraft. It's similar in size to the Cessna Caravan but has a low wing and would not be a STOL aircraft. However it is sold to Government agencies for surveillance-type work, and it's also used for target-towing.
Don't forget the Air Corps Cessnas are Reims machines: maybe they got a good trade-in deal?
anyway, if they got something like the CASA 212, that might mean never getting anything more sizable lke the C-298 or C-27JDr. Venture: Why is it every time I need to get somewhere, we get waylaid by jackassery?
Dr. Venture: Dean, you smell like a whore
Comment
-
Originally posted by carrington View PostThe Polish PZL Skytruck is similar to the CASA C-212 but even cheaper, around €4 million. The Twin Otter is back in production, priced less than €3 million. AFAIK, the Defender comes in at around €6 million.Dr. Venture: Why is it every time I need to get somewhere, we get waylaid by jackassery?
Dr. Venture: Dean, you smell like a whore
Comment
-
Viking Twin Otter- Series 400
Wikipedia: Twin Otter
It seems that new-build Twin Otters have become an option again. An aircraft lineage with a well proven track record in both military and civilian hands, and the largest aircraft you can put floats on.
Any thoughts?If you have to do it, you always have to do it right. Either it makes a difference, or it’s good practice so that when it does make a difference, it gets done right.
-Me.
Comment
-
It's a great aircraft, but we have to go back to an earlier point.
Why get a Twin Otter to observe/escort cash in transit operations? It's too much aircraft for that kind of a role, and a gas guzzler compared to the 172's.
As a dedicated troop transport/parachute training aircraft, it would be fine - but you'd need another aircraft type to fill all the roles currently looked after by the Cessna.
Whether this is worthwhile or not is a really big question. Is Para training really necessary? Would the IAC require/need/use a STOL semi-prepared strip capability?
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Twin Engined Replacments
The new order of the day seems to be for a twin engined aircraft for there requirments for the future and there is a plans to return to more basic military operations as rough field landings for various military purposes such as was mentioned to me as training with Army units for in-theatre resupply or medevac operations for example to get LSB and Army Units used to a more closer relationship with the IAC.
Acourse the Aircraft would keep it survailance role as 172s always have. As has always been said the Defence Forces wants to expand its knowlegde and capability with miitary parachuting. This does not means that the DF will make a Parchute regiment but who nows down the line it could create a niche capability for lets say a infantry recce platoon or something who knows.
More importantly we would have capability to fly aircraft at night,in adverse weather due its twin engines (certainly better then one) enlarged aircraft, Improved STOL etc.... there so much we could achieve out of smaller fleet of aircraft in comparsion to the current 172s. Hope this helps.British officer: You're seven minutes late, Mr. Collins.
Michael Collins: You've kept us waiting 700 years. You can have your seven minutes.
[As the British flag comes down]
Michael Collins: So that's what all the bother was about.
Comment
-
I have to agree with Blue Max and Carrington the purcahse of a CASA 212 or similiar would be of great advantage to the Aer Corps. A twin engine light cargo aircraft could offer a new capacity to the whole Defence Force. Airborne operations does not just mean parachuting troops, air drop has always been an effective way to supply troops in the field. Just have a look at operations in Iraq and Afghanistan where SF and other troops have been supplied by air drop. A CASA 212 could also be used in the SAR field.
I cannot understand the logic in replacing the 172's with a similiar aircraft. The 172's do not seem to really furfill any useful military role and any similiar replacement would only do the same.
Having completed Parachute Training (not with the Irish Army) I find it hard to see how the 172's undertook the Para Training role. For those who have done Para you will know what I mean.. no SIM Door or ramp capacity.
Comment
-
No-one is disputing that something like the Twin Otter or C-212 would offer a great leap in capability compared to the Cessna's.
But why waste an expensive, capable troop transport in the CIT observation role?
The Cessna's are also used for relatively menial tasks such as pilots getting hours in the air. Why use a large aircraft for that?
I think a lot of people, myself included, would also like to see a relatively cheap, simple aircraft used in the pilot screening role - instead of them hopping straight into the PC-9's after simulator and theory time.
Such an aircraft could double in the observation role for hour building etc etc.
So, again, if the Air Corps see themselves getting C-212/Twin Otter type aircraft fine, but something else will then be needed to fill the void left by the Cessna's. In my opinion anyway.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
think a lot of people, myself included, would also like to see a relatively cheap, simple aircraft used in the pilot screening role - instead of them hopping straight into the PC-9's after simulator and theory time
Why is thatThings fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere***
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Comment
Comment