The rumour mill...

[pym]

Video showing the C295's palletized system

[FMP]

Wrong enormous amount of work for a transport version of the C-295 such as aid to civil power air ambulance/organ harvest teams/ on island evacuation, passenger transport, troop transport upcoming Nordic battle group for exercise, logistical support to Nordic battle group, deployment of troops/equipment overseas on un/eu missions, logistical support to un/eu missions, non combatant evacuation, fit a tank can fulfil the oil slick dispersant mission as required, military static line parachuting, HAHO/HALO parachuting, humanitarian relief in times of international crisis and I imagine many more easily a 1000-1200 flight hours a year in those roles. Ideally combined with a gradual movement to C-295 for marpat and transport with an end goal of two transports/four surveillance to take account of our extended maritime domain, this number would also make it feasible to bring all maintenance in-house there-by reducing costs and waiting/lead in times for maintenance events.

Spot on Spark23!!!! As I have already talked the 295 palletised mission system to death on other threads I wont go over it again,,,,,,,,,,,or will I .
If the various pallet mission systems are applied, one air frame is capable of multi tasking, proper multi tasking!!!! Not being made to do something it was not designed for. One air frame capable of carrying out all of Sparks23's roles and much more depending on which mission system you have in the back of it.

No more shortages due to down time for maintenance etc etc. Haul the mission system out of the 295 heading to the workshop and into the 295 just leaving it (as an example Portugal operates 12 C-295's, five equipped with the pallet-based MPA fit at any one time). As long as all the air frames you buy are pallet mission system compatible it means no one (role specific) air frame will be idle waiting for a job to come along. In order for that to happen all air frames need to have radar FLIR etc etc fitted as standard. No more one trick ponies capable of a single function that occasionally get pressed into another role out of necessity and just about manages to pull it off,,,,,only just.

Whatever the numbers involved (minimum of 3 would be desirable to cover the normal 30% not available at any one time,,,,,ish) the various mission systems greatly greatly enhance your capability, to coin a phrase "Buy an air frame, get an air force". A multi mission, capable, versatile and value for money air force! Or Air Corps if you wish in the DF's case .

The C 295 MPA is no P-8A, C-130, C-17, ATL 3, P-3 etc, etc, but then it is not trying to be. Folks talk about it's "Limitations". In regard to the Air Corps? It has no Limitations!! It is a force multiplier of note! It is a mission enhancer, it is cost effective and versatile it is more capable in every way than any aircraft the Air Corps currently have on its books.

Price tag of 50 Million for the MPA/ASW version was a figure quoted for the MOD by airbus (25 million for the bog standard transporter), MOD looking at the C 295 to fulfill a capability gap due to the demise of Nimrod. That was for an all whistles and bells you would expect to find on a MPA/ASW aircraft, fully integrated tactical system mission suite (FITS) configured with four onboard operator stations, sonobuoy dispenser equipment, magnetic anomaly detector boom, defensive systems, 6 under wing hard points and a FLIR sensor turret etc. Pricey but at the same time not, three 295 MPA/ASW for the price of a single P-8A and the P-8A can't transport standard 463 L pallets, carry out cargo drops, para jumps, operate from unpaved runways, transport 71 bods, vehicles, be converted from one role to an entirely different one in 30 minutes,,,,,,,,,,,,,if you use the pallet mission system.

C-295 is an fantastic little aircraft.

It can carry 9 tonnes of cargo. (Max range with 9 tonnes: 1,300 Km).
Has an endurance of 11 hours and a range of 4,500 Km. (That's something like a six hour loiter 250 Km off shore in the MPA/SAR topcover role).
Transport 71 pax on troop seats.
48 paratroops on same.
27 stretchers. Rigged.
Carry 5 463 L pallets.

Not to mention all the different roles it can fulfill when utilised with the Palletised mission systems .
MPA.
SAR.
ISR.
ICU/AA.
VIP.
NEO.
And a load more acronyms, love a good acronym .

[apod]

That was the most positive post I have read here in a long time FMP.Well done.

[Charlie252]

Jaysus.. Thats like an Airbus brochure!!

And I agree the C-295 is a Fantastic little aircraft.

But I think IF there was a desire and funding to purchase an Military Transport Aircraft then there has to be as little compromise as possible. IF that means dragging another 10 years out of the -235's then that might be a good option, the mission kit is up to date and the airframe should have plenty of life left in it.

The brochure figures are impressive, but in reality as with any aircraft the operators can never extract the range and payload abilities that the manufacturer claims. They always have caveat's about standard day, still air etc.

According to Airbus military the CN-235 has a ferry range of 2730nm.. which it might do with a 100kt tail wind..

The Cabin is the main restrictor with the -295 it is the same barrel as the -235. I would like to know what vehicles can fit?

[Spark23]

Really it's not the aircraft for vehicles

[ropebag]

....I would like to know what vehicles can fit?

the ever reliable wiki has a picture of a Polish 'Honker' 4x4 jeep type thing absolutely wedged in - windscreen flattened the lot...

so really its a couple of stripped down Honkers, or bikes, or ATV's or Argocats. what isn't going to happen is a WMIK landy rolling off the back and letting fly with half-a-dozen GPMP's - that said, you could paradrop 40 blokes and half-a-dozen 81mm mortars, which is going to spoil anyones day, or roll off perhaps two Argocats and two ATV's, two 81mm's and two Javelin's and 30-odd blokes.

all of which suddenly look like useful capabilities given whats happening in UNDOF this evening...

[Come-quickly]

Well there is a new recognition of the paratroopers utility in smaller scale ops for dropping cordons or QRFs without the predictability or vulnerability of Whirlies.

[Herald]

the ever reliable wiki has a picture of a Polish 'Honker' 4x4 jeep type thing absolutely wedged in - windscreen flattened the lot...

so really its a couple of stripped down Honkers, or bikes, or ATV's or Argocats. what isn't going to happen is a WMIK landy rolling off the back and letting fly with half-a-dozen GPMP's - that said, you could paradrop 40 blokes and half-a-dozen 81mm mortars, which is going to spoil anyones day, or roll off perhaps two Argocats and two ATV's, two 81mm's and two Javelin's and 30-odd blokes.

all of which suddenly look like useful capabilities given whats happening in UNDOF this evening...

I've seen that pic. I'd imagine it'd be long enough for 2 Honkers? So with that in mind what about 2 F-350's? Although when you go down that route, you're looking at more than one Airframe, and ideally 3. to make the whole effort purposeful.

[ropebag]

..So with that in mind what about 2 F-350's?..

they'd never go in heightwise - probably about 2 or 3ft to tall.

a 295 could also have supported a handful of 139's operating from RAF Akrotiri or Beruit international. they, along with a Coy of reinforcements, might have found some utility over the last few days...

[Charlie252]

So we went from having trouble justifying a Transport asset to: Parachuting in "two 81mm's and two Javelin's and 30-odd blokes" and this from an Organisation that really has no history of Military Air Transport.

Crawl-Walk-Run comes to mind.

For me the priority should be get a decent aircraft and then build experience flying stuff around the place, build knowledge of loading, deploying, supporting and maintaining an aircraft in semi-austere locations. By semi-austere I still mean airports with hard surface runways but just located in out of the way places. There is huge amount that an organisation would need to learn to conduct such missions. In reality one airframe doesn't do it, if nothing else based on the fact that if your ONE air asset is tech somewhere you can't support it and your snookered.

The next stage after that is to develop the skills to operate from unprepared strips, airdrops etc.

Fingers crossed funding is available, but the base line is at a very basic level and this type of operation would need significant ongoing funds to make the advances we would all like to see.

[ropebag]

...Crawl-Walk-Run comes to mind...

why?

the AC does parachuting - on a small scale, and not very often - but it does it. it does landing and taking off, it does opening the ramp and closing the ramp, and it does map reading - it also does - very occasionally, landing at vast international airports its not been to before.

exactly which componant of a) loading an aircraft full of blokes and kit, b) taking off, and finding Cyprus, c) landing on a 9,000ft runway, d) hanging around eating ice creams till someone makes a plan, e) taking off from a 9,000ft runway and steering towards the Golan, f) opening the back door and feeling the aircraft get lighter by 50 people, and finally g) pointing it towards Cyprus, landing on a 9,000ft runway in time for ice creams and medals is completely outside the AC's collective skills base?

could you pull a 295 off the production line and do it? no, of course you couldn't - but need it take years and endless crap and learning stuff that while undeniably useful isn't strictly required this week, or, to be blunt, so fcuking obvious that anyone who needs to 'learn it' ought to have velcro shoes and a carer?

nothing the government could decide on procurement on monday morning is going to effect the current situation, its far too late for that, but once the AC got its grubby mitts on an asset - or preferably 3 or 4 of them - a nacient, initial capability should not be too far off.

[pym]

ropebag, I think the issue is that most of us are still looking at the prospects of the AC getting even a single C295, as only slightly more likely than Army hovertanks & NS nuclear submarines.

If it happens, you're right in that the crews could probably manage such a trip almost immediately.

But there has to be a really thorough training up period to get the most out of the aircraft - in recent years, vastly more experienced Air Forces have lost modern C130J's, C235s, C295s in very preventable screw ups.

And Crawl-Walk-Run is probably the only pace that procurement will allow. As I said before - get one aircraft, work the arse off it and make it an indispensable piece of the armys day to day thinking - and then, maybe there'll be a second one on the cards. And fingers crossed, a third. That's when prolonged deployments can become a realistic proposition.

[Charlie252]

why?

the AC does parachuting - on a small scale, and not very often - but it does it. it does landing and taking off, it does opening the ramp and closing the ramp, and it does map reading - it also does - very occasionally, landing at vast international airports its not been to before.

exactly which componant of a) loading an aircraft full of blokes and kit, b) taking off, and finding Cyprus, c) landing on a 9,000ft runway, d) hanging around eating ice creams till someone makes a plan, e) taking off from a 9,000ft runway and steering towards the Golan, f) opening the back door and feeling the aircraft get lighter by 50 people, and finally g) pointing it towards Cyprus, landing on a 9,000ft runway in time for ice creams and medals is completely outside the AC's collective skills base?

could you pull a 295 off the production line and do it? no, of course you couldn't - but need it take years and endless crap and learning stuff that while undeniably useful isn't strictly required this week, or, to be blunt, so fcuking obvious that anyone who needs to 'learn it' ought to have velcro shoes and a carer?

nothing the government could decide on procurement on monday morning is going to effect the current situation, its far too late for that, but once the AC got its grubby mitts on an asset - or preferably 3 or 4 of them - a nacient, initial capability should not be too far off.

Most likely don't have fifty parachutes for a start.

[DeV]

why?

the AC does parachuting - on a small scale, and not very often - but it does it. it does landing and taking off, it does opening the ramp and closing the ramp, and it does map reading - it also does - very occasionally, landing at vast international airports its not been to before.

exactly which componant of a) loading an aircraft full of blokes and kit, b) taking off, and finding Cyprus, c) landing on a 9,000ft runway, d) hanging around eating ice creams till someone makes a plan, e) taking off from a 9,000ft runway and steering towards the Golan, f) opening the back door and feeling the aircraft get lighter by 50 people, and finally g) pointing it towards Cyprus, landing on a 9,000ft runway in time for ice creams and medals is completely outside the AC's collective skills base?

could you pull a 295 off the production line and do it? no, of course you couldn't - but need it take years and endless crap and learning stuff that while undeniably useful isn't strictly required this week, or, to be blunt, so fcuking obvious that anyone who needs to 'learn it' ought to have velcro shoes and a carer?

nothing the government could decide on procurement on monday morning is going to effect the current situation, its far too late for that, but once the AC got its grubby mitts on an asset - or preferably 3 or 4 of them - a nacient, initial capability should not be too far off.

Except your proposing that initial capability is enough to deploy an aircraft into a war zone with most probably a AAA and SAM threat.

Oh and that's if, you get Government (never mind UN approval).

[GoneToTheCanner]

Given that the Don has now got a generation of experience on the 235s, they could get a 295, train on it and use it in a comparatively short space of time. I'd go along with Ropebag on this; as long as they don't dick around, they'd get used to it in no time. As an example, when we in Aer Lingus got the A330, it was after a year's preparation. The company set up a working team dedicated to the adoption of the aircraft and it's commonality with the A320 helped, as did the contacts established with the manufacturer. Everybody who was expected to play a role in the use of the A330 was involved; pilots, engineering and planning, line mechs, cabin crew, cleaners, ground handlers,etc,etc. When it arrived, it went into revenue service within two or three days. Of course, there were snags and **** ups but it essentially worked as planned. But it indicates the lead time required, based on past experience with other types. If you wanted a successful adoption of a not-entirely-new type, such as the 295, you'd need to be planning now for next March and you'd want to tolerate no bullshit or faffing about. remember, when the Don adopted the PC-9, not only did they change aircraft, they also changed a huge amount of the old mentalities and practises, which was essential to making the PC-9 project work, even for an aircraft that only leaves our shores to go to airshows.