Thanks Thanks:  135
Likes Likes:  268
Dislikes Dislikes:  11
Page 10 of 13 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 226 to 250 of 304
  1. #226
    Sergeant madmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    put out to pasture
    Posts
    628
    Post Thanks / Like
    What next for the don a few leonardo m-346fa ????????????????
    Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.

  2. #227
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,984
    Post Thanks / Like
    Nah, it'll be a PC-9Z to replace the Ms. Even the Italians have balked at buying more 346s and have bought warmed-over Siai s-211s.

  3. #228
    Sergeant madmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    put out to pasture
    Posts
    628
    Post Thanks / Like
    The 346-fa look to be a good little aircraft. The FA version i believe has yet to get a launch customer. I believe they are about 30 million per air frame not sure if that is a good or bad price
    Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.

  4. #229
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,873
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by madmark View Post
    What next for the don a few leonardo m-346fa ????????????????
    Nothing for years to come at this stage. At the most I would guess perhaps some naval rated helicopters if the EPV is to be fully utilised at some stage.

  5. #230
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,655
    Post Thanks / Like
    Nothing.
    The Air Corps fleet of the 1990s has been completely replaced.
    Only a sudden security or environmental crisis will see any major changes to the inventory for the forseeable future.
    Helicopter fleet
    Eurocopter EC135: Expect to see it in service for another 20 years
    Agusta Westland AW139: Same timeline. The EPV deck will be big enough to land one on, when in port, without preparation. Any other use will be someone elses aircraft landing on during overseas RAS or other operations.

    Fixed Wing
    Pilatus PC9: Only heavy use and too much aerobatics will shorten the lifetime of this type. The Aussies only just decided to upgrade theirs to PC21 having been in service since 1987. 30 years of hot and dusty compared to our cool and relatively dry. I predict 2050.
    Casa C295: If the CN235 is being retired having been in service since 1994, one can expect that the 295 will be expected to live on until 2050 also.
    Pilatus PC12: We got 40 gentle years from their predecessor, I expect no less from these, whose special avionics will require cosy hangers and plenty of maint downtime.
    Lear 45: This is the only unknown. Originally a backup for the VIP transport G4, the G4 was never replaced, and the Lear gets used less and less in a time when unnecessary use can draw vocal criticism from environmentalists and beancounters united. It is fine for the quick hop to the UK or Brussels, but too small for a transatlantic trip, with VIP assistants. Could we see in the future a larger A330 type, set up to be used for a multitude of tasks? Small bizjets are so 1990s. Airliners, with VIP areas are where its at, swap out the seating easily, and deliver the UNIFIL rotations. At a push you could even manage a cargo door and carry some military freight. Imagine it....


    And all for a military air arm that has more squadrons than aircraft.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  6. Likes madmark, Flamingo, hptmurphy liked this post
  7. #231
    Commandant Jetjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,810
    Post Thanks / Like
    A more pertinent question to this thread is whether or not the current CN 235 aircraft have any future with the IAC, stripped of MPA equipment in a transport capacity.

    Given that we see 40 plus year old P-3 Orions and Atlantiques having their service lives extended beyond 2030, the effects of operations in a saltwater environment are sometimes overstated for well looked after aircraft.

  8. Thanks Herald thanked for this post
    Likes Herald liked this post
  9. #232
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,655
    Post Thanks / Like
    Of course not. They will be returned to EADS, stripped out, repainted, and conducting freight ops elsewhere before anyone notices they are gone.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  10. Likes DeV, GoneToTheCanner, hptmurphy liked this post
  11. #233
    Chief Casey Ryback
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,356
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Of course not. They will be returned to EADS, stripped out, repainted, and conducting freight ops elsewhere before anyone notices they are gone.
    In the hands of a Libyian warlord to go along with his ex Irish Naval vessel .
    Don't spit in my Bouillabaisse .

  12. Likes na grohmiti, ibenji, hptmurphy, Graylion liked this post
  13. #234
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    401
    Post Thanks / Like
    Does anyone have any insight into what's included in the contract, particularly around the Maritime Spec, Palletized, are they going to recycle equipment from the current FITS setup in the -235 ETC..

    The Model Aircraft at the contract signing shows a Radome above and below the fuselage... is this representative of the Spec, my understanding that this was an ASW configuration??

  14. #235
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,243
    Post Thanks / Like
    This was the RFP (doesn’t necessarily mean what we are getting)

    https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/docmgm...3&DVID=1469602

  15. Likes Tempest liked this post
  16. #236
    C/S
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    410
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by na grohmiti View Post
    Airliners, with VIP areas are where its at, swap out the seating easily, and deliver the UNIFIL rotations. At a push you could even manage a cargo door and carry some military freight. Imagine it....
    You may find this interesting as it directly relates to what you suggested.

    http://www.airforce.mil.nz/downloads...erstood757.pdf

    In 2015, ST Engineering of Singapore signed an agreement with Airbus and Elbe Flugzeugwerke for the launch of the A320/A321P2F conversion programme.

    The A320/A321P2F programme includes two variants – the A320P2F and the larger A321P2F. The A320 and A321 allows bulk cargo or containerised freight to be carried in belly holds, delivering more loading flexibility.

    The A320P2F, with 11 main-deck positions, is capable of carrying 21 metric tonnes of payload, while the A321P2F, with 14 main-deck positions, is able to carry up to 27 metric tonnes.

    A number of companies have the STC for B737 P2F conversions for under around USD$5m plus donor aircraft so that maybe a guideline for the A320P2F. Airbus offer Additional Center Tank (ACT) Installation in the aft cargo hold on the A320 family thus extending the range. An ex Aer Lingus A320-200 or similar wouldn't be a bad option to consider as a potential P2F conversion as there is scope to contract out the depot level support and sim time locally.

  17. Thanks na grohmiti, DeV thanked for this post
    Likes na grohmiti, Herald liked this post
  18. #237
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,873
    Post Thanks / Like

  19. #238
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,655
    Post Thanks / Like
    Cockpit armour, RWR,LWR and MAWS? Excellent if accurate.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  20. #239
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,984
    Post Thanks / Like
    The thing about converting Airbus A320s to freighters has been going on since God was a dog. What has happened,in effect,is that older,larger freighters do the bulkof freight work and ATRs and sundry turboprops do the rest. In that airframe size,B737s dominate the market and right now, it's worth more to scrap an A320 than convert it. They are even talking of scrapping A380s and even A320s as young as 10 years old have been scrapped........as for the potential duration of PC-9 life, the engine is the determining factor as it's not a new model of that engine and is itself a very basic unit. Either they upgrade the engine or they go down the PC-21 road,which is what Pilatus would love. A PC 21 is a generation ahead.Even the PC-12 engine is way ahead of the current PC-9 unit.......... Regarding the PC-12s avionics,they should be fine. Just park the aircraft out of doors like every other PC-12 in the world. If they fail to function in the morning, boot the tech rep out of bed and start tapping the contract off his head until the kit is back in action,which usually involves powering up the aircraft with ground power and getting it heated up. This tends to cure 9 out of 10 morning problems.The overdependence on hangars is a critical failure of the Don,not the aircraft.

  21. Thanks na grohmiti thanked for this post
    Likes CTU, hptmurphy liked this post
  22. #240
    Commandant EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,848
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Anzac View Post
    In 2015, ST Engineering of Singapore signed an agreement with Airbus and Elbe Flugzeugwerke for the launch of the A320/A321P2F conversion programme.

    The A320/A321P2F programme includes two variants – the A320P2F and the larger A321P2F. The A320 and A321 allows bulk cargo or containerised freight to be carried in belly holds, delivering more loading flexibility.

    The A320P2F, with 11 main-deck positions, is capable of carrying 21 metric tonnes of payload, while the A321P2F, with 14 main-deck positions, is able to carry up to 27 metric tonnes.

    A number of companies have the STC for B737 P2F conversions for under around USD$5m plus donor aircraft so that maybe a guideline for the A320P2F. Airbus offer Additional Center Tank (ACT) Installation in the aft cargo hold on the A320 family thus extending the range. An ex Aer Lingus A320-200 or similar wouldn't be a bad option to consider as a potential P2F conversion as there is scope to contract out the depot level support and sim time locally.
    In by-gone days the idea of taking an ex-Aer Lingus A320/A321 could have worked but today Aer Lingus is owned by IAG so the aircraft to be converted would have to sourced on the open market. At the moment the feedstock is very limited due to some issues with B737... However once that clears up the should be A320/A321 available.

    However the P2F conversion removes a lot of what such an aircraft should do in IAC service as part of the conversion process is removing almost everything needed to transport passengers. The forward main deck cargo door is however an attractive addition to an A321. If they would offer a A321PF-Multi-Role-Transport then that would be a good fit. It would need to have capabilities similar to the RNZAF B757, VIP, troop transport and cargo. With an ACT or two it would have the range to fly non-stop from the Don to Beirut. And the price would be that same as a super-mid sized business jet.

  23. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  24. #241
    Commandant EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,848
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie252 View Post
    Does anyone have any insight into what's included in the contract, particularly around the Maritime Spec, Palletized, are they going to recycle equipment from the current FITS setup in the -235 ETC..

    The Model Aircraft at the contract signing shows a Radome above and below the fuselage... is this representative of the Spec, my understanding that this was an ASW configuration??
    The one below is the 360deg radar just like in the CN235. For the radome on the top I would guess that it is for SatCom/Datalink given its size and location.

  25. #242
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    401
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    The one below is the 360deg radar just like in the CN235. For the radome on the top I would guess that it is for SatCom/Datalink given its size and location.
    The CN-235's had Satcom/data and the antennae was much smaller.

  26. #243
    C/S
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    410
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    The thing about converting Airbus A320s to freighters has been going on since God was a dog. What has happened,in effect,is that older,larger freighters do the bulk of freight work and ATRs and sundry turboprops do the rest. In that airframe size,B737s dominate the market and right now, it's worth more to scrap an A320 than convert it. They are even talking of scrapping A380s and even A320s as young as 10 years old have been scrapped........
    The reason for that is no one has up until a big outfit like ST came along were able to afford to go through the STC process and have the backing of Airbus. Why are they doing it now - because the feedstock of B734's and B735's are running out and will need to be replaced. Also the air freight markets are different in different countries and Airbus and ST obviously see a market in the Asia Pacific where the B734F which dominates in short-medium range bulk and will need replacing. The days of 10year old A320's being scrapped will soon be over unless they are fubar's. The 14 with Air NZ are due to be replaced with the Neo from 2023.

  27. #244
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    401
    Post Thanks / Like
    What have A320's and P2F conversions have to do with CASA replacement

  28. Likes DeV liked this post
  29. #245
    C/S
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    410
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie252 View Post
    What have A320's and P2F conversions have to do with CASA replacement
    The possibility that the IAC may refrain from trying to merge a potential airlift capability with a maritime patrol capability on a single platform that may well compromise the effectiveness of one or both capabilities.

    Maybe that "3rd" CASA people speculated on because it could swing roles was not considered because as the CASA is a light-medium intra theatre tactical transport may have deemed as unsuited as an air mobility platform in the Irish context, which like RNZAF sized deployments needs to airlift tactical loads - strategic distances.

    That the 3rd CASA might be something else, like mmm let's see ..... a A320-200 type of aircraft .....
    Last edited by Anzac; 17th December 2019 at 08:34.

  30. Thanks na grohmiti, Herald thanked for this post
    Likes Herald, sofa liked this post
  31. #246
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,984
    Post Thanks / Like
    Remember,ifyou use a 320 or a 737,you still need pallet lifters and conveyor belts and refitted roller floors. So,you or somebody else needs to have them in place downrange. Adding the extra fuel tank is not always operationally useful,as it itself and it's associated piping weighs about a ton, so its a trade off........I suspect that the new Casas will rarely,if ever, have the mission kit removed on a casual basis. Allegedly,the third PC-12 may or may not be a fully kitted out surveillance aircraft, but will be a plain vanilla airframe,depending on how well the first two get on.

  32. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  33. #247
    C/S
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    401
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Anzac View Post
    The possibility that the IAC may refrain from trying to merge a potential airlift capability with a maritime patrol capability on a single platform that may well compromise the effectiveness of one or both capabilities.
    Maybe that "3rd" CASA people speculated on because it could swing roles was not considered because as the CASA is a light-medium intra theatre tactical transport may have deemed as unsuited as an air mobility platform in the Irish context, which like RNZAF sized deployments needs to airlift tactical loads - strategic distances.
    That the 3rd CASA might be something else, like mmm let's see ..... a A320-200 type of aircraft .....
    Seriously you are making such a leap. Even if there was a requirement for some kind of larger capacity Military Transport aircraft for the AC and an even more unlikely chance that there was Finance available, there are many more suitable Platforms available other than some untried and uncertified Airliner conversion.

    It is strange that despite the announcement, we have no detail of clarity as to what spec and support package is included in the declared contact value, by any standards 220Mill of two C-295's in a basic Fish Pat spec is high, particularly when we already have two SETS of FITS with two modern radars and FLIR systems on hand.

    Very disappointed that no statement about a third or more airframes was made.

  34. Likes GoneToTheCanner liked this post
  35. #248
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    , but will be a plain vanilla airframe,depending on how well the first two get on.
    Just to clarify. A non ISR equipped aircraft has nothing to do with how the others "get on". Not sure who is feeding you those lines. Information was set out in the tenders.

    As for talk of an airbus strategic airlift aircraft. Not in a million years.

    For a start you would have techs and pilots walking out the door with tech and type ratings and no one will sign an undertaking for said ratings.

    In addition, there will never be a single role aircraft in the inventory again. Any aircraft has to do several roles, even if that is the detriment to said roles.

  36. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
    Likes DeV, GoneToTheCanner, hptmurphy liked this post
  37. #249
    CQMS
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie252 View Post
    It is strange that despite the announcement, we have no detail of clarity as to what spec and support package is included in the declared contact value, by any standards 220Mill of two C-295's in a basic Fish Pat spec is high, particularly when we already have two SETS of FITS with two modern radars and FLIR systems on hand.

    Very disappointed that no statement about a third or more airframes was made.
    The final product will be far more advanced than a basic MPA airframe. Capability will be lightyears ahead of the 235.

    Location of mission equipment will be different to 235s to take advantage of the longer cabin and negate the need for removal/reinstallation of said equipment when changing roles.
    Last edited by Chuck; 17th December 2019 at 19:59.

  38. Thanks DeV, Tempest thanked for this post
  39. #250
    Commandant EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,848
    Post Thanks / Like
    While announcing our order Airbus also announced the Czech order of 2 C295 in a transport configuration for €102m, so at least we know what one would cost. Although I take it that this order also includes a large support package and even offsets (always make the price higher).

    Last year the Italians ordered an ATR72MP which is has a similar role (except the transport part) as the C295MPA, they paid €44m in a deal that included training and logistics support. The list price for the civil version being €26m. It would interesting to know why the C295 is double the price? Remember both aircraft have the same engine the PW P127 and the engines make up a large part of the cost.

  40. Thanks DeV thanked for this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •