Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CASA Replacement

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

  • No, acid drop, I haven't. I decided not to call Embraer directly as the cost of a call to Brazil is a bit high so I hit the internet instead. Wiki's gen on the KC 390 is quite outdated so you don't have to believe it....apart from that, I have only once ever spoken directly to a DoD person (in the Don, when a new toy was being unveiled) and his one-word description for the AC was "dreamers", followed by a sigh and a shake of the head.

    Comment


    • No "switch" to call for you in EI?

      My 7 year old nephew could tell you that Wikipedia is probably the most unreliable source you can reference. At least use something halfway credible. I'm sure your google search contained a press release or two, or even better, something from Janes. Picking the first one is just lazy.

      Not sure what the "dreamers" anecdote adds to the discussion either? Ironically enough, suggesting that the KC-390 is a suitable CASA replacement is just like what you allegedly heard - dreaming.
      Last edited by Chuck; 30 May 2018, 18:48.

      Comment


      • The DoD man didn't elaborate but I understood exactly what he meant....the AC can ask for all they would like, but what they'll actually get is another matter. Given that the -295 appears to be the only game in town for future Irish MPA, then that's what I expect will actually roll onto the ramp and the Donners will smile politely and sign where the DoD man says.

        Comment


        • In response to a question on the RFP, the aircraft must be new builds (they cannot be zero timed / remanufactured).

          Comment


          • Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
            Just occurred to me you could have two 90mm OPVs for the price of three C130Js.......now why do we need MPAs
            Obviously a sense of humour has no place here........
            Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

            Comment


            • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
              Serious question, because I'm not a fishead, but how much more effective (yes, I know...) do you think would an 11 ship NS be than a 9 ship NS with 3 high end MPA's?
              I was actually taking the piss...thought some humour was required but it is amazing how engrossed people become in the subject and react in a very defensive manner to their own train of thought.
              Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                So why aren't they flying off the shelves?

                New C-130's are expensive, A400m is expensive, late and not perfect, C-2 is expensive if very good - so why isn't the 390 flying off the shelves given the apparatus confidence than any buyer could have in it?

                I know you work in the industry, and so you've a good grasp on the what works, and what's a pain in the arse end of this - so why is there this marked lack of confidence on the part of buyers?
                There are many reasons behind the slow sales of KC-390: firstly the number of nations in the market for new build aircraft of this size are limited. A lot of countries do operate C-130s but a lot of these are older versions sold after retirement from the USAF. This also means that the US can offer cheap recycled C-130s from its vast stocks which makes it difficult for any new build A/C. Looking at the number of outstanding orders for new build C-130Js you will find only a fraction of the open orders for KC-390s.

                If we look at Europe most countries looking for a tactical airlifter have committed to the A400M many decades before anyone thought about a KC-390. But a number of countries have expressed their intention to order the aircraft, these include Portugal and Czech Republic. Sweden was consider a key potential customer until it pushed back its replacement date for its C-130s.

                But a major issue is still when will the aircraft enter serial production for BAF, there was an issue that the Brazilian government paying for the aircraft. There was the chance that the program could be postponed/delayed. This makes any potential other customer less likely to order as without the Brazilian order there is no program.

                There is now a co-operation agreement between Boeing and Embraer which should mean that over the next decade the program should become a success especially as the older C-130 (E & H) versions reach the end of their lives. Even some C-130Js will begin to reach the end of the lives as the first ones entered service 20 years ago.

                Comment


                • One question that could be asked is why go for a manned MPA?

                  I am not talking of a MQ-4C Triton but there are other platforms which could provide maritime ISR:
                  http://www.ga-asi.com/Websites/gaasi...ian_032515.pdf
                  http://www.p1hh.piaggioaerospace.it/
                  http://elbitsystems.com/media/hermes...itime_2016.pdf

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                    One question that could be asked is why go for a manned MPA?

                    I am not talking of a MQ-4C Triton but there are other platforms which could provide maritime ISR:
                    http://www.ga-asi.com/Websites/gaasi...ian_032515.pdf
                    http://www.p1hh.piaggioaerospace.it/
                    http://elbitsystems.com/media/hermes...itime_2016.pdf
                    Because they can’t do anything except surveillance (and possibly engagement)

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                      Because they can’t do anything except surveillance (and possibly engagement)
                      And?

                      The point is MP-UAV are a much more cost effective way of providing maritime ISR, cheaper to procure, cheaper to operate, no need for expensive traditional pilot training etc. I just think that the option should have been explored.

                      The non-MPA tasks is the RFP are nice to haves, if they are core needs then there would be no reason why a tactical transport (or two) along side 3-4 MP-UAV could not be acquired. The cost should not be so much different as the cost of the kit to transform a platform such as the C-295 into a MPA is close to that of a MP-UAV.

                      Just thought the option should have been explored, Israel is replacing its Sea Scan MPAs with MP versions of their Heron UAV which will have a 45hr patrol endurance!
                      Last edited by EUFighter; 1 June 2018, 00:56.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                        And?

                        The point is MP-UAV are a much more cost effective way of providing maritime ISR, cheaper to procure, cheaper to operate, no need for expensive traditional pilot training etc. I just think that the option should have been explored.
                        they are not multi role, they can only do ISTAR. They are cheaper to procure and operate but that doesn’t mean they aren’t still expensive. UAVs of that size still require certified pilots. There are also I believe, limitations on them for an airspace regulation point of view.

                        The non-MPA tasks is the RFP are nice to haves, if they are core needs then there would be no reason why a tactical transport (or two) along side 3-4 MP-UAV could not be acquired. The cost should not be so much different as the cost of the kit to transform a platform such as the C-295 into a MPA is close to that of a MP-UAV.
                        no they aren’t (they are roles assigned by Government) they may the CASA a multi-role more versatile and better VFM aircraft.

                        Just thought the option should have been explored, Israel is replacing its Sea Scan MPAs with MP versions of their Heron UAV which will have a 45hr patrol endurance!
                        who says it wasn’t ?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                          they are not multi role, they can only do ISTAR. They are cheaper to procure and operate but that doesn’t mean they aren’t still expensive. UAVs of that size still require certified pilots.
                          Everything is expensive depending on the point you view it from. Comparing a UAV to manned platform the UAV is the cheapest option. The airframe is smaller so cost less to buy, maintain and operate. There is no need for complex life support equipment and human comfort facilities etc. If VFM is the criteria then a UAV/dedicated transport will be the winner, even if it means two system. If the Don cannot handle it, then the UAV can be a fully NS asset.

                          Originally posted by DeV View Post
                          There are also I believe, limitations on them for an airspace regulation point of view.
                          That was true but to a large extent the UAV industry has reacted to this and the latest offerings are for operation in controlled airspace. For the majority of our patrol area the UAV would be much much lower than civil traffic.

                          Originally posted by DeV View Post
                          no they aren’t (they are roles assigned by Government) they may the CASA a multi-role more versatile and better VFM aircraft.
                          Lets be honest, the additional roles are because the current platform was able to perform these along side its primary roles. If we has a KingAir I doubt the RFP would require 6t or 20 troops as carrying capacity. Just like the Cessna/PC12NG, the requirement is tailored to an existing pre-selected solution. But having a split between UAV and manned platform would allow a better optimisation of both platforms. The UAV would perform the long range high endurance low level ISR missions while a dedicated manned transport would provide the rest of the requirements. You would still have a ramp to drop rafts, you still can do Medevac, you can still transport 20+ troops etc.

                          Multi-roles does not always mean better VFM, "Jack of all trades/master of none!".

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                            Because they can’t do anything except surveillance (and possibly engagement)
                            Though I would broaden "surveillance" into maritime ISR and at the higher end electronic air warfare capabilities, but I am imaging that you are pointing out the inability of generic RPAS not able to deploy a UNI-PAC II once it has located a vessel in distress.... though once located by the RPAS you can either call in a utility transport like a CASA and get the loadmaster to biff one out the back or if a light payload capable Rotary UAV is deployed off the OPV's once it is within tasking range it can transit to the distressed vessel and deploy a UNI-PAC II or similar.

                            Realistically it is more prudent to consider maritime RPAS platforms as capability enablers that extend the prime manned platform rather than a silver bullet solution.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Anzac View Post
                              ...Realistically it is more prudent to consider maritime RPAS platforms as capability enablers that extend the prime manned platform rather than a silver bullet solution.
                              This.

                              RPAS are a piece in the jigsaw, they don't replace everything.

                              Interestingly, it takes more people to put an MQ-9 Reaper in the air than it does a Sentinel, Sentry or RIVET JOINT - cheaper to buy they may be, and long endurance they are, bit cheap to make operational they aren't.

                              RPAS also don't do judgement calls 400 miles out into the Atlantic in a near hurricane force storm - people do that, and people who are there and can feel the pressures on the flight controls make much better ones than people watching it on TV.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                                This.

                                RPAS are a piece in the jigsaw, they don't replace everything.
                                That is right they extend the capability output beyond the reach of the primary manned platform. They are the finder and the manned platform is the keeper.

                                Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                                Interestingly, it takes more people to put an MQ-9 Reaper in the air than it does a Sentinel, Sentry or RIVET JOINT - cheaper to buy they may be, and long endurance they are, bit cheap to make operational they aren't.
                                Essentially because there are more shifts involved due to the flight endurance. Lets be honest here talking MQ-9's or god forbid Triton is a bit alternative universe with respect to Irelands conops when a Selex ES Falco or IAI Heron is more pragmatic and budget friendly. There is a quantum of difference between fairly modest RPAS platforms like Falco with limits to their datalink range and capacity compared to premium US kit that is WGS routed.

                                Have to say whoever spun the meme about keeping Rivet Joint in the air being cheaper than a MQ-9 ... yeah right .. I'ii just leave it there.

                                Originally posted by ropebag View Post
                                RPAS also don't do judgement calls 400 miles out into the Atlantic in a near hurricane force storm - people do that, and people who are there and can feel the pressures on the flight controls make much better ones than people watching it on TV.
                                I wouldn't disagree with the people analogy though I would point out that it would be very marginal for an air component commander to authorise a SAR tasking using a crewed MPA asset during and into such conditions anyway.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X