An A320 needs about 250m runway than an A319 and an A321 needs 1000m more than a A319, all at MTOW. (ISA @ SL)
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Air Lift Capability
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostTo put some figures and thus perspective.
Before Covid a new A321 costs around $46m each, a 10yr old one was down at $18m. Now that will have dropped in the past few weeks and is now likely to be even lower as the market value will now be based upon how much it is worth in parts. As a grey civilian aircraft would be better with a large cargo door on the main deck then a P2F like that offered by EFW could be done for around $6m per aircraft. Thus a multi-role grey A321 would cost around $24m (€22m). For that you would get something that could transport pallets and containers, could be quick changed for troop transport (200-200 troops) or even as medevac. On the minus side would be; that it needs a paved runway and dedicated GSE to load and unload.
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostThe flyaway cost for a C-130J for the USAF is currently $95m (system cost is $115m per aircraft) the cost of a A400M is around double that. The KC-390 comes in at around $61m based upon the order from FAB. So what do you get for the extra money, well it is flexibility, rough field landing, no need for GSE for loading and unloading, ability to take larger sized loads and a avionics and defensive suite tailored to military transport.
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostJust looking at the cost of the aircraft on their own; 4x C-390's + 2x A320P2F(M) would be less that 5x C-130J's. That would be one major upgrade in terms of airlift capacity!
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anzac View PostIt would be cheaper and would generate 4200 flight hours p.a in typical military use over 3000 hours which a fleet of five C-130J would normally consume. The question would be - is that too much utility or not?
If I am not mistaken (open to better info) the Irish Army is not only larger but has more deployments and troops deployed at present. This might not have been the case at the height of the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. But having an idea of how the RNZAF sized their fleet could help answer the question.
Comment
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostGood question. It would be interesting to have some insight as to the tasking of the RNZAF C-130's and B757 over a year.
If I am not mistaken (open to better info) the Irish Army is not only larger but has more deployments and troops deployed at present. This might not have been the case at the height of the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. But having an idea of how the RNZAF sized their fleet could help answer the question.
A 757 size aircraft is probably the minimum size and range required given that fact.
Our situation is different and the fleet make up should reflect the uniqueness of our geographical location.
But I think, very importantly, given that this may be the once in generation chance to get some meaningful airlift capability into the DF.
It has to be a Militarily capable aircraft, if in the future the Ramped aircraft is being used to such a degree that a trooping type aircraft is needed and requirement is funded then you look at the QC 320/737 class of aircraft.
The reality in an Irish context is, if funding were to become available it would be a for an Aircraft that would need to serve for 30 years before a replacement would be considered.
A 320/737 p2F is a hugely capable aircraft and in a DF context a couple of giant leaps forward, but it does not get past the requirement for ground handling equipment. It cannot lift outsize items into an under developed airport and load/unloaded unaided. Nor does it give any kind of Air Drop ability.
These two capabilities in a Military and importantly Humanitarian Aid mission are essential.
220 Million Euro to count fishing boats would have bought a lot of real airlift capability.
Again the AC is hamstrung by the DOD and this idea that aircraft can only be replaced...
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charlie252 View PostAlso worth considering the remoteness of NZ, at least 1200nm from the next large land mass means your fleet make up has to be different. Also the country is more expansive than our little Island.
A 757 size aircraft is probably the minimum size and range required given that fact.
Our situation is different and the fleet make up should reflect the uniqueness of our geographical location.
Originally posted by Charlie252 View PostBut I think, very importantly, given that this may be the once in generation chance to get some meaningful airlift capability into the DF.
It has to be a Militarily capable aircraft, if in the future the Ramped aircraft is being used to such a degree that a trooping type aircraft is needed and requirement is funded then you look at the QC 320/737 class of aircraft.
The reality in an Irish context is, if funding were to become available it would be a for an Aircraft that would need to serve for 30 years before a replacement would be considered.
Originally posted by Charlie252 View PostA 320/737 p2F is a hugely capable aircraft and in a DF context a couple of giant leaps forward, but it does not get past the requirement for ground handling equipment.
Originally posted by Charlie252 View PostIt cannot lift outsize items into an under developed airport and load/unloaded unaided.
Originally posted by Charlie252 View PostNor does it give any kind of Air Drop ability. These two capabilities in a Military and importantly Humanitarian Aid mission are essential.
Originally posted by Charlie252 View Post220 Million Euro to count fishing boats would have bought a lot of real airlift capability.
Originally posted by Charlie252 View PostAgain the AC is hamstrung by the DOD and this idea that aircraft can only be replaced...
- Likes 6
Comment
-
Originally posted by EUFighter View PostGood question. It would be interesting to have some insight as to the tasking of the RNZAF C-130's and B757 over a year.
If I am not mistaken (open to better info) the Irish Army is not only larger but has more deployments and troops deployed at present. This might not have been the case at the height of the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan. But having an idea of how the RNZAF sized their fleet could help answer the question.
Overall the NZDF employs 14900 of which their are 6750 with Army Reserve (1800) and Regular Force (4950), however there are a around 1250 full-time contractors or civilians who are direct supports to the NZ Army - many of them ex uniform following the civilianisation process (There are 3000 civilians / contractors within the NZDF). If you are dressed in Green you can be deployed - if white collar/grey collar you stay home - your civvy street.
The C-130's conduct readiness training exercises like PITCH BLACK, BULLSEYE and GREEN FLAG to qualify crews in Airborne Operations plus participate in BLACK WING and NOCTURNAL REACH to reinforced airborne operational skills with other services overseas. Operation TEAL supported rotation and sustainment of NZDF deployed forces in the Middle East mostly in Iraq at Taji who are coming home. Then as part of DEEP FREEZE C-130H and B757-2K2 aircraft fly around 10-12 annual airlift missions to Antarctica and provide standby medical evacuation support pre-positioned in Christchurch as a backup to the primary US-led evacuation option. They also do MAOT (Multi-Agency Operational Taskings) in support of the Government like a medevac, repatriation of nationals, Civil Defence, logistic support to other departments ect. They also support the Army in getting to their annual major joint service level exercises overseas such as TALISMAN SABRE or locally SOUTHERN KATIPO as well as deploying the NZSAS Regiment personnel who are frequent flyers for Exercises and the like. Also there are the HADR runs into the Pacific as they have an annual Hurricane season and other events, plus SASO events come up from time to time. Lastly, they fly the PM and Foreign Minister who is the Deputy PM, pretty much only those two bigwigs go VIP on the B757 (probably just 200 hours p.a max). Even the Defence Minister flies Air NZ to overseas meetings unless the FM/DPM is going too. The thing when there is not much in the way of formal deployments 40Sqd are busy with exercises.Last edited by Anzac; 16 May 2020, 17:34.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
I think the point is being missed. Buying a White Aircraft, regardless of paint job runs the reel danger of being seen as a New Govt Jet, and as a result being Politically unpalatable.
This is the reality of the Irish Situation.
The situation in NZ is different and clearly defence policy and expenditure is further up the list or priorities.
The 220 million Euro's on the Marpat aircraft may be the only real investment in the AC for the remainder of the decade, that is the reality.
You have to be aware that the DOD, and by default the Minister, refer to the Investments in the DF, and mention in the same breath the Helicopters, PC-9's and Mowags that were delivered more than 15 years ago.
This is the reality of Irish Defence policy and the expenditure that follows it.
You can hammer home your point about the 320 type aircraft and you have many valid points, but the decision, if it happens, will not be based on those types of rational arguments.
In my view the AC will be lucky if as a result of the current situation a decision is made to purchase a third GP C-295.
From a wider DF and for the future of the AC I hope that a larger military transport aircraft is in the mix.
I am of the view that if a 320 type aircraft is mentioned the DOD would be able to shoot it down early on cost grounds because they can charter one at short notice!
A C-130 class aircraft brings unique capabilities and generates a different conversation in the DOD.
The realities and costs of operating any of these aircraft are for AC management to determine and plan for.
In my view its not such a huge step from a CN-235 to either a 320 or C-130 class aircraft from a Purely flying and maintaining point of view. But the costs are significantly increased and given the current expenditure on the AC on an annual basis is about 18 million to run the entire operation, it is clear either is a huge ask from an annual budgeting point of view.
Finally, I actually never envisage AC aircraft flying high end military combat type operations anywhere, this is not realistic given defence policy and its not a realistic role given the budgets that are currently available and even if the budget were to double, would still not support such a capability.
Ireland is non-aligned and has a Neutral stance that would preclude being involved in expeditionary types of operations.
Dream land is the ability to deliver a sizable load into austere locations for humanitarian purposes and to have the capability to support DF deployments in similar circumstances.
Total dreamland is those deployments would include our own rotary wing supporting our troops.
There is a Fundamental difference between where NZ defence policy stands and Ireland's.Last edited by Charlie252; 16 May 2020, 18:02.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charlie252 View PostI think the point is being missed. Buying a White Aircraft, regardless of paint job runs the reel danger of being seen as a New Govt Jet, and as a result being Politically unpalatable.
This is the reality of the Irish Situation.
Originally posted by Charlie252 View PostIn my view the AC will be lucky if as a result of the current situation a decision is made to purchase a third GP C-295.
I am of the view that if a 320 type aircraft is mentioned the DOD would be able to shoot it down early on cost grounds because they can charter one at short notice!
Of course do it properly and stump up 300m euro for a couple of KC-390's and be able to do everything you will ever need with respect to air mobility for the next 40 years - in the scheme of things with the amount of money being borrowed by Governments at the moment Eur300m is looking like a rounding error for an economy a hundred times larger than that.
Originally posted by Charlie252 View PostBut the costs are significantly increased and given the current expenditure on the AC on an annual basis is about 18 million to run the entire operation, it is clear either is a huge ask from an annual budgeting point of view.
There is a Fundamental difference between where NZ defence policy stands and Ireland's.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anzac View PostHere goes. The C-130'Hs generate 2400-2500 annual hours and the B757's around 1400-1500 annual hours.
Looking at our troop deployments, we currently have MINURSO, MONUSCO, EUTM (Mali), EULEX (KFOR), UNTSO, UNIFIL and UNDOF. Then there is the EUBG participation and the odd live fire of RBS70's in Sweden. We may not have a hurricane (typhoon) season but there is regular HADR events, from forest fire through to earthquakes and as we say with the NS mission in the Med such things come over very well with Joe public. Also the region to the south and east of the EU is not the most stable often leading to man made disasters. So once the relevant training hours are added it should be enough to justify a similar if slightly smaller mixed fleet.
As for medevac we currently abuse the Casa but the new PC-12 should relive that problem.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anzac View PostNo it would not buy a lot of real airlift capability if you are thinking a proper military medium tactical air mobility asset that would be future proofed for the next 40 years. 220 million would buy just 1 and a half KC-390's or C-130J-30. To give you an idea of the cost of operating five RNZAF C-130's per annum (what is called Output 13.2 on our budget line) is Eur80m or NZ$150m each and every year and believe me we pinch pennies.
Comment
-
All very laudable, but doesn't get past the fact that you aren't comparing apples.
NZ defence budget is 2.4 Billion, Ireland's is 1 Billion
The NZ defence minister is on record this week stating his number one priority is getting the C-130J's, we have never heard any Irish defence minister, ever make any statement, even remotely like that.
So if you accept the current situation, and the reality, that there will not be any appreciable increase in the foreseeable future.
Then I would contend that if funding were to become available, then there is only one option in terms of increasing Defence Air Mobility for the next 20-30 years.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
While I would welcome the IAC getting a couple of C130J's or KC390's I can't see it happening at the moment unless maybe I get the new job in Newbridge!
Bester would be at present something like an A321P2F, a converted A321 with a nice big door on the side and no windows! Paint it the same dark grey that the USAF uses on there transports, have an open day in the Don to show it off, for the show have a few rows pf palletized seats at the back, mid section with some litters and forward pallets, naturally packed with boxes which have big red crosses on them. A lot will be about how the public perceives the aircraft and the last thing it should look like is a business jet for high rollers. The public still remember the planes going to Tripoli, they now see and accept the government sending almost daily an A330 to China for PPE and always welcome when a government learns a lesson from a mistake (oversight).
Yes there still will be shouting from certain media outlets, the left will cry foul and the Shinners, there will always be something for them to complain about. But that should not stop us from doing something, government only moves when it is pushed on defence.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
This all also has to be considered in the context of the White paper which outlined the next ten years of defence spending and policy.
A caretaker government, a public apathy to defence and politicians who are not engaged.
I think if pushed, and something HAS to be done, then I can see DOD seeing a third C-295 as ticking the box and everybody moves on too more important stuff!!
Its a shame but given the historically low DF budget it would take years of huge capital expenditure to move Irelands defence capability to even a fraction of comparable nations.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charlie252 View PostAll very laudable, but doesn't get past the fact that you aren't comparing apples.
So if you accept the current situation, and the reality, that there will not be any appreciable increase in the foreseeable future.
Then I would contend that if funding were to become available, then there is only one option in terms of increasing Defence Air Mobility for the next 20-30 years.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anzac View PostIt is not a comparison Charlie. It was a reference for capability needs based on what a defence force of a similar size and generic operational outlook does albeit one with a larger budget at present is doing - which was not the case until a few years ago. Looking at the IDF requirements and air mobility capability gap, the wider whole of Govt MAOT tasking and DF mission deployment needs along with the likely to be very tight budget allocation over the next period which I accept is likely (though disappointed it wont be more), and with Leo's statement in the past week that air mobility is being looked into, added to my familiarity with the subject, I gave my view that there is just one plausible option under the circumstances.
Have a look at the last decade in defence expenditure for both countries.
The other branches of the DF have a significant shoping list, and would also be making their case if funding were to be available.
I don't think the funding has yet been secured for the NS blue/green vessel.
In my view the 321 p2f is a super aircraft but is unpalatable in an Irish Context. I also haven't seen a QC type conversion for it, but that's another conversation.
I think at a huge stretch a C-130 might be possible.
As it stands the next decade of AC capital expenditure is the CN-235 replacement which covers the next 3-4 years, the LR-45 is scheduled for replacement in 2024, that date will shift to the end of the decade most likely.
And Finally the PC-9 replacement is due 2025, however we know that those aircraft will still be viable and fit for purpose so that will also shift to the end of the decade.
In the context of the White Paper the C-295 ticks the box of enhanced transport capability, the PC-12 ticks many box's. And the requirement to look into Air Defence capability will be tied to the PC-9 replacement and as I have already said that's ten years away.
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment