Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pilatus PC-9M Replacement.

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

  • Pilatus PC-9M Replacement.

    Believe it or not our Turboprop trainers are in service now since 2004. In 2015 the then minister (who is the current minister) stated they were to serve until 2025. https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-20350477.html
    With everything going on in the world is it time to start the process? Could take 2-3 years for anything to go from contract to delivery, and that is after the usually lengthy tender process has completed.
    The type has done well, but the tandem configuration was probably unnecessary, when every aircraft the pilot will lead into is side by side seating.
    So given the other discussion on the identified need for an intercept capability, is a LIFT aircraft a given? If we go with LIFT, do we then need a basic flying training aircraft? For example is a PC21 too much aircraft for a student pilot? Is it possible to put someone with zero flying experience into the front seat of a TA50 or M346?
    Should we have a Basic flying training aircraft, screen pilots early on to heli or Multi engine, send some to fast jets/LIFT, if we do go down that road? Or given our good relationship with Pilatus, is the PC21 enough for anything that could be asked of it?
    For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

  • #2
    "Gets out popcorn, sit's back"
    'He died who loved to live,' they'll say,
    'Unselfishly so we might have today!'
    Like hell! He fought because he had to fight;
    He died that's all. It was his unlucky night.
    http://www.salamanderoasis.org/poems...nnis/luck.html

    Comment


    • #3
      What about some of these??

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Herald View Post
        What about some of these??

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_172
        Do they come in green?
        For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
          Believe it or not our Turboprop trainers are in service now since 2004. In 2015 the then minister (who is the current minister) stated they were to serve until 2025. https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-20350477.html
          With everything going on in the world is it time to start the process? Could take 2-3 years for anything to go from contract to delivery, and that is after the usually lengthy tender process has completed.
          Even if the Minister for State in September 2019 repeated that the PC-9M's were to be replaced in 2025 he was merely repeating something rather than knowing.
          We must not forget that since 2015 the AC has received a new PC-9M to replace the one lost in 2009, this has plenty of hours. So with a lot of fleet balancing the PC-9s should be still in service at the end of he decade, maybe not all but enough to meet our training needs.

          Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
          Is it possible to put someone with zero flying experience into the front seat of a TA50 or M346?
          Some people will tell you yes, to which I respond Luftwaffe-Starfighter. It is possible but it is highly discouraged unless you want to kill off pilots. There is no real substitute for proper training and this is especially true for pilots of high performance aircraft.


          Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
          So given the other discussion on the identified need for an intercept capability, is a LIFT aircraft a given? If we go with LIFT, do we then need a basic flying training aircraft? For example is a PC21 too much aircraft for a student pilot?
          Should we have a Basic flying training aircraft, screen pilots early on to heli or Multi engine, send some to fast jets/LIFT, if we do go down that road? Or given our good relationship with Pilatus, is the PC21 enough for anything that could be asked of it?
          The PC-21 System starts with ab-intro taking place on simulators, even they do not propose putting pilots into a high performance aircraft such as a PC-21. Even the good old PC-9M is pushing it to the limit. Pilots need to learn basic piloting skills, some of the best do this without an engine! The problem will be if we do want to replace the PC-9M's post 2025 what aircraft will be in production?

          A LIFT is not an interceptor, it can act as a "Point defence" fighter but they lack the performance for an intercept, climb, acceleration and endurance are normally too low. So no matter what about jumping into a LIFT aircraft IMHO no-one would propose jumping from a simulator straight into a Gripen or Viper.

          IMHO, given the small number of pilots we need to train per year it might be better looking at an existing multi-national training school or setting one up with some friendly countries. Or we just see all trainees to the RAAF.
          Last edited by EUFighter; 9 September 2020, 09:05.

          Comment


          • #6
            Turboprop?? I thought we were getting Grippens

            Comment


            • #7
              If we do not get Gripens or Vipers and we do replace the PC-9M's then what do we have to train pilots for:
              Fixed Wing: C-295 & PC-12
              Rotary: H135 & AW139

              Then there are IMHO two contenders for the replacement: a) Grob G115TP and b) Diamond Dart. Both are lighter than the PC-9M but still give a decent performance, enough for pilots going onto the PC-12s.

              https://grob-aircraft.com/en/g-120tp.html

              https://www.diamondaircraft.com/en/s...dart/overview/

              PS: We should forget trying to have people think the PC-9M was an air defence aircraft, no-one fell for that one!

              Comment


              • #8
                Even the current PC9 pilots spend a lot of hours in the simulators before getting into the aircraft.

                If we decide to stay with a turboprop basic/advanced training and want an air intercept capability, the cheapest (and least effective) way is a LIFT.

                If we want something more capable eg Gripen, then we need access to LIFT as well (not necessarily AC provided). For the amount of pilots that would be going to a Gripen Sqn that would not be cost effective (you’d probably be talking max 4 a year). No one jumps straight from turboprop to Gripen currently so we need a training deal overseas.

                Either way we will need a PC9 replacement eventually .... and a lot more pilots coming through

                Comment


                • #9
                  It was a light ground attack aircraft at best...
                  For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                    If we do not get Gripens or Vipers and we do replace the PC-9M's then what do we have to train pilots for:
                    Fixed Wing: C-295 & PC-12
                    Rotary: H135 & AW139

                    Then there are IMHO two contenders for the replacement: a) Grob G115TP and b) Diamond Dart. Both are lighter than the PC-9M but still give a decent performance, enough for pilots going onto the PC-12s.

                    https://grob-aircraft.com/en/g-120tp.html

                    https://www.diamondaircraft.com/en/s...dart/overview/

                    PS: We should forget trying to have people think the PC-9M was an air defence aircraft, no-one fell for that one!
                    Excellent point actually

                    If we get a LIFT or a multi-role fighter .... do we need a basic trainer with (even minimal) combat capabilities

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                      If we do not get Gripens or Vipers and we do replace the PC-9M's then what do we have to train pilots for:
                      Fixed Wing: C-295 & PC-12
                      Rotary: H135 & AW139

                      Then there are IMHO two contenders for the replacement: a) Grob G115TP and b) Diamond Dart. Both are lighter than the PC-9M but still give a decent performance, enough for pilots going onto the PC-12s.

                      https://grob-aircraft.com/en/g-120tp.html

                      https://www.diamondaircraft.com/en/s...dart/overview/

                      PS: We should forget trying to have people think the PC-9M was an air defence aircraft, no-one fell for that one!
                      I agree with your assessment regarding the 2 contenders for basic trainers but thats where the requirement for trainers should stop. We have no need for PC21 or LIFT. Have Interceptors for flying alongside Bears is unachievable and to have the resources to man QRA would break us. If the day comes where we need Ground attack then its too late. We would be better served not replacing the PC9 and diverting the monies into more Patrol Aircraft/Helicopters and maybe an aircraft that can be converted into the much vaunted Transport capability.
                      Does anyone have any idea what it takes to maintain an interceptor capability or even to keep readiness levels at an acceptable level, let alone having enough Pilots, ground crew etc on hand.
                      It would be great to have the resources but we need to be realistic or am I missing the point

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        the PC 21 is part of a fully integrated system whereby the candidate steps into a fighter afterwards, such as an F18 or F16 and it is heavily dependent on simulators.Users claim that it eliminates an aircraft from the full system, so that the candidate sees two aircraft, two simulators and two training set ups for his eventual qualification as a fighter pilot, saving money on hull hours/engine hours and gunnery. It's really a bit of overkill for someone going on to fly a turboprop single or twin for a career.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by DeV View Post
                          Excellent point actually

                          If we get a LIFT or a multi-role fighter .... do we need a basic trainer with (even minimal) combat capabilities
                          IMHO the answer would be NO.
                          The purpose of a basic trainer is to train a pilot to fly, to give them real world experience of flying. A lot can even be simulated on a basic aircraft without the complexity of adding weapon systems. Also on a modern battlefield a basic trainer going into combat is going to mean the certain loss of that aircraft.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by apc View Post
                            I agree with your assessment regarding the 2 contenders for basic trainers but thats where the requirement for trainers should stop. We have no need for PC21 or LIFT. Have Interceptors for flying alongside Bears is unachievable and to have the resources to man QRA would break us. If the day comes where we need Ground attack then its too late. We would be better served not replacing the PC9 and diverting the monies into more Patrol Aircraft/Helicopters and maybe an aircraft that can be converted into the much vaunted Transport capability.
                            Does anyone have any idea what it takes to maintain an interceptor capability or even to keep readiness levels at an acceptable level, let alone having enough Pilots, ground crew etc on hand.
                            It would be great to have the resources but we need to be realistic or am I missing the point
                            You are. The notion that it would "break us" is a myth. We play the "poor mouth" internationally when in reality we have a strong economy, good quality of life and a healthy balance of payments. Smaller nations can operate aircrafts of all types as required. We are the only EU state without such aircraft. We wouldnt have been allowed into the Eurozone if we didn't have comparable economies. The costs are well covered on other threads, but Ireland historically since the mid 90s has chosen to reduce defence spending, year on year, giving justification of a "benign security risk profile internationally" during , in no particular order of importance, The Balkan Wars, 9/11 and the war on terror, Islamic terrorist "lone wolf" attacks on European cities, a refugee crisis in the Med, and all while the Russian air force and navy frequently carry out manoeuvres, unhindered in waters and airspace where we are supposed to have responsibility. But hey, "benign security risk profile"
                            For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
                              You are. The notion that it would "break us" is a myth. We play the "poor mouth" internationally when in reality we have a strong economy, good quality of life and a healthy balance of payments. Smaller nations can operate aircrafts of all types as required. We are the only EU state without such aircraft. We wouldnt have been allowed into the Eurozone if we didn't have comparable economies. The costs are well covered on other threads, but Ireland historically since the mid 90s has chosen to reduce defence spending, year on year, giving justification of a "benign security risk profile internationally" during , in no particular order of importance, The Balkan Wars, 9/11 and the war on terror, Islamic terrorist "lone wolf" attacks on European cities, a refugee crisis in the Med, and all while the Russian air force and navy frequently carry out manoeuvres, unhindered in waters and airspace where we are supposed to have responsibility. But hey, "benign security risk profile"
                              We aren’t the only EU country without an air intercept capability

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X