Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Air Lift Capability

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

  • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    The problem is/was that "can do/make do" has always been the default setting in the Don, from mundane stuff like the provision of clothing to capital stuff like the acquisition of aircraft and permanent buildings and infrastructure. Do more with less. It should be written on the cap badge, the sides of the aircraft and the main gate. While it's admirable in one sense, it shouldn't be the operating philosophy behind an air arm.

    It’s a military wide philosophy worldwide

    The problem is in Ireland it is that it is used, for far too long, as an excuse not to provide more resources... heaven forbid the DF May be able to complete their tasks more efficiently or complete additional tasks (and that is not the DF’s fault)

    In the last few years the DF have finally realised that the default answer isn’t yes we can do that and that when capabilities are taken off line people notice and something is done (eg Baldonnel ATC, naval vessel tie ups)

    Comment


    • In purely an air freight role, it would take us a while to get to 30,000hrs.
      For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
        In purely an air freight role, it would take us a while to get to 30,000hrs.
        Is the decision to get rid carved in stone (i.e. has someone’s name attached who will look silly if it is reversed)?
        '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


        • The two aircraft will have been in service for around 30 years, by the time their replacements arrive. How much life is left is not just a look at the number of hours, but the type of hours as well as cycles, hence my earlier question (#237). Flying in a pure transport role is usually less demanding than low level maritime work, and given that the yearly totals would be also less it could be that there would be a few years service available.

          Roughly each aircraft has done around 15,000 hrs based upon publicly available figures. But as pointed out that does not mean there is still the same amount available, but even if there was only 2000-3000 hours still available that would give at least 5-10 years in a transport role. So why not re-purpose? (If there are airframe hours available)

          Comment


          • if you had two Casas, as freighters, you'd probably end up giving more parachuting air time to those who genuinely need it. You'd also be able to set up a near full time airlift to Kosovo/Lebanon and any other point of interest in Europe and the near Middle East/ North Africa. You'd be able to lift more medevacs in a relatively spacious hull. It would definitely be worth it, to retain them as freighters, even if you limited their annual flight hours.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
              The two aircraft will have been in service for around 30 years, by the time their replacements arrive. How much life is left is not just a look at the number of hours, but the type of hours as well as cycles, hence my earlier question (#237). Flying in a pure transport role is usually less demanding than low level maritime work, and given that the yearly totals would be also less it could be that there would be a few years service available.

              Roughly each aircraft has done around 15,000 hrs based upon publicly available figures. But as pointed out that does not mean there is still the same amount available, but even if there was only 2000-3000 hours still available that would give at least 5-10 years in a transport role. So why not re-purpose? (If there are airframe hours available)
              Both A/C have over 20000 hrs now, second one reached it while delivering PPE to Lebanon.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
                if you had two Casas, as freighters, you'd probably end up giving more parachuting air time to those who genuinely need it. You'd also be able to set up a near full time airlift to Kosovo/Lebanon and any other point of interest in Europe and the near Middle East/ North Africa. You'd be able to lift more medevacs in a relatively spacious hull. It would definitely be worth it, to retain them as freighters, even if you limited their annual flight hours.
                Not without an increase in establishment and strength

                Comment


                • [QUOTE=DeV;481732]Not without an increase in establishment and strength[/QUOT

                  Strength the issue due to lack of retention of other ranks

                  Comment


                  • Two pilots and a loadie per flight; half a dozen people to refuel, unload and inspect it (and the rest)on the turnaround. It really doesnt take much to operate a small turboprop. All you'd have to do is give it an annual hourly limit, say a max of a thousand hrs a year and you'd only break that in an emergency and you'd easily afford it. Run it on a power by the hour basis and it's even cheaper, including training flights. You can plot most of your maintenance well in advance. If it flies for the HSE,bill them. If it acts as a top cover radio link,bill the Coastguard. If it does a run for the DFA,bill them. Even if it does a lift for the Rangers, take a wedge out of their subhead. Make the aircraft work for it's keep. The Polish Air Force use Casas to provide airlift for their Police. The PC-12s are good aircraft but there's no substitute for cubic metres and two Casas would lift enough pallets to make them viable.

                    Comment


                    • [QUOTE=Spark23;481742]
                      Originally posted by DeV View Post
                      Not without an increase in establishment and strength[/QUOT

                      Strength the issue due to lack of retention of other ranks
                      And officers!


                      But what was proposed here is when the C295s arrive keep the C235s... my point is there would need to be an increase in establishment because otherwise the pilots, loadmasters and techs will be from the C295 pool.

                      In other words there will be no one to fly them.

                      Comment


                      • Where there is the will there is always a way.
                        If the AC & Army wanted and pushed, then it could become a possibility.

                        Comment


                        • In the long run, it could be better value to procure a third C295W in tactical airlift configuration, if the costs of converting the CN-235's, hangarage, crew training, maintenance, service life, etc is taken into account.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Rhodes View Post
                            In the long run, it could be better value to procure a third C295W in tactical airlift configuration, if the costs of converting the CN-235's, hangarage, crew training, maintenance, service life, etc is taken into account.
                            The cost of conversion is almost nothing as the FITS can be easily removed. Training etc is already taken care of as the CASA's are even today used for transport. And despite what everyone think aircraft are designed to be outside most of their lives. If they have a few years on the life then if would be a lot cheaper than buying new aircraft to retain, but only if they have life remaining.

                            Comment


                            • bang on the money! two easily adaptable transport aircraft, already well understood by all of the Corp's users, easy to operate and keep. It's a no-brainer. A C295 pilot can have the 235 on his license,so like any Airbus or Boeing pilot, he or she is covered to fly multiple variants of the same type. Same for the mechs. They have so many hours left on their airframes that it would be a sin to let them go.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                                The cost of conversion is almost nothing as the FITS can be easily removed. Training etc is already taken care of as the CASA's are even today used for transport. And despite what everyone think aircraft are designed to be outside most of their lives. If they have a few years on the life then if would be a lot cheaper than buying new aircraft to retain, but only if they have life remaining.
                                You're very underestimating the work and cost that would be required to covert the aircraft from an MPA to tactical airlifter.
                                Internally, the mission console has to be removed, the electronics rack has to be removed, miles of wiring for both units has to be removed, the flare launcher has to be removed. It will then have to be rewired, a cargo floor with flippable rollers installed, sidewall seats installed, possibly a second WC.
                                Externally, the maritime radar has to be removed, the FLIR has to be removed and fuselage panels then rebuilt.
                                It's a lot of work and cost which would require a long stay in Seville.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X