A
Aussie Digger
Guest
I understood that additional orders from the US, Europe, Canada and Australia meant the line is now open until 2009 and orders can be placed up until that time???
C-17 or A400M for Australia?
- Thread starter cherry
- Start date
That is my understanding as well, this year has seen the order of, or imminant order for, 4 for the RAAF, 4 for NATO, and 4 for RCAF and 1 extra for the RAF.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
From my understanding, some of the parts are long leadtime items. Some of which are ordered 36 months in advance. The C-17 line itself has sufficient orders to keep going until 2009 or so, but some of the parts suppliers IIRC are going to be shutting down production of some parts. I think that's where the order due date comes in, the C-17 might still be in production but some parts needed for new aircraft won't necessarily be available. At least, not without restarting some of the parts productions lines, with all the time, effort and cost that entails.
Still, I would like to see 6 (or more!) C-17s in RAAF colors.
-Cheers
Many of the tails for Boeing aircraft are built in Grand Prairie, Texas at a Martin Marietta site. They are back logged by 30 months currently with orders for tails, and with Boeing 787s being bought in considerable numbers they will surely fall futher behind or have to increase production. They build tails for all of Boeing's wide body jetliners and the C-17.
Yes, there are long lead items. Keep in mind Boeing likes to take delivery of parts when they are needed, not months before.
As I recall, New Zealand had to take up their options for either one or two Anzac class frigates in 1999 at the latest, even though the production line lasted until this year, 2006.
Yes, there are long lead items. Keep in mind Boeing likes to take delivery of parts when they are needed, not months before.
As I recall, New Zealand had to take up their options for either one or two Anzac class frigates in 1999 at the latest, even though the production line lasted until this year, 2006.
Yep at the end of next year it will be officially too late to order more C-17's.
So if anyone else needs C-17's they need to place the orders now. If Australia wants additional C-17's they need to decide very quickly.
I believe the deadline on orders is the middle of next year, thats when some of the long lead time parts will be shutting production.
However if the US keeps ordering more aircraft which then the production line will remain open
So if anyone else needs C-17's they need to place the orders now. If Australia wants additional C-17's they need to decide very quickly.
I believe the deadline on orders is the middle of next year, thats when some of the long lead time parts will be shutting production.
However if the US keeps ordering more aircraft which then the production line will remain open
I think if Australia needed more heavy airlifters we would purchase A400M's in the future.
The A400 sits between the C-130 and C-17 in capability. A general rule of thumb i have heard is that the A400 can carry twice as much cargo over the same distance of the C-130.
The A400 would then take alot of the larger items and shorter distance missions and significantly reduce the workload of Australia's C-17's.
Lets look at the options shall we..
4 C-17
12 A400m
24 C-130J
24 Caribou replacements.
30 helicopters
Pretty smooth transition in aircraft, however too many aircraft in my opinion. It would be wiser to just buy more C-17's now, 6 would be nice 8 would be perfect.
8 C-17
30 C-130J's
30 Carribou replacements
30 Helicopters.
This would be better, fewer aircraft types allow for more total aircraft, and more of the larger C-17's so greater heavy airlift.
I dont see Australia having less than 3 types of airlift though. If we use up the flight hours of the J Hercules then we could operate like this.
10 C-17's
50 C-27J's
50 Helicopters
Bigger gaps between each aircraft. The C-27's would provide troop transport in the theatre of operations as well as training. The C-17's would do international airlift. 1 C-17 for every five C-27J, so when the C-17 arrives its cargo can be split between 4-5 C-27J's and then dropped into combat.
Looking at it that way it would work well. But we have a relatively new fleet of Hercules so that wouldn't work in the short term.
8 C-17's
25 C-130J's
25 Big choppa's
Probably the more realistic option. Replace the caribou with a big helicopter this would ease the workload of the C-130's. More C-17's would also reduce the workload of the C-130's so would be the most ideal and solution. More C-17's and upgraded the chinooks.
The A400 sits between the C-130 and C-17 in capability. A general rule of thumb i have heard is that the A400 can carry twice as much cargo over the same distance of the C-130.
The A400 would then take alot of the larger items and shorter distance missions and significantly reduce the workload of Australia's C-17's.
Lets look at the options shall we..
4 C-17
12 A400m
24 C-130J
24 Caribou replacements.
30 helicopters
Pretty smooth transition in aircraft, however too many aircraft in my opinion. It would be wiser to just buy more C-17's now, 6 would be nice 8 would be perfect.
8 C-17
30 C-130J's
30 Carribou replacements
30 Helicopters.
This would be better, fewer aircraft types allow for more total aircraft, and more of the larger C-17's so greater heavy airlift.
I dont see Australia having less than 3 types of airlift though. If we use up the flight hours of the J Hercules then we could operate like this.
10 C-17's
50 C-27J's
50 Helicopters
Bigger gaps between each aircraft. The C-27's would provide troop transport in the theatre of operations as well as training. The C-17's would do international airlift. 1 C-17 for every five C-27J, so when the C-17 arrives its cargo can be split between 4-5 C-27J's and then dropped into combat.
Looking at it that way it would work well. But we have a relatively new fleet of Hercules so that wouldn't work in the short term.
8 C-17's
25 C-130J's
25 Big choppa's
Probably the more realistic option. Replace the caribou with a big helicopter this would ease the workload of the C-130's. More C-17's would also reduce the workload of the C-130's so would be the most ideal and solution. More C-17's and upgraded the chinooks.
I think you are dreaming there which is a shame.
What WILL happen is...
4 x C-17
5 x KC-30B (A330) possibly expanded to 8
18 x C-130J (including 6 x KC-130J short fuselage tankers)
16 x C-27J
12 x CH-47F (including the incumbent CH-47Ds upgraded to CH-47F standard)
It's possible the original 12 C-130Js will be replaced by about 8 A400Ms, but probably not until after 2016.
This is ample for the RAAF/Army's current crewing numbers; any increase would be very difficult to keep flying.
Magoo
and here I was trying to be a good lad and avoid the mention of numbers and frame types.
you do realise that I've been sitting on the spartan since an email in April?
can the KC130J,s be used as a multi role tpt, revert to traditional C130J? and how usefull is it as a tanker for Aust purposes? Ta lads.
If you take the fuel pods out I don't see why not. It is reconfigurable.
Magoo[/QUOTE]
These figures certainly seem more realistic based on published procurement planning (Defence Capability Plan, White Paper, Budget papers, etc), unless there is a major escalation of perceived threat to Australia during the next few years.
The acquisition of KC130Js will certainly provide a force multiplier to the Chinook fleet if it goes ahead.
There seems to be a strong consensus that the C27J will be acquired together with more Chinooks (which I think would be sensible). Is this based on inside knowledge or educated guessing?
:?:
Last edited by a moderator:
Holy crap!!
So we may operate C-17, C130J, A330, C-27J, CH-47F and possibly A400M's?
Talk about effecient!! We may as well buy a C-5 galaxy and a few CN-295's and we will operate every single airlifter available
nfloorl:???as opposed to C130E, C130H, Boeing 707,CC08,CH47D and Chartering Qantas and Antanovs.....whats ya problem?Holy crap!!
So we may operate C-17, C130J, A330, C-27J, CH-47F and possibly A400M's?
Talk about effecient!! We may as well buy a C-5 galaxy and a few CN-295's and we will operate every single airlifter available
...and the engines and some sytems from the C27J,s are interchangable with the C130J,s, seems efficient enough to me...
re C27's, theres some parts interchange with the late model Hercs. Its actually not an absolute negative on the logistics side of the ledger.???as opposed to C130E, C130H, Boeing 707,CC08,CH47D and Chartering Qantas and Antanovs.....whats ya problem?
Currently the RAAF operates 20 C-130 aircraft (8 C-130H purchased in 1978 and 12 C-130J-30 purchased in 2000).
The order for the C-17 has been confirmed. I don’t think the order for the KC-130J or the C-27J has yet been confirmed.
I see the logic in retiring the C-130H aircraft when the C-17 aircraft (and the C-27J aircraft) become available.
However, I’m unsure about the plans for the C-130’s. The 6 KC-130Js main role would be A/A refuelling, probably of the RAAF & AA helicopters, and the RAAF C-130Js. Does the P-3 Orion have an in flight air-to-air refuelling capability? Being multi-role they could also be used for general transport tasks. I assume that these aircraft would be new builds rather than conversions of aircraft currently in the fleet.
I am rather puzzled by the comment on the possible replacement of the original 12 C-130Js with about 8 A400Ms after 2016. At that time the aircraft will only be 16 years old. The C-130H aircraft currently in service are being retired after 30 –35 years in service. Why replace capable aircraft at so early an age?
And why purchase A400M aircraft at all? They can carry higher payloads (and larger loads), but only over similar distances as the C-130Js. So if the advantage is a larger load size, what loads would Australia want to carry in the A-400M that couldn’t be carried in the C-130J (or the C-17).
Wouldn’t it be better now to order additional (2x) C-17s now and continue to operate the C-130Js for longer (2026) and replace the aircraft with either the A-400M, if it is still in production, (unlikely) or more probably with a “Hercules Replacement” aircraft along will all the other operators of the C-130 which will be seeking a replacement in that timeframe.
Chris
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Inefficient, compared to what?Holy crap!!
So we may operate C-17, C130J, A330, C-27J, CH-47F and possibly A400M's?
Talk about effecient!! We may as well buy a C-5 galaxy and a few CN-295's and we will operate every single airlifter available
Operating, C-17, C-130J-30, C-130H, DHC-4 Caribou, KC-30B, CH-47D, which is the CURRENT situation, or will be by 2009 even IF current plans aren't implemented?
Unfortunately RAAF needs different aircraft for different roles and Army needs heavy lift helo's, meaning: Chinooks.
I think it unlikely we'll operate A400M's, unless a plan can be devised to swap or sell the existing C-130J-30's and according to Magoo's figures that doesn't seem likely. If anything MORE C-130J-30's are likely to be acquired, which would SURELY sound the death knell for the A400m in RAAF service...
The capability most likely to be forgone (if any) out of that group is the C-27/C-295, IMHO. There is not that much advantage in operating these aircraft as opposed to C-130J-30's in my opinion, as they apparently don't offer much of an advantage in STOL performance compared to the C-130J-30 but there IS a big difference in load capacity/range performance...
Additional Chinooks seems likely in any case and "tanked" Chooks (via KC-130J's) may ease the requirement for the C-27J/C-295 and ease the logistical burden somewhat.
Interesting to see what happens anyway...