NZDF - Now and the Future.

[Rocco_NZ]

My understanding was that the C130J was given serious consideration prior to the go ahead for the upgrade. There should be no reason why the rebuilt A/C should'nt be just as reliable as a new build C130J.

http://www.spar.ca/spar_solution.htm

A contract option existed for up to 8 aircraft to be purchased as a follow-on to the Australian order. Obviously that option was never exercised.

 

[NZLAV]

I would prefer that the RNZAF waits until the A400m is avaliable because he C-130J is nowhere near as capable as a A400m.

 

[Markus40]

Was there any reason why that was?

A contract option existed for up to 8 aircraft to be purchased as a follow-on to the Australian order. Obviously that option was never exercised.

 

[Markus40]

Re:NZ LAV.

Thank you for pointing this out. Its interesting about the LAV. Could a LAV loaded into a NZ C130 be flown to Darwin direct without a stopover in Australia if NZ as part of the L3 upgrade converted one of its C130 s into a tanker, (Drogue) and the remaining C130Hs into having a refueling probes installed as part of that package. And if not why not?

Yes, i am comming round to the MMA option for the RNZAF for the long term.

The LAVIII has an internal system that allows the height and tyre pressures of the vehicle to be lowered, at the "flick" of a switch. Other mods necessary to fit the vehicle into a C-130 include having no more than half a tank of fuel, no ammo, external aerials, stores etc.

All up it reputedly takes about 30mins max to prepare the vehicle for operations once it has been flown somewhere, inside a C-130. The RNZAF have demonstrated this, specifically to refute the speculation about it.

Of course they didn't release the range figures for the C-130 once it was loaded with an NZLAV (because it would show that there is practically no ability to fly once one is loaded) but it CAN be done. "Would" be done is a completely different matter.

Markus, although LM has kept the production line tooling etc for the P-3, it would be extremely costly to set up production again. An order for 5-6 new builds is unlikely to be economically viable.

As to the C-130 issue. The RAAF's C-130J-30 (-30 denotes extended variant) cannot carry heavier (theoretical) loads than a C-130J, OR C-130H for that matter.

What it provides is greater room, ie: usable space. The non -30 variants run out of space before they run out of lift capacity, the fuselage extension rectifies this situation, allowing the C-130 to carry the loads it could theoretically carry, but can't due to stumpy fuselage syndrome, if that makes sense???

 

[Whiskyjack]

Thank you for pointing this out. Its interesting about the LAV. Could a LAV loaded into a NZ C130 be flown to Darwin direct without a stopover in Australia if NZ as part of the L3 upgrade converted one of its C130 s into a tanker, (Drogue) and the remaining C130Hs into having a refueling probes installed as part of that package. And if not why not?

Yes, i am comming round to the MMA option for the RNZAF for the long term.

While that may be possible it is very inefficent, better to do the stop offs, more cargo would be delivered, than having 1 fly direct with the others providing tanking, also much cheaper.

One option I though about was NZ buying 1 C-17 to be based with the RAAF C-17s, with a deal that the NZDF has one C-17 available at all times for operations. Would tie into Aussie logistice, be cheaper to run that way and provide 25% more ANZAC C-17 lift. An idea anyway.
Just looked at the cost of my idea 1 C-17 with associated equipment and spare parts up to US$500m (based on RAAF costs for 4 at US$2b) close to NZ$800m!!!! Maybe not such a good idea.

 

[Whiskyjack]

I would prefer that the RNZAF waits until the A400m is avaliable because he C-130J is nowhere near as capable as a A400m.

Yes, form what I remeber a A400 could deliver 1 LAV and 1 Pinz to Darwin direct. Much faster also.

But once again it is all paper figures until it is flying!

 

[Markus40]

I dont think so. While the argument of getting LAVs and aircraft direct to Darwin has been the debate in the past posts, i dont see why this cant be implemented, if the government chose to include the refueling option into the L3. We have already argued that the stop offs are inefficient and costs the Airforce more in the long run. The first 2 C130s at least will arrive in Darwin with our LAVS in good shape. I would like to see a better argument than just saying it is inefficient.

As it would be nice to operate the C-17 its highly unlikely NZ will acquire this expensive piece of equipment, despite its ability to move at least 2 LAVS at one time direct to Darwin with any trouble. It would be alot more sensible to purchase second hand C141s from the Americans despite its age and use them till we are able to purchase the C130J or the A400M. Thats if the Americans will sell us some. At least that would put to bed our logistical long reach option.

While that may be possible it is very inefficent, better to do the stop offs, more cargo would be delivered, than having 1 fly direct with the others providing tanking, also much cheaper.

One option I though about was NZ buying 1 C-17 to be based with the RAAF C-17s, with a deal that the NZDF has one C-17 available at all times for operations. Would tie into Aussie logistice, be cheaper to run that way and provide 25% more ANZAC C-17 lift. An idea anyway.

 

[KH-12]

The Starlifters have been withdrawn from service in the US, and I believe the airframes were pretty much at the end of their run as well, even if they hav'nt been cut up yet operational support for them would be difficult. How much for a C17 , $200M US ?

 

[Whiskyjack]

I dont think so. While the argument of getting LAVs and aircraft direct to Darwin has been the debate in the past posts, i dont see why this cant be implemented, if the government chose to include the refueling option into the L3. We have already argued that the stop offs are inefficient and costs the Airforce more in the long run. The first 2 C130s at least will arrive in Darwin with our LAVS in good shape. I would like to see a better argument than just saying it is inefficient.

As it would be nice to operate the C-17 its highly unlikely NZ will acquire this expensive piece of equipment, despite its ability to move at least 2 LAVS at one time direct to Darwin with any trouble. It would be alot more sensible to purchase C141s from the Americans despite its age and use them till we are able to purchase the C130J or the A400M. Thats if the Americans will sell us some. At least that would put to bed our logistical long reach option.

Off the top of my head (remembering a paper that was written on the topic) the range of a C-130 with a combat loaded LAV is roughly 800km, it is 5137km from Auck to Darwin, which equals 6.4 refuels or there abouts. Standard practice is that no aircraft will go so far from a base that it cannot divert if a re-fuel fails.

So the idea is impractical for two reasons,
1. it will take at least 5 C-130 configured for AAR to get one C-130 loaded with an LAV to Darwin.
2. It will require a fleet of 8-10 C-130s to get one LAV direct to Darwin.

Very very impractical and cost restrictive.
Plus there are loading considerations that even I don’t fully understand that make the carriage of a LAV impractical.

So the practical considerations make deployment of a LAV by C-130 outside NZ a non starter (unless it is fully stripped and down to a more manageable weight. That opens a new can of worms.) That includes the J.

The C-141 is also impractical. No one flies them anymore, so no support and we would have to look at an upgrade programme for them, not practical either.

Better to forward deploy 5 to Darwin and ship the rest.

 

[Whiskyjack]

The Starlifters have been withdrawn from service in the US, and I believe the airframes were pretty much at the end of their run as well, even if they hav'nt been cut up yet operational support for them would be difficult. How much for a C17 , $200M US ?

Agree about the C-141.

Aussie paying up to US$500m per C-17!!!

 

[KH-12]

$500 M a piece that is incredible !, you would think Boeing would cut a deal to keep the production line open, although I suspect that is not the fly away price but includes significant spares support etc (although the Aussie NH90 deal did'nt look too sharp price wise either !), that sort of price tag would put them out of the equation for NZ I would have thought.

 

[Rocco_NZ]

$500 M a piece that is incredible !, you would think Boeing would cut a deal to keep the production line open, although I suspect that is not the fly away price but includes significant spares support etc (although the Aussie NH90 deal did'nt look too sharp price wise either !), that sort of price tag would put them out of the equation for NZ I would have thought.

Hey technically NZ ownes a decent number of 747s..since the government ownes 80% of Air NZ

 

[KH-12]

Hey technically NZ ownes a decent number of 747s..since the government ownes 80% of Air NZ

Not sure how keen Rob Fyfe would be is the RNZAF proposed chainsawing the nose off a 747-400 to roll in some LAV's ! , perhaps ANZ could purchase a 747 400F and share it with the RNZAF.

 

[Markus40]

Re: Military Transport.

These are some of the C130 stats i got from the RNZAF web site.

Max payload 17,250kgs (38,000lbs)
Max fuel 28,540kgs (62,920lbs)
Ferry Range Approx 7,400km (4,000NM)
Typical Range 4,100km (2,200NM) with payload of 12,700Kgs (28,000Ibs)

I would suggest that there would only need to be one air to air refueling pit stop, to get to Darwin based on these figures. I still think the argument of the C130 getting there with the L3 upgrade would cut it for the moment.

Yes i know the C141s are being phased out of service, but we could cut a deal for the short term to get the airframes and parts and spares until the C130J or A400M came into service.

Agree about the C-141.

Aussie paying up to US$500m per C-17!!!

 

[Whiskyjack]

Not sure how keen Rob Fyfe would be is the RNZAF proposed chainsawing the nose off a 747-400 to roll in some LAV's ! , perhaps ANZ could purchase a 747 400F and share it with the RNZAF.

Not a bad idea, NZDF helps fund initial purchase and has a certain number of hours each year to use them, with provisions around emergencies, and ANZ uses them for commercial purposes the rest of the time.

 

[Markus40]

So are the RNZAF C130s. How about some C5s? If we could get them from the states? Now we are talking. ! Wouldnt cost as much as a C17 either.

The Starlifters have been withdrawn from service in the US, and I believe the airframes were pretty much at the end of their run as well, even if they hav'nt been cut up yet operational support for them would be difficult. How much for a C17 , $200M US ?

 

[Whiskyjack]

These are some of the C130 stats i got from the RNZAF web site.

Max payload 17,250kgs (38,000lbs)
Max fuel 28,540kgs (62,920lbs)
Ferry Range Approx 7,400km (4,000NM)
Typical Range 4,100km (2,200NM) with payload of 12,700Kgs (28,000Ibs)

I would suggest that there would only need to be one air to air refueling pit stop, to get to Darwin based on these figures. I still think the argument of the C130 getting there with the L3 upgrade would cut it for the moment.

Yes i know the C141s are being phased out of service, but we could cut a deal for the short term to get the airframes and parts and spares until the C130J or A400M came into service.

If you are talking a load of 12t then yes one refuel would be sufficient, but for each kg extra the range will decrease exponentially, hence a LAV loaded C-120 has a range of 800km. In 1999 it took the RNZAF around one week with 3 or 4 C-130s to deliver 4 M113s and a small number of additional vehicles. The LAV is 50% heavier combat loaded.

While technically possible forget the C-141, not going to happen. Nor is equipping the C-130 to conduct AAR. All possible but not realistically going to happen.

747SF is possible if sold along the commercial lease lines. But still not likely.

Best bet, forward deploy equipment and fly in troops.

 

[Whiskyjack]

So are the RNZAF C130s. How about some C5s? If we could get them from the states? Now we are talking. ! Wouldnt cost as much as a C17 either.

Mate just as a general comment you need to look at what is happening with equipment. C5s are out of production as well, by around 20 years. USAF is upgrading them, much the same way as RNZAF is with C-130s. So no spare C5s. If there were the operating costs and logistics to support a prohibative.

 

[KH-12]

How about an AN124 ? The RNZAF could run on a commercial heavy lift basis when not required for forces support , give them a revenue stream , could even end up self finding

http://www.sfu.ca/casr/id-antonov-costs.htm

 

[Whiskyjack]

How about an AN124 ? The RNZAF could run on a commercial heavy lift basis when not required for forces support , give them a revenue stream , could even end up self finding

http://www.sfu.ca/casr/id-antonov-costs.htm

Yes on a pure commercial lease based on buying time per year. Good for committed deployments where the flights would be done at regular intervals.

Disadvantage it would be based in Europe and would have to fly to NZ. Also I guess the ability to have it here in time for a operation conducted at short notice would be marginal?

Something like a fast Cat or Trimaran could also be considered, I notice there is no Cat this time around.