I've got the distinct feeling there's no intended project for a B757 SP suite. What does concern me about any commitment for the P3 SP suite - they aren't truly 'combat capable' IMHO without it! Especially now they also have an over land role.
Royal New Zealand Air Force
- Thread starter Lucasnz
- Start date
I've got the distinct feeling there's no intended project for a B757 SP suite. What does concern me about any commitment for the P3 SP suite - they aren't truly 'combat capable' IMHO without it! Especially now they also have an over land role.
Todj mentioned it on here a few posts back, I personally hav'nt seen(or looked for) anything but seems appropriate. Even if it was just early warning surely better than nothing and out of curiosity what measures (if any) do DHL and other civ liners have for flights into Kabul or Baghdad?
I thought I read somewhere that civvies, the likes of DHL, simply use a tactical approach & takeoff strategy ie: minimum time at low level as possible (ie: drop in, climb out) - although with a fully loaded freighter it wouldn't be easy.
However if this were the case then there would be no reason the RNZAF couldn't take a B757 in there, but I guess RNZAF didn't need to use Kabul or Baghdad - and Bamiyan required a C-130 due to rough strip.
Contracted aircraft (helo and fixed wing) fly all around Iraq/Afghanistan with no SP suite. That would impact on profit margins. Realistically there is no need for EWSP for aircraft in Afghanistan. There hasn't been a successful SA7/Stinger launch for years and years, and it won't help you one iota against RPGs and small arms. EWSP in Afghan is just a legacy of ridiculously low tolerance for risk.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
A few snippets from the Paris Air Show that may be of interest.
PARIS: Lockheed pitches civilian J-model Hercules
Lockheed Martin provides a little info on the 'Sea Hercules' and also says it may produce Herc parts offshore to cut costs. At heart, this is LM trying to salvage some sales from the Boeing P8 lock on US maritime surveillance.
Embraer and Boeing team up to market KC-390 airlifter | Australian Aviation Magazine
Boeing jumps into bed with Embraer to help sell a new twin-jet tactival airlifter aimed squarely at the Hercules replacement market. This is a mirror image of the piece above, with Boeing trying to get some crumbs from a market dominated by Lockheed Martin. It won't do their chances of selling the F18 to Brazil any harm, either!
For Boeing's MSA, Its Been Bombardier All Along
Boeing is planning to fit surveillance equipment from the 737-based P8 into a Bombardier business jet, and pitch the resulting product to countries unable to afford a proper P8. "Hi there Wellington, this is Seattle calling.."
Italian Air Force Plans To Buy 10 HammerHeads UAVs
The world's coolest twin turboprop gets even cooler, as Selex and Piaggio conspire to turn it into an armed UAV. This is apparently because the Italians are increasing unhappy with the US for not letting them arm US-made Predator UAVs.
PARIS: Antonov seeks customers for new-look An-70
The Antonov An70 flies agian,although Russia looks like pulling out of ordering any. This leaves them with a single flying aircraft from the 90s and firm orders for about three aircraft. Shame - a great piece of design orphaned by geopolitics. In a better world, the A400 would have been cancelled a decade ago and a westernised version of this ordered instead. Who could resist an aircraft with two propellors on the same shaft, one turning clockwise, the other anticlockwise.
PARIS: Lockheed pitches civilian J-model Hercules
Lockheed Martin provides a little info on the 'Sea Hercules' and also says it may produce Herc parts offshore to cut costs. At heart, this is LM trying to salvage some sales from the Boeing P8 lock on US maritime surveillance.
Embraer and Boeing team up to market KC-390 airlifter | Australian Aviation Magazine
Boeing jumps into bed with Embraer to help sell a new twin-jet tactival airlifter aimed squarely at the Hercules replacement market. This is a mirror image of the piece above, with Boeing trying to get some crumbs from a market dominated by Lockheed Martin. It won't do their chances of selling the F18 to Brazil any harm, either!
For Boeing's MSA, Its Been Bombardier All Along
Boeing is planning to fit surveillance equipment from the 737-based P8 into a Bombardier business jet, and pitch the resulting product to countries unable to afford a proper P8. "Hi there Wellington, this is Seattle calling.."
Italian Air Force Plans To Buy 10 HammerHeads UAVs
The world's coolest twin turboprop gets even cooler, as Selex and Piaggio conspire to turn it into an armed UAV. This is apparently because the Italians are increasing unhappy with the US for not letting them arm US-made Predator UAVs.
PARIS: Antonov seeks customers for new-look An-70
The Antonov An70 flies agian,although Russia looks like pulling out of ordering any. This leaves them with a single flying aircraft from the 90s and firm orders for about three aircraft. Shame - a great piece of design orphaned by geopolitics. In a better world, the A400 would have been cancelled a decade ago and a westernised version of this ordered instead. Who could resist an aircraft with two propellors on the same shaft, one turning clockwise, the other anticlockwise.
DHL and other commercials do not fall under ISAF rules and regulations they fly in and out as per any other airport in the world. ISAF have mandated that all military aircraft are to have a self protection suite flying into Afghanistan this is the sole reason RNZAF C130H can fly in country and the B757 cant.
A very low tolerance to risk IMHO and nothing more.
Yes just wondered what the big civilian operators do, seems dodgey as they would still be good targets in the nternational attention seeking sense, just look how spectacular the civ B747 freighter crash was, an actual attack would have gained even more expousure and notereity.
Those pilots must earn their pay on those runs even though not directly a target there is still a larger than normal danger factor, kudos to them and their pax.
If this eventually leads into integrating P-8 systems with a BD Global 8000 platform then bring it on. However I guess it will be just a cold version with no smackback systems like SLAM-ER. Its range will be huge all the same if they do base it on the future G8000.
Its assumed lower operating and acquistion costs with respect to the P-8 will certainly make it an attractive proposition to the NZDF.
Yes but isn't NZDF acquistion of capability like SLAM-ER really moot because successive NZGs since 1985 have avoided the costs of such weaponry? A USN fact sheet costs the AGM-84K Standoff Land Attack Missile-Expanded Response (SLAM-ER) at US$500,000 ea. However it's weight is only 674.5kg so maybe two could be underslung from the fuselage.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Given a choice, a G7000 would be a better aircraft IMO. The Internal cabin length of a G700 is ~9 ft/2.75 m longer and the MTOW is ~658 kg greater than that of a G8000.
What I am not certain of is just how much less an MSA would be.
Last I had heard, the projected price of a P-8 Poseidon was expected to be ~USD$200 mil. and the price of a B737-800 is (in 2012 $'s) USD$89.1 mil. The extra costs being for the R&D, avionics, airframe modifications to add hardpoints, a bomb bay and sonobuoy dropping system, etc. The expected price of a G7000 & G8000 is ~USD$65 mil. So about 30% less for the aircraft itself, but it seems that less than half the platform cost comes from the aircraft/airframe.
The other area of uncertainty for me is how efficient such an aircraft would be. The G7000 & G8000 are intended to surpass the Gulfstream G650 in terms of non-stop long range flight. Such aircraft are also designed with high max and cruising speeds, with the Bombardier aircraft having a max speed of Mach 0.90 with a cruising speed of Mach 0.85. For MPA (and AEW) -type what is really desired is a long loiter time. This is determined by which aircraft requires the least amount of fuel over time to stay aloft, and also by the amount of coolant the electronics systems require over time, and how much of that the aircraft can carry.
It will certainly be interesting to see what sort of capabilities a Boeing/Bombardier MSA would have, but not sure whether this would be an appropriate replacement for a P-8, or more as something to augment the Poseidon's.
-Cheers
Boeing are also working with Embrear on the KC390 and I've been looking at the Embrear range of aircraft. They have an Embrear Lineage which is a developement of the Embrear 190 and has a range of 4,400nm which maybe is a bit short in some aspects but that could be built on. Embrear Executive Jets - Lineage 1000 Performance
Russian submarines heading to NZ Waters!
Stuff has picked up on a Tass agency report that Borei-class submarines will be able to revive South Pole patrols.Wonder what Phil Goff will have to say?
Russian submarines heading to NZ waters | Stuff.co.nz
Stuff has picked up on a Tass agency report that Borei-class submarines will be able to revive South Pole patrols.Wonder what Phil Goff will have to say?
Have a look on page 128. We discussed this four days ago. As to what Goff may have to say, they are not his precious foreign fishing vessels so he won't care.
I've been having a long and hard think about NZ and the P8. Two things come to mind; cost and aircraft numbers. The P8 is designed to be used in conjunction with a BAMS UAV which in themselves are as expensive or more expensive as the P8. Therefore that creates a very large affordability issue for NZDF and the NZG. This then reduces numbers of that platform(s) that will be acquired if it is acquired. In past posts Mr C has been very adamant that the P8 is the only MPA aircraft to replace the P3K2s because of the capabilities that it offers. But my question now is the P8 platform a capability that realistically NZDF can operate and sustain? How many do they purchase? Three, four, five? Realistically we would not see a one for one replace of the P3K2s with the P8 purely on costs. If we buy less say three then we have a reduced capability compared to what we had before numbers wise.
What is so good about the P8? A couple on the forum here know and I am aware Kiwis do not because we haven't bought into the program. But we can surmise generally. We are aware that it doesn't use a MAD which I understand is because it's designed to operate from high altitude. What has been said in the open arena is that it has a detector for fumes from diesel subs, but lots of other craft use diesel as well. Maybe it has a graviometer which could be sensitive enough. I would also presume that it has a very comprehensive computing, networking and comms suite probably along similar lines to that of the F35. The ISR component is really attractive to the NZG and again I would presume that it would have a comprehensive elint suit as well.
I would suggest that similar capabilities could be obtained in a cheaper platform which can operate at low level and I would not discount the SC130J Sea Hercules so readily SC130 Sea Herc. If an ISR, elint computing, networking & comms suite were added it may offer us capabilities similar to the P8 without the expense even if we had to buy the added components elsewhere. We've already done it with Project Kestrel which replaced Project Sirius. It is certainly worth a thought and may offer us a one for one replacement of the Orions.
Because of decisons made by previous NZGs starting in the late 1970s, and NZDF has been, and still is facing block obsolescence that is proving detrimetal to NZDF capability. In 1998 Cabinet had proposals for the third ANZAC frigate, the F16 lease and the M113 APC replacement. All very expensive items on their own but previous decisons to put off equipment replacements lead to this dillema. Also service and bueraucratic politics appear to have played a major part with the RNZAF winning round one and the RNZN and NZ Army losing out. But when there was a change of govt in 1998 and a review of Defence procurements ordered, the Army won with the other two services losing out. There were accusations of mid level and senior Army officers waging a campaign that some called plotting and sedition. But in the long term everybody lost even if the NZ Army don't see it that way Timing is Everything - ANU E Press - ANU.
This is where my concern is now, in that when the Orions are due to be replaced, the FFHs will be close to being replaced and the RNZN will not want to lose the frigate capability, which they have been close to already. Therefore will we have a repeat of the 1998 - 2001 era with two platforms lost in order to gain one (albeit badly needed)? That's another issue for another time - will we be able to afford frigates?
Is the Boeing MSA going to be the right platform to deliver the capability that the NZG and NZDF require?
Well I think that we'd have to add weapons.
If it is decided to acquire the proposed Boeing MSA what do we lose capability wise? It's not much point having all the gee whiz stuff to find the bad boys and then have nothing to deal to them with. Then I question do we actually need SLAM-ER for ASuW considering we would be after maritime targets? At present we have acquired 100 AGM-119 Penguin missiles which I admit are at max medium range missiles. Maybe the Harpoon would be better. However at US$1.2 million per unit (BlockII) The US Navy -- Fact File: Harpoon Missile the Cabinet would have a collective coronary.
What is so good about the P8? A couple on the forum here know and I am aware Kiwis do not because we haven't bought into the program. But we can surmise generally. We are aware that it doesn't use a MAD which I understand is because it's designed to operate from high altitude. What has been said in the open arena is that it has a detector for fumes from diesel subs, but lots of other craft use diesel as well. Maybe it has a graviometer which could be sensitive enough. I would also presume that it has a very comprehensive computing, networking and comms suite probably along similar lines to that of the F35. The ISR component is really attractive to the NZG and again I would presume that it would have a comprehensive elint suit as well.
I would suggest that similar capabilities could be obtained in a cheaper platform which can operate at low level and I would not discount the SC130J Sea Hercules so readily SC130 Sea Herc. If an ISR, elint computing, networking & comms suite were added it may offer us capabilities similar to the P8 without the expense even if we had to buy the added components elsewhere. We've already done it with Project Kestrel which replaced Project Sirius. It is certainly worth a thought and may offer us a one for one replacement of the Orions.
Because of decisons made by previous NZGs starting in the late 1970s, and NZDF has been, and still is facing block obsolescence that is proving detrimetal to NZDF capability. In 1998 Cabinet had proposals for the third ANZAC frigate, the F16 lease and the M113 APC replacement. All very expensive items on their own but previous decisons to put off equipment replacements lead to this dillema. Also service and bueraucratic politics appear to have played a major part with the RNZAF winning round one and the RNZN and NZ Army losing out. But when there was a change of govt in 1998 and a review of Defence procurements ordered, the Army won with the other two services losing out. There were accusations of mid level and senior Army officers waging a campaign that some called plotting and sedition. But in the long term everybody lost even if the NZ Army don't see it that way Timing is Everything - ANU E Press - ANU.
This is where my concern is now, in that when the Orions are due to be replaced, the FFHs will be close to being replaced and the RNZN will not want to lose the frigate capability, which they have been close to already. Therefore will we have a repeat of the 1998 - 2001 era with two platforms lost in order to gain one (albeit badly needed)? That's another issue for another time - will we be able to afford frigates?
weegee
Active Member
Well regarding the P8 its seems to me (an idiot in military aircraft) that it is a hugely more capable aircraft. As the RAAF is replacing its 18 P3's with 8 P8's now I know that this is also going to be supplemented by a purchase of 8ish MQ-4C Tritons. So we are also going to be down on air frames as well and I don't think this would happen unless the replacements weren't vastly superior in my own opinion. So if the NZ air force could only get 2-3 air frames perhaps this could be an increase in capacity who knows?
t68
Well-Known Member
ngatimozart; said:
When I use to work for DAS we did a fair bit of work for defence transporting the crackers. It came to my attention that for a lot of the more expensive side of the EO we had in place a system where we were a storage facility for the US if they ever needed EO in a hurry, as part of the deal the ADF would have accesses to these munitions and would if we use it we pay for, in other words a lease type arrangement, now the US is pivoting into the Pacfic and relations with the US is warming maybe a deal on this line might have its advantages for NZ but the US as well
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Ng,
It certainly is a dilemma the NZDF is faced with, needing to replace the various capabilities that you mentioned, but also the financial problem of competing priorities so that one capability is not lost while the other is maintained, the money available only goes so far.
As you said, for NZ the P8A is possibly far too expensive (for the number of airframes required), the Boeing MSA might give you the sensor capability, but as you said when you find the bad guys, you don't have the weapons capability to do anything about them.
Obviously with the financial restrictions and block obsolescence, NZ needs to be creative in finding a solution to satisfy all of the requirements.
Maybe a purchase of 10-12 SC130J / C130J airframes, split 50/50, to replace both the P3K2's and the C130H might provide a value for money solution for both the MPA and Transport Sqn's.
And something from left field, would there be any value or merit in purchasing a Sqn's worth of the much younger AP3C's, when the RAAF retires them?
If there was, maybe they could be operated long enough so that the other priorities could be funded and purchased, then when there is a bit of clear air and there are no other competing priorities, replace them with P8's (and possibly BAMS too) if that is the preferred capability solution.
Just a thought!
It certainly is a dilemma the NZDF is faced with, needing to replace the various capabilities that you mentioned, but also the financial problem of competing priorities so that one capability is not lost while the other is maintained, the money available only goes so far.
As you said, for NZ the P8A is possibly far too expensive (for the number of airframes required), the Boeing MSA might give you the sensor capability, but as you said when you find the bad guys, you don't have the weapons capability to do anything about them.
Obviously with the financial restrictions and block obsolescence, NZ needs to be creative in finding a solution to satisfy all of the requirements.
Maybe a purchase of 10-12 SC130J / C130J airframes, split 50/50, to replace both the P3K2's and the C130H might provide a value for money solution for both the MPA and Transport Sqn's.
And something from left field, would there be any value or merit in purchasing a Sqn's worth of the much younger AP3C's, when the RAAF retires them?
If there was, maybe they could be operated long enough so that the other priorities could be funded and purchased, then when there is a bit of clear air and there are no other competing priorities, replace them with P8's (and possibly BAMS too) if that is the preferred capability solution.
Just a thought!
They might be far more capable but 2-3 aircraft aren't going to be able to provide the same coverage as 6 P3's. This is one area where less will not equal more.
That is my main concern - the lack of numbers. Whilst quality can be a force mulitplier of its own and as a general rule quality overrides quantity, in NZDFs case this would have the opposite effect. I think that we would have to have six airframes minimum to do the taskings that are required and the at present the P8 would limit that because of costings.
The number of P-8 airframes (4) planned circa 2009 through the released Cabinet doxs is offset by the UAV system, which may well end up being the Triton platform (3) with the rationale that they are the platforms our strategic partners (USN/ADF) in the Broad Maritime AOI Surveillance and alphabet soup will be using. It is geo-politically vital we dont go "blind" and not be able to operate at that level as a valued contributor and quickly become a 2nd tier client.
The UAV / P-8 mix will have different tasking dynamics than what the P-3s tasking are used for. Thus the numbers game is somewhat different. Simply put the UAV/Triton is the finder and the P-8 is the keeper.
The UAV / P-8 mix will have different tasking dynamics than what the P-3s tasking are used for. Thus the numbers game is somewhat different. Simply put the UAV/Triton is the finder and the P-8 is the keeper.