Royal New Zealand Air Force

[Zero Alpha]

Back in December Boeing was talking about 2 C-17s being sold to an undisclosed Middle East customer. Unless I've missed something, two of those 4 aircraft sold to Qatar could actually be the two aircraft with an undisclosed buyer. So potentially there may be 3 aircraft left.

 

[John Fedup]

Back in December Boeing was talking about 2 C-17s being sold to an undisclosed Middle East customer. Unless I've missed something, two of those 4 aircraft sold to Qatar could actually be the two aircraft with an undisclosed buyer. So potentially there may be 3 aircraft left.

The last whitetail count was 5 (after the OZ and Can orders). Qatar's 4 unit purchase leaves one left. Why this peon desert kingdom needs 8 C-17s escapes me.

 

[40 deg south]

They do, the closest alternative to the B757 is the A321LR NEO.

The question is whether they will replace the 757s with a civilian twin-jet. The strategic transport role should be taken by whatever replaces the Hercs, most likely the A400. That only leaves VIP and long-range passenger transport.

I'd bet a lease option with Air NZ will be looked at closely, probably for a guaranteed minimum number of hours per year. It would avoid capital expenditure up front, and may work out a lot cheaper.

One thing for sure, the PM's office (DPMC) and MFAT won't give up the passenger capability the 757s provide without a fight - it has proved too useful around the Pacific and on trade and diplomatic missions. But hiring rather than buying may be the way to go.

 

[40 deg south]

Back in December Boeing was talking about 2 C-17s being sold to an undisclosed Middle East customer. Unless I've missed something, two of those 4 aircraft sold to Qatar could actually be the two aircraft with an undisclosed buyer. So potentially there may be 3 aircraft left.

Hmmm. Good point. Boeing hasn't released anything conclusive on numbers, so perhaps we are all jumping to conclusions?

John F - Because they can!
More seriously, I think Qatar plans on providing airlift capacity to it's neighbouring Gulf Cooperation Council states for HADR/defence purposes. Given their very small population, it may be a sensible way of contributing to regional efforts.

 

[recce.k1]

Then again in the long term RNZAF may very well have a overall larger euro flavour with a pendulum swing in an Airbus direction in the heavy/med air transport role. Aqquiring Safe air is a smart move by Airbus and will actually be another feather in the cap for any A400 purchase and off shoot could also pave the way for some Malaysian A400 maintainence as well.

Now if Airbus also had a viable contender for P8 and possibly B757 we could very well have a one stop shop and would become an even more attractive proposition.

Airbus Group Australia Pacific - Company

From the link, Airbus Group Australia Pacific are assembling the ADF's MRH90's and Tiger ARH's (as well as supporting other ADF aircraft types) i.e. they would have extensive facilitates and hundreds of skilled personnel. Surely Airbus in Australia would simply expand their existing infrastructure to service the Malaysian A400's (and any potential NZDF A400's)?

If so I'm not really sure a potential Safe Air sale to Airbus would actually see any major expansion of the Safe Air facilities in Blenheim, if anything they could end up downsizing (after being bought to eliminate any competition), it's not as if the RNZAF have the aircraft numbers they once had prior to the ACF disbandment plus the bigger market for Airbus is the Australian/SE Asian ones etc.

@ Zero Alpha, would the two C-17's that the UAE picked up be the undisclosed ones? Unless it is Qatar as you suggest. Personally I'm not ruling any NZ C-17 acquisition out (be they for 1 or up to 3) until things are a little bit clearer.

 

[t68]

According to this article only one remains. I too am at a loss to understand why they need eight.

Qatar To Procure Four C-17s

certainty doesn't make sense, with 24x Rafale fighters on order to replace 14 Mirage 2000 certainly understand 3x AEW Boeing 737 and perhaps the MRTT and with a standing Army of 8500 I think 8 C17 are a little over the top

and id say that last one will go cheap to get it off the books

 

[John Fedup]

According to this article only one remains. I too am at a loss to understand why they need eight.

Qatar To Procure Four C-17s

certainty doesn't make sense, with 24x Rafale fighters on order to replace 14 Mirage 2000 certainly understand 3x AEW Boeing 737 and perhaps the MRTT and with a standing Army of 8500 I think 8 C17 are a little over the top

and id say that last one will go cheap to get it off the books

Hopefully cheap enough that the RCAF can get the last one and end up with a half dozen C-17s.

 

[John Fedup]

Hmmm. Good point. Boeing hasn't released anything conclusive on numbers, so perhaps we are all jumping to conclusions?

John F - Because they can!
More seriously, I think Qatar plans on providing airlift capacity to it's neighbouring Gulf Cooperation Council states for HADR/defence purposes. Given their very small population, it may be a sensible way of contributing to regional efforts.

Yes, they can and your explanation as to why they are buying them is reasonable.

 

[40 deg south]

Yes, they can and your explanation as to why they are buying them is reasonable.

One of the aerospace publications (prob. FlightGlobal or AWST) made some comment to that effect when Qatar got their first batch.

Sounds plausible to me - they are a little too narrow to be used as alternative venues for Workd Cup soccer matches!

 

[kiwi in exile]

Richo99 pretty well nails it. C295 is also cheaper to operate (important for the maritime patrol role). The multi-mission payloads were also developed by Airbus / CASA themselves eg. in the Portuguese C295M (although the USCG led the HC-144A project for the CN-235). For the C-27J, it is the USCG who are developing it, not Alenia. As I understand it, USCG are still at the point of having a few operating as transport-only aircraft.

Another consideration would be potential civilian use, NZ has a few air freight & minor airline operators (currently running aircraft such as the Convair 580 & the Fokker Friendship) who could put the C295 to good use - it seems more passenger friendly than the C-27J.

Chis73

Re C27 vs C295:
The C27 can carry more, further faster. The C295 is cheaper to buy and run and is more mature as a MPA platform. Operating the C295 as medium MPA and tac transport would suggest a bigger fleet. A similar sized mixed fleet of say C27 tac transport and King Air type MPA might be similarly cheap to buy and run. King Air MPA might be a close match for our 'lite' MPA requirements and can be rerolled as appropriate. Having a C295 as 'lite' MPA to compliment our P3(/P8) might be a bit 'heavier' than reqiured. I'm just speculating here as I don't know the finer details.

I like both, but the size of the cabin, and comonality with Aust pushes me in the direction of the C27, especiually for HADR.

 

[RegR]

The A321 might be an alternative to the B757, but Airbus does not currently have any alternative to the P-8, aside from a C-295 in MPA configuration. Not exactly what I would consider a peer in terms of capability.

It is also questionable whether another civilian-based jetliner with the capabilities of a B757 would really make sense for the RNZAF. We have had the discussion here before, one really needs to ask, what missions does the B757 perform well at, why, at what cost, and are there other aircraft or methods to meet those same missions at lower cost and/or to a greater degree.

Exactly, the P8 type P3 replacement will be the driver in this particular area, any B757 replacement will be a bonus and currently only if it will have synergies with the MPA fleet to bring down cost if ownership. The B757s for us are pretty unique in that other current options are either too big, not big enough or lack range or take off weight as viable replacements, another mark against their succession and survival

B757s have been pretty busy lately and I think govt have seen this, yes we could do these tasks with hercs but would we want to is another question. Cost also equates to practicallity and everyone seems to think everything RNZAF does is combat in nature and austere in location which could not be further from the truth. Yes it is a portion but definately not the majority. It would be like government swapping the ministarial BMWs for some hiluxs, would definately save money and no doubt be just as useful if not more in areas but they do have a purpose to serve.

The boeings are just the next easiest capability in line to cut with the least amount of justification as apparently there are other options that can do the job 'just as efficiently'. End of the day it would just be yet another capability gone without proper replacement in an effort towards 'savings' and just like civilianisation, downsizing, downgrading and amalgamation seems like a great idea until you do it. What's next, frigates? P3s? another base?

 

[KiwiRob]

Back in December Boeing was talking about 2 C-17s being sold to an undisclosed Middle East customer. Unless I've missed something, two of those 4 aircraft sold to Qatar could actually be the two aircraft with an undisclosed buyer. So potentially there may be 3 aircraft left.

They went to UAE. Why UAE need 8 C-17's like Qatar is also beyond me. My thoughts are "have money will spend", mainly for political influence I guess.

http://worlddefencenews.blogspot.no/2015/02/united-arab-emirates-announce-purchase.html

 

[swerve]

Hmmm. Good point. Boeing hasn't released anything conclusive on numbers, so perhaps we are all jumping to conclusions?

John F - Because they can!
More seriously, I think Qatar plans on providing airlift capacity to it's neighbouring Gulf Cooperation Council states for HADR/defence purposes. Given their very small population, it may be a sensible way of contributing to regional efforts.

Of the GCC states, Qatar has 4 C-17 with 4 on order, the UAE has 6 with 2 on order, & Kuwait has 2. That's a lot of C-17s to lend out to Bahrain, Oman & Saudi Arabia - which, BTW, could easily have bought its own but wasn't interested.

 

[John Fedup]

Of the GCC states, Qatar has 4 C-17 with 4 on order, the UAE has 6 with 2 on order, & Kuwait has 2. That's a lot of C-17s to lend out to Bahrain, Oman & Saudi Arabia - which, BTW, could easily have bought its own but wasn't interested.

Didn't realize there are going to so many C-17s in the region. Twenty jets is only 1 or 2 off the combined fleets of Australia, Canada and the UK!

 

[40 deg south]

NZ ANTARCTIC FLIGHTS ON ICE | Politik

Interesting piece on the Politik website run by Duncan Garner, a veteran political reporter. Suggests there are tough new restrictions on the 757s going to Antarctic, adding to pressure for a new strategic transport..

You can read 5 articles on the site before having to pay up.

 

[ngatimozart]

NZ ANTARCTIC FLIGHTS ON ICE | Politik

Interesting piece on the Politik website run by Duncan Garner, a veteran political reporter. Suggests there are tough new restrictions on the 757s going to Antarctic, adding to pressure for a new strategic transport..

You can read 5 articles on the site before having to pay up.

Yes well can't cry over spilt milk and now the A400M is the only viable alternative as military strategic airlifter. To much procrastination, well more accurately slow decision making. They knew there was a time limit and first in first served. Air NZ have I think 3 B767s still in service, so maybe they could charter those in the short term for pax and freight that can be carried in pax aircraft.

 

[recce.k1]

NZ ANTARCTIC FLIGHTS ON ICE | Politik

Interesting piece on the Politik website run by Duncan Garner, a veteran political reporter. Suggests there are tough new restrictions on the 757s going to Antarctic, adding to pressure for a new strategic transport..

You can read 5 articles on the site before having to pay up.

The full article seems to appear for me ok (if one clicks on the text). Some interesting bits below (and my bolding). The article seems to indicate the DefMin is still interested in the C-17 (and less so the A400) !

And so when New Zealand heard that Boeing was going to close its C17 production line and produce only ten more planes it made what Mr Brownlee calls “some inquiries.

It was widely reported in specialist defence media that New Zealand was in fact going to buy two of the planes.

They are reported to cost about $US225 million each.

Indeed New Zealand was so interested in the planes that when the RAAF flew the red stones from India for the Australian Memorial at the National War Memorial in a C17, trial landings and take-offs too place at Blenheim Airport to see whether the plane could get in and out of a smaller New Zealand strip.

The Australians were offering to service the New Zealand C17s if we bought them at their C17 facility at Amberley Air Base near Brisbane.

But it was reported yesterday in “DefenseNews”, an authoritative US defence magazine, that the Gulf state of Qatar was going to purchase four of the last ten leaving only one available for sale.

It said that New Zealand “has been suggested as an option, but the fact that only one C-17 remains makes such a move unlikely.”

Mr. Brownlee says that despite that our inquiries are continuing.

“Whether we get them or not it is not going to make no difference to the situation we are in at the moment and the challenges we’ve got at the moment don’t change.”

Airbus offer the only serious alternative to a C-130.

Their A400M is a four-engined turboprop aircraft with a payload capacity more than twice that of a C-130 Hercules, and 44 per cent more range.

But Mr. Brownlee says it is an unproven aircraft.

There remains the question of whether New Zealand will scrap or replace the existing C 130s and the future of the 757s which Mr. Brownlee says will be coming to the end of their operational life in 2020.

He says if New Zealand bought C17s it would still want to maintain some transport capacity that was slightly smaller which could mean we bought a smaller number of new Hercules.

But it is clear that the desire by New Zealand to maintain a sovereign presence in Antarctica is now going to apply some urgency to the Air Force’s decisions on how to replace its ageing aircraft.

 

[chis73]

Another excellent article from Mr Harman.

The only 'off the books' C-17s that I am aware of are the 3 test aircraft, produced right at the start of the programme, one of which has already been retired (T-1, see here) and is in a museum. The other two were ground-test only as I understand it, one of which suffered structural failure (see here).

Luckily there is someone out there who has conveniently collated the production details (see here). Not quite up to date though.

Sounds like yet another 'NZ Special' procurement might be on the cards. God I hope not! ope

Chis73

 

[Gibbo]

The full article seems to appear for me ok (if one clicks on the text). Some interesting bits below (and my bolding). The article seems to indicate the DefMin is still interested in the C-17 (and less so the A400) !

And so Mr Brownlee, what would the point be of continuing those discussions?!!

I guess having 1 x C17 could be workable, if somewhat limited in flexibility, but surely only if 2 conditions were met - (1) NZDF relies completely on supposed Aussie offer to maintain it (not worth NZDF tooling up to support 1 a/c of a type) & (2) it is added to the existing 40sqn fleet & is in no way intended as a replacement for any current capability.

This would allow NZDF to operate it to Antartica & run other 'big jobs' as required but it would require a lot of careful pre-planning for it's flying programme to allow for expected maintenance downtime.

Such a scenario is frankly unlikely but not necessarily impossible. Having said that, the C130 has always maintained the Antartic run so surely it'll be just a case of back to basics. Anyway from a suggestion on 'another kiwi site' there isn't any real appetite for the type.

 

[RegR]

Yes well can't cry over spilt milk and now the A400M is the only viable alternative as military strategic airlifter. To much procrastination, well more accurately slow decision making. They knew there was a time limit and first in first served. Air NZ have I think 3 B767s still in service, so maybe they could charter those in the short term for pax and freight that can be carried in pax aircraft.

Or we just revert back to using the C130s like we always have, and still do (although I see now he is even having a go at these after how many decades?). Having a B757 type doing flights to Antarctica is not a mission breaker, they trialled it, it worked, they had a scare and they stopped. It was a nice to know/have/use but definitely not now the way forward.

End of the day this is a civilian function that NZDF supports and should not be the be all end all of NZDF air transport, Brownlee is using Antarctica for complete justification when really he should be considering NZDF total outputs for overall justification. The fact he is still contemplating 1 C17 is getting to be a joke taking into account the cost, issues and considerations of such a move. If we were going to do that would it not be better just to charter USAF and they could easily bring one out of storage and add to their already established pool, cycle and Antarctic operation to cover?

X amount of flights for X amount of the year IMO still does not warrant a one off buy (literally). Two AC was borderline, one has crossed fully into Mexico in terms of out there.