Royal New Zealand Air Force

[t68]

I did say like MRTT but without the refueling option. Hence I meant no AAR capability, so forget the tanker bit. Maybe I should've phrased it better.

If that's the case, I don't see the need to use the defence budget for 757 replacement, go with a PPP deal with Air New Zealand for the proposed 787 convertabile freighter.

Whole idea of MRTT you are bring a much needed capabilty set to the coalition partners for they will act as force enablers and multipliers in place of an ACF whilst at the same time meeting the needs locally. Whilst disbanding the ACF was unfortunate NZG has a real opportunity to erase the ill feeling and make a significant contribution to coalition events.

 

[40 deg south]

If that's the case, I don't see the need to use the defence budget for 757 replacement, go with a PPP deal with Air New Zealand for the proposed 787 convertabile freighter.

Whole idea of MRTT you are bring a much needed capabilty set to the coalition partners for they will act as force enablers and multipliers in place of an ACF whilst at the same time meeting the needs locally. Whilst disbanding the ACF was unfortunate NZG has a real opportunity to erase the ill feeling and make a significant contribution to coalition events.

If the strategic lift function is taken care of elsewhere, the replacement 757 role then becomes simply shifting people around. I'd bet that there wll be careful consideration of a lease deal with Air NZ, taking RNZAF out of the picture altogether. It could involve either use of their existing fleet, or Air NZ keeping a dedicated aircraft for govt use (and possibly using it in commercial service when not otherwise required). Future governments will want the capability the 757s provide, but are unlikely to care much about who is delivering it.

 

[40 deg south]

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/...-supports-sh-2gi-helicopter-training-devices/

Seasprite simulator and support package up and running.

Not glamorous, but this looks like an example of behind-the-scenes support NZDF has previously lacked.

 

[ngatimozart]

If the strategic lift function is taken care of elsewhere, the replacement 757 role then becomes simply shifting people around. I'd bet that there wll be careful consideration of a lease deal with Air NZ, taking RNZAF out of the picture altogether. It could involve either use of their existing fleet, or Air NZ keeping a dedicated aircraft for govt use (and possibly using it in commercial service when not otherwise required). Future governments will want the capability the 757s provide, but are unlikely to care much about who is delivering it.

Never underestimate a pollies sense of entitlement, importance and vanity. Nothing beats having military personnel rendering one honours as one disembarks from an aircraft emblazoned with the country's name and insignia upon it. They will care quite a bit about who the service deliverers are. It will be interesting to see what the air transport study suggests.

 

[MrConservative]

Treasury's Major Projects Report released yesterday is a mixed bag for defence.

http://www.treasury.govt.nz/statese...ublications/majorprojects/pdfs/mppr-jun15.pdf

Of most interest is the FAMC project which has moved to an adverse status of delivery confidence of mixed red/amber. The reporting date was until the end of June and it seems that this project was going along swimmingly until in mid June Qatar bought 4 of the 5 last C-17A's. An amber light or mixed amber/green at that stage obviously went to amber/red.

The agency (MoD) and Treasury assessments were positive until that point. It was an open secret that the C-17 was the front runner FAMC as part of the strategic component and that it was the keystone in the capability planning.

The MPR notes that:

"There is a risk that alternatives to C-17s cannot be explored effectively in a reduced timeframe. Defence’s bringing forward of decisions on Future Air Mobility
Capability will also likely have a significant impact on achievability of the Defence Capital Plan.

The MoD notes:

The current focus of the project is supporting the consideration of the Boeing C-17 aircraft, including support, training and introduction into service should procurement proceed. Consequently resources are committed to the C-17 effort at the expense of the routine progression of Future Air Mobility project outputs. Whilst C-17 would meet the strategic element of the Future Air Mobility Capability, it will not satisfy all airlift requirements. Other aircraft will be needed, particularly
for tactical missions and also to provide concurrency. The composition of the balance of the fleet will be further considered once a decision on C-17 is reached. As current aircraft could continue to operate into the 2021 – 2025 period, there is ample time to allow this. Should the decision be made not to proceed with C-17
at this time, consideration of the strategic component of future airlift will revert to the overall project time-frame.

So the project is now at amber / red status and the fact that 5 months later from the end of the reporting period to yesterdays publication that the powers that be have not expunged the C-17 from the record - that it has not entirely gone to Red status must mean that not all hope has been given up. There are options to explore and I have a feeling those options will be given an airing first before being ruled in / ruled out and having to move onto other options.

 

[ngatimozart]

Treasury's Major Projects Report released yesterday is a mixed bag for defence.

http://www.treasury.govt.nz/statese...ublications/majorprojects/pdfs/mppr-jun15.pdf

Of most interest is the FAMC project which has moved to an adverse status of delivery confidence of mixed red/amber. The reporting date was until the end of June and it seems that this project was going along swimmingly until in mid June Qatar bought 4 of the 5 last C-17A's. An amber light or mixed amber/green at that stage obviously went to amber/red.

The agency (MoD) and Treasury assessments were positive until that point. It was an open secret that the C-17 was the front runner FAMC as part of the strategic component and that it was the keystone in the capability planning.

The MPR notes that:

"There is a risk that alternatives to C-17s cannot be explored effectively in a reduced timeframe. Defence’s bringing forward of decisions on Future Air Mobility
Capability will also likely have a significant impact on achievability of the Defence Capital Plan.

The MoD notes:

The current focus of the project is supporting the consideration of the Boeing C-17 aircraft, including support, training and introduction into service should procurement proceed. Consequently resources are committed to the C-17 effort at the expense of the routine progression of Future Air Mobility project outputs. Whilst C-17 would meet the strategic element of the Future Air Mobility Capability, it will not satisfy all airlift requirements. Other aircraft will be needed, particularly
for tactical missions and also to provide concurrency. The composition of the balance of the fleet will be further considered once a decision on C-17 is reached. As current aircraft could continue to operate into the 2021 – 2025 period, there is ample time to allow this. Should the decision be made not to proceed with C-17
at this time, consideration of the strategic component of future airlift will revert to the overall project time-frame.

So the project is now at amber / red status and the fact that 5 months later from the end of the reporting period to yesterdays publication that the powers that be have not expunged the C-17 from the record - that it has not entirely gone to Red status must mean that not all hope has been given up. There are options to explore and I have a feeling those options will be given an airing first before being ruled in / ruled out and having to move onto other options.

I read it last night and have been chewing it over. There have been all sorts of rumours floating around and they have been quite interesting and entertaining. I am of the belief that the fat lady has sung

 

[kiwipatriot69]

Doesnt 'The Boneyard' in Nevada desert store mothballed air transports like the C17? could be purchased and restored as they have done this before ,with F22 in recent years.

 

[ngatimozart]

Doesnt 'The Boneyard' in Nevada desert store mothballed air transports like the C17? could be purchased and restored as they have done this before ,with F22 in recent years.

Don't think there are any C17s in the Boneyard. Would have to have a look and see what's on their public released inventory. The real point is, if the NZG were really keen on getting the C17, they would have fast tracked the acquisitions process so as to place an order whilst there were still white tails available.

 

[t68]

Don't think there are any C17s in the Boneyard. Would have to have a look and see what's on their public released inventory. The real point is, if the NZG were really keen on getting the C17, they would have fast tracked the acquisitions process so as to place an order whilst there were still white tails available.

If there is any sitting in the bone yard thee would be early examples and not the ER version which started around 2002 from memory, don't know what sort of condition the early birds are in or if the can be brought up to ER standard. Be interested to know thou

I thought their was one white tail left havnt heard of anyone snapping that up yet.

 

[kiwi in exile]

Doesnt 'The Boneyard' in Nevada desert store mothballed air transports like the C17? could be purchased and restored as they have done this before ,with F22 in recent years.

Mothballed F22's?

 

[beagelle]

14-0001 is RAAF A41-212
14-0002 is RAAF A41-213
14-0003 is Boeing C-17A N273ZD (unsold); currently in storage at KSKF
14-0004 is RCAF 177705
14-0005 is Qatar AF MAM
14-0006 is Qatar AF MAN
14-0007 is UAE AF 1229
14-0008 is UAE AF 1230
14-0009 is Qatar AF MAO
14-0010 is Qatar AF MAP

 

[rjtjrt]

Is a "fleet" of one C-17 so impossible for RNZAF to contemplate?
With Australia having a full training and maintenance base on East Coast there is adequate regional support available, or you could rely on US maintenance and training.

 

[John Fedup]

Is a "fleet" of one C-17 so impossible for RNZAF to contemplate?
With Australia having a full training and maintenance base on East Coast there is adequate regional support available, or you could rely on US maintenance and training.

I believe the last production jet is going to Qatar so it would seem a fleet of one is impossible now unless one of the recent ME customers decide to offer up a jet for the RNZAF.

According to an AW article on the C-17 line closing, there is an unsold C=-17 in storage in Texas.

 

[kiwipatriot69]

Sorry was qouting a Reuters article dated 12/2/2011 titled 'US to mothball gear to build F22, easy to find. Did halt the programme and store at Serria army depot then returned to service due to budget constraints on F35,and filling an interm role due to the F35 production, introduction to service issues.

A bit off topic, what im driving at is the numbers of Aircraft they have successfully returned to service from storage there,and wether this is a cheaper, quicker option for Nz.

 

[John Fedup]

Sorry was qouting a Reuters article dated 12/2/2011 titled 'US to mothball gear to build F22, easy to find. Did halt the programme and store at Serria army depot then returned to service due to budget constraints on F35,and filling an interm role due to the F35 production, introduction to service issues.

A bit off topic, what im driving at is the numbers of Aircraft they have successfully returned to service from storage there,and wether this is a cheaper, quicker option for Nz.

The last production F-22 rolled off the assembly line in Dec 2012. None have ever been put into storage. When the line was closed, there was a requirement to keep all the tooling in case it was necessary to restart production within 5 years of closing the line (I think this was the timeframe). Whether production should be restarted is up for debate but a resumption is unlikely. The cost of the last jet was 147m excluding R&D costs.

 

[vonnoobie]

The cost of the last jet was 147m excluding R&D costs.

Realistically a cheap price considering the limited production run.

 

[MrConservative]

If there is any sitting in the bone yard thee would be early examples and not the ER version which started around 2002 from memory, don't know what sort of condition the early birds are in or if the can be brought up to ER standard. Be interested to know thou

I thought their was one white tail left havnt heard of anyone snapping that up yet.

Boneyard birds. Not yet anyway.
Last whitetail. Not yet anyway.

JBLM C-17 squadron will be inactivated in 2016 | The News Tribune

Up to 16 C-17A"s will be going into back-up reserve starting next year. The budgetry allocation for the USAF does not stretch enough to fund 222 aircraft whilst they are also flying the C-5M and looking to upgrade the 70 C-17A's to post 2001 ER configuration over the next few years.

 

[John Fedup]

Realistically a cheap price considering the limited production run.

Agreed. Had the US allowed foreign sales to Australia, Japan, Canada, the U.K., and Israel, 100-150 addtional builds might have been possible thus allowing 50 -100 addtional USAF builds at a more affordable price. With the JSF now having most of its developmental issues resolved the F-22 restart is very unlikely.

 

[ngatimozart]

Agreed. Had the US allowed foreign sales to Australia, Japan, Canada, the U.K., and Israel, 100-150 addtional builds might have been possible thus allowing 50 -100 addtional USAF builds at a more affordable price. With the JSF now having most of its developmental issues resolved the F-22 restart is very unlikely.

Well they are actually two different capabilities aren't they? When you look at it. F22 is the F15 replacement and the F35, the F16 replacement. If Congress hadn't got the jitters and panicked, a long run of F22 would've bought the unit price down eventually to near F15 level. But that's all moot now.

 

[John Fedup]

Well they are actually two different capabilities aren't they? When you look at it. F22 is the F15 replacement and the F35, the F16 replacement. If Congress hadn't got the jitters and panicked, a long run of F22 would've bought the unit price down eventually to near F15 level. But that's all moot now.

The F-22 is certainly moot now. The next chapter is jitters by Congress over the F-35. If the US build numbers fall off it will be trouble for everyone involved.