Like I said earlier those aircraft are not included in the production slots currently allocated. Both those countries have reduced the total number that they originally committed to order. The filled production slots are definite orders.
Royal New Zealand Air Force
- Thread starter Lucasnz
- Start date
Simple. Different horses for different courses. One is a tactical airlifter and the other a strategic airlifter. This has been discussed often enough on this thread as to why.
Germany has reduced their order by 7 from 60 and are wanting to on sell 13 aircraft from the remaining 53 reducing their fleet to 40. Spain have 27 aircraft on order and are wanting to sell 13 as well reducing their fleet to 14.
I doubt that the available aircraft would meet the RNZAF timeframe outlined above in any case, not to mention the ongoing issues the A400 has.
My bad, misconstrued what i was reading. However why the rush, unless some fatigue issue has arisen not covered by the very extensive rebuild one would think that possibly an opportunity may have presented it's self. A straight "it's time to change" does not make a lot of sense if they are going for a C130J as I said in 4540, with life left in the old girls.
It takes time and resources to induct new aircraft, train crew, groundies etc., to achieve IOC and the FOC. FOC is set for February 2024, four years after delivery.
`I would have thought that if we get the C130J this could be achieved a lot quicker. When I was at the rebuild they where thinking well past 2025 as a realistic life expectancy as most of the stuff they where replacing/renewing had already lasted almost 50 years the new should be good for a very long time. the extent of the rebuild was mind blowing, there was a huge amount of the aircraft structure replaced.
`I would have thought that if we get the C130J this could be achieved a lot quicker. When I was at the rebuild they where thinking well past 2025 as a realistic life expectancy as most of the stuff they where replacing/renewing had already lasted almost 50 years the new should be good for a very long time. the extent of the rebuild was mind blowing, there was a huge amount of the aircraft structure replaced.
That presumes the C130J is acquired. They could go with the KC390 for example or something else. That is what I'm getting; we shouldn't presume that the C130J will get the nod. On a like for like basis it has to be the favourite but to use a horse racing term, there are a couple of roughies out there. With the synergies between the FAMC and FASC being prominent in the RFIs, out of all the manufacturers, Boeing has the most platforms to meet the requirements. Airbus would be next.
Agreed. While the C130J appears to have the inside running I would hope for the kc390 as not only is it more modern,it appears to have a better range payload and its higher cruise speed is a multiplying factor as it would carry out a mission quicker, therefore be able to carry out more missions in the same period of time with a slightly larger load.
The upper harbour see very little wave action, it can be blowing hard out in the Gulf and you'll see barely a ripple under the Upper Harbour Bridge.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
New Zealand Issues RFI for New Transport, Surveillance Ai | DefenseNews
Defense News covers the RFIs.
Defense News covers the RFIs.
The Defence News take on the C130 replacement RFI is interesting as they say that the first replacement aircraft is to be delivered by feb 2020 , which could indicate an extended delivery program. This may level the playing field some what and enable other manufacturers other than Lockheed a better chance.
Unless they got for the A320/KC390 mix I don't see much in the way of synergies between the transport fleet (If Im missing something please point it out), Though there may be synergies if they go for 737/P-8 fleet.
In regards to the options out there for the C-130 replacement..
C-130J is the one likely with the quickest introduction time while also having an ally just across the way already operating a dozen of them so while not allowing synergies in NZ's own fleet could allow some savings if worked in with Australia (maybe).
KC390 is still in development, Will be easier engine wise to maintain as it is a commercial engine allowing for part's to be sourced from pretty much any where in the world (One of the reasons the KC-30A's and Wedgetails have been so successful in Iraq has been there ability to source part's quickly). Payload wise while it can carry more then the C-130J it is only in my opinion a margina increase (6 ton give or take) and with the short time frame does present a bit of risk for a small gain.
A400M would be a great aircraft but is still undergoing development so nothing to say it will be able to meet the IOC and FOC time frames. As has been pointed out the 26 aircraft up for sale from Germany and Spain are at the back of the production run, I dont see Airbus increasing production schedules for such a small order so unless Germany or Spain are open to seeling some of there earlier production slots (For Spain with money being tight being able to hold off spending money could be seen as beneficial) I don't see the chances as being good but you never know.
For the C-2 from Japan I am actually more hopeful about, It appears that Japan will have there's coming on line a lot quicker providing comparable range and payload to the A400M at around $40m US less, Benefits of it is theengine is commercial in nature allowing for wider range of sources when needed. If there are no issues in Japan introducing theres then this could be a decent contender.
Personnaly I'd prefer the C-2, gives the best increase in capability, has commercial engines and at a reasonable price.
In regards to the options out there for the C-130 replacement..
C-130J is the one likely with the quickest introduction time while also having an ally just across the way already operating a dozen of them so while not allowing synergies in NZ's own fleet could allow some savings if worked in with Australia (maybe).
KC390 is still in development, Will be easier engine wise to maintain as it is a commercial engine allowing for part's to be sourced from pretty much any where in the world (One of the reasons the KC-30A's and Wedgetails have been so successful in Iraq has been there ability to source part's quickly). Payload wise while it can carry more then the C-130J it is only in my opinion a margina increase (6 ton give or take) and with the short time frame does present a bit of risk for a small gain.
A400M would be a great aircraft but is still undergoing development so nothing to say it will be able to meet the IOC and FOC time frames. As has been pointed out the 26 aircraft up for sale from Germany and Spain are at the back of the production run, I dont see Airbus increasing production schedules for such a small order so unless Germany or Spain are open to seeling some of there earlier production slots (For Spain with money being tight being able to hold off spending money could be seen as beneficial) I don't see the chances as being good but you never know.
For the C-2 from Japan I am actually more hopeful about, It appears that Japan will have there's coming on line a lot quicker providing comparable range and payload to the A400M at around $40m US less, Benefits of it is theengine is commercial in nature allowing for wider range of sources when needed. If there are no issues in Japan introducing theres then this could be a decent contender.
Personnaly I'd prefer the C-2, gives the best increase in capability, has commercial engines and at a reasonable price.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Overall that seems a fair summation Vonnoobie and with the reference in the previously released NZDF C-17 documentation to the Japanese C2 suggests that option is being taken seriously. I suspect Airbus cannot take an A400M acquisition by the NZDF for granted. Maybe not unless something attractive is thrown in (in terms of deals and timeframes) but as others have pointed out here "why should they" for such a relatively small acquisition etc?
On the other hand and in terms of wider NZ (and Australasian) - Japan relations, such a C2 deal could have greater political support .... Regardless, interesting times ahead!
All I know of the FAMC RFI is what has been posted here, but so far haven't seen any indication of a requirement for doing Antartica without that 'safe point of no return' etc. A little surprised that (possibly) hasn't been defined up front given it is supposedly such a hot topic at present.
Mind you still a lot of water to go under this bridge! Gut feel tells me NZ Govt will simply plump for C130J for tactical as it offers less change; probably less unknowns; and commonality with allies. As for strategic though... well now that they shot themselves in the foot over the C17 this is anyone's guess!
Agree with the C2, I would like to see that happen, Given the increased speed this aircraft offers over the propeller A400 and c130, leads to a mission multiplication factor (they do the missions quicker therefore can do more missions). I think you under rate the kc390 for this reason, combine a 10 to 20% increase in mission availability due to speed, with a 30%+ more lifting ability and an improved payload range, they are a significant improvement over the C130. I would think that the kc390 could lift over 50% more over the same distance in multiple flights in the same time frame as a C130. The other interesting point is that if the Defence News is wright and only the first aircraft has to be delivered by Feb 2020, this could imply a Phased delivery with the last aircraft only having to be delivered a short time before FOC. This would also explain the significant gap between IOC (2021) and FOC (2024 ) This would also mean a phased retirement of the C130
Last edited:
After the "scare" with, IIRC, Murray McCully, onboard that B757 flight with the whiteout at Pegasus Field I think that it is an now presumed that the no PNR capability will be one of the requirements.
Either the C130J or the KC390 would make for good tactical airlifters. Where Boeing would have an advantage over Lockheed is in that they would be able to offer a package deal of P8 / B737-800 (or KC46) and the KC390 with the maintenance and MRO agreements for all three platforms which would be advantageous to Defence. Lockheed can only offer only platform and Airbus two at best with no synergies between the FAMC and FASC capabilities because their MPA (C295 MPA) doesn't meet all the requirements of the FASC RFI. Interestingly enough if they had of gone ahead with the A319 MPA they could've have got the RAF MPA contract, probably the French one and it could've met most of the FASC RFI requirements. Definitely all if they added ISR, ESM, EW, Air Intercept, TDL and SATCOM capabilities to it. It would've had the room available for those where as the C265 MPA would most likely not.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
This is what the RFI says on delivery time (Para 12).
Para 10 refers to Antarctica
Flying to Antarctica with no point of safe return doesn't appear to be a requirement, but I suspect it would certainly help the chances of a bid.
The distance from Christchurch to McMurdo is 2069 nautical miles using a great circle. According to The Aviation Zone, the C130H has a range of 2047nm with the max payload of 20 tonnes. The C130s that fly Christchurch - McMurdo have the external wing tanks, and they would need them.