Royal New Zealand Air Force

[kiwipatriot69]

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.

I was just thinking that of how either C130J or KC 390 would make the journey to Mcmurdo, whether they would be utilised at all given the 'point of no return' being a factor. Would it be left up to a commercial type lifter like 737 for strategic lift then , with future Endeavour AO as backup?

Still think A400 purchase should be done, they could do that easy with no such issues,with greater speed and load, more airframes to do the job. And we could phase them in while some hercs reach their use by date, surely it wont take till 2020 to deliver a few airframes? Unlike KC 390, a number of european militaries and of course, Malaysia have them in service, now.

 

[ngatimozart]

I was just thinking that of how either C130J or KC 390 would make the journey to Mcmurdo, whether they would be utilised at all given the 'point of no return' being a factor. Would it be left up to a commercial type lifter like 737 for strategic lift then , with future Endeavour AO as backup?

Still think A400 purchase should be done, they could do that easy with no such issues,with greater speed and load, more airframes to do the job. And we could phase them in while some hercs reach their use by date, surely it wont take till 2020 to deliver a few airframes? Unlike KC 390, a number of european militaries and of course, Malaysia have them in service, now.

Actually if you are following the discussion you'll understand why the A400M won't make the February 2020 cut. Some of us are suggesting a Kawasaki C2 and Embraer KC390 mix as an alternative to a A400M / C130J mix. There are distinct advantages to such a mix and an A400M / C130J mix isn't writ large in stone.

 

[recce.k1]

Actually if you are following the discussion you'll understand why the A400M won't make the February 2020 cut. Some of us are suggesting a Kawasaki C2 and Embraer KC390 mix as an alternative to a A400M / C130J mix. There are distinct advantages to such a mix and an A400M / C130J mix isn't writ large in stone.

Certainly a C2/KC390 mix appears to have its attractions eg better mission availability and additional lift etc (and my bad a couple of posts earlier, the KC390 seems to be on its way to type certification within the FAMC timeframes etc).

Certainly a Boeing sustainment and training package for the KC390 will also have some attractions for the planners and decision makers (including possible links to the FASC project).

Although I wonder if counting the most against the KC390 (of these 4 types mentioned) at this point in time is that there is only one NATO partner making a commitment to that type (Portugal), and in an ABCA context only potentially NZ which means we may need to certify the carriage of a range of ANZAC/common equipment (from Army vehicles to helicopters etc)? Not sure that may be helpful being a relatively new type (with MoD wanting already proven MOTS solutions). Mind you as pointed out the current C-130H replacement timeframes (and replacement type IOC/FOC timeframes) could help especially if the likes of the US show some interest.

Certainly the A400M has a broad support base going for it that NZ could easily plug into for training and type certification for carrying equipment (eg France, Germany, the UK, as well as on-going operating partnerships with Malaysia).

Perhaps now that potential aircraft types have been narrowed down, the support and sustainment side of things could throw in some twists?

 

[Sam W]

It is my understanding that the C-2 cannot fit the NH90, is this the case? If so that means that the A400 is the only aircraft being considered that is capable of airlifting the NH90.

It is also my understanding that our NH90s do not cope well with sea transport. Does this mean that NZ really needs a way to airlift the NH90 to the Pacific and beyond? I assume that is not realistic to ferry the helicopters up the the islands when necessary with air to air refueling?

Based on this, how important is the government likely to consider the ability to airlift the NH90 in any future strategic airlift capability?


As a side question (sorry for all the questions), the Endeavor replacement has been talked about as carrying an NH90. Is this likely to be a permanent fixture on the boat (requiring a new marine variant of the NH90 to be acquired I imagine) or something that is just carried occasionally?

 

[t68]

Actually if you are following the discussion you'll understand why the A400M won't make the February 2020 cut. Some of us are suggesting a Kawasaki C2 and Embraer KC390 mix as an alternative to a A400M / C130J mix. There are distinct advantages to such a mix and an A400M / C130J mix isn't writ large in stone.

Wonder if Embraer can make the 2020 date mention in the RFI, seems production not starting till 2018 and the have 28 firm orders with a possabile 30 odd orders pending outcome of certifaction, with the French saying they too will buy KC-390 on condition that Rafele is selected for the F-2X fighter competition. But at any rate having Boeing being the prime through FMS with a mix of KC-390 and KC-46A Pegasus might be on the money.

But Airbus would also have some appeal with an C295/A400M/KC-30A, time will tell if NZG relaxes the preliminary first aircraft acceptance date, or other avenues are chosen. As its not unheard of to delay programs to wait for aircraft maturity.RAAF have gone down this road before.

 

[ngatimozart]

Certainly a C2/KC390 mix appears to have its attractions eg better mission availability and additional lift etc (and my bad a couple of posts earlier, the KC390 seems to be on its way to type certification within the FAMC timeframes etc).

Certainly a Boeing sustainment and training package for the KC390 will also have some attractions for the planners and decision makers (including possible links to the FASC project).

Although I wonder if counting the most against the KC390 (of these 4 types mentioned and excluding any KC30/KC46 types) at this point in time is that there is only one NATO partner making a commitment to that type (Portugal), and in an ABCA context only potentially NZ which means we may need to certify the carriage of a range of ANZAC/common equipment (from Army vehicles to helicopters etc)? Not sure that may be helpful being a relatively new type (with MoD wanting already proven MOTS solutions). Mind you as pointed out the current C-130H replacement timeframes (and replacement type IOC/FOC timeframes) could help especially if the likes of the US show some interest.

Certainly the A400M has a broad support base going for it that NZ could easily plug into for training and type certification for carrying equipment (eg France, Germany, the UK, as well as on-going operating partnerships with Malaysia).

Perhaps now that aircraft types have been narrowed down, the support and sustainment side of things could throw in some twists?

There's quite a few variables to throw into the equation and it's hard to predict how this will actually turn out because the pollies can change their minds like the wind. This is really the first time that I am aware of (I am quite possibly mistaken here) that the synergies between to separate aviation capabilities have been so prominent in their overall thinking and published requirements. Hence in some ways it's no, longer just a straight platform A vs platform B vs platform C etc., ruck, but the complete footy game with the second capability secondary requirements needing to be considered as well for synergies between the platforms chosen for each capabilities in ongoing sustainment, maintenance training etc., i.e., degree of commonality between the chosen platforms. Also what we have to take into consideration is the ability of a prime being able to offer a comprehensive package covering those synergies across the strategic and tactical airlift capability plus the FASC capability. If a prime can do that there may be a cost benefit to NZDF in such a package that cannot be ignored and a prime would not ignore such a chance, because the deal may be worth somewhere north of US$1.5 billion and that's real money in anyone's language.

On another note, I saw a photo earlier tonight of TA4K Skyhawk NZ6254 of No 2 Sqn RNZAF with canards on it. The photo was taken at Ohakea in 1989.

The aircraft that crashed a Nellis AFB the other day was a Draken owned TA4K Skyhawk N140EM ex NZ6251. The c/n: 14094, USN No: Bu157914, BOC by RNZAF: 16/6/1970. Placed in storage: 19/10/2001, Hours when placed in storage: 6558.0, registered in US as N140EM on 1/3/2013.

 

[ngatimozart]

Dawn has broken at McMurdo, so WinFly has started. Well the first flight was supposed to be Saturday but was cancelled due to bad weather. Three Airbus (A319) and two C17 flights are planned. The flight schedule will start to become busier from now on as the summer season starts to ramp up.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

Two Kawasaki C2 replacements for the B757, three Embraer KC 390 and three C295W would be a very realistic transport fleet. The C2's would provide long range strategic lift capability with the ability to fly tactical missions when needed. The KC390 as the heavy tactical transport able to fly most missions and support overseas operations with full self defence capability. The C295W would be the multi role stay at home utility aircraft able to provide MEPT, utility transport of cargo or passengers, possible MR with a FITS mission system option plus other non critical government taskings.

A mixed fleet provides thru life savings by using aircraft right sized to the task with max cargo capacities of 40 ton, 20 ton and 10 ton respectively. Using available acquisition costs for airframe only, not full life cycle costings, the eight frames could be acquired for approximately $1 billion New Zealand dollars today.

This mix provides one additional airframe over today's seven frame fleet but provides all aircraft as ramp equipped lifters. As stated the increase in speed allows for more cargo to be delivered over a given distance because more trips can be made. Additional airframes can be added as need develops. I would prefer a minimum of three C2's, but this is unlikely,in order to maintain the rule of 3.

A timeline for delivery could see the C295W's delivered first followed by the KC390 and then the C2's to allow for delivery slots to be made available and meet the timelines set out in the RFI. This also allow maximum use of the existing Hercules fleet until completely tapped out.

Passenger travel should be outsourced to a leased BBJ as needed otherwise pollies can travel in the back with everyone else.

It would also allow the movement of some transport capacity to Ohakea with the C295W. In its MEPT role it provides the opportunity for trainees to step over to the bigger air frame without leaving the training environ. Basing in the approximate centre of the country also provides a quick response for SAR and other internal natural disaster support. All turbo props at one base and all turbo fans at Whenupai.

Sorry Mr C I know it's been stated that a C295 sized aircraft isn't seen as needed but the limited ability of the B350 in the low end of the transport spectrum limits its value IMHO. To far of a step from a B350 to a P8 or C2 sized aircraft.

 

[MrConservative]

The C295W would be the multi role stay at home utility aircraft able to provide MEPT, utility transport of cargo or passengers, possible MR with a FITS mission system option plus other non critical government taskings.

Sorry Mr C I know it's been stated that a C295 sized aircraft isn't seen as needed but the limited ability of the B350 in the low end of the transport spectrum limits its value IMHO. To far of a step from a B350 to a P8 or C2 sized aircraft.

The vast majority of the NZDF's domestic transport requirements are undertaken by vehicle transport including the use of commercial inter-island RoRo ferries.

Our Beechcraft sized aircraft are used for occasional VIP use and primarily MEPT. There is simply no need for $50m aircraft like the C-295W for either MEPT or Coastal Fisheries Surveillance or indeed local VIP transport - the B350 or similar sized platform is more than suitable and greatly more cost effective.

When you eventually visit NZ and talk to NZDF people this will all soon become apparent. I could introduce you to former 5, 40, and 42 Sqd CO's who also would happily point this out.

 

[MrConservative]

It is my understanding that the C-2 cannot fit the NH90, is this the case? If so that means that the A400 is the only aircraft being considered that is capable of airlifting the NH90.

IIRC rotors removed or folded horizontal the NH-90 can squeeze into both the C-2 & A400M which both have very similar cargo box heights circa 4m. The C-2 may in fact be slightly larger. The NH90 height is 5.4m if the tail rotor is extended and operational - under 4m if stowed.

 

[Rob c]

Wonder if Embraer can make the 2020 date mention in the RFI, seems production not starting till 2018 and the have 28 firm orders with a possabile 30 odd orders pending outcome of certifaction, with the French saying they too will buy KC-390 on condition that Rafele is selected for the F-2X fighter competition. But at any rate having Boeing being the prime through FMS with a mix of KC-390 and KC-46A Pegasus might be on the money.

But Airbus would also have some appeal with an C295/A400M/KC-30A, time will tell if NZG relaxes the preliminary first aircraft acceptance date, or other avenues are chosen. As its not unheard of to delay programs to wait for aircraft maturity.RAAF have gone down this road before.

I suspect that the dates for delivery may be based on the theoretical life expectancy's of the c130"s post rebuild. If the resulting deal looked attractive enough both financially and resulting hardware outcome, ( getting more capability for your buck) there may be some flexibility shown.

 

[Gibbo]

IIRC rotors removed or folded horizontal the NH-90 can squeeze into both the C-2 & A400M which both have very similar cargo box heights circa 4m. The C-2 may in fact be slightly larger. The NH90 height is 5.4m if the tail rotor is extended and operational - under 4m if stowed.

Getting a NH90 into an A400M is one hell of a squeeze... check out the video!
A400M loading NH90 - Initial Operating Capabil...

 

[vonnoobie]

In regards to some people continueing on with the C295, The RFI states that they are to be replaced by comparable or better aircraft of which the C295 does not compare to any of them and would actually be a step back.

NZ simply doesnt have a need for such an aircraft as they already have other options available and quite frankly dont have to travel as far internally to get what they need where it needs to be making the C295 redundant, as MrConservative says the B350 covers that role with out hassle.

There are literally just 4 aicraft that can fill the role for the C-130's (excluding Russian stuff because really, Do we expect NZ to deal with Putin?). One is flying today but the least capable (C-130J), another is going through IOC (C-2), another mixed between IOC and development (A400) and th last one in development (KC390).

It willl be one of them and nothing else unless a politician thinks he can save a few bucks and changes the RFI.

One must remember most if not all of these 4 aircraft have been designed to carry sizeable loads and land on small runways, The C-2 off hand can land on a 900m strip carrying 26 ton of cargo.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

Mr C I do in deed plan on someday visiting your lovely country as its on the top of my bucket list.

The need for a mid shore unarmed maritime recon aircraft has been speculated by a variety of posters here as P8 will be too in demand elsewhere and too costly. Although a modest sized aircraft the C295W offers crew comfort, payload capacity for more than the mark one eye ball in the form of a FITS station plus the ability to be multi role. IIRC the RNZAF operated similar sized aircraft in the form of Fokker F-27-100's in the 1980's in the same numbers and for the same purposes as I suggested. These were operated at the same time as the ten Andovers and the five Hercules.

There must have been a need for these aircraft and I am sure they were utilized on a regular basis inter island in support of the entire Defence Force and whole of government.

Size has benefits like numbers. If we settle for the lowest end capability then there is little avenue for surge when the need arises. There is a cost to providing a service. There is more of a cost when you can't deliver.

I have the benefit of living in a part of my country where we live on solid rock, no volcanos, no earthquakes unlike New Zealand. Depending so heavily on road transport and the associated infrastructure in times of crisis is fool hardy. The air bridge that ran to Christchurch during the earthquakes was a massive undertaking.

I don't need to meet former COs to know that they had little ability to question the resources that were provided to them when they wore the uniform. I can be very confident knowing that all of them would have willingly accepted bigger, better and more resources had they been offered.

As citizens of democratic countries we owe it to those that protect us to offer the very best that we can so they can do their demanding jobs safely and effectively.

The lowest cost option is not the best. I am not advocating gold plated but I think NZ can do better.

 

[rjtjrt]

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.

C-130J's almost universally fly without underwing tanks. This is said to be due to the extra efficiency/range afforded by the modern engine/prop in the J makes it unnecessary in typical sorties.
As I understand it the J has ability to use the underwing tanks if extra range is wanted for a particular mission.

KC-130J info

KC-130J Tanker · Lockheed Martin

4,275 n.mi (with external tanks)

 

[Novascotiaboy]

Vonoobie

The purpose of a forum is to express an opinion. I understand the RFI and in keeping with the discussion not everyone agrees that the B200-350 is an acceptable choice for the role of the low end of the transport solution. There are also those here who feel that there is little value in the current B757 as it lacks a ramp for loading cumbersome loads. As a passenger transport it is very nice and an impressive sight with its Kiwi roundel when landing in some far off place. But is it the best aircraft for the purpose? I think no it's not.

So in order to get the most capable, cost effective multi purpose fleet I feel what I have suggested is a viable option. My opinion. The opportunity has been lost for the best solution in the form of C17 and C130J. A400 will not solve its issues anytime soon IMHO and will cost many billions more for those committed to its cause. Hopefully NZ avoids this nightmare.

As to the $50 million cost of the C295W how does it compare to the cost paid for the NHI 90's? The C295 seems to be a steal in comparison to me.

 

[ngatimozart]

Vonoobie

The purpose of a forum is to express an opinion. I understand the RFI and in keeping with the discussion not everyone agrees that the B200-350 is an acceptable choice for the role of the low end of the transport solution. There are also those here who feel that there is little value in the current B757 as it lacks a ramp for loading cumbersome loads. As a passenger transport it is very nice and an impressive sight with its Kiwi roundel when landing in some far off place. But is it the best aircraft for the purpose? I think no it's not.

So in order to get the most capable, cost effective multi purpose fleet I feel what I have suggested is a viable option. My opinion. The opportunity has been lost for the best solution in the form of C17 and C130J. A400 will not solve its issues anytime soon IMHO and will cost many billions more for those committed to its cause. Hopefully NZ avoids this nightmare.

As to the $50 million cost of the C295W how does it compare to the cost paid for the NHI 90's? The C295 seems to be a steal in comparison to me.

Listen to what people are saying and have a look at a map of NZ and it's location relative to the Pacific Islands, Australia and Antarctica. We have been explaining why a twin engine turboprop airlifter is not viable for NZ. Yes the forum is for the expression of opinion, but the caveat is informed opinion, not the repetition ad nauseum of positions that have been discounted as unviable for logical and practical reasons after the presentation of reasoned and informed arguments and discussion.

 

[Rob c]

Two Kawasaki C2 replacements for the B757, three Embraer KC 390 and three C295W would be a very realistic transport fleet. The C2's would provide long range strategic lift capability with the ability to fly tactical missions when needed. The KC390 as the heavy tactical transport able to fly most missions and support overseas operations with full self defence capability. The C295W would be the multi role stay at home utility aircraft able to provide MEPT, utility transport of cargo or passengers, possible MR with a FITS mission system option plus other non critical government taskings.

A mixed fleet provides thru life savings by using aircraft right sized to the task with max cargo capacities of 40 ton, 20 ton and 10 ton respectively. Using available acquisition costs for airframe only, not full life cycle costings, the eight frames could be acquired for approximately $1 billion New Zealand dollars today.

This mix provides one additional airframe over today's seven frame fleet but provides all aircraft as ramp equipped lifters. As stated the increase in speed allows for more cargo to be delivered over a given distance because more trips can be made. Additional airframes can be added as need develops. I would prefer a minimum of three C2's, but this is unlikely,in order to maintain the rule of 3.

A timeline for delivery could see the C295W's delivered first followed by the KC390 and then the C2's to allow for delivery slots to be made available and meet the timelines set out in the RFI. This also allow maximum use of the existing Hercules fleet until completely tapped out.

Passenger travel should be outsourced to a leased BBJ as needed otherwise pollies can travel in the back with everyone else.

It would also allow the movement of some transport capacity to Ohakea with the C295W. In its MEPT role it provides the opportunity for trainees to step over to the bigger air frame without leaving the training environ. Basing in the approximate centre of the country also provides a quick response for SAR and other internal natural disaster support. All turbo props at one base and all turbo fans at Whenupai.

Sorry Mr C I know it's been stated that a C295 sized aircraft isn't seen as needed but the limited ability of the B350 in the low end of the transport spectrum limits its value IMHO. To far of a step from a B350 to a P8 or C2 sized aircraft.

The C2/kc390 I think would give an ideal combination for NZ and I think the C295 could provide a more flexible training/light transport role.The very good runway performance of the C295 would be very useful in a in theater or disaster relief role. If the C2 was chosen this could also open the door for the Kawasaki P1 as a P3 replacement.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

Thank you Rob C.

I saw the recently posted video of the contract Caribou making a supply drop on the PRT in Afganistan and there is definitely a need for smaller resources from time to time. I am not advocating for the deployment of C295W's to a high threat environment but there is not the option to do that sort of an operation with smaller assets like a B200/350.

The first flights into Fiji after the cyclone were by B200 providing photo recce of the islands. Did they fly up and back? No they landed there and operated from local strips. The distance from Ohakea to Fiji is 2513 km and the max range of a B200 is 3338 plus 45 minutes reserve fuel. For Comparison a C295W with 6000 kg of cargo can fly 3700 km and air drop that cargo to those in need of immediate resupply instead of just taking photos and tipping the wings to say we see you there. That ability in and unto itself saves lives. In addition once it lands its onboard APU eliminates the need for ground support that a B200 requires. Sure a Herc or its replacement could do that but again cost comes into play.

Like the AW109 is a quantum leap in ability over the previously serving Bell 47 and the NH 90 is incomparable to the venerable Huey's the time for better capability is at hand.

Again just my informed opinion.

A rapidly deployed photo recon asset in a post disaster scenario (SoPac natural disaster responses being something which the NZDF has huge experience in) is important in providing initial situational awareness and informs follow on decision making on what resources are to be required via follow up air and sea transport. But hey you know better than us Kiwi's - what the hell do we know. Maybe we should follow your 'informed' advice and make a huge guess to what is required organise it load it and fly it up on a light tactical twin. Sheer genius ....

 

[Pusser01]

C-130J's almost universally fly without underwing tanks. This is said to be due to the extra efficiency/range afforded by the modern engine/prop in the J makes it unnecessary in typical sorties.
As I understand it the J has ability to use the underwing tanks if extra range is wanted for a particular mission.

KC-130J info

KC-130J Tanker · Lockheed Martin

4,275 n.mi (with external tanks)

Recently the RAF has fitted external fuel tanks to several of its C130J's.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/raf-hercules-get-extended-range-upgrade-410303/

I did read recently somewhere that the RAAF was investigating the option as well, will have to try to find the link.
Cheers