Royal New Zealand Air Force

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
https://airbusdefenceandspace.com/our-portfolio/military-aircraft/a400m/

The link that T86 put up a few pages ago is worth a re-read with respect to the A400M. Not necessitating the 'hub and spoke' like in the traditional Tac/Strat approach is its very design advantage. As the Airbus marketing people say it is the USP or unique selling point. This is the kind of proposition that becomes attractive to the RNZAF.

Short Unpaved Airstrip Performance

The A400M is the only large airlifter that can fly heavy and outsize equipment directly to the point of need. The A400M is designed to operate efficiently from austere airfields, with unpaved airstrips, short runways, limited space for parking or manoeuvring and no ground facilities, conditions that present severe constraints for any tactical airlifter. The ability to use unpaved airstrips close to the final destination saves precious time in the delivery of heavy equipment, personnel or supplies and allows bypassing of intermediate airports that may be congested during times of crisis. As on turboprops like the EuroProp EPI TP400 Turboprops, the inlets are smaller than on turbofan engines and the propeller serves as a first line of defence, turboprop engines are less subject to foreign object debris (FOD) including sand dust particles.

Thanks to the design of its 12-wheel High Flotation Main Landing Gear and the robustness of its structure and systems the A400M offers unprecedented tactical capabilities in the heavy segment.

The A400M is therefore able to land on, and take-off from, any short, soft and rough unprepared CBR 6 airstrip, no longer than 750 m / 2,500 ft, while delivering up to 25 tonnes / 55,000 lb of payload, and with enough fuel on board for a 930 km / 500 nm return trip.

Autonomous Ground Operations

The autonomous capability of the A400M enables operations from remote austere airstrips. By minimising time on the ground, the A400M’ systems reduce the aircraft’s vulnerability to hostile action. The state-of-the-art digital Load Master Work Station (LMWS) enables full management of the Cargo Handling System and monitoring of aerial delivery operations. The cargo floor can be re-configured very quickly as rollers can be manually and easily turned upside down by a single operator in order to have either rollers down for flat floor configuration or rollers up for pallet configuration. The main landing gear can be kneeled to lower the rear of the aircraft in order to adjust the height from cargo floor to ground and reduce the crest angle formed between the Ramp and the Cargo Floor when the Ramp is deployed to the ground.


It tactical field capabilities are really not that much more than the smaller C-295.

https://airbusdefenceandspace.com/our-portfolio/military-aircraft/c295/

SHORT TAKE-OFF & LANDING (STOL) CAPABILITY

The C295’s STOL capability combined with a strong landing gear enable it to operate in the most austere locations with the worst conditions for take-off and landings. The aircraft is a tactical military transport with a light footprint to enable operations from short (no longer than 670 m / 2,200 ft), soft and rough (CBR 2) unprepared airstrips. The C295 is also designed to provide outstanding low-level flight characteristics for tactical missions, flying at speeds down to 110 kt.


Finally, to clear up the 'size' misconception about the training pathway from B-350 to A400M and that a graduated middle sized aircraft is somehow required. Not in the RAF who one could says is a model of best practice and rationalisation.

Future Pilots Meet Future Aircraft
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
There are a couple of things to consider with respect to Whenuapei operations over the medium term.

1. The urgent demand for houses to be build on its site will increase until the demand pressure gets so much it will go the way of Hobsonville. It will be a subdivision.

2. The RNZAF presence in Auckland will be transferred to a 'sub base' facility at AIA which if plans head for fruition will have its 2150m second runway around 2025-2030. Maybe only 6 Sqd and 5 Sqd could remain with 40 Sqd going to OH or even both 40 & 5 Sqd going to an enlarged OH base.

The WP base is worth a considerable amount as it is on high value land if zone residential. It would fund a new smaller joint use facility at AIA and probably pay for further growth at OH.

I would not be surprised if this is at least raised or even happens.
Don't know if the RNZAF still have an engineering presence at Mangere, but when I was at Hobsonville, I worked at the RNZAF RPU in the Air NZ engineering facility at Mangere - AIA.

If they moved both the RNZN and RNZAF out of Auckland why not take both north to Whangarei? Relocate the RNZAF on the the flat land south of the harbour and the RNZN in the harbour near the RNZAF. Wouldn't be a silly move. The land will be relatively cheap to acquire even at market rates.
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
They'd even get more per sq metre for Devenport NB than WP. Both are prime real estate, but DNB more so.
A few months back on the RNZN thread someone raised a valid concern about the residual toxicity that may be left behind due to 100 years of military use as a Naval base. That said it is / was / could be very prime real estate if that was mitigated.

WP has the space to supply 1000's of mix-mode dwellings from detached houses through to apartments. There is a certain inevitability about WP's long term future.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Finally, to clear up the 'size' misconception about the training pathway from B-350 to A400M and that a graduated middle sized aircraft is somehow required. Not in the RAF who one could says is a model of best practice and rationalisation.

Future Pilots Meet Future Aircraft
One other thing about the RAF is that they don't operate a twin engined tactical airlifter such as the C295 or C27J. I think that the last ones they had were the HS780 Andover C Mk1s that we bought off them in 1976. They use their C130Js in a tactical airlift role and as an air transporter plus they operate Chooks as well as Merlins and Pumas.
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
Don't know if the RNZAF still have an engineering presence at Mangere, but when I was at Hobsonville, I worked at the RNZAF RPU in the Air NZ engineering facility at Mangere - AIA.

If they moved both the RNZN and RNZAF out of Auckland why not take both north to Whangarei? Relocate the RNZAF on the the flat land south of the harbour and the RNZN in the harbour near the RNZAF. Wouldn't be a silly move. The land will be relatively cheap to acquire even at market rates.
http://www.wdc.govt.nz/TrafficandTr...rt/Documents/Port-Nikau-Assessment-Part-1.pdf

You maybe interested in this. Note the remarks and map dated from 1946 regarding a 3000m airport.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
A few months back on the RNZN thread someone raised a valid concern about the residual toxicity that may be left behind due to 100 years of military use as a Naval base. That said it is / was / could be very prime real estate if that was mitigated.

WP has the space to supply 1000's of mix-mode dwellings from detached houses through to apartments. There is a certain inevitability about WP's long term future.
Well they cleaned up Hobsonville and Wigram so DNB shouldn't be a deal breaker. There were all sorts of bits and bobs buried at Wigram (bits of old planes etc.,) and gawd knows what at Hobsonville especially down by the where the Sunderlands and Catalinas were pulled in and out of the water, maintained and hangared. There's also a USAAF B17 or B24 crash up around WP that was bulldozed into a hole after the deceased were removed, and then the hole was filled in. The same was done after a USAAF B17 blew up nearby with a full bomb load when it crashed after take off.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro

swerve

Super Moderator
One other thing about the RAF is that they don't operate a twin engined tactical airlifter such as the C295 or C27J. I think that the last ones they had were the HS780 Andover C Mk1s that we bought off them in 1976. They use their C130Js in a tactical airlift role and as an air transporter plus they operate Chooks as well as Merlins and Pumas.
Don't assume that just because the RAF does it it's been decided after careful consideration of all the factors. The RAF was heading towards an all-A400M/C-17 force until last year, when it was decided to keep some of the C-130Js. Sanity!

IIRC, we're keeping the special forces ones. If the rumours are true, there was intense lobbying from the army to either keep some C-130J or get some C-27J or the like.
 
Last edited:

RegR

Well-Known Member
Another reason keeping 40 in AK (C130 at least) is the quick access for the group boys to conduct their trade who in turn require quick access to an international airport for much the same reason. There was talk of moving the base south to AIL when they were to build their proposed southern runway, could still be on the cards as combined projects. May have been talk of private investor partnership as well ie somone else build and defence long term lease.
 

Sam W

New Member
Thanks, yes interesting. I was thinking more out towards Marsden Point, between One Tree Point and Takahiwai for the RNZN and in behind there for the RNZAF. Mind you there are a few cribs (bachs) out that way.
Marsden Point refinery would be a very important piece of national infrastructure in the event of a sea denial situation. Having an air base there would be ideal.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Both the C-130J and (eventually more than likely the A400M) are both the only current choices for NZ transport. The KC390 shows great promise but realistically it's a long shot. The only deviation is a "Hail Mary" offer by the USAF/US Gov for a couple of surplus C-17s. If the US really wants some addtional lift to the Anarctic by NZ then the ball is in their court if they want a US jet to perform the mission. I like the A400M concept and in a prefect procurement world, a mix of C-17s and A400Ms would be nice for NZ and other nations assuming the dollars could be made available. The longer NZ current assets can serve, the KC390 will have more time to prove itself.
 

40 deg south

Well-Known Member
https://airbusdefenceandspace.com/our-portfolio/military-aircraft/a400m/

The link that T86 put up a few pages ago is worth a re-read with respect to the A400M. Not necessitating the 'hub and spoke' like in the traditional Tac/Strat approach is its very design advantage. As the Airbus marketing people say it is the USP or unique selling point. This is the kind of proposition that becomes attractive to the RNZAF.

...

It tactical field capabilities are really not that much more than the smaller C-295.

https://airbusdefenceandspace.com/our-portfolio/military-aircraft/c295/

SHORT TAKE-OFF & LANDING (STOL) CAPABILITY

...

Finally, to clear up the 'size' misconception about the training pathway from B-350 to A400M and that a graduated middle sized aircraft is somehow required. Not in the RAF who one could says is a model of best practice and rationalisation.

Future Pilots Meet Future Aircraft


Mr C
As always, you make some good points. The claimed short-field performance and autonomous operations capability of the A400 will be key attractions to RNZAF.

However, my support for the 'hub and spoke' model of aid delivery isn't really because of the inability to land large loads on small runways. Its more to do with the most efficient use of a scarce resource - the strategic lifter itself. To get the maximum amount of supplies to (for example) Fiji post-cyclone, you want to fly straight in, drop your 30 tonnes of supplies at Nadi International Airport and go back to Auckland for another load. The alternative might involve staging around multiple small island strips, unloading a few tonnes at each, then refueling at Nadi and returning to NZ. This doesn't seem like the most efficient use of such a capable long-range aircraft.

Unless the loadmasters in Whenuapai have got excellent information on what is required where, the crew could end up having to unload a heap of tarpaulins and rice to get at a much-needed generator hidden down the back, then re-load the un-needed pallets before taking off to the next one-village island and repeating the act. I think there is a mis-match between the capability of the aircraft and the ability of the receiving community to store/distribute a full load of supplies.

As to moving straight from B200 to A400, erm, I dunno. It's clearly possible, but I can't help thinking the RAF are making the best of the circumstances they are in (i.e. not having a twin turboprop and expecting to lose their C-130s when the article was written). Most commercial airlines seem to expect pilots to progress through regional turboprops or at least start of the small narrow-bodies (B737/A320) before moving onto larger jets. I'm pretty sure there is a reason for this.

If NZ selects the C-130J or KC-390, I'm confident we won't see a twin turboprop. If we get something larger, i still think a twin turboprop option will be closely considered.
 
Last edited:

chis73

Active Member
Orion underwater systems upgrade going ahead

Well, bugger me, this is a project that I didn't think would get over the bar- the Orions are to have their underwater systems upgraded for $36m. Considering the age of the aircraft and their impending retirement (probably mid 2020s, ie. approx 8 years away), and that similar projects have been rejected twice before (circa 1983 & 2000), I wasn't holding much hope.

Further investment in new Defence capabilities | Scoop News

Some exaggeration in the press release: I doubt there are 2/3rds of the world's subs in the Asia-Pacific. More like half.
 

40 deg south

Well-Known Member
Both the C-130J and (eventually more than likely the A400M) are both the only current choices for NZ transport. The KC390 shows great promise but realistically it's a long shot. The only deviation is a "Hail Mary" offer by the USAF/US Gov for a couple of surplus C-17s. If the US really wants some addtional lift to the Anarctic by NZ then the ball is in their court if they want a US jet to perform the mission. I like the A400M concept and in a prefect procurement world, a mix of C-17s and A400Ms would be nice for NZ and other nations assuming the dollars could be made available. The longer NZ current assets can serve, the KC390 will have more time to prove itself.
John
The RFI contains some pretty definite dates (although these can obviously be modified further down the track). Airbus, Embraer and Kawasaki have just over three years to iron out any bugs and deliver the first aircraft.

 Replacement of the five C-130H aircraft between February 2021 and
December 2023. A replacement aircraft will be delivered by February 2020
to allow initial operational capability to be declared in February 2021. Full
operational capability shall be declared no later than February 2024
 Replacement of the two B757-200 combi aircraft by February 2026. The
first replacement aircraft will be required by 1 February 2025 to allow initial
operational capability to be declared by 1 February 2026
 

40 deg south

Well-Known Member
Mr C

While looking at your link on RAF pilot training, I learned that the RAF is now moving to multi-engine training on an Embraer light jet.

Embraer Phenom 100 Multi-Engine Pilot Trainer Aircraft - Airforce Technology

That supports your suggestion of NZ adopting the new Pilatus 24 for training/utility purposes. I knew very little about it - here are a couple of links for others who share my ignorance. It does look as if initial production is heavily booked up, and simulator hasn't yet been build. Further down the track, it could certainly be a versatile light asset for NZ.

Pilatus PC-24 To Do Everything | Business Aviation content from Aviation Week

http://www.synerjet.com/assets/pc-24-broschure-pilatus.pdf
 

40 deg south

Well-Known Member
Well, bugger me, this is a project that I didn't think would get over the bar- the Orions are to have their underwater systems upgraded for $36m. Considering the age of the aircraft and their impending retirement (probably mid 2020s, ie. approx 8 years away), and that similar projects have been rejected twice before (circa 1983 & 2000), I wasn't holding much hope.

Further investment in new Defence capabilities | Scoop News

Some exaggeration in the press release: I doubt there are 2/3rds of the world's subs in the Asia-Pacific. More like half.
Nothing on the RNZAF website, and the acquisition section of the MinDef website was last updated on this topic on 8 September 2015. It announced Boeing was the preferred supplier, and negotiations and due diligence would begin.

Underwater Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance [Ministry of Defence NZ]

Unlike the very clear delivery dates given in the Mobility RFI (see above), I can't see any delivery date in the Surveillance RFI. Seems a little odd, unless I've just missed it.

UPDATE
Also nothing on the Boeing website.
 
Last edited:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Well, bugger me, this is a project that I didn't think would get over the bar- the Orions are to have their underwater systems upgraded for $36m. Considering the age of the aircraft and their impending retirement (probably mid 2020s, ie. approx 8 years away), and that similar projects have been rejected twice before (circa 1983 & 2000), I wasn't holding much hope.

Further investment in new Defence capabilities | Scoop News

Some exaggeration in the press release: I doubt there are 2/3rds of the world's subs in the Asia-Pacific. More like half.
Well the release came from the minister so it must be right :D
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/further-investment-new-defence-capabilities
 

Rob c

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
While 36 million is not a huge amount,these days for a system upgrade, I thought this project would be dead in the water with the release of the RFI. "WRONG". Obviously the thinking is for the P3 to go full term in regard to the mid 2020 replacement date. The point I am not sure of is, will the P8 still be in production at that time?
 

kiwipatriot69

Active Member
Top