Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I could be mistaken, but AFAIK all purchases from the US must go through FMS except for Canada, and are subject to ITARS rules as well as requiring consent from State and Congress.
Royal New Zealand Air Force
- Thread starter Lucasnz
- Start date
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Overnight, a billboard touting the Embraer KC-390 ("The First Responder") has appeared on The Terrace in downtown Wellington.
Not sure if Embraer know something we don't about timing, or whether they are just raising awareness of the brand.
Not sure if Embraer know something we don't about timing, or whether they are just raising awareness of the brand.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Making your presence known can't hurt. Embraer's marketing/support agreement with Boeing should be made known along with a BTW this is the same company that will be offering a MPA solution. Still, the KC-390 is a longshot.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Don't forget guys that the C-130J also comes in the -30 model which goes a fair way towards fixing the standard length Hercs biggest drawback, that you tend to run out of room long before you reach max load weight.
Very true, but the range / payload deteriorates, which is why most customers buy the standard model. With the long ranges the RNZAF flies this is not good and while I was in the mob, there never was a thought that our Herks should be modified to -30 standard as where some of the RAF C130's because of this problem. It is the old saying "you don't get something for nothing", is especially true with aircraft.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
With the comments of Minister Mark last year regarding equipment for the NZDF its very possible that a STOL transport aircraft could be a possibility. My preference is for C295W over the C27J but I am thinking MH-47F may be a better choice as it allows more interoperability with allies and a greater ability to assist during HADR operations. Specing the Canadian version would likely be in NZ's best interest as they come with long range fuel tanks and refueling probes.
I think the KC130J-30 is the likely replacement for the existing Hercules fleet as it offers the best value for money with the least risk. The tanker mod allows the aforementioned Chinooks to self deploy to assist in the islands for HADR.
Hopefully Mr. Mark sees it right to add an additional five AW109LUH to the fleet as well.
Although early days for the new government i look forward to the anticipated program for the transport replacement. Let the games begin.
I think the KC130J-30 is the likely replacement for the existing Hercules fleet as it offers the best value for money with the least risk. The tanker mod allows the aforementioned Chinooks to self deploy to assist in the islands for HADR.
Hopefully Mr. Mark sees it right to add an additional five AW109LUH to the fleet as well.
Although early days for the new government i look forward to the anticipated program for the transport replacement. Let the games begin.
t68
Well-Known Member
MH-47F would have to be a seperate project as the FAMC project is not mandated to look at rotary, but agree with the thought.
I agree, but now with the new govt and new MinDef that could change. I am sure that DefMin Mark would see the logic of Chooks in NZDF service; whether or not he could get it through Cabinet is another story. I would far rather Chooks than a twin turboprop airlifter. IMHO far better VfM.
Novascotiaboy
Active Member
Playing the devils advocate if a change to the current plan is made and a purchase of Chooks became an option what are peoples opinions of numbers that would make a viable fleet. As has been mused previously could a Chook fleet for the RNZAF form a CSAR unit to assist on allied ops?
Personally I am thinking four minimum and five prefered.
Personally I am thinking four minimum and five prefered.
Due to the much higher servicing requirements for fling wing over fixed wing I think any thing less than 5 would be a waste of time.
While I can see the logic for the CH 47 there are downsides when compared with STOL transports. for example when required to deploy the fixed wing can go immediately it is ready and will get there faster. The Chook needs to be constantly refueled every 900 km or so and if normal practice is adhered to there will be even more top ups so that the chook has somewhere to go in the event of a refueling failure. and this will tie up aircraft to do this.(presumably the C130 replacements) so that they cannot deploy until the chook deployment is complete. It also means that they cannot be used to to deploy men or materials until the chooks are at their destination, or if the men and materials go first, the chooks will be late, so everything is dramatically slowed up. The reverse also happens on the way home. If we got a big enough Herk replacement either the A400 or C2 then the NH90's could be simply flown directly to the destination in far less time and trouble in which case I would go for more NH 90's as being more practical.
t68
Well-Known Member
I fairly certain I saw a diagram somewhere showing CH-47F in a A400M, pending the circumstances it may be fesable to use joint AAR capabilty between NZ/AU
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
It would really depend on what other elements are within the NZDF. Unless the RNZAF gets some A400M's as replacements for either the C-130H or B757 or perhaps picks up a few 2nd hand USAF C-17's... That would really limit where any Kiwi CH-47 Chinook's could be deployed to without requiring outside assistance.
The Canterbury heli deck looks large enough to fit a single CH-47, but that would really only permit either lily-padding or using the Canterbury to transit into or out from an area of operations. Relating to that, given the very limited self-defence capabilities of the Canterbury, that would mean the NZDF could potentially deploy a single CH-47 to a relatively benign area of operations.
I do think that some time in the near future, the NZDF will want to have a medium/heavy rotary lift capability, but right now I do not see how the NZDF could organically support such a capability away from NZ.
Interestingly enough, l read an article - which now I can't find; bugger - where Ron Mark suggested the Singaporean Endurance class LPD instead of the MRV Canterbury so if that were to be the case, with some modifications to include hangar space, I think that a chook or three could operate off it. If for a HADR or whatever, chooks need to be somewhere in the islands in a hurry, with say the KC-130J they could fly the distance with in flight refuelling and the same with the NH90s. AFAIK to transport a NH90 by A400M and probably KHI C-2, it has to be broken down a bit, with the removal of the rail rotors and the main rotor, including possibly the rotor mast, from the looks of it. That's a lot of work at either end which negates the temporal advantage over sailing the helos there or flying them using AAR.
And of course it is not just getting our stuff quickly over there it is also getting them from there to back here as well.
When the Seasprite embarked on Te Mana in the Gulf suffered damage in 2004 it was months before the aircraft could have arrangements for it to be transported back to New Zealand and then months to fix. Which had impacts systemic impacts on the Frigate Force capability.
When the Seasprite embarked on Te Mana in the Gulf suffered damage in 2004 it was months before the aircraft could have arrangements for it to be transported back to New Zealand and then months to fix. Which had impacts systemic impacts on the Frigate Force capability.
Every photo of an NH90 being trasported by an aircraft I could find on google shows them with the rotors removed. The aircraft I could find photos of were AN24, C-17 and A400.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Here's a series of pictures showing the loading of a Merlin into a C-17. The rotors are removed. Canada's CH-148 Cyclone and the NH-90, similar size, would also require rotor removal.
https://theaviationist.com/2013/06/11/c17-merlin/
https://theaviationist.com/2013/06/11/c17-merlin/
t68
Well-Known Member
Tight fit by the looks of it, very low to the deck seems either the landing gear is retracted or removed dosnt appear to be sitting on her own wheels. I wonder if they have two chained down as the photo shows something tied down behind the camera.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The line below the second photo mentions " one of the choppers" so likely the additional tie downs are for something else.
Huh? Most countries have either bought only the -30 model and those able to afford both still have more of the longer version making the -30 by far the most popular choice in the J range so unsure how you have come to the conclusion most countries have stuck with the standard model?
If we were to stick with C130 IMO we would be even more disadvantaged not to go with the extended version as it really would be no change from the current fleet and therefore merely commiting to another 50 years of the already identified deficiencies and if so then what exactly would we be achieving in all honesty?
Yep a stuff up on my part re numbers. The range payload is still a problem for us due the distances we have to fly as the C130J has the worst range payload of the viable replacement aircraft. the next worse aircraft (the KC390) can travel almost 50% further on the C130J normal max (not the absolute max) of 15.4 tonnes. My personal choice of replacement would if the money was available would be a close choice between the C2 and the A400, with the nod going to the C2 as it is fan powered not prop which leads to lower maintenance, longer engine life, far less cabin noise, (down to almost airline standard) and greater speed which reduces mission time and increases availability. it also seems to be over development problems which the A400 is not yet. With less money the pick would be between the KC390 and the C130J. My pick would be the KC390 as it is more modern aircraft with modern control systems, has a significantly better range payload ,it is significantly cheaper again fan powered with the same advantages as the C2 and the AAR can be fitted or removed quickly as opposed to the KC130's days of work so most operators don't bother and except the performance liability. As I think RM will want to squeeze in the jet trainer / light strike aircraft I think that the cheaper option is the likely one.