Do we know for sure if a NH90 will fit inside without significant dis-assembly?
Just think it might be a bit too 'green' for NZ (ie: small numbers & unproven over time)
Royal New Zealand Air Force
- Thread starter Lucasnz
- Start date
Just think it might be a bit too 'green' for NZ (ie: small numbers & unproven over time)
No idea if it can or can't I would assume that yes it will but will require the NH-90 to be disassembled to some degree, as for being a bit green that equally applies to A-400 & C-390 but then again if KHI are clever they will be going after the strategic part of FAMC...who knows TBH time will tell.
Last edited:
Interestingly enough, apparently the cargo compartment of the C-2 ishigher than that of the C-17, so that means that it is possible that no or little disassembly of NH90s may be required.
Yes I get bugged by those out there there that assume they only do VIP work, they do much more than just that! Supporting deployments of C130 & P3 by getting personnel in & out. On one occasion IIRC one took crew & spares including a prop up to a middle east P3 deployment.
As for tri-service deployments why shouldn't personnel get to fly in something other than a cattle truck? Improves fatigue rates etc. And not forgetting B757 actually have a significant cargo lift capability both in the cabin (combo) and in the underfloor baggage hold. They also offer specialised AME capability.
So all these jobs are ones that take some pressure of the Hercs at present. Imagine if they then went full-hog & replaced the B757 with A330 MRTT, that certainly ain't just a VIP taxi.
Trouble is once again, small minds = small budgets!
That would be amazing, but very unlikely. I was thinking a great bang for your buck option would be the IAI 767 conversion tanker/cargo/personnel. At "only" $150M per aircraft it's a lot cheaper than a KC-46 and a LOT cheaper than a MRTT. Unfortunately Boeing now refuses to give the conversion licences to IAI because they're trying to flog their KC-46 and don't want the competition. A tanker would be great for supporting the P-8s and whatever tactical transports we get. We'd be able to get down to the ice, no problem. It'd be a great asset for our allies as well. Oh well.
A second hand 767 cargo/passenger conversion would also work.
I think that there is a place for a KC-30 / KC-4 6 type in the RNZAF fleet and my preference would be for three. They can cover the typical KC role which is a force multiplier, plus VIP, MEDEVAC, personnel transportation and palletized freight to a hub etc The RAAF KC-30 role is gradually being expanded into the 5th generation multi-domain role as a comma / data node, basic EW etc., and that is an area that we need to become active in, to add value and quality to any allied or coalition operation that we maybe involved in.
IMHO converting an existing airliner on an ad hoc basis using a third party would be a mistake and quite risky. Acquiring a new build KC-46 through FMS or KC-30 MRTT from Airbus, whilst expensive initially, would be value for money in the long term.
IMHO converting an existing airliner on an ad hoc basis using a third party would be a mistake and quite risky. Acquiring a new build KC-46 through FMS or KC-30 MRTT from Airbus, whilst expensive initially, would be value for money in the long term.
Of course there is a glaring difference between what the NZDF should have and is going to get!
My gut instincts are that the RNZAF will get either a balance of 4-5 in the tactical role (likely to be a C-130J variant with OEM furnished and certified A2A and ISR capabilities as it is the path of least resistance and a fully developed turn key platform) and 2-3 in the strategic role as part of the FAMC acquisition totalling 7 airframes - viz 5 + 2 or 4 + 3 with the mix coming down to the most logical distribution based on tasking projections and O/S load requirements.
If there is a later decision for an additional troop transport / international VIP / medevac / cargo then a leased vanilla passenger jet per B767-300 could be funded or possibly bought on the 2nd hand market as suggested in the 2011 VfM - and this potential aircraft does not necessarily need to be funded from the NZDF appropriation but as it would focus on MAOT taskings could well come from another crown account with proportions deducted from other departments and ministries.
My gut instincts are that the RNZAF will get either a balance of 4-5 in the tactical role (likely to be a C-130J variant with OEM furnished and certified A2A and ISR capabilities as it is the path of least resistance and a fully developed turn key platform) and 2-3 in the strategic role as part of the FAMC acquisition totalling 7 airframes - viz 5 + 2 or 4 + 3 with the mix coming down to the most logical distribution based on tasking projections and O/S load requirements.
If there is a later decision for an additional troop transport / international VIP / medevac / cargo then a leased vanilla passenger jet per B767-300 could be funded or possibly bought on the 2nd hand market as suggested in the 2011 VfM - and this potential aircraft does not necessarily need to be funded from the NZDF appropriation but as it would focus on MAOT taskings could well come from another crown account with proportions deducted from other departments and ministries.
But isn't that what we currently have/had and seems to work/have worked for what we use this particular capability for anyway?
Guess it will all come down to the level of funding, commitment the importance the govt will throw at this portion of the FAMC as to if we go for new build or "new" buy.
The Edda fonn purchase has shown they are not adverse to finding/funding a suitable solution regardless of all the visions they have for the future capabilities especially if we can achieve at least majority goals at favourable cost and in a beneficial time frame.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
It is what the RNZAF has had and used, but it has also demonstrated some rather glaring capability shortfalls.
If memory serves, the B757's were unavailable during a crisis soon after their purchase because they were undergoing some 3rd party modifications to make them suitable as a military airlifter. Relating to that, IIRC they were unable to fly into Afghanistan to support deployed Kiwis because the onboard EW and self-defence suites were considered inadequate for the potential threat environment.
Having the RNZAF unable to use their newest and strategic airlifter to support a PRT deployment was sort of a red flag for me.
Being designed as a civilian airliner intended for passenger use, the B757's can do a decent job moving large numbers of people a long distance, quickly. It does less well at moving large amounts (by weight) of cargo, as well as moving large items of cargo. Further, due to having a civilian origin, there are certain cargo handing systems an airport would require to be effective, that are much less of an issue with dedicated military airlifter desings.
The B752 replacement will not be arriving sooner and more likely a little later. It does not have the same critical urgency as the C-130H replacement. My guess is that there could be up to a 3 year gap between decisions.
The thing is any aircraft requiring modification will be out of action for a task during that period of modification, that is a timing issue, would be no different to us buying aircraft and waiting that extra time for the mods to be built in new only difference is we pushed the Boeings straight into service and then modified later.
The 757s could not fly into Bamiyan anyway as it is not suitable, RAAF A330s wouldn't be able to either, and would still need a staging apod to marry up with the hercs regardless as per the PRT rotations. The level of EW suite and self defence mods was and is upto the operator to fit, our govt could just as easily not tick these options or fit to any replacement aircraft, fitted for but not with is a common phrase in NZDF circles and if we based every capability on a single mission then we would literally have all the bells, whistles, armour, calibre and sensor under the sun. We had 10 years in theatre to kit out the 757s if that was the requirement.
If we need to move large freight then we use our large freight transport ie the hercs as if we are essentially going to have 2 types of aircraft to do the same job then we may as well just get the best specced option and combine the 2 into a single type.
WRT cargo handling it is all part of the planning process and again the best suited type is chosen accordingly and FYI the boeings get a lot of work,in demand and are infact not always available. We have unloaded a 757 in Timor directly onto the back of mogs, a little more difficult and hot work for the unload team in the hold but not unheard of, but TBH the vast majority of runways we take them to are more than adequate. We seem to get hung up on Afghan as our one and only ever mission when it is abit like saying the OPVs cannot do anti-piracy ops so we in fact need more frigate type ships instead.
The C130s and the 757s are different aircraft with different roles (in RNZAF use) but in my experience just as important and useful as each other for day to day ops in the NZDF (as in NZ) and we seem to be trying to compare the boeings to C17s when they are literally dummed down versions of A330 (albeit minus AAR capability) and treated as such. We had the option to acquire C17 and it was not taken up, I would like to think for valid reasons as this whole we waited to long and missed out theory does not quite wash as C17s are by no means new not even to us in terms of understanding what they do or could do for us.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
As someone who has lived and worked in the Pacific Islands, you see the Boeings passing through on a fairly regular basis. And they were rarely carrying VIPs.
My guess is that they will be replaced, one way or another, by something that offers a similar passenger transport capability.
The decision papers released (2 yrs ago?) about the possible purchase of a C-17 white tail showed the Air Force considered losing one or both Boeings as part of the cost-cutting measures to fund the C-17. There was some discussion about whether using a leased/purchased bog-standard civilian narrow-body for passenger transport, and my understanding is the tentative answer was 'yes'.
With that in mind, it's worth noting that AirNZ has just received it's first Airbus A321 NEO - which is being widely being used in the US and Europe to replace fleets of aging 757s. It strikes me as possible that the government could purchase or lease an aircraft and contract AirNZ to fly and maintain it. It would have negligible cargo capacity, but that need would be met by the new strategic lifter.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Leonardo and Northrop Grumman Australia Sign a Memorandum of Understanding for C-27J Through Life Support in New Zealand - APDR
This is APDR's take on the C27J team-up.
Poseidons for South Korea and New Zealand placed under contract | Jane's 360
And here is Janes reporting that the long-lead items for the Poseidons destined for South Korea and NZ have been ordered.
Also, the US Navy is very close to hitting its planned Poseiden fleet of 120 aircraft. The long lead times involved make me sceptical that it will be posible to 'pick up another airframe later'. Note that delivery isn't expected until 2023. Without substantial fresh orders, it's hard to see how the production line could be kept viable once the US stops ordering aircraft.
This is APDR's take on the C27J team-up.
Poseidons for South Korea and New Zealand placed under contract | Jane's 360
And here is Janes reporting that the long-lead items for the Poseidons destined for South Korea and NZ have been ordered.
Also, the US Navy is very close to hitting its planned Poseiden fleet of 120 aircraft. The long lead times involved make me sceptical that it will be posible to 'pick up another airframe later'. Note that delivery isn't expected until 2023. Without substantial fresh orders, it's hard to see how the production line could be kept viable once the US stops ordering aircraft.
It does beg the question how long a single B752 could on for if the 2nd one was canabalised to support it?
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
https://venturaapdr.partica.online/apdr/apdr-february-2019/responsive
The current APDR has a couple of pieces on NZ. One highlights the potential for Trans-Tasman coperation when we are both operating P-8s. Not any real conrete information, though.
The current APDR has a couple of pieces on NZ. One highlights the potential for Trans-Tasman coperation when we are both operating P-8s. Not any real conrete information, though.
Among the misc. news in their regular 'Across the Tasman' page is refernce to an intriguing suggestion that NZ could host a new antennae for the JORN over-the-horizon radar, extending it's coverage into the South Pacific. It stresses that no official talks are underway, and I haven't a clue about the technical feasibility of such an idea.
kiwipatriot69
Active Member
Whiplash34
Member
An interesting bit of info from one of the members on the Wings over New Zealand aviation forum, as follows:
“I had a really interesting conversation with someone today. Obviously I can't say who but I now have a very clear idea on what the future transport fleet will look like. No surprises really, but Treasury are going to determine what we end up ordering. They have put the brakes on what NZDF wants to do over the next few years (DCP) and essentially we can have 2 A400s or 2 KC-390s or 5 C-130Js... and whatever we get has to be delivered in 2022 (when the current Herc's structure is expected to turn into confetti). A 2 airframe fleet isn't going to work so that leaves just one contender... expect an announcement shortly.”
A400 for RNZAF | Wings Over New Zealand
I believe this member has a pretty good source and this is not just scuttlebutt thrown up on the inter webs by an armchair critic / internet commando.
If true, this is incredibly frustrating.
“I had a really interesting conversation with someone today. Obviously I can't say who but I now have a very clear idea on what the future transport fleet will look like. No surprises really, but Treasury are going to determine what we end up ordering. They have put the brakes on what NZDF wants to do over the next few years (DCP) and essentially we can have 2 A400s or 2 KC-390s or 5 C-130Js... and whatever we get has to be delivered in 2022 (when the current Herc's structure is expected to turn into confetti). A 2 airframe fleet isn't going to work so that leaves just one contender... expect an announcement shortly.”
A400 for RNZAF | Wings Over New Zealand
I believe this member has a pretty good source and this is not just scuttlebutt thrown up on the inter webs by an armchair critic / internet commando.
If true, this is incredibly frustrating.
recce.k1
Well-Known Member
Sounds like this is in relation to the tactical airlift (C-130H) replacement only (not the strategic airlift replacement circa 2025 etc)?
If so, 5x C-130J will still only give at least 2 aircraft concurrently available for deployment (same as the current situation). 8 airframes would have allowed for 3 aircraft available concurrently (and complement the P-8 for long range SAR etc). But will the coalition govt override Treasury advice? They have been doing so in other areas. Suspect DefMin Ron Mark will be a lone voice on this (and his leader won't back him - I hope I'm wrong but the way things are going of late eg only 4x P-8's not 5 or 6, Singapore F-15 basing scrapped etc .... ).
Be interesting if the other contenders (Airbus, Embrarer) could not only deliver their aircraft in these timeframes, but also have them certified and reach FOC - the KC-390 certification may be problematic in that no other 5-Eyes nation operates them.
Airbus though (along with Kawasaki) could still have a chance with the strategic airlift component of the FAMC project later on. Surely, as this is still another 3 or so years away decision wise, isn't affected by this latest Treasury brain-fart? I can see why they would do this though, as govt spending in other areas must surely be projected to accelerate alarmingly in the short-medium term?
Last edited: