Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Transport Aircraft

Options
1282931333451

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,909 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Martin has said repeatedly this week since Sudan blew up that he had ordered officials to look at the European Programs that Ireland might consider joining. Whether or not anything comes from that is a whole other question.



  • Registered Users Posts: 300 ✭✭tippilot


    Give Marshalls of Cambridge free reign on those Hercs and you are getting a "new" aircraft.

    2 X Pilots plus a load master. 3 crews per aircraft as a rule of thumb. 9 aircrew plus techs per airframe.

    50 is wildly inflated. It's not the 1940's. 20 - 25 skilled crew per machine is relaistic and doable.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,690 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    Id presume maybe wrongly but the defence forces and martin already know what grouping they want to join. The air corps made there case for joining the EATC if they had got the two WFP casas. So how long will it take for us to join one of the airlift groups?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,690 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    If they had bought the 5th pc12 maybe they 3 spectare NG models could be doing there jobs maybe even heading to the med with the navy



  • Registered Users Posts: 299 ✭✭Grassy Knoll


    Whatever aircraft the Aer Corp had in the past have given amazing service and value for money … additional C295 are in that bracket. What is ordered is only bare bones territory. The defence spokespeople are also being disingenuous this week when pointing to the new MPA - these are being equipped for a particular technical role, hawking about cargo or landing in dusty airstrips is not one of them.

    However , as we know they are a limited enough aircraft in terms of tactical transport. Clearly for access to large scale aircraft the pooled EU option is the way to go, however as a sovereign state there may be occasions where mission’s could fall out side scope and we have no ability to transport certain equipment or vehicles …

    certainly 1 transporter is better than none, but the c295:it is on occasion the equivalent of using a hatchback vehicle where a small van is the better option ….



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Yeah but sure the only way to transport heavy equipment or armoured vehicles by air is the A400M / C-17 bracket and the airlift partnership, or the aircraft of the 2024/25 EU Battlegroup nations, are the only ways that's going to happen.

    In no universe are we buying a €180 million strategic airlifter, on our own.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,083 ✭✭✭jonnybigwallet


    Fair comment grassy. This attachment gives an interesting comparison. The more capable of the two cam transport two IFV' s and a helicopter

    https://jetlinemarvel.net/aircraft-comparisons-between-the-brazilian-built-embraer-kc-390-and-the-european-airbus-c-295/?utm_content=cmp-true



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,690 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    The main role of the PC12 is suppouse to be ISTAR not an air taxi for covid tests and officals. It could work in the med the same as the beckett will . If we have the extra pc 12 it could do the donkeywork same as the 4th an not be wasting hours on aircraft that where fitted out for ISTAR



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    The ISTAR equipped PC12NG could be an ideal maritime patrol asset in Op IRINI. It would be as good as the Polish An-28 out there at present. Or the Kingair 350 from Luxembourg.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    It wouldn't, in that the Pilatus is a single-engined aircraft and the others are both twin.

    The risk of se-ops over 200,000+ sq.km of open sea, the southern coast of which is hostile with some of the very people your mission is to prevent from getting arms, is not a great idea.

    I couldn't see the DF or the Government going for it, even if we had the other resources to do it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    Everyone is concerned about the PC12 losing an engine over water. Do they realise losing it over land is not exactly an ideal situation either? Lindbergh crossed the atlantic in a single engine aircraft...



  • Registered Users Posts: 230 ✭✭mupper2


    Speaking of the PC-12's 2 of them returning home today after supporting the operation in Sudan




  • Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    He did, but Lindbergh wasn't orbiting near the Libyan coast above a scattering of dodgy sub-Saharan trawlers and freighters trying to get small arms and RPGs into Benghazi.

    Of course operating single-engine anywhere has its risks, but no redundancy on an operation like this would be simply reckless and so won't happen.

    Who knows, maybe when the 295W arrives, we may be able to spare a 295 MPA for Irini or other international embargo or anti-piracy ops. The right aircraft for the job and a great opportunity to get some overseas operational experience.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,909 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Why would the transport arriving allow us to free up an MPA for such a tasking? It can't replace it here and the two aren't enough as is.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Because the previous 235s and, for the moment, the 295MPAs when they arrive, will be used as transport planes also, due to the historical lack of any such dedicated plane.

    If we have one 295W and one 295MPA operational in Ireland and one 295MPA deployed abroad, we're still better off that we are right now.

    We all know the PC-12s aren't suitable for Irini and we should stop pretending that they may be.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,541 ✭✭✭California Dreamer


    I didn't know that the engines knew when they were over water!!

    (something my flight instructor said to me years ago)



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    If we have 2 its because we expect one to be unavailable for a variety of reasons. Usually the non-flying ones. It'll take a year at best to bring the C295 MPA up to operational levels. The 3rd will jump straight in because we'll already have the pilots, we'll just need to train the guys in the back.

    We will never have a spare MPA unless we have 4 MPA.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,690 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    If it will take a year for the 295s to get up to operation level will they hold on the 235s for another year. One of the posters here previously said the 235s have many years left in them as they where kept very well



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    Whoever said that was mistaken. Before the bump in the hangar recently, one of the 235 has been without a functioning FLIR for quite some time. We had 2 flyable recently for a short period, but realistically only one available for MPA. Their usefulness otherwise is questionable. Keep one or both you have to maintain tech & pilot currency on type, and we haven't exactly got spare pilots & techies wandering around the don looking for something to fly or fix.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,690 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    In the document you shared before about the WFP casas where the air corps wanted them they noted they could do SAR Top Cover with the 235s but if they had only 295s it would make life alot eaiser with maintaiance and crews



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,116 ✭✭✭Psychlops


    No offence but that talk of single engine over water is pretty much long gone among nearly all air arms these days, RN using single engine F35 daily over sea from an aircraft carrier etc



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,909 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Not too mention the PC12s used in Australia, doubt going down in the wrong spot there is any better just because its land instead of water, also how many incidents have there been of aircraft in Operation Irini being attacked up to now? Hell if we are going to go the "single engine is a risk" argument then surely pretty much all they have been doing is a "risk" since we bought them?



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    If a single engine prop plane has engine failure overland and has an APU, it can be glided to an emergency landing quite successfully on a short expanse of flat land and its position communicated. That doesn't apply at sea and you know this.

    Ask yourself why neither the President or Taoiseach are never cleared to be flown on the PC-12? This stuff is actively considered in the AC and is part of the risk assessment of any mission planning.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,116 ✭✭✭Psychlops


    I have zero interest as to why those 2 are not in the PC12 but I do know that if the AC were doing a risk assessment then why send single engine aircraft to Africa, the answer is obvious.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,690 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    Posters have said here in the past the state should have bought the Blackhawk. I reading some of the submisions to the CoDF and in one submission a person states that the board that where recomending rotary reolacements for the A3 and Gazelle actually approved the Blackhawk as the best choice rather than the 139?.

    Is that true?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    Yup. Unfortunately Blackhawk Down was in the movies at the time, so the DoD said no.

    The EC135 replaced the Gazelle, and AIII, effectively offering the same capacity and usefulness as a Light Utility Heli. The AW139 replaced the Dauphin in the Utility Helicopter role.

    It's not that the AW139 is a bad aircraft, its just a civvy heli designed for civvy roles, painted green. Even the Agusta brochure at the time said "law enforcement" rather than "military".



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,944 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Did you ever hear such shiteball amateur hour reasoning in your entire life. No wonder the DF is a calamity of late.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,370 ✭✭✭Dohvolle


    Don't forget we turned down a PC12 for immediate delivery because we had nowhere to park it.

    There are 5 hangars in Baldonnel for 26 aircraft. When we had only 4 hangars, strangely we had enough room for over 40 aircraft in the 80a and 90s.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,690 ✭✭✭roadmaster


    Id say also the price of the aw139 vs a combat fitted out blackhawk also helped the DOD choice



Advertisement