Replacment for Cessna 172

Larbre34 · 01-03-2021 12:41am

Yisser havin a laugh. The Air Corps couldn't get one decent sized transport aircraft out of the Government in good times, they certainly aren't going to get 5 now.

You won't see another aircraft acquisition until a) the defence commission has reported and b) some sustainable plan to address retention is enacted.

punchdrunk · 01-03-2021 2:03am

Larbre34 wrote: »

Yisser havin a laugh. The Air Corps couldn't get one decent sized transport aircraft out of the Government in good times, they certainly aren't going to get 5 now.

You won't see another aircraft acquisition until a) the defence commission has reported and b) some sustainable plan to address retention is enacted.

agreed, and to be fair what difference have previous white papers made to the acquisition of new gear anyway? they're full of recommendations of what the DF/DOD should do...that rarely come to anything

punchdrunk · 01-03-2021 2:12am

Psychlops wrote: »

Dauphin is too small & cumbersome, wouldnt be able to take all the required medical gear either.

the 139 is also small and cumbersome and neither have a full head height cabin
the 4 Dauphins, gifted to a charity AAS organisation supported by the NAS and could have been an ideal air ambulance
strip out the unnecessary equipment such as the winch, harpoon, floats etc and they'd have been perfect. lots of exers skilled in maintaining them, flying them—all could have been hired and those skills kept.

the EAS is a brilliant service but a waste of a military asset and it ties up the bulk of the 139 fleet

the Dauphin was a scapegoat, given away for a song...Chile still seem very happy with our cast offs and the US coastguard are once again upgrading theres- plenty of life left in them

punchdrunk · 01-03-2021 3:28pm

https://www.flightglobal.com/helicopters/us-coast-guard-mh-65-helicopter-upgrades-start-full-rate-production/136329.article

US Coastguard may fly them until 2039!

Stovepipe · 06-03-2021 10:23pm

The AC Dauphins had most of the available add-ons and wasn't much different than the Saudi Exocet-capable one. It was too heavy, too small inside,very difficult to climb into the cockpit with survival gear on and in essence, it was the wrong aircraft for the AC. The avionics were a mix and match job and were essentially unique and therefore expensive. I always suspected that Aerospatiale used the AC as a testbed for some of the equipment and fittings and it ate the maintenance budget like nothing else. The people who picked it appeared to have drunk the Aerospatiale Kool-Aid. In certain aspects,it was very good,as it was fast and it gave a solid grounding on more modern avionics and engines and airframes to the techs and the pilots but,over all, the entire Dauphin project was not a success.

California Dreamer · 07-03-2021 8:40pm

I have seen 280 heading as far as Beirut on several legs. Was wondering how Simon Coveney got to Iran. Would the Learjet have the legs for it or would it be commercial from London?

Larbre34 · 08-03-2021 12:04am

Probably on a UN aircraft or charter.

roadmaster · 08-03-2021 9:35am

Dept of Defence probably told Coveney the Learjet does work past grease

California Dreamer · 06-05-2021 2:41pm

Did they ever re-paint 280?

jonnybigwallet · 06-05-2021 2:51pm

I think they did...not 100% sure.

Peregrine · 06-05-2021 3:03pm

California Dreamer wrote: »

Did they ever re-paint 280?

As of April 21, no.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CN7x19vHxju/?igshid=ntvnntna3hss

Psychlops · 06-05-2021 8:03pm

California Dreamer wrote: »

Did they ever re-paint 280?

The IAC said themselves it was going to happen but not until their use has calmed down with the Pandemic.

sparky42 · 06-05-2021 8:43pm

Psychlops wrote: »

The IAC said themselves it was going to happen but not until their use has calmed down with the Pandemic.

And given its usage rate, that’s not likely anytime soon, I’d agree that it will most likely be when she needs to go back to the factory for something else. If for no other reason that I could already see some of our TDS kicking off about spending x thousand on repainting her anyway...
Still a shame we couldn’t swing the other one.

Larbre34 · 06-05-2021 11:41pm

A fifth? Was it ever suggested?

sparky42 · 06-05-2021 11:44pm

Larbre34 wrote: »

A fifth? Was it ever suggested?

Back when we picked up the extra one for Covid responses, they offered us another from the same cancelled order for only a couple more million (no more than 5 million from memory), the offer got turned down by the GS of DOD citing "lack of hanger space at Baldonnel" from memory.

Larbre34 · 07-05-2021 12:07am

Interesting.

That and the lack of crew I imagine.

sparky42 · 07-05-2021 12:35am

Larbre34 wrote: »

Interesting.

That and the lack of crew I imagine.

Sure, but at the time the 3 were still stuck in the States with no set time for arrival, an extra plane would have been useful, and ideally (though not at all in the DF right now) easier to build up pilots than get a good deal on another aircraft...

roadmaster · 07-05-2021 7:36am

They seam to have being a very good purchase and never out of the air weather its trips to carrickfin or lebanon

jonnybigwallet · 07-05-2021 7:39am

Classy bit of kit all right!

Larbre34 · 07-05-2021 12:27pm

I don't think we'd really need 5 of the type long term. A larger transport is definitely the next priority and that's a well rehearsed story at this stage.

That said, 280 has been an absolutely invaluable asset these past 14 months, a superb utility aircraft. There's little doubt already that the PC-12 was a worthy winner of the acquisition process and Pilatus have become a great partner to the DF.

California Dreamer · 07-05-2021 12:33pm

PC-24 replacement for the LJ45?

California Dreamer · 07-05-2021 1:16pm

Dohvolle wrote: »

No.
The PC24 is a PC12 with a Jet engine.(or 2)
It's a niche product for PC12 civvy owners who want to upgrade.

In fairness whats the LJ?

sparky42 · 07-05-2021 1:17pm

Larbre34 wrote: »

I don't think we'd really need 5 of the type long term. A larger transport is definitely the next priority and that's a well rehearsed story at this stage.

That said, 280 has been an absolutely invaluable asset these past 14 months, a superb utility aircraft. There's little doubt already that the PC-12 was a worthy winner of the acquisition process and Pilatus have become a great partner to the DF.

If we were finally to get to the point where the PC12 was deployed on a UN/EU mission for an ISTAR role having another basic airframe at home might have been useful, but that’s still remote.

But yes the PC12s do seem to have been worth it in the end.

California Dreamer · 07-05-2021 1:21pm

Dohvolle wrote: »

An aircraft to transport officers not important enough to travel on the G4.

Any replacement of it should be a military strategic transport, at minimum.

What G4? Thats gone years!

An LJ is not a military spec aircraft.

Larbre34 · 07-05-2021 1:45pm

An A321 with modular interior fitout should be acquired, similar to the RNZAF 757s.

Ideal to rotate troops to UN postings, carry cargo like foreign aid or emergency medicine or equipment and also to service ministerial air transport needs. Far more versatile than a C-130 and could also be leased for buttons from any one of the airlines that have them in storage at the moment.

California Dreamer · 07-05-2021 4:15pm

Dohvolle wrote: »

Exactly.
The Lear was a backup to the G4, which the Air Corps and Government have managed without.
People got notions in the 70s and 80s, and ministers felt they deserved to be carried about in luxury while they pretended it was in the national interest. Fact is its probably as easy for Michael Martin to get to Brussels, Paris or Washington on a scheduled flight, and not a Bizjet just big enough for the Minister and his entourage, and their shopping.
If we are going to replace it in its role, then it should be with a larger passenger aircraft that can also carry freight, so maybe we wouldn't have to hire Volga Dnepr next time we need to move emergency aid overseas. Make it so the cabin can be converted as a flying ambulance to it can further assist in international disasters.

I am not here for the politics, I am just interested in the aircraft!

California Dreamer · 07-05-2021 4:30pm

Dohvolle wrote: »

I'm sorry for your trouble, but the very existence of the Lear in the Air Corps is all about politics.
If you don't like that you might be in the wrong forum?

I think it is you that is in the wrong forum. I am just interested in the shiny metal tubes that go up in the air. I have no interest in the who, what, where or why and the polices of governments. I get enough of that elsewhere.

I asked a question, I got an answer but whatever style of tinfoil hat youre wearing there I will leave you to it.

California Dreamer · 07-05-2021 6:04pm

Dohvolle wrote: »

I'm sorry.
I didn't realise you were worthy of being ignored.
I'll fix that right away so the adults can continue with the conversation.

This is not the aviation forum.
Military=politics by other means.

Ok sonny, I have no interest in an argument despite your best efforts!

Manic Moran · 07-05-2021 7:07pm

Dohvolle wrote: »

You asked a question. I answered it. Then you became a dick.

[MOD]Unsurprisingly, this one gains moderator attention.

It seems to me the two of you have been talking past each other and have not demonstrated any point of disagreement on the issues.

Cal-Dreamer, I think you're overreacting by claiming Dohvolle's post was politics. Cynical, sure. (Personally, I like cynicism), but not politics.

Dohvolle, the rules against personal abuse are pretty clear. And, honestly, I think overreacting a bit here as well.[/Mod]

Stovepipe · 07-05-2021 8:15pm

The trouble with using airliners is that they need dedicated loading equipment such as pallet lifters,tugs, dedicated cargo bins or cargo pallets and mobile conveyors. A C-130 doesnt. When you see how much of those heavy equipments that expeditionary armies like the French have to position into places like Chad and Mali,before the first airliner ever lands, you get to understand why air arms like ramp-equipped aircraft,even small, basic ones like the CN 235/295. When you are dealing with Africa,you need to have the best kit on hand and a warmed over 321 is not the best. So,if you venture into Africa,you need to have a protected airport, heavy kit readily available,men on hand to protect it and the means to bug out if it all turns to ****. None of that is guaranteed and even the French have their off days and they've been there since God was a boy......apart from that,it's nice to see the PC-12 doing well. It would be really nice if it had two engines,a loadmaster and a big belly to hold stuff.;-)

Replacment for Cessna 172

Comments