This is a discussion on Royal New Zealand Air Force within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by Todjaeger
In terms of commonality between airlifters... I think people have missed some of the important parts ...
In terms of commonality between airlifters... I think people have missed some of the important parts of this commonality. With regards to the C-130J and C-27J, the glass cockpit is supposed to be the same, as ar the engines and some of the other avionics. The advantages here are the ease of the maintenance burden for operating the two aircraft, as well as maintaining parts & equipment and a trained groundcrew staff. In terms of air ops, while yes the aircraft are different, having a high degree of commonality between airlifters can simply training and transitioning pilots between aircraft, as well as easing any concurrency burdens for pilots who might fly both types of aircraft.
What might IMO be more important is the commonality in airlift capacity. A cargo pallet which gets flown into a local area by a C-130J can be offloaded into a C-27J to take the cargo pallet onto its final destination. The cargo area of a C-295 is too small to take a pallet which can fit into a C-130J, and the floor strength is too low to take the weight of a fully loaded C-130J or C-27J pallet. This means that cargoes which get flown into an area in a C-130J would need to either be broken down and re-packed to fit into the C-295, or the C-130J would need to be packed with smaller and lighter pallets which are compatible with the C-295 in the first place.
its one of the things that does seem to get ignored. as you say, its the commonality aspects that are the big advantages with the spartan.
common logistics impact is a huge consideration if you already have hercs in the fleet.
its not just about airframe and flight handling etc - its about he through life support advantages, and the loggie impact with spartans is much much better if you already have hercs
________________ A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
Personally, I like the C-27J, so I'm not anti-Spartan. I just don't think it is as clear a decision as we would like (as if it ever is).
Commonality with the C-130J is only an issue if the service already operates the C-130J or has firm plans to operate the C-130J. Yes for Australia - No for NZ.
Similarly I think the C-130 -> C-27 pallet issue is also an issue that requires careful thought.
How often does cargo go from logistics centre to battlefield without being broken down and repacked at an intermediate regional centre?
It is best for the pallet to be packed at the logistics centre with the needs of the end user and the pallet is transfered from truck to aircraft to aircraft to truck, but I wouldn't know how often that is realistic.
Complicating the issue is the uncertainty over the USAF program. If it is stopped, or even cut altogether, the associated support costs over the life of the aircraft will rise. The C-295 is more commercial in component origin, and that has to have an impact on support through its life (especially towards the end).
Similarly I think the C-130 -> C-27 pallet issue is also an issue that requires careful thought.
How often does cargo go from logistics centre to battlefield without being broken down and repacked at an intermediate regional centre?
It is best for the pallet to be packed at the logistics centre with the needs of the end user and the pallet is transfered from truck to aircraft to aircraft to truck, but I wouldn't know how often that is realistic.
Most likely the pallet is broken down, prior to being loaded onto trucks, helicopters, manpacked, etc.
The advantage of the C-27J and the C-130J both being able to handle palletized loaded of the same weight, is that allows an intermediate pallet breakdown and repack to be skipped.
One logistical question which would need to be considered and answered, is how far removed are the deployed troops from the depots?
I would imagine that the preference would be for there to be forward depots to resupply the deployed troops with water, food and munitions. It would IMO be from these areas where the supplies would be broken down and flown out to the troops via helicopter, trucked out or perhaps even carried out. Depending on the area of operations, supplies might need to be flown into the theatre via a C-130J and then taken to the depots by C-27J, or perhaps the depots would just be supplied via C-130J and then in shifting of depot inventory was required, that might be accomplished via C-27J.
The fewer points where cargo needs to be handled before it gets into the end-user's hands, the fewer points where bottlenecks can interfere with operations.
-Cheers
________________
"I'm doing the same thing I do every night, Pinky..." comment from one lab mouse to another.
Personally, I like the C-27J, so I'm not anti-Spartan. I just don't think it is as clear a decision as we would like (as if it ever is).
Commonality with the C-130J is only an issue if the service already operates the C-130J or has firm plans to operate the C-130J. Yes for Australia - No for NZ.
Similarly I think the C-130 -> C-27 pallet issue is also an issue that requires careful thought.
How often does cargo go from logistics centre to battlefield without being broken down and repacked at an intermediate regional centre?
It is best for the pallet to be packed at the logistics centre with the needs of the end user and the pallet is transfered from truck to aircraft to aircraft to truck, but I wouldn't know how often that is realistic.
Complicating the issue is the uncertainty over the USAF program. If it is stopped, or even cut altogether, the associated support costs over the life of the aircraft will rise. The C-295 is more commercial in component origin, and that has to have an impact on support through its life (especially towards the end).
No I'd definitely plumb for the C27J because we'd have commomality with the RAAF and the ability of transhipping pallets between C130s and C27Js without having to break them down. People do not think about that and I know that Todj has commented on it, but I used to work in freight forwarding (before I edumicated myself) and that transhipping ability without breaking down, saves a lot of time and hassle. I was a fan of the C295 but too much stuffing round in theatre if you've gotta break every pallet down. Also if you light load pallets at embarkation then you are wasting resources.
The agreement between the two governments changes the complexion of purchasing, especially for NZDF, and so we'll go C27J and C130J, unless the two govts agree that the A400M will be the best option for Australia and NZ. One scenario maybe that we'll get 5 - 7 C130J or C130J -30 and the RAAF another C17 (or 2 x C17), with NZ having access to a C17 when needed. Thats another scenario, some 40 Sqn crews being trained and rated on the C17.
Des Ashton is saying that once delivered the aircraft have another 10 years left in them. Good!! That is an extra couple of years to flatten out the acquisition hump from a number of concurrent projects.
Des Ashton is saying that once delivered the aircraft have another 10 years left in them. Good!! That is an extra couple of years to flatten out the acquisition hump from a number of concurrent projects.
All the same, work really needs to begin on the C-130H replacement programme now. "Another 10 years" means that the first Herc will require either replacement or yet another SLEP in 2022. If the programme to replace the Herc's does not start until after the 2015 Airlift review, that would only give the RNZAF seven years to make a replacement aircraft selection, get the selection through Gov't, place the order, receive delivery from the manufacturer and then reach IOC with the new airlifter before the Hercs start retiring.
That IMO is an extremely tight schedule. Unless Gov't opts to purchase second hand aircraft for sale from the aviation market or another air force, or is able to purchase an in production airlifter where the manufacturer has excess production slots/capacity or jump ahead of someone else's order I do not think the RNZAF will be able to get the Herc replacement to IOC before the first Herc retires. Now there are five Hercs, and I would imagine that the SLEP delivery will be staggered with the first now expected in June an AFAIK the rest over the next two years... That still leaves a very narrow window that the Herc replacement needs to be stood up in, while the Hercs available for service rapidly diminish.
From my perspective, it would almost seem like the 2015 airlift review really needs to be a way for the RNZAF/Gov't to announce their chosen selection(s) rather than for them to examine what their airlift requirements are.
-Cheers
________________
"I'm doing the same thing I do every night, Pinky..." comment from one lab mouse to another.
All the same, work really needs to begin on the C-130H replacement programme now. "Another 10 years" means that the first Herc will require either replacement or yet another SLEP in 2022. If the programme to replace the Herc's does not start until after the 2015 Airlift review, that would only give the RNZAF seven years to make a replacement aircraft selection, get the selection through Gov't, place the order, receive delivery from the manufacturer and then reach IOC with the new airlifter before the Hercs start retiring.
That IMO is an extremely tight schedule. Unless Gov't opts to purchase second hand aircraft for sale from the aviation market or another air force, or is able to purchase an in production airlifter where the manufacturer has excess production slots/capacity or jump ahead of someone else's order I do not think the RNZAF will be able to get the Herc replacement to IOC before the first Herc retires. Now there are five Hercs, and I would imagine that the SLEP delivery will be staggered with the first now expected in June an AFAIK the rest over the next two years... That still leaves a very narrow window that the Herc replacement needs to be stood up in, while the Hercs available for service rapidly diminish.
From my perspective, it would almost seem like the 2015 airlift review really needs to be a way for the RNZAF/Gov't to announce their chosen selection(s) rather than for them to examine what their airlift requirements are.
-Cheers
From what you have said I would agree that the Herc replacement and the overall airlifter slection has to be gone into now and the process started. As an aside it was mentioned on 3 News tonight that the NZ$ is expected to reach 94 cents US later in this year and then that would be the time to pay for the now excess USAF C27J Spartans. Even that must be seens by the manadrins in Treasury as the optiminal time for such a purchase.
From what you have said I would agree that the Herc replacement and the overall airlifter slection has to be gone into now and the process started. As an aside it was mentioned on 3 News tonight that the NZ$ is expected to reach 94 cents US later in this year and then that would be the time to pay for the now excess USAF C27J Spartans. Even that must be seens by the manadrins in Treasury as the optiminal time for such a purchase.
One thing that does bother me about the NZG/MoD approach to defence expenditures is how short term the planning seems to be, and how willing they are to defer things. Between these characteristics and the apparently desire to purchase the least expensive, rather than the most appropriate, piece of kit for a role... It does seem like the NZG is being penny wise, but pound foolish.
Using the currently in production C-130J as a guide, it looks like it takes ~4-5 years from the order being placed to the first airlifters being delivered to the user. Unfortunately, in a procurement programme there are additional time blocks before an order is placed, while the piece of kit is being selected and any contracts negotiated. Similarly, once the first units are delivered, there are workups down to familiarize personnel with the new kit so that IOC can be reached.
Given how long things take, it seems like the NZDF should be looking ~15 years into the future with the various procurement programmes.
-Cheers
________________
"I'm doing the same thing I do every night, Pinky..." comment from one lab mouse to another.
Using the currently in production C-130J as a guide, it looks like it takes ~4-5 years from the order being placed to the first airlifters being delivered to the user.
Indians started receiving their C-130's in almost two years.
Indians started receiving their C-130's in almost two years.
The FMS request that I came across was in May 2007, with the first C-130J delivery in December 2010.
When I looked at several other C-130J orders placed by different countries, most of the orders seemed to take about 4 - 5 years between order placement and initial delivery. Some more, some less, depending on a number of other variables.
-Cheers
________________
"I'm doing the same thing I do every night, Pinky..." comment from one lab mouse to another.
The FMS request that I came across was in May 2007, with the first C-130J delivery in December 2010.
When I looked at several other C-130J orders placed by different countries, most of the orders seemed to take about 4 - 5 years between order placement and initial delivery. Some more, some less, depending on a number of other variables.
-Cheers
Thanks for that because we now have somewhat of an idea of how long it takes to proceed once it gets to the US via the FMS. IIRC the DWP made mention of 2020 for C130H replacement and say 5 years to progress trough FMS and arrival of 1st aircraft in NZ then really the air transport decision planning and process needs to start now like as in today - nek minnit.
Jeez I just wish Wellington would say right lets get the USAF C27J Spartans that are being kicked loose, the spares & anything else that goes with them because its going to be the best deal we'll ever get, especialy if the kiwi$ hits US$0.94 as predicted AND we'll start the process looking at NZDF air transport needs so that we will have C130H replacements agreed too and the first replacements in country when our C130Hs are due to be replaced.
The RNZAF has been projected to spend $1.74 Billion over the next decade (2011-2021) on major capital acquisitions according to the incoming Govt briefing.
This of course is too cover the B200 replacement, the advanced pilot replacement, the extra three AW109's, the Seasprite replacement (or upgrade), as well as the start of the future airlift capability (B757 and C-130H replacements).
Following that further funding will have to be found by increasing the Defence spend to fund the remainder of acquisition pathway post 2022 such as the rest of the airlift capability, the P3-2K replacement and of course the ...................... Shornets
Just joking about the Shornets. Don't get too excited!
The RNZAF has been projected to spend $1.74 Billion over the next decade (2011-2021) on major capital acquisitions according to the incoming Govt briefing.
This of course is too cover the B200 replacement, the advanced pilot replacement, the extra three AW109's, the Seasprite replacement (or upgrade), as well as the start of the future airlift capability (B757 and C-130H replacements).
Following that further funding will have to be found by increasing the Defence spend to fund the remainder of acquisition pathway post 2022 such as the rest of the airlift capability, the P3-2K replacement and of course the ...................... Shornets
Just joking about the Shornets. Don't get too excited!
Mr C the link came up 404 Not found.
There is a lot of chatter on the RAAF thread today about the RAAF possibly not going ahead with the C27J buy because the USAF has retired the type the costs of ongoing sustainment, electronics updates, Self Defence updates etc have just gone up, maybe quite a bit.
There is a lot of chatter on the RAAF thread today about the RAAF possibly not going ahead with the C27J buy because the USAF has retired the type the costs of ongoing sustainment, electronics updates, Self Defence updates etc have just gone up, maybe quite a bit.
