Royal New Zealand Air Force

[swerve]

Ok, the timing makes sense now. I didn't realize Australia had a 10 year head start on C-130Js compared to Canada. As you likely are aware, Canada has a bad habit to keeping kit well past the best before date.

I think the RAAF was the second export customer for the C-130J, after the RAF. Sorta fits, doesn't it?

The RAF will retire its oldest C-130Js soon, replaced by A400M. They've been heavily used. It's keeping the C-130J-30s until 2030 or so.

 

[Justin Case]

KC-390 performance

Hi, Friends.

KC-390 PT-ZNJ has just completed a ferry flight from Windhoek (Namibia) to Alverca (Portugal). Demonstrated performance:

- Mach 0.7 cruise speed at 32.000 ft
- Total distance flown: 8000 km - 4300 Nmi
- Total flight time: 12 hours

 

[t68]

Hi, Friends.

KC-390 PT-ZNJ has just completed a ferry flight from Windhoek (Namibia) to Alverca (Portugal). Demonstrated performance:

- Mach 0.7 cruise speed at 32.000 ft
- Total distance flown: 8000 km - 4300 Nmi
- Total flight time: 12 hours

The RNZAF tactical airlift is going to be the one to watch, the like for like in the reporting should give either C130 or KC390 a leg up but I guess it all depends on how much the oversize load capabilty the A400M will be valued by the Powers to be, with all the consternation about A400M I belive it's the right aircraft for NZ defence in conjunction with a heavy rotary lift Ch-47F even tho it is not part of the equation

 

[ngatimozart]

Even though the KC-390 is coming here this month, I think that any chance it had in NZ service has just gone belly up. One of the things that the NZG will assess is the political stability of Brazil and that has become worse over the weekend with the current president being investigated for corruption. He replaced the previous one who was impeached for corruption. Corruption appears to be endemic in Brazil, especially amongst the political elite and the NZG will be wanting to avoid any potential political fallout or NZ being dragged into Brazilian domestic politics and / or judicial proceedings.

 

[Rob c]

Even though the KC-390 is coming here this month, I think that any chance it had in NZ service has just gone belly up. One of the things that the NZG will assess is the political stability of Brazil and that has become worse over the weekend with the current president being investigated for corruption. He replaced the previous one who was impeached for corruption. Corruption appears to be endemic in Brazil, especially amongst the political elite and the NZG will be wanting to avoid any potential political fallout or NZ being dragged into Brazilian domestic politics and / or judicial proceedings.

These issues certainly won't help it's chances. I would have thought that as an aircraft the KC390 could have been a front runner when comparing , price, performance and capability, but the political problems will not help at all. If however the deal is seen as a purely one with Embraer which is a well respected aerospace company , there may be hope.

 

[40 deg south]

These issues certainly won't help it's chances. I would have thought that as an aircraft the KC390 could have been a front runner when comparing , price, performance and capability, but the political problems will not help at all. If however the deal is seen as a purely one with Embraer which is a well respected aerospace company , there may be hope.

There is always a political element to major defence deals, and NZ has no compelling need to butter up the Brazilian government that I am aware of. However, the news that some leading Brazilian politicians are more than a bit dodgy isn't going to surprise anyone in Wellington. After football, looting the public purse is practically Brazil's national sport.

I think a more significant hurdle for Embraer to leap is the newness of the platform, and the fact it won't enter service with any of our main defence partners in the near future, if at all. Also, see this quote on procurement from the Select Committee report I just linked to in the Navy forum.

https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/SCR_74473/5b9da0e3ec9bc9c3861d724672e4c4963bd66da8

We wanted to know whether safeguards would be built into contracts to avoid past situations where poor acquisitions have cost the taxpayer a considerable amount to put right.The Secretary of Defence said that she is very satisfied with the contracting element of the ministry’s work.

Past mistakes with military procurement were made where New Zealand sought to customise capabilities and to be an early adopter. Lessons from those mistakes have been learnt. Now, when looking at new equipment, a key consideration is whether it has been proven operationally. This approach significantly reduces the risk involved.

We heard that “optimism bias” is a feature of military acquisition and procurement to be guarded against internationally. Another element to be aware of is the whole-of-life cost of the capability during a 25-or 30-year period. The ministry has developed a whole-of-life costing model that the Treasury is happy with. The model will also be independently quality-assured and tested.

 

[Rob c]

There is always a political element to major defence deals, and NZ has no compelling need to butter up the Brazilian government that I am aware of. However, the news that some leading Brazilian politicians are more than a bit dodgy isn't going to surprise anyone in Wellington. After football, looting the public purse is practically Brazil's national sport.

I think a more significant hurdle for Embraer to leap is the newness of the platform, and the fact it won't enter service with any of our main defence partners in the near future, if at all. Also, see this quote on procurement from the Select Committee report I just linked to in the Navy forum.

https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/SCR_74473/5b9da0e3ec9bc9c3861d724672e4c4963bd66da8

I would agree that the already in service platforms,( C130, A400, C2) must have an advantage , but we did buy the sea ceptor before it entered service so while the Brazilian government is a bit dodgy Embraer has a good reputation and as such I don't think the KC390 is dead. My personal preference is the C2 then the A400
I like the C2 over the A400 because they used more in service equipment including commercial engines and so currently has been less problematic,(they did not try to reinvent the wheel as happened with the A400) It is faster. giving a better utilization. has a superior range/payload and the cabin noise is low, similar to an airliner. making it passenger friendly.

 

[old faithful]

Rob, I agree that the Kawasaki C2, would be a good choice for the RNZAF, and perhaps a deal for the P1 instead of the P8 could be made, both platforms would be suitable for any air force, its just that the Japanese are the only customer at this stage. The P1 has some advantages over the P8 that would be attractive. The C2 also has some advantages over the C130J, although I'm not sure how it would handle small,rough airfields of smaller Pacific nations.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

The C2 has been designed to operate from short fields on the outer islands of the Japanese archipelago flying in outsize loads to reinforce the defences in the face of an amphibious threat. This is according to multiple online sources that I have read in the past. Sorry no link.

The C2 is in my mind the replacement for the B757's when the time comes. Offers all that the Boeings can plus the benefit of outsize cargo and its ramp. The Japanese do not build junk. Nor do they not support the product once in service. The two or hopefully three airframes that would be purchased would be well supported by Kawasaki over the lifetime. As RobC has pointed out the aircraft uses a multitude of existing systems throughout from the major avionics players.

Just because the production run is currently only a JSDF product the lack of competition globally for a western heavy lift aircraft besides the A400 makes it a go to product that I believe will garner more attention as time goes by.

Here here to the P1 Old Faithful.

Given the recent speculation here as well as on other forms talking about the RNZAF I am thinking that the safe bet of a C130J30 purchase is the likely one for one purchase to replace the legacy C130's in service. As much as I like the KC390 and the Embraer fit and finish overall I believe the existing infrastructure and service knowledge will be hard to beat. If the reports about the SOF variant as being of interest to the RNZAF are correct then Lockheed is likely to offer a deal to maintain NZ as a continuing customer. The C130 isn't going to be leaving the inventories of western allied air forces anytime soon.

As always time will tell.

 

[Rob c]

Rob, I agree that the Kawasaki C2, would be a good choice for the RNZAF, and perhaps a deal for the P1 instead of the P8 could be made, both platforms would be suitable for any air force, its just that the Japanese are the only customer at this stage. The P1 has some advantages over the P8 that would be attractive. The C2 also has some advantages over the C130J, although I'm not sure how it would handle small,rough airfields of smaller Pacific nations.

As Nova stated , the C2 was designed for short strips and in fact exceeds the C130 short field performance being both shorter in both take off and landing requirements.
I do like the AESA type radar on the P1 over the mechanical scan unit in the P8, as it is far more stealthy. The P 8 basically uses an electronic search light which an adversary with modern ECM gear will pick up and locate before the P8 is in radar range, and it is vulnerable to anti radiation weapons and jamming. The P1's radar panels are made up of a multitude of transmitter/receiver units all transmitting on a different frequency and changing frequency up to a thousand times a second. this means that each radar pulse is very small and overall they blend in with the background radio noise. this makes detecting them very difficult and locating the source or jamming them near to impossible. they also mix with any incoming radar
and significantly reduce the return of these, so reducing the return signature of the parent. This is why AESA is used on the F22 and the F35. It also has no scan gap as in the P8 as it's radar has a information gap of several seconds between each time the radar swings by, the P1 radar is a continuous 360 degree coverage with no scan gap.

 

[old faithful]

The P1 is also designed to be able to cruise on 2/engines, shutting 2 down while on patrol.
It has better performance at low altitude, much better than the P8, also happy to play at high altitude. Carries a few less sona bouys than the P8, at 107, think the P8 is at around 140ish.
Cockpit has better visibility. All up seems like a very capable maritime patrol aircraft.

Could be a good buy if paired with a few C2,s.

 

[swerve]

Like the Nimrod - two engine cruise for increased endurance.

Systems matter for an MPA, though. The best aircraft in the world for an MPA platform isn't necessarily the best MPA, if something else has better sensors & ability to process the information from them, even on an inferior platform.

I'd love to know how the P-1 & P-8 (& other types) compare, but I doubt if that'll be made public.

 

[Gibbo]

Like the Nimrod - two engine cruise for increased endurance.

Systems matter for an MPA, though. The best aircraft in the world for an MPA platform isn't necessarily the best MPA, if something else has better sensors & ability to process the information from them, even on an inferior platform.

I'd love to know how the P-1 & P-8 (& other types) compare, but I doubt if that'll be made public.

True, it's about sensors & processing capabilty - and therein lies the big question in regards to P1 vs P8. As we now know, the RNZAF is not looking for a MPA to replace the P3K2 - in fact even the latter is no longer purely just an MPA. They are looking for a platform that allows over-sea & over-land ISR and signals/intelligence capability that offers seamless integration into a securely networked group of allied assets whch in our allies case we already know to be the P8 (USN, RAF, RAAF, poss. RCAF).

MPA is only one part of the requirement and is no longer the be-all and end-all in the decision making process. The P8 might not be the best MPA (I not suggesting it isn't, just playing devils advocate!) but it might tick all the other boxes with more certainty than the P1.

 

[Rob c]

True, it's about sensors & processing capabilty - and therein lies the big question in regards to P1 vs P8. As we now know, the RNZAF is not looking for a MPA to replace the P3K2 - in fact even the latter is no longer purely just an MPA. They are looking for a platform that allows over-sea & over-land ISR and signals/intelligence capability that offers seamless integration into a securely networked group of allied assets whch in our allies case we already know to be the P8 (USN, RAF, RAAF, poss. RCAF).

MPA is only one part of the requirement and is no longer the be-all and end-all in the decision making process. The P8 might not be the best MPA (I not suggesting it isn't, just playing devils advocate!) but it might tick all the other boxes with more certainty than the P1.

I was reading through a couple of google translations from Japanese of P1 Info when I came across a sentence which said 'THE Japanese would not sell the P1 to anyone who did not have robust security in place to safeguard the technology and capabilities of the aircraft".It was not until later (after I lost the page) that I realized the significance of the safeguarding the capabilities. It inferred that there are capabilities this aircraft has which are secret and not in the public domain. what these are, of coarse we cannot know.

 

[t68]

I was reading through a couple of google translations from Japanese of P1 Info when I came across a sentence which said 'THE Japanese would not sell the P1 to anyone who did not have robust security in place to safeguard the technology and capabilities of the aircraft".It was not until later (after I lost the page) that I realized the significance of the safeguarding the capabilities. It inferred that there are capabilities this aircraft has which are secret and not in the public domain. what these are, of coarse we cannot know.

I imagine that would also be the case of P8, I'm guessing the US will have limitations on who can have what on board, like the Indian procurement of P8 from what I understand it has a different fitout

 

[STURM]

There was mention in a Indian defence blog about India's P-8s having an extra radar compared to the American ones. In the near future American P-8s will be able to drop torps from high altitude as part of the High Altitude Anti-submarine warfare Weapon Capability [HAAWC]; remains to be seen if this capability will be made available to India.

 

[Redlands18]

There was mention in a Indian defence blog about India's P-8s having an extra radar compared to the American ones. In the near future American P-8s will be able to drop torps from high altitude as part of the High Altitude Anti-submarine warfare Weapon Capability [HAAWC]; remains to be seen if this capability will be made available to India.

Probably referring to the MAD Boom which the Indian Aircraft are carrying and everyone else is not.

 

[Rob c]

Probably referring to the MAD Boom which the Indian Aircraft are carrying and everyone else is not.

The Indians required an air to air mode with their aircraft so the original AN/APY 10 radar was modified to accommodate this requirement. If the RNZAF gets the P8 I would expect the same mod would be incorporated as they have an air awareness requirement. The current P3K2 has this ability.

 

[gf0012-aust]

There was mention in a Indian defence blog about India's P-8s having an extra radar compared to the American ones. In the near future American P-8s will be able to drop torps from high altitude as part of the High Altitude Anti-submarine warfare Weapon Capability [HAAWC]; remains to be seen if this capability will be made available to India.

they don't have an extra radar, they have substituted a USN system with a pre-existing capability

it also means that there is a fundamental difference in the way that the respective P8's are employed

the CONOPS will also be functionally different as a result

 

[htbrst]

they don't have an extra radar, they have substituted a USN system with a pre-existing capability

I thought the P-8I's had an additional aft radar - Google suggests it's a Telephonics APS-143 OceanEye aft radar - did this change?

This page details the changes to the APY-10 made on the P-8I for ITAR reasons: P-8I NEPTUNE - TheStrategicTimes.com . Mostly removal of functionality but Air to Air and a different weather mapping mode were added.