C-295 (again...yawn)

[SousaTeuszii]

Please, please,please,
The C295 is a great aircraft but please show me ONE role currently utilised by the DF, either provided by military or civilian operators, at home or overseas, that the 295 can fulfil FULLY and not be an oversized batter. It is the wrong size for DF operations. It is an intra theatre airlift aircraft. The DF have no areas of operations big enough to require these aircraft and by all accounts never will. The DF do however have a huge international logistical footprint that the 295 cannot fulfil.

Also while you may fit a vehcile into a 295 it will not be going very far and probably on its own. Any rapid reaction team needs to move qiuckly as a team not in dribs and drabs.

With regards to the MPA being augmented by 295s dont get me started. They provide about 600-700hrs per year per aircraft on patrol in an airline class aircraft (PAL of Canada provide 5000hrs per year with 3 SKA 200s!!), spend about 15% of this time over land because their base is nowhere near the west coast and provide NO on call service of any kind. They dont deserve the aircraft they have never mind more or bigger machines. For my tupence worth the refit should be scrapped and the money channelled by the EU into an organisation that will provide a credable MPA service. The Air Corps can then have 2 intra theatre airlifters for free, although they still wont have a role for them!
ST

[Fouga]

Quote (Old Redeye @ 11 Oct. 2006,10:11)

Wouldn't it be nice...just squint your eyes a little....actually it's a brand new CASA C-295 for Brazil.  But, if Ireland ordered two now, this could be one of them in less than two years!

Pic dont work.

[Old Redeye]

Try this Fouga.

Sousa is right, for the most part.  The fisheries mission would be bettr performed by a contractor, as with SAR, but I suspect their is real concern that to strip another mission from the IAC could well call into question teh entire rationale for the service among some in the Defence Force, the government and the public.  At least until a more complete military capability stands up in teh form of tactical helos and, yes, airlift.

I do suspect that a C-295 is in the cards and will enhance capabilities across the board - for airlift within Europe and when deployed to provide in-theater airlift to an international mission or humanitarian mission.  Don't underestimate the capabilities of the 295 - Poland flies theirs regularly to/from Iraq.  Troops will continue to deploy via contract air.  For material airlift Ireland should join the NATO SALIS program, which the other members of the Nordic Plus EU Battelegroup already have - Sweden, Finland and Norway.  Ireland should also join the European Airlift Group based in Eindhoven NL, as a means to maximize/pool airlift assets.  Again, the other Nordic Plus countries are alrady members.  Sweden and Norway are upgradng their C-130's and Finland just ordered 295's.

[Old Redeye]

Ooops!  Try this.

[Hess]

Great debate people! But the only way the IAC is going to obtain proper transport A/C is to have the words "HUMANITARIAN RELIEF" plasterd over all related government documents.Only then will the people&press buy into it,IMO

[SousaTeuszii]

Hi Guys,
Just some research to throw some oil on the fire.

Firstly the issue that Poland operates C295s to Iraq. This is true but only because they have to at the moment but a solution is on its way. The 2005 US budget included $66mil in military support for Poland which is mostly to support the increase in airlift capability with the purchase of C130s. This is a thank you for the support in Iraq and also shows that over this distance a C295 cannot provide full support.

I also do not think you fully apprciate the distances involved. Poland is a good example of a European nation supporting its troops in the middle east with a C295 but is it such a good example, look where Poland is. To rationalise this here are a few examples:

Dublin - Krakow - 1141nm
Krakow - Baghdad - 1480 nm

So you can see that while Europe to the Middle East sounds impressive it is only a short hop greater then a pan European flight.
We also do not know the load carried on these flights, the logistical requirement or the number of flights required to fill this logistical footprint. What is obvious is that it will take many flights in a 295 to fulfil the role of an airlifter such as a C130 sized aircraft. (please dont get hung up on aircraft type, get hung up on capability). This in itself is expensive, inefficent and I imagine a nightmare for the ground troops having supplies arrive in dribs and drabs. What is also obvious from the Polish is that they do not consider their present airlift cabaility to be sufficent and are clambering to get C130s.

Secondly airlift in Europe. To where and what for.
The only operation in Europe at present is in Kosovo and only accounts for 100 troops. These troops are rotated twice yearly in 737 class aircraft by carriers who have Dangerous Goods licenes and, even if all troops rotate at once, plenty of cargo hold space and capacity. So with 2 runs per year and no actual warfighting, ie ammo resupply etc, exactly how many trips a year would these troops require. I am not saying that they should not be resupplied by the Air Corps but the purchase of a C295 that can only (nothing else in C295 practical range) resupply a unit who still have to be rotated by airline with a cargo capacity is in my opinion a waste of money.
While we are on this point:
Dublin - Pristina - 1268nm (Not far from Baghdad now!)

Please also consider that these are direct distance and do not allow for ATC routings etc. You can add at least 230nm to all of the above to account diversion and final reserves.

Thirdly, with no other commitments in Europe and with Africa winding down our next place to look, and the larger DF commitment, will be the Lebanon. The troops there will not require intra theatre fixed wing airlift as the area has three airports all of which are in the northren half of the country.
Again direct distance:
Dublin - Beirut - 2120 nm.
Before anybody says this is doable think about it. carrying 8 ton the C295 can do about 900nm. The distance including reserves is about 2350nm, so far that is 3 refuelling stops plus the C295 Cruise is about 250 Kts TAS that means 8.5 hrs to get 8 tons to Beirut! It doesnt make sense either militarily or financially.
Finally Hess is spot on. To gain acceptance this machine must be capable of Humanitarian Aid operations. As stated before the major operations requiring this support have been in the middle east and asia, not Europe. A C295 would be useless in this role.
So the question to think about is this:
Do you want the Air Corps to buy an aircraft that will enhance it capabilities but can only support one small operation and then be consigned to the useless bin by the Army or one that can actually support the Army and other government directed tasks worldwide? The choice is yours.
ST

[pym]

Excellent post again Souza.

Taking your points on board, I can only see two choices:

- Take the transport issue seriously and thus get serious aircraft

- Bury heads in the sand and hope we're able to charter aircraft when we really need them

Obviously, I'd prefer option number 1.

With that in mind I've been having a look towards what the northern european countries have been doing. Sweden & Denmark are the most interesting.

Denmark:

Quote

In 1999 following the end of the 'cold war' the air force was re-organised to be an expeditonary air force, capable of supporting international operations worldwide. In 2004 the original Lockheed C-130H Hercules fleet of 3 aircrafts (bought in 1973) was replaced by 4 advanced C-130J version. In 2006 the RDAF signed a letter of intent to purchase the Boeing C-17 Globemaster III, the order is to be confirmed but is expected to be the basis of a shared NATO C-17 fleet.

Sweden

Quote

The Swedish Armed Forces have in a spring 2006 budget proposal identified a need for a strategic airlift capability for use with the EU Nordic Battlegroup led by Sweden. The battle group is intended to be placed on rapid deployment alert on January 1st 2008 which thus necessitates a rapid decision on what type of airlift assets will be employed to move the battlegroup within given weight and time constraints should it be needed. Repeated reports in the Swedish media suggest that the Armed Forces are lobbying hard for the airlift requirement to be satisfied with the purchase of two C-17 aircraft at a total cost of 4 billion SEK. This item from the Armed Forces' English release was also intreresting: "The Armed Forces plans also propose a new operational capability through the procurement of aircraft for strategic air movement. This is an important requirement to meet the increased demand not only for volume and distance, but also for the possible evacuation of personnel or humanitarian aid efforts." Sweden currently owns 8 Hercules Tp84 (C-130E/H) aircraft based at F7 Satenas, and is a non-NATO member of the NATO SALIS consortium

Norway

Quote

6 Hercules transport aircraft, replacing wing spars to extend service life

Finland, the black sheep

Quote

Fokker F.27 (FF), transportation aircraft (2) (will be replaced by two EADS CASA C-295M by 2008)

Rough price guide:
C-130J ($65 million)
A400M ($100-120 million)
AN-124 Ruslan (est. $80-120 million)
IL-76 Candid ($50 million)
Globemaster III ($200 million)

It's also worth bearing in mind that there is alot of speculation about the Naval service purchasing a vessel which will be able to support operations abroad. The costs being mentioned, albeit by randomers on the internet, are in the region of eur 100million.

At current exchange rates the C-130J would come in at roughly 52million euros. Order two (the absolute minimum in my opinion) and you're talking the same costs as the new naval vessel.

The costs are not astronomical, but the capability they would give is very considerable. If we're to become a meaningful partner in the EURRF, then we are going to have to provide our own transportation. But can you see the Department of Finance okaying this?

[SousaTeuszii]

Hi Pym,
That is good info on the Northern European countries and quite posibily our nearest allies.
It is interesting to note, as Old Redeye has stated, that non NATO members are allowed in the SALIS organisation. However giving the PR nightmare of explaining joining something named 'battlegroup', or operating in peace 'enforcment' operations I cannot see the country allowing joining a NATO lead and operated organisation.

I also imagine that the EU Battlegroup and SALIS assets will only be utilised on missions by these organisations. Little room for Humanitarian aid and UN peace operations considering the already strained NATO logistics system.

With regard to type I note that all the machines you mention are tactical transports, i.e have ramps etc. While this will ease loading and unloading is the cost really justified. During all of the DFs overseas ops so far the vehciles have been sent by sea. This also allows transport of larger items in cargo conatainers and indeed containerised buildings themselves. With the purchase of a blue / green ship for the navy I think this is likely to continue and as the vessel may also be utilised as a hospital ship it has huge potential in peace operations and humanitarian aid ops. I also believe that this bulk movement is more cost effective, also considering that there are usually weeks if not months of notice before a deployment this slower but bulk method is more then sufficent.

So whats left, well day to day supplies. Food, Water, clothing, equipment, troops etc. None of these require a ramp door but would require a cargo door.

Looking at the costs you have shown the one that I would flag again is the  737-700QC as in operation with the US navy.
The aircraft can carry up to 140 passangers or 18,200Kgs of cargo or can be in combi for 70 passangers and a lower amount of cargo. For all this it costs about $52 mil, the lowest cost of any and with a mach 0.82 cruise it is also easily the fastest.

Also assuming that the Air Corps as usual look at costs over a 20 year life that makes it €2.08 mil per year.
Subtract from this the cost savings on troop rotations and Dept of Justice deportations and it will amount to very little. Perhaps somebody can assist me with the troop rotation costings, i believe africa was over €0.25mil per rotation but I do now that in the last 6 years we have spent a staggering €0.7mil on average per year on charters for deportations.

So:
Africa *2 =        €0.5
Balkans * 2=      €0.3
Deportations =   €0.7

total (Approx) =  €1.5mil
Aircraft cost =    €2.08mil
residual     =       €0.58mil/year

Of course this is a bit over simplfied as you still have to pay to operate the aircraft on the above flights but it is a general indicator. It is also something that would not be done on a tactical aircraft.

So what are the pros and cons for the 737
Pros:
Payload
Range
Speed
Passenger Capability
Flexibility of Combi operations
Purchase Cost
Operational Cost
Publicly percived as a civil aircraft not an instrument of war
Ease of training pilots / engineers
Part of huge fleet
Ease of maintenance, avilability of spares. Civil maintenance if required

Cons:
No ramp
Good runway required
Requires GSE at destination for offloading
Retention of 737 rated crews!!

To be honest I think a good arguement could be made of a 737 while trying to convince the public to buy a herc could be a problem. What do you think?
ST

[The Blue Max]

Sousa I Agree with your idea with and they idea od 737-700 QCA would provide the entire DF with a great true multi-role aircraft that the Boeing 737 would offer the IAC.

But i feel there is a need for a true capable ramp aircraft even poorly for the likes ARW Quick Deployment or transporting for examle Mowag engine or like back out where the 737 wouldnt be able to access.

I know Redeye has mentioned this idea before and probly in context of overseas operational forces it best practice to have a ramp capable aircraft (I dont mean anything bigger then 235) for light recce vechices of the likes F-350 (Or Previous LandRover Defenders) in service with the ARW which were transported by Air to Liberia i was informed and not by sea so it would have one visable role within the DF already aswell as increased aircraft more capable of Parachute/Paratrooping Training Operations which the DF have stated that our keane to promote within the Army.

I most repeating what i have commented on before but it would be great to see the likes of the Boeing 737BBJ/QCA alongside a CN235 (Tactical Aircraft) and would give great service to the DF.

Here a nice link with a great site with lots of info on the CN235 which could also carry over to the 295 for comparison

http://www.aviation.blm.gov/docs/CN235Report.pdf

[SousaTeuszii]

Blue Max,
I also like the idea of an airlifter that can serve the DF 'in the field' so to speak. The problem is that to require one you must have an area of operations big enough, or hostile enough, to justify air transportation over ground transportation. You also require one that has runways capable of taking a 235 size aircraft. While this is not a big runway it is unlikely that there will be one far enough away from an international airport to warrant air transport yet close enough to be in the Irish AO. This wont happen in very many areas.
With regard to the example of the Mowag engine. If a mowag breaks down in the field it will be towed or transported back to the base workshops. Here repairs will be attempted and if not the engine removed. What are the chances of the base workshops being co located with the HQ, very good I would imagine. What are the chances of the HQ being within short road distance of an international size airport, again I would say very good. Therefore after the Mowag has been taken out of the field it will most likely be close to an airport that can take a 737 which could easily bring in replacement engines.
Again with the ARW we face the same problem. The ARW will only be stationed overseas for very limited periods before the main body arrives. This is due to the units small numbers. While in country the ARW will be on recce duties and unlikely to be on QR operations and it is more then likely that there will not be a second runway on which to deploy vehciles. Parachuting is an option but in reality the ARW, as the only Irish force in the country, are unlikely to go jumping into unknown areas.
While in Ireland on QA duties a small airlifter is useless for postioning overseas and for in counrty reaction the ARW would again have plenty of notice of an op as control has first to be handed over by the Gardai and this wont happen in a hurry. They also have a sight more gear then a couple of 4*4s.
Please dont get me wrong I would love to see this capability but I just dont think the DF have a requirement, as of yet. The DF do however have an international transport requirement and to ignore this while buying non required aircraft will only further irritate the Army into beliving the AC is a waste of money.
ST

[Old Redeye]

Fair enough Hess.  There is no question that one of the primary missions for an Irish airlifter will be humanitatian relief operations under the UN and EU banner.  In fact, one could honestly argue that even anticipated military ops, such as those now underway in Kosovo and Africa, are "humanitarian" in that they are peace enforcement missions.  All about honest packaging.

[Old Redeye]

OK folks,

I think I have the airlift solution.  May not be sexy or popular, but it will work.  The starting point is to recap the airlift requirment, which is predicated on Ireland becoming the 'Plus' in the Nordic Plus EU Battlegroup as expected, alongside Sweden (lead), Finland, Norway and the Baltic states:

- national support, including MATS
- support to Irish contributions to international EU/UN military and humanitarian missions - preferably including casualty evacuation back to Ireland
- support to Nordic Plus Battlegroup training exercises - at least quarterly
- support to RW training, including exercises and exchanges in Scandanavia (Nordic Plus SFTG), Germany, France and elsewhere in Europe - at least quarterly

Solution: IAC Boeing 737-700QC with secure digital satcom,  
a palletized casualty evacuation kit and a palletized VIP seating kit.

Make the 737 availabile to support other members of the Nordic Plus group for troop rotations, medevacs and non-vehiclular cargo airlift in return for dedicated vehicle/bulk cargo airlift missions by Swedish/Norwegain C-130H's (presently being upgraded) and Finnish C-295's, and access to SALIS AN-124 missions from members Sweden, Finland & Norway - maybe once/twice a year other than a crisis deplyment.  Offer the 737 to the UN and EU for similar missions, and for transporting delegations, on a cash-payment basis. When Sweden and Finland join the NATO SAC C-17 program early next year, they extend joint access to C-17 missions for Ireland if required.

In other words, the IAC's 737 will fly regularly, moving Irish, Swedish, Finish and Norwegian troops and cargo around Europe, Africa and the Mideast, while Nordic C-130's and C-295's do the same with Irish cargo and the odd RW packet.  When big moves come along in conjuction with Nordic Plus training and ops - moving LAV's, etc., they go via SALIS AN-124's or SAC C-17's.  

Too easy as my Canadian friends like to say, and could be in place by 2008.  And yes, there is the likelihood of scheduling conflicts between MATS taskings and other taskings, but that's not difficult to work out.  Most MATS missions will still be done by the Lear and the G-IV, which needs a mid-life upgrade, but still has a lot of life left in  it.  Similar G-IV's, recently upgraded, are good enough for the Swedish and Dutch governments.  Finally, the palletized VIP fit for the 737QC would not be anything like a "flying palace".  Several business class pallets and several convertible lounge pallets.  No fancy bedroom, no gourmet galley, no marble bathrooms and no shower.

[Old Redeye]

See my previous post and use your imagination....

[Old Redeye]

Poland Purchases Another Two EADS CASA C-295 Military Transport Aircraft (Source: EADS; issued Oct. 26, 2006)
  
MADRID --- Polish Secretary of State of Defence, Marek Zajakala, Chief of Staff Polish Air Force, Lt. Gen. Stanislaw Targosz and Polish Air Force Lt. Gen. Magensky, on the Polish side, and Antonio R. Barberán, Vice President Sales at EADS Military Transport Aircraft Division, have signed today, in the presence of Spanish Ambassador in Warsaw, Rafael Mendivil Peydro, a new contract to provide Polish Air Force with two additional C-295 military transport aircraft.  
 
In August 2001, Poland purchased eight C-295, from which last delivery took place in July 2005.  
 
Antonio R. Barberán said during the signing ceremony: “We would like to thank and congratulate Polish Air Force for its professionalism, and to specially mention the 6,000 flight hours in different missions under the most demanding and hard conditions performed with the C-295 in areas that extend from the Middle East to the Far East”  
 
Poland is the first export customer for C-295 which repeats with new acquisitions.  
 
EADS CASA is the world leader in light and medium weight aircraft. The CN-235 and C-295 have accumulated over one million flights with more than 900.000 flight hours in five continents. The C-295 is in operation with air forces of Poland, Jordan, Algeria and Spain, with orders from Brazil and Portugal commencing delivery, to be followed by Finland. Compared to its competitors, it is the only aircraft in its category that has operated in actual operational conditions in the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan.  
 

[Hess]

Just thinking, guys, about the cost of these airlift aircraft & a thought struck me. Would it be possible to put part or all of their funding under humanitarian relief. After all, isn't Ireland supposed to donate 0.7% of GDP to the aforesaid mentioned humanitarian relief?


Just a thought, that's all.


PS: Great debate!