Originally Posted by
noooby
I'm sorry, why 30 years early? Isn't expected retirement, at least in the article you reference, set at 2037? That is 14 years away. That would be 197,400 hours.
I remember he Seasprite fiasco in RAN and how well they same airframe was operating in NZ. Looks to the same again with the -90.
ADF orders for 12 MRH90 in 2005 and 34 in 2006 were not completed on time and not considered at FOC until 2015. A retirement in 2037 would leave only 22 operational years which is far less than expected when the system was purchased in 2005 and 2006. Hence planned retirement time must be calculated from FOC, not delivery. Regardless of whether retirement is cut short of 14 or 30 years the cost saving estimate of 2,6bn seems very conservative. If we use your 14 years and 300 FH per year the saving is 13k per FH which still seems very low compared to the reported actual difference in cost (6k vs 50k). Even if you add in the procurement cost of the new AC the numbers are greatly in favor of a swap.