A couple of aspects are disturbing so a final input from me this topic.
In multiple threads this forum and elsewhere, inherent apprehension seems conveyed by some who may have served in recent conflicts regarding aircraft platform survivability and risk of personnel casualties. Most types can be optimised by fitment of enhancements to improve combat readiness and hardware manufacturers usually get type certifications for new kit pretty quickly so they can sell more of their gear. But alas, Australia has largely not gone down that track as evidenced by systems deficiencies in Chinook and Blackhawk when they were first considered for deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan. And of course, useful hardware that is shed is inevitably refurbished/optimised by others for service elsewhere in the world.
Military involvement in conflict is unpredictable and nations have historically had to make best use of platforms in service. Survivability always depends more on operating practices than any other factors and there will inevitably be some equipment losses and personnel casualties in combat (521 Australians killed and 3,000 plus wounded in the Vietnam War). But one has to ponder the underlying culture within the Australian DoD when many media announcements over-emphasize the suitability of expensive new platforms for aid to civil power tertiary roles, be it disaster relief, humanitarian aid or whatever. The primary purpose for acquiring such hardware is military applications and if that is going to be subordinated, then the Australian Government is giving the ADF a warm and fuzzy 'Peace Corps' flavour.
AOTW; specific cost of a Penn-Turbo Caribou unknown, but there is some interesting discussion re cost factors at this link: http://www.ausairpower.net/DT-Turbo-Caribou-July-05.pdf . The base price for a Basler BT-67 (turbo-Dakota) is about $4.5 million, depending on how configured (see here: Frequently Asked Questions) so maybe thereabouts for a turbo-Caribou. Perhaps 5 or so for the unit price of one MRH90 or 7 for one C-27 Spartan!
That turbo-'Bou are not yet operated militarily by others matters nought if it is the most cost-effective option for fixed wing SRT operations in Australia's near neighbourhood. See the military/para-military operators for BT-67 versions (USAF gets mention).
Enough from me. Wishing all a satisfying Year 2012.
Last edited by Bushranger 71; 30th Dec 2011 at 21:22.
Reason: grammar