Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

RAAF VIP Fleet Renewal

Old 16th Feb 2016, 10:18
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 220
KC 30

When the PM goes O/S why doesn't he use the KC 30?
It's RAAF and the thing apparently can be configured differently with more comfortable seating up the front.
It has enough seats for the media.
It has the range.
It should have secure communications being standard.
When it's not being used for the PM then it can be used for its primary role.
I would think it would be a smart thing to do using current assets. Big enough to satisfy the PM's ego and keep the public happy not buying anything flash.
Wingspar is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2016, 10:37
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: overthere
Posts: 2,876
And what does the RAAF do when the refuelling asset is needed?
donpizmeov is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2016, 10:50
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 21
A mix of A330 (KC30 combi?) and Challenger/G550 size would seem to make sense. A330 for fleet commonality with the KC30 for the drivers and maintainers, perhaps G550 for similar reasons given the impending addition of that type.

Or is that too sensible/I'm missing something?
Know I. Deer is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2016, 11:27
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 220
Aren't they transports as well as refuellers?
Fuel tanks are in the wings leaving a nice big cabin full of seats to use. Not to mention the cargo capacity it offers underneath.
So use them for transport like they're designed for.
Not enough hulls...get another one!
When the PM ain't using it 33 get another hull at their disposal.
Another hull online to cover planned maintenance or operational requirements elsewhere.
Wingspar is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2016, 13:25
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 95
so you guys suggesting a KC-30 realise the PM just doesn't sit in Canberra when he isn't o/s. He does get around Australia and often takes a fair chunk of people with him. i.e. more than will fit comfortably in a G550.

so this combo KC-30 will mostly fly the PM et al about and do not much else to be honest.

given this they may as well buy a dedicated VIP aircraft because that's what any KC-30 will end up been.
lurker999 is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2016, 21:09
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 220
Lurks,
I agree.
The PM needs something to fly around domestically, regionally with.
G550 may fit the bill.
My argument with the KC30A was something to go to Washington, Europe in.
I simply argue that when he does his long distance runs he uses existing assets.
The aircraft is there.
I know it may be a novel idea to Defence Procurement.
It has the ability, range and suits the purpose. If it breaks down there should be another available to call on.
The Aussie public get another refueller/transport for their military.
Wingspar is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2016, 23:50
  #47 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,178
I've never been inside one but from my understanding the J class seats in the KC30 are the same as the domestic business class on a 737. There's no freaking way I want our PM travelling for 14 hours. He's entitled to at least the equivalent of what Qantas now has in its domestic A330 fleet. That means a lie flat bed.

In addition to that a conference type area that can seat 4-5 people should also be a requirement. Maybe that can be converted to other uses if need be.

We live miles away from the rest of the world and so being able to work and rest well on the journey is a lay down miserere requirment. Heck, a shower probably isn't a bad idea either.
Keg is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2016, 03:14
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: asdfgh
Posts: 50
The BBJs are a good asset for VIP. They are small enough to land in places a wide-body could only dream. For example, Çanakkale Airport (near ANZAC cove), Paris Le-Bourget and Caen, France. All airports the BBJ has been in/out of. Other leaders needed to be driven in from larger airports further away. Even yesterday, Mackay and Bundaberg - wouldn't get anything bigger than a 737 into there. Richmond is a key VIP destination, major operational limitations on a wide-body there. Many South-Pacific and NZ airports are better suited to the 737.

There is a significant limitation - the two-stops required to reach Europe or Eastern USA (normally Singapore/Abu Dhabi and Honolulu/Oakland). Having said that, these trips are not as frequent as you might think, maybe a handful of long round the world trips a year. So a dedicated wide-body asset is overkill IMHO. Having said that, not being able to carry the media is a significant issue for modern Government. It has been overcome recently by having a RAAF KC30 shadow the BBJ for G20 and then having the second BBJ replace it after the Prince of Wales duties were complete. So yes one BBJ was just for the media.

The most significant limitation is lavatory waste space. On long sectors it's honestly one of the major reasons they tech stop (not fuel/range).

The BBJ can fly the RNP approaches into CBR now which helps during days of reduced visibility, something a wide-body would need certification for into there. CBR has performance limitations on a good-day, the wide-body would struggle to take a full payload and fuel for 12 hour sectors.

The aircraft is not a flying palace, Emirates First Class has better amenities. It doesn't even have a bed. Just lie-flat seating. It does have WIFI, a private bathroom and shower for the VIP and business class seating in the rear.

The CL64 can only carry 5-6 pax - rarely enough for the PMs entourage.

Keep in mind, I'd hazard a guess that nearly 30-40% of missions/taskings are training sorties to keep all the crew current (operating under EVY callsign).

The GG does get first use of the jet but it's mostly used for Govt and Defence work.
rexxxxxy is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2016, 09:27
  #49 (permalink)  
601
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Brisbane, Qld, Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 1,007
So yes one BBJ was just for the media.
I do hope it is user pays

The CL64 can only carry 5-6 pax

For domestic operations, it should be able to carry at least double that number of pax.
601 is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2016, 11:00
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 21
Interesting info rexxxxxy, thanks for posting Good points about 737 sized aircraft being more appropriate for many destinations.

Re: wide bodies and Canberra, how's SQ going to go with their RPT service as of September? Enough runway for a 777 with a decent fuel load and pax?
Know I. Deer is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2016, 11:46
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In da Big Smoke
Posts: 2,348
Having said that, not being able to carry the media is a significant issue for modern Government.
Especially when they get stuck on a Garuda flight and end up in a plane crash because the BBJ is too small. Was a bit of an issue at the time but the media seem to have a love/hate relationship with the use of private aircraft. They love to bang on about how expensive it is but at the same time when some of their own got killed on a third world airline all of a sudden we need a bigger aircraft and the government has 'blood on its hands' etc etc
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 17th Feb 2016, 23:16
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 220
Lie Flat Beds

Ok.
KC 30.
Get another hull.
Configure it with a VIP section between doors one and two.
Dedicate that A/C to VIP duties.
That keeps everyone happy. The media and all the hangers on can be accommodated down the back.
When 33 are desperate for another hull they can call on that one and the grunts can stay down the back and not soil the PM's leather seat.
All operational matters are consistent with existing staffing and systems.
Minimal cost increase.
Wingspar is offline  
Old 18th Feb 2016, 23:11
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: asdfgh
Posts: 50
Re: wide bodies and Canberra, how's SQ going to go with their RPT service as of September? Enough runway for a 777 with a decent fuel load and pax?
With the extension it's more than enough to get a 777-200 as far as Singapore or Wellington, it's the 12hour+ missions that I'm talking about.

2 BBJs are a lot cheaper than a brand new wide-body or three.
rexxxxxy is offline  
Old 28th Feb 2016, 06:37
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In da Big Smoke
Posts: 2,348
Here we go again......

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/pm-...story-comments
MALCOLM Turnbull has insisted officials keep looking for lower cost options after he “inherited’’ Tony Abbott’s $190 million plan to replace his clapped-out VIP jet.

The Prime Minister’s *dilemma has been revealed in the defence white paper that confirms officials have allocated $190 million to buy an A330 plane and gut it to accommodate future PMs, their spouses and a travelling press pack.

It would be flying high with the future PM from 2019, *raising the prospect that it could be ferrying Bill Shorten around the world if he won the next election.

The defence white paper released last week by defence minister Marise Payne has been praised for long-term planning but it has been hit by claims it was largely finalised under the Abbott government.

Senior MPs have suggested the only major changes were “watering down’’ the rhetoric on China and inserting more “rainbow’’ language on *inclusion in the military and climate change.

“They were entitled to add what they like, but the reality is there was no real change in the strategic assessments and direction,’’ a Liberal source said.

Mr Turnbull told the *Sunday Herald Sun yesterday that he was concerned about the $190 million price tag.

The Prime Minister said no final decision had been made and he planned to consult with Labor.

“The PM was concerned about the high cost of the proposal and asked for lower cost options to be investigated and they have been,’’ a spokesman said.

“As this would be an acquisition which would not be completed until after the 2019 election and would be a long-term investment affecting many governments, the PM discussed it with the Opposition Leader some time ago and has arranged for him to be briefed by the secretary of *defence and CDF.

“The PM’s view is that an investment of this kind should only proceed with bipartisan support.’’

Complaints about the existing Boeing business jet 737 *include that the aircraft is ageing and has limited range and seating. This means it is forced to stop and refuel more often on overseas trips.

“The argument for acquiring the new aircraft is longer range and more seating, *enabling media and business delegations to travel with the Prime Minister,” a spokesman said.
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 28th Feb 2016, 07:14
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 234
Most Governments that have VIP jets have a number of different capability aircraft. One size fits all doesn't work. The media and others including advisors etc etc take up a lot of seats when the PM travels. They whinge if they miss the 'on-board' briefings etc..
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 28th Feb 2016, 09:32
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 7
The CL64 can only carry 5-6 pax
Incorrect.
SevenTwentySeven is offline  
Old 28th Feb 2016, 09:55
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 234
The press and other hangars on do pay for their seat. It is not a freebie. The other issue is that these aircraft are used on short notice on occasions. Bit hard to drag a KC-30 from a tanking schedule to fly a VIP flight that could be in the road for days with schedule changes.
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 28th Feb 2016, 12:44
  #58 (permalink)  
601
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Brisbane, Qld, Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 1,007
OK how many media do we need.
ABC
9
7
SBS
News
Fairfax.

That is 6.

Give them each a selfie stick, a gropro, pencil and notebook and we have a news team of one for each media outlet.
Still only 6.

From past experience, carrying the media was bigger production than Ben Hur.
601 is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2016, 00:16
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 95
They need 2 large(ish) aircraft.

I suspect it will be one ER jet, ie a 777, 787, A330, A350 and a 737, A319 size aircraft.

The big beast for LR missions, or those with lotsa pax, the smaller one for regional visits or where the bigger beast doesn't fit.

In an election I think both leaders are supposed to have equal access. Might be a problem with the above scenario.
lurker999 is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2016, 19:22
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 589
Originally Posted by neville_nobody View Post
The BBJ doesn't work well that's the problem. Too small, not enough range, too slow. They should have bought a 777/767/330/747 originally.

Aircraft that size will fly from Canberra to anywhere in the world non-stop with no need for crew positioning and various other logistics associated.

One of the biggest issues with selecting aircraft is the 'poor bugger me' attitude of the australian press. Politicians have to be seen flying around in a 210 as anything bigger is to pretentious. Fact is the 707 should have been replaced by a 767 at the time.
They (RAAF) were offered the 2 x B747-SP-38s that Qantas was disposing of, they knocked them back on the basis of having to extend the runway at CBR and the cost of doing so... the aircraft were scrapped and then 'guess what', they extended the runway at CBR anyway... that was the Howard government - not being political but just shows they all cock up and make stupid decisions.
AerialPerspective is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.