Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

£15m RAF planes re-fit contract

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

£15m RAF planes re-fit contract

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 19th Jun 2012, 08:27
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: dundee
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
£15m RAF planes re-fit contract

BBC News - BAE Prestwick wins £15m RAF planes re-fit contract

Last edited by mrmrsmith2; 19th Jun 2012 at 08:30.
mrmrsmith2 is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2012, 09:21
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sweden
Posts: 473
Received 158 Likes on 71 Posts
Is the 146 really the best choice of aircraft for the RAF, or is it just a combination of cost and 'flying the flag'? Would something like a 737 combi not have been a better choice?
Avionker is online now  
Old 19th Jun 2012, 10:31
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I suspect the reason lies here:

The BAE 146 aircraft were bought for about £4m from Belgium's TNT Airways.
With the emphasis being on £4M.

Gotta fill the K-gap with something. I suppose the '146 at least has decent short field performance, one wonders what it's like in hot 'n high conditions though.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2012, 10:50
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: England
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hot n High 146

WW,

Regarding the 146 performance I refer you to RAF News 15/6/12 Page 3

"Its superior hot and high performance compared to other transport assets means that we can operate throughout Afghanistan at any time day or night"

From 32 Sqdn spokesman MP
EODFelix is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2012, 11:15
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Was he told to say it or did it come from the heart? Don't think there's been a 'controversial' piece in Pravda for a while.

Last edited by Willard Whyte; 19th Jun 2012 at 11:17.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2012, 11:15
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 51st State
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
"for delivery in March 2013."

Doesn't the "U" in UOR signify Urgent?
HaveQuick2 is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2012, 11:21
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: .
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't know if these are from the same batch, but I still have memories of a visit from a TNT sales rep around the time the 146 Combi / Freighter was announced twenty years or so ago.
The story was that TNT had done a deal to be the exclusive customer for this variant for the first ten years, that they would lease all that BAe produced and then sublet them as required. I've forgotten the numbers involved, but a couple of hundred sticks in the memory. She claimed that they were specifically intended to be capable of flying into remote / short airfields with hot / high capability included by design. Essentially TNT flew parcels anywhere and everywhere, and needed a large global fleet that could get anywhere.
I've no idea what happened to the contract, but at face value the aircraft as described to me at the time would seem to suit the need now.
............................................................ .......

edit
PS I seem to remember a major financial crash not long after, leaving TNT holding aircraft it couldn't use and trying to renegotiate the contract - hence the difference between the numbers she was talking about and the numbers actually built

Last edited by Milo Minderbinder; 19th Jun 2012 at 12:16.
Milo Minderbinder is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2012, 11:32
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sweden
Posts: 473
Received 158 Likes on 71 Posts
A little digging around seems to support the 'hot and high' performance claims. If the intention is to operate from rough fields within Afghanistan, as opposed to just between the UK and Kandahar, perhaps it is a good choice.

Maybe I was a little too sceptical, but I'm used to working on aircraft with full size engines as opposed to podded APUs hanging off the wings.
Avionker is online now  
Old 19th Jun 2012, 11:34
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,390
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Was he told to say it or did it come from the heart?
Years ago, recollect C17 Sqn Ldr becoming a bit miffed when I expressed concern about operational restrictions alleged to have been placed on his aircraft by the nation of manufacture.
Basil is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2012, 11:38
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Stamford
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
We also have trained crews and a proven DAS fit for the 146, same cannot be said for 737.
Stuff is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2012, 11:39
  #11 (permalink)  
Red On, Green On
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Have they solved the 146 air quality issues?
airborne_artist is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2012, 07:04
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: South of the North
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hot and high?

According to the Flight article below:

Each of the adapted 146M aircraft will be capable of carrying fewer than the type's standard 96 passengers, due to the hot temperature and high-altitude environment encountered in Afghanistan, and due to the volume of equipment carried by combat personnel.
PICTURE: Ex-TNT BAe 146s enter conversion for Royal Air Force
Sook is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2012, 07:05
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Taif-Saudi Arabia
Age: 64
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We see the odd 146 / RJ here every now and then and they certainly don't need much of our stretches of motorway in the middle of the desert! Hot? Is 35 degrees + in summer hot enough, high? 4800ft ASL. What is the definition of hot and high or is it a sliding scale with runway length added?
AGS Man is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2012, 07:21
  #14 (permalink)  

Evertonian
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: #3117# Ppruner of the Year Nominee 2005
Posts: 12,501
Received 105 Likes on 59 Posts
Milo. Those TNT 146's were the brainchild of Peter Abeles. A lot of Ansett's troubles began around this time as we seemed to be funding this purchase. I think the idea was a failure, but one tends to get this when one thinks of Airfreight as glorified Road freight...
Buster Hyman is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2012, 07:24
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Where the heart belongs
Age: 55
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
What is the definition of hot and high or is it a sliding scale with runway length added?
Suppose it's conditions that take you to your WAT limit. Doesn't matter how long the runway is you're not going to lift off any heavier.
Sideshow Bob is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2012, 08:23
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: South of the North
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I presume they will also have to attain a reasonably high rate of climb when coming out of theatre which may limit the AUTOW further. I wouldn't have thought departing Bastion at max achieveable AUTOW for the temp/elevation only to proceed low level for several mile would be very popular with the crews!
Sook is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2012, 09:37
  #17 (permalink)  

Champagne anyone...?
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: EGDL
Age: 54
Posts: 1,420
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Its superior hot and high performance compared to other transport assets means that we can operate throughout Afghanistan at any time day or night"
I nearly had seizure fom laughing so much after reading that Good ole Pravda. Why don't the RAF just present this as what it is - a cheap, temporary sticking plaster for the large festering, pustulent running sore that is the current state of the RAF's theatre/tactical lift capability?

Very sad.
StopStart is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.