Mahindra leaving Australia.
...however, I seem to remember that an 'all-through' course, i.e. ab initio to advanced, was trialled on the PC 9. As one before with the Macchi, it was not particularly successful and the concept was dropped.
And this is what it comes down to. Not the Guvment, sadly not the unfortunate shareholders who have stumped up cash for private ventures, but the managers who have made some hopeless decisions. Managers who wouldn't listen to details be they technical or financial, but ploughed on regardless, or worse reckoned they knew more than the experts. The Nomad (N1) was a single engined aircraft designed around the PT6 until the RAAF managers got involved. Once again the injection seat was in and out of the design (the sloping frame forward of the wing remained in the design). The aeroplane was then rushed into production while the deficiencies obstinately remained uncured on 01 and 02. This sort of business has gone on up until the present day.
As to Mahindra and Australia, do you think the former Shareholders in Gippsland Aeronautics made a bomb from the sale? In terms of the press report which started the thread, I think the reporter sort of mixed up two themes. One has been the age old problem of how to rationalise shipping of aircraft parts from global suppliers and where to nail them all together - that debate will continue. The second has been Mahindra's propensity for shopping around for a "production facility" eyeing off where the best "inducements" can be found. In Australia, Mahindra has been mentioned in connection with Bundaberg, Toowoomba, Sunshine Coast - all the usual suspects. Overseas? who knows?
As to Mahindra and Australia, do you think the former Shareholders in Gippsland Aeronautics made a bomb from the sale? In terms of the press report which started the thread, I think the reporter sort of mixed up two themes. One has been the age old problem of how to rationalise shipping of aircraft parts from global suppliers and where to nail them all together - that debate will continue. The second has been Mahindra's propensity for shopping around for a "production facility" eyeing off where the best "inducements" can be found. In Australia, Mahindra has been mentioned in connection with Bundaberg, Toowoomba, Sunshine Coast - all the usual suspects. Overseas? who knows?
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget the Government also tried to sell a Tandam version of the A10 Wamira to the UK and it was to be known as the A20. When the UK selected the Embraer Tucano, that pretty much sealed the fate of the A10/20 Wamira.
BPA ...No ..... Not the Guvment ....AAC tried to sell the UK a tandem version. The Guvment didn't decide things like whether the A10 would be side by side seating.... it was Ronny RAAF. So then if you want to get into the export market, you need to go with the flow and for some unknown reason, the rest of the world were building trainers which according to the RAAF were impossible for instruction - ie they had tandem seating -so AAC proposed the A20 to the RAF. There were a few exceptions to tandem seating for new designs but they were OC aircraft where widening the fuselage and jamming in side by side ejection seats was the Quick and Dirty solution, but the tandem solution for the Harrier T2 (before the days of any stability augmentation) must have been a clue.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airvan on Floats
I see that at AirVenture 2014 Mahindra exhibited an Airvan on Wipline 3450 amphibious floats. Strangely there is nothing on the Gippsaero website about this project.
In one media article the Mahindra CEO is quoted as saying “Wipaire Inc. has begun feasibility testing on the aircraft with floats, and upon a successful outcome, a certification program will be launched later in 2014.”
In another article an engineer from Wipaire is quoted as saying “The configuration has not yet been determined, but the floats will likely be larger than the 206 floats, which have a certified weight limit of 3,800 pounds. The max gross weight for the Airvan is 4,200 pounds.”
Wipline floats for the Airvan have been promised for many, many years. Why all the mucking about? Is there some reluctance on behalf of Mahindra or perhaps Wipaire to offer the Airvan on floats.
In one media article the Mahindra CEO is quoted as saying “Wipaire Inc. has begun feasibility testing on the aircraft with floats, and upon a successful outcome, a certification program will be launched later in 2014.”
In another article an engineer from Wipaire is quoted as saying “The configuration has not yet been determined, but the floats will likely be larger than the 206 floats, which have a certified weight limit of 3,800 pounds. The max gross weight for the Airvan is 4,200 pounds.”
Wipline floats for the Airvan have been promised for many, many years. Why all the mucking about? Is there some reluctance on behalf of Mahindra or perhaps Wipaire to offer the Airvan on floats.
Last edited by Seagull V; 14th Aug 2014 at 03:31. Reason: Fix font size
airvan on floats
You need a customer. The Airvan on 3450s will probably weigh 2650 lb as a straight seaplane and 2850 lb as an amphib with TOWs of 4200 lbs and 4000 lbs respectively. Or around about 1550 lb or 1150lb disposable. Still worthwhile especially for the seaplane, but you would need to work the financials pretty closely.
and the score is ......
As to the rumours that started this thread, Regional airport turnaround | Latrobe Valley Express
would seem to indicate that the "auction" for the GippsAero "should I stay or should I go" (you could write a song around that) was won by Vic Gov and LTV to the tune of 2 million
would seem to indicate that the "auction" for the GippsAero "should I stay or should I go" (you could write a song around that) was won by Vic Gov and LTV to the tune of 2 million
