RAF to get second hand jets in wedgetail buy

[Agent K]

Meanwhile.....

The RAAF bought secondhand A330s to boost its KC30 fleet (they were built after the first and before the second KC30s)….


https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/e-7-wed ... -aircraft/

Is the RAAF that desperate that they are willing to accept any old bodge-up? Why does Australia seem to buy 'cheap' but ultimately pay more for their procurements?

[TonyO]

The RAAF bought secondhand A330s to boost its KC30 fleet (they were built after the first and before the second KC30s)….

They are the first and so far only MRTTs to be converted from second-hand/used aircraft, but fitted the need as they were built in close to the same batch/production block as the RAAF's other KC-30s.
And this is the point, if we have second-hand 737s with two different from the other three, that could impact on maintenance, training and spares. Airliners go through all sorts of upgrades during production that we don't really hear about, upgraded flight management systems, aerodynamic adjustments not to mention the differences in cabin configurations.

[Agent K]

The RAAF bought secondhand A330s to boost its KC30 fleet (they were built after the first and before the second KC30s)….

They are the first and so far only MRTTs to be converted from second-hand/used aircraft, but fitted the need as they were built in close to the same batch/production block as the RAAF's other KC-30s.
And this is the point, if we have second-hand 737s with two different from the other three, that could impact on maintenance, training and spares. Airliners go through all sorts of upgrades during production that we don't really hear about, upgraded flight management systems, aerodynamic adjustments not to mention the differences in cabin configurations.

Working in the business I know this well, operating fleets within fleets. I'd have imagined (and I hope the contract will insist on), and as per my previous comment, that the aircraft will be pretty much stripped down to the frame, gutted and rebuilt, to a common standard, especially considering the work needed. You'd be surprised but the majority of the avionics, cabin etc. equipment is completely buyer furnished and removable/replaceable. This shouldn't be an issue.

[ColintheCaterpillar]

The RAAF bought secondhand A330s to boost its KC30 fleet (they were built after the first and before the second KC30s)….

They are the first and so far only MRTTs to be converted from second-hand/used aircraft, but fitted the need as they were built in close to the same batch/production block as the RAAF's other KC-30s.
And this is the point, if we have second-hand 737s with two different from the other three, that could impact on maintenance, training and spares. Airliners go through all sorts of upgrades during production that we don't really hear about, upgraded flight management systems, aerodynamic adjustments not to mention the differences in cabin configurations.

Considering the breadth of the work to make an E-7 out of a basic 737NG, I don’t think it’s going to be an issue.

I suspect we’re after a 737 shaped piece of metal tube with engines and the ancillary bits that it stands on. Other than that, to fit the kit I think it’ll be pretty much gutted from nose to tail.

[YellowBelly]

now we just need a few B737 passenger jets to fill the short-medium haul gap left when the VC 10 retired, no excuse not to now that engineering will be available for the type.

[webbysdad]

Just a thought on the secondhand aircraft question, the VC10 refuelling fleet was all secondhand and all were well-used airframes. There were info boards in the engineering control office detailing total hours and number of landings for each 'frame. If I remember correctly most of them had several thousand hours and lots of landings! That was soon after they came into service with the RAF. Also they had been stored for several years before being converted. So secondhand is nothing new! As a further thought, the RAF Tristar fleet were all secondhand, three from Pan-AM and six from BA.

[Vulcanone]

The K.2/K.3 and K.4s were indeed. Even the C.1s were not new when they converted them to partial tankers.

[webbysdad]

The K.2/K.3 and K.4s were indeed. Even the C.1s were not new when they converted them to partial tankers.

The C Mk 1's were originally built new for RAF service, though and were a different spec to the commercial VC10, I believe.
As for the Tristars, they were effectively two different aircraft, I heard, with all the differences between them.

[ColintheCaterpillar]

The K.2/K.3 and K.4s were indeed. Even the C.1s were not new when they converted them to partial tankers.

It is worth noting though that I believe the C1s still had far fewer hours than the ex airliner Ks.

Grey liveried aircraft will probably fly far far less than their civilian counterparts, and as for the E-7, due to the nature of its job will fly far fewer “cycles” (short haul airframe, often long haul flight times).