Irish government jet

smurfjed

not a whole lot dearer than a G4/5 type aircraft. It would be able to perform support flights for the army UN missions, but also, head of state missions.

Is there any other country using them like that ? For me, even a basic BBJ configuration can't be configured for cargo or normal passengers in a timely manner.
You could configure it like an airliner, but one of the benefits of a corporate aircraft is that it allows the occupants to work whilst in transit. But that logic probably goes out the window as we are talking about politicians

EchoIndia

For the most part the Air Corps machines carry fewer than ten people on flight (sometimes well less) so I think a BBJ-class aircraft would be well beyond what is needed.

Graham

doolox wrote: »

Would it be possible to lease a jet until we get the public finances in better shape?

This isn't really a problem/question about financing a government jet.

The right/sensible thing to do is for the country to go out and procure an appropriate aircraft, the only reason that hasn't happened is the parish pump brigade would immediately start brandishing pitchforks.

man98

So, the CSeries can do 3,200 miles on a full tank at empty weight. Let's say extra tanks were added, and this plane operates at a low weight, which it will, it could go far. 3200 miles, make that 3000 miles with winds. Minus 200 more miles with weight, so all we need is a 5,000L fuel tank added to reach New York? These are new, efficient, parts built in Belfast, can take off at almost every runway of a commercial airport for transplant patient transfers, this seems almost perfect. And if I had my way, the LJ45 would make way for a Casa 235 too.

Irish Steve

Operating cost for a 320 or BBJ is probably higher, as en route costs and landing charges are based on size, etc, and there's some difference between a G4 and a 320 or BBJ, and I suspect that the fuel costs would be somewhat higher as well.

Yes, realistically, the relevant people should do a proper evaluation, and go out and get whatever is appropriate, but the fear factor that is still endemic in Leinster House will make this one of those decisions that either gets made badly, or wrongly, for all the wrong reasons.

Tenger

If only:

http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.file?id=4223&filename=phpT99zFr.jpeg

Strumms

How can it be in that bad a shape ? I mean I'm no expert and open to correction and to be informed but I cannot imagine that it is subject to so many cycles per year and with proper regular maintenance shouldn't be unviable and sitting on it's ass for weeks on end in the US ?

I'd imagine a BBJ or an ACJ would be well too much aircraft for the requirements of the state. Surly it wouldn't be too hard to source a low hours GiV or GV second hand that could be suitable for the roll ?

Irish Steve

perhaps this puts it into context. With all the comings and goings in Cardiff, an earlier report on the Flightradar thread mentioned Turkish 1, probably bringing in the Turkish Delegation for the NATO conference,

Supposedly, Turkey's economy is struggling, but their Government Jet appears to be an Airbus 330. Makes one wonder.

Esel

Deleted User wrote: »

No one batted an eyelid when the irish navy spent €150 million on three navy ships.

The vessels were grey. Navy is an optional extra. :pac:

owenc

No offence but the southern Irish government always make a laughing stock. Its no surprise to me the type of aircraft they have.

owenc

smurfjed wrote: »

Another issue with an European based G4 is the avionics, as the FR24 guys will tell you, very few G4's show up on their screens due to a lack of ADS-B, even when they do show, its generally generic data. With the changes to European ATC requirements next year, operators have the choice to upgrade their avionics at about $1m per aircraft or seek a waiver, they will also start to run into problems with CPDLC requirements over the North Atlantic. So the questions start about dripping money into the aircraft or selling them and upgrading while they still have a residual value. But with the G450 costing around $40m, the G550 around $55m and the G650 around $70m, its not a cheap nor easy decision.

As a G4 pilot, we have a launch time of 2.5 hours, that includes 1 hour to get to operations, so we can have the passengers sitting at their destination before the fractional aircraft would have even arrived to pick them up. But we aren't cheap

Lucky for you.

owenc

debabyjesus wrote: »

They should charter a wx avro. Or buy one off them altogether for about three fiddy! If its good enough for lizzy surely our lads could potter around in one!

Landing in fields all over the country opening shops rezoning land collecting tax or whatever it is governments do.

I don't understand why the British government has no jet with the size of our country.

porsche959

owenc wrote: »

No offence but the southern Irish government always make a laughing stock. Its no surprise to me the type of aircraft they have.

:rolleyes: Thanks for the moral lecture from the failed political entity.

(no offence)

L1011

Irish Steve wrote: »

perhaps this puts it into context. With all the comings and goings in Cardiff, an earlier report on the Flightradar thread mentioned Turkish 1, probably bringing in the Turkish Delegation for the NATO conference,

Supposedly, Turkey's economy is struggling, but their Government Jet appears to be an Airbus 330. Makes one wonder.

The dodgier the state, the bigger and better the ministerial transport. Germany used an ex commercial 310 till recently, UK has some Avros and generally charters, etc. Random dictatorships have multiple BBJs

Tabnabs

For the sake of 'keeping up with the Joneses', here's a comparison of what other States use

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_transports_of_heads_of_state_and_government

owenc

porsche959 wrote: »

:rolleyes: Thanks for the moral lecture from the failed political entity.

(no offence)

What?

You mean the UK is a failed country? No I don't think so.
The reality IS that down there the government have embarrassed themselves multiple times trying to put themselves in places that they can't hence the bailout.

Tabnabs

owenc wrote: »

What?

You mean the UK is a failed country? No I don't think so.
The reality IS that down there the government have embarrassed themselves multiple times trying to put themselves in places that they can't hence the bailout.

What short memories you have in Britain, err, sorry the UK. 1976 and the IMF bailout ring any bells? I think the score is neatly tied at 1-1.

smurfjed

I mean I'm no expert and open to correction and to be informed but I cannot imagine that it is subject to so many cycles per year and with proper regular maintenance shouldn't be unviable and sitting on it's ass for weeks on end in the US ?

It depends on the maintenance program that its on, but one of the options from Gulfstream is based on calendar checks, 12 month, 24, 36 and 72 months, these are combined with hour based checks. The 72 month check is pretty much the same as an airline D Check, so its a complete rebuild.
Based on US costs, the operating costs for the G4 are about 2 million Euro per year based on 400 hours, with an hourly operating cost of about 5,000 Euro, this is actually quite cheap for what you get. Considering that the capital costs are paid for this aircraft, then the cost of the check and upgrading the avionics will give the country a reasonably cheap aircraft for the next 6 years.

lord lucan

owenc wrote: »

What?

You mean the UK is a failed country? No I don't think so.
The reality IS that down there the government have embarrassed themselves multiple times trying to put themselves in places that they can't hence the bailout.

Cut the political stuff,ROI V UK has absolutely nothing to do with the topic under discussion.

SpaceTime

I think it's completely ressonable to have a business jet for state (our) use.

However, I think we need to also have VIP transport use subject to an Oireachtas oversight committee - maybe a monthly report goes to the PAC and is published online.

There's a need for flexible transportation services but they should be using scheduled services where possible and showing how they're keeping costs down.

Same goes for use of state cars and expense accounts.

Idbatterim

Supposedly, Turkey's economy is struggling, but their Government Jet appears to be an Airbus 330. Makes one wonder.

There is no issue with the finance for it, the publics perception is the issue! We spend what €70,000,000,000 a year? public finances are €870,000,000 odd euro ahead of forecasts. Money is not the issue!


Here we go, fresh off the press, todays indo!

Ministers 'don't want to lose the plot' and loosen purse strings for a new jet - See more at: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/ministers-dont-want-to-lose-the-plot-and-loosen-purse-strings-for-a-new-jet-30557556.html#sthash.wlrzEk99.dpuf

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/ministers-dont-want-to-lose-the-plot-and-loosen-purse-strings-for-a-new-jet-30557556.html

cdsb46

There is a few second hand jets for sale in Ireland atm which should be of interest to the Gov, including this one http://www.aso.com/listings/spec/ViewAd.aspx?id=151828

SpaceTime

There are plenty of people who think this would be more than adequate:

http://www.aerlingus.com/Services/iolar.htm

man98

Mr. Workingman and Mrs. Workingwoman can think what they like about a new government jet. The fact is, it is highly beneficial to have our own. Comparing us to similar countries, such as Denmark (4 Cl604s), Norway (1 Dassault Falcon 20, charters), Sweden (2 G4s and 3 Saab 340s) and the Czech Republic (2 Yaks, a Challenger and 2 A319CJs), we get a rough idea of what we need. AW139s on demand, a Casa 235 and a private jet of some sort. I'm no expert on private jets, but a G4, Cl 604 or Embraer Legacy should suffice. The private jet for Transatlantic journeys, the Casa 235 for transplants, routine trips etc. and the AW139 for their current use. In other words, axe the LJ45.

Negative_G

man98 wrote: »

Mr. Workingman and Mrs. Workingwoman can think what they like about a new government jet. The fact is, it is highly beneficial to have our own. Comparing us to similar countries, such as Denmark (4 Cl604s), Norway (1 Dassault Falcon 20, charters), Sweden (2 G4s and 3 Saab 340s) and the Czech Republic (2 Yaks, a Challenger and 2 A319CJs), we get a rough idea of what we need. AW139s on demand, a Casa 235 and a private jet of some sort. I'm no expert on private jets, but a G4, Cl 604 or Embraer Legacy should suffice. The private jet for Transatlantic journeys, the Casa 235 for transplants, routine trips etc. and the AW139 for their current use. In other words, axe the LJ45.

Why would you advocate the use of helicopters carrying out MATS roles as opposed to the Learjet? Ministers seem to spend the majority of their time travelling to mainland Europe. Using a 139 in the role would be ridiculous. The range and endurance of a 139 is not comparable to that of the Learjet.

man98

I'm not saying to use a helicopter for international transport? I'm saying buy a Casa for that purpose. The AW139s are sometimes used when a minister needs to go out to an island. That's the role I suggest it continues to be used for.

EchoIndia

The two existing CASAs were jointly funded by the EU, if I recall correctly, given their fishery protection role. Apart from the fact that they are a large aircraft if only a few people need to travel, turboprops are really only suited for trips to the nearer parts of Europe. I once flew LUX-SNN on a Beech 200 and it was something like 3hr 15min - tolerable up to a point but not what you would term luxury travel.

sully2010

Anyone know where I can find photos of the interior of the Gulfstream? Does it have a 23 year old cabin too?

Negative_G

man98 wrote: »

I'm not saying to use a helicopter for international transport? I'm saying buy a Casa for that purpose. The AW139s are sometimes used when a minister needs to go out to an island. That's the role I suggest it continues to be used for.

I see, it wasn't clear from your post exactly what you meant.

Why would you suggest buying another Casa to fulfil the role that the Learjet already provides? If accommodating larger numbers of passengers is an issue isn't that exactly the reason the GIV would be chosen in such a scenario.

You have a small aircraft that can do short range MATS/patient transfer etc for up to 6 pax.

You then have a larger aircraft that can do the same jobs but has longer range, endurance and can ferry more pax.

man98

The Learjet is inefficient, we already have a few people in the Air Corps trained to maintain a Casa 235. Also, they do about 300mph cruise speed, which isn't bad.