..you've got the wrong idea. Military aircraft that are not on F24 etc are still running their transponders and are fully visible to civilian ATC and other aircraft. Mode S etc is all 100% functioning, the data is just being suppressed on the web.

frankv:

 

Getting back to invisibility to FlightRadar and suchlike web-based aircraft trackers, presumably this particular aircraft had permission from Director of CAA to fly into Wellington without a transponder? Which I would have thought would be a significant headache for ATC.

 

Assuming it was just transporting that one guy, it seems a hell of an uncomfortable way for him to fly in and out of Wellington. If it was me, I would have preferred AirNZ, even cattle class.

 

 

 

 

 

pretty sure it will still be using its transponder its just not being shown on the web based sites

frankv:

Getting back to invisibility to FlightRadar and suchlike web-based aircraft trackers, presumably this particular aircraft had permission from Director of CAA to fly into Wellington without a transponder? Which I would have thought would be a significant headache for ATC.

Assuming it was just transporting that one guy, it seems a hell of an uncomfortable way for him to fly in and out of Wellington. If it was me, I would have preferred AirNZ, even cattle class.

Often a BusinessJet along with it while the stringalongs and gear go with earplugs :)

But they don't fly 'no transponder'.  So no headache. They fly with secondary Mode-S transponder. Only GPS integrated ADSB (the b=broadcast) systems broadcast where they are for other TCAS systems to receive. ATC see them, sites receiving GPS locations do not (or hide them).

As mentioned earlier, with right gear you still get a Transponder code. Registration based on it, Altitude. ATC can see them from the various multilateration and ground based radar interrogation responses from that data. The same way you can see the Dash-8 and small aircraft with the same Mode-S only via MLAT on fr24. Except those aren't explicitly ignored like military are

We can still know they're out there. Just not exactly where. P3 Orion (dont think they show up)

C130 USAF ski doing tests..

frankv:

 

Assuming it was just transporting that one guy, it seems a hell of an uncomfortable way for him to fly in and out of Wellington. If it was me, I would have preferred AirNZ, even cattle class.

 

He may have used a "silver bullet"   - a palletised heavily modified airstream trailer, with comms gear and executive seating etc

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/14718/mattis-used-the-usafs-flying-airstream-trailer-pod-silver-bullet-on-afghanistan-trip

PolicyGuy:

 

MikeB4:

 

The visit is probably serving a double purpose as the US is trying to sell the RNZAF Globemasters to replace the C130s 

 

 

The C-17 production line has been closed for three years now, there aren't any more and never will be.
So the US aren't trying to sell them to anybody, especially not the RNZAF.

 

Gerry Brownlee, when Minister of Defence, initiated a study to see if we should buy the last two or three of the production line. Conclusion: they were waay to big for most of our use cases, and waay too expensive.

 

Second hand maybe, the USAF has a large mothballed inventory in the desert.

MikeB4:

 

PolicyGuy:

 

MikeB4:

 

The visit is probably serving a double purpose as the US is trying to sell the RNZAF Globemasters to replace the C130s 

 

 

The C-17 production line has been closed for three years now, there aren't any more and never will be.
So the US aren't trying to sell them to anybody, especially not the RNZAF.

 

Gerry Brownlee, when Minister of Defence, initiated a study to see if we should buy the last two or three of the production line. Conclusion: they were waay to big for most of our use cases, and waay too expensive.

 

 

Second hand maybe, the USAF has a large mothballed inventory in the desert.

 

No mothballed C-17s, that fleet is worked really hard

I'm reasonably sure that any air force that does have C-17s would say that "you'd have to tear them out of our cold dead hands" before you would be able to get one.

PolicyGuy:

 

MikeB4:

 

PolicyGuy:

 

MikeB4:

 

The visit is probably serving a double purpose as the US is trying to sell the RNZAF Globemasters to replace the C130s 

 

 

The C-17 production line has been closed for three years now, there aren't any more and never will be.
So the US aren't trying to sell them to anybody, especially not the RNZAF.

 

Gerry Brownlee, when Minister of Defence, initiated a study to see if we should buy the last two or three of the production line. Conclusion: they were waay to big for most of our use cases, and waay too expensive.

 

 

Second hand maybe, the USAF has a large mothballed inventory in the desert.

 

 

No mothballed C-17s, that fleet is worked really hard

 

I'm reasonably sure that any air force that does have C-17s would say that "you'd have to tear them out of our cold dead hands" before you would be able to get one.

 

Apologies you are correct, it is the C-5 they have parked up in Arizona. 

Well I'll be.. A trailer in a plane

That may well explain the curtains and placement of the freight on the tail lift. It looks pretty similar to that layout in the images!

C-17 is an expensive aircraft (up until the Gulf War the Brits and Ozzies only had 4 each) and you are stuck in a lease type arrangement with regard to spares and support. If you go all 'anti-nuke' on the yanks you could find yourself with a bunch of white elephants that are stuck on the ground.

What you gain in lifting capacity, you loose in numbers of aircraft and the places they can be at the same time which restricts the number of pies you can have your fingers in.

We have done exchanges with the Ozzies where we trade C-17 hours (when we need that capacity) for C-130/B757 hours doing smaller jobs for them. It's a useful arrangement that can benefit both sides of the alliance. We have a similar arrangement with the yanks and the Antarctic program. A B757 can move more people for a lot less money than a C17.

tripper1000:

 

We have a similar arrangement with the yanks and the Antarctic program. A B757 can move more people for a lot less money than a C17.

 

The B757 has major problems with flights to Pegasus/Phoenix in Antarctica....

"The Defence Force report says that when the weather at Pegasus Field continued to deteriorate, it became clear "there would probably be no improvement until after [the plane's] fuel reserves had been exhausted"."

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/10004119/Antarctic-passengers-dodged-a-bullet

The TAIC report is here and its pretty sobering reading

https://taic.org.nz/inquiry/ao-2013-009

O.T. but this isn't s systemic problem but was a one off where the weather deteriorated after passing the point of safe return. The B757 has done numerous trips to the ice since this event. The risks are not materially different to a C-130 doing the same flight.

An Icelandic airline followed the New Zealand Air Force lead and landed a commercial B757 in Antarctica in 2015 - well after this event.

MikeB4:

 

NZFAF aircraft appear on Flightradar

 

What, both of them?

Geektastic:

MikeB4:

NZFAF aircraft appear on Flightradar

What, both of them?

The RNZAF was flying a mix of leased (civilian owned) and RNZAF owned aircraft. From memory I think it was the leased aircraft (eg the king air B200) that were showing up on Flight Radar.

I have never seen the P3 on the web - even when I could physically see they were flying. That info would be far to valuable to the unscrupulous fishing fleets that lurk around the pacific.