CanForce to China with the PM

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

Post Reply
Message
Author
ogopogo
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 223
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:28 am

CanForce to China with the PM

#1 Post by ogopogo » Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:04 pm

Was thinking about the range of our old A-310s. Today’s flight departed YVR....do they have the range?

https://www.google.ca/search?q=trudeau+ ... AEEctQMvFM:
---------- ADS -----------
  

lownslow
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 963
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 8:56 am

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#2 Post by lownslow » Sun Dec 03, 2017 9:28 am

Let's hope not.
---------- ADS -----------
  

mmm..bacon
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 7:19 pm

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#3 Post by mmm..bacon » Sun Dec 03, 2017 9:29 am

I'm sure that there are some who are fervently hoping that they don't!
---------- ADS -----------
  

fish4life
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:32 am

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#4 Post by fish4life » Sun Dec 03, 2017 2:45 pm

While I agree with most of what is said in this thread, I would think the Polaris can do Air to air refueling along with probably having bigger tanks / additional ones over the standard 310 but I stand to be corrected
---------- ADS -----------
  

Gannet167
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 444
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:23 pm

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#5 Post by Gannet167 » Sun Dec 03, 2017 5:17 pm

The RCAFs 310 has standard tanks. It can not air to air refuel. There are a few that can tank and refuel other aircraft, but they cannot receive fuel. Those models are not used for VIP.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Mooney21
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:31 am

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#6 Post by Mooney21 » Mon Dec 04, 2017 8:02 am

Any aux. tanks in the cargo hold?
---------- ADS -----------
  

bradley
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 12:19 pm

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#7 Post by bradley » Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:58 am

On longer flights like that they have to stop for gas on the way. If the flight is longer than a single crew can do in a crew day, they would have a slip crew prepositioned at the fuel stop too. Flying from YVR to China, my best guess would be a stop for gas in Alaska.

The Polaris cannot refuel in flight. The two tankers do have extra fuel tanks, but they are not configed for VIPs.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Inverted2
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1974
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:46 am
Location: Ontario

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#8 Post by Inverted2 » Mon Dec 04, 2017 6:51 pm

Well they could dump Socks over the pacific, that could save some weight and he could apologize to some sea creatures on the sea floor. :lol:
---------- ADS -----------
  

ogopogo
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 223
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:28 am

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#9 Post by ogopogo » Tue Dec 05, 2017 6:33 am

bradley wrote:
Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:58 am
On longer flights like that they have to stop for gas on the way. If the flight is longer than a single crew can do in a crew day, they would have a slip crew prepositioned at the fuel stop too. Flying from YVR to China, my best guess would be a stop for gas in Alaska.

The Polaris cannot refuel in flight. The two tankers do have extra fuel tanks, but they are not configed for VIPs.
Thanks. Turns out they did refuel in Anchorage.

To the other posters who replied with unrelated comments - get a life.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Gilles Hudicourt
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1991
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:51 am
Location: YUL

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#10 Post by Gilles Hudicourt » Thu Dec 07, 2017 6:24 pm

The VIP A-310 has standard tanks, meaning almost 49 tonnes. It burns about 5 tonnes an hour, so it can fly about nine to ten hours, no reserves, no alternate, according to payload.
This same aircraft can be modified to receive one or two ACTs, Additional Center Tanks in the forward hold, which each contain 5.7 tonnes of fuel. The installation of two such tanks would give the A310 a total of 60 tonnes of fuel, so 12 to 13 hours hours endurance, no alternate, no reserves, again according to payload.
If the Aircraft, which weighs around 80 to 81 tonnes empty, took off with 60 tonnes of fuel, and only 10 tonnes of payload, it would have a take off weight of just 150 tonnes, which would give it a bit better range (MTOW is 164 tonnes).
Vancouver to Beijing is about 4600 NM Great Circle, so over 10 hours. Impossible with current tanks, perhaps possible with 2 ACTs and a light payload and no winds.
Plus, I understand that for security reasons, when the PM is carried, they carry much more reserve fuel for contingencies then a commercial flight would on the same flight.....
---------- ADS -----------
  
Last edited by Gilles Hudicourt on Fri Dec 08, 2017 6:56 am, edited 1 time in total.

fish4life
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:32 am

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#11 Post by fish4life » Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:26 pm

I guess in the end I thought we might have something that seems comparable to the US but again we do not. No Air to Air refueling seems like a security issue to me.
---------- ADS -----------
  

DanJ
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 288
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:12 pm

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#12 Post by DanJ » Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:32 pm

This is Canada. We can't have nice things. Hell, Chretien wouldn't even fly in that plane out of appearances. And then they put a nice paint job on it and people whined again.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
YYZSaabGuy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:32 am
Location: On glideslope.

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#13 Post by YYZSaabGuy » Fri Dec 08, 2017 3:39 am

fish4life wrote:
Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:26 pm
I guess in the end I thought we might have something that seems comparable to the US but again we do not. No Air to Air refueling seems like a security issue to me.
I'm not sure exactly what the security issue is: airport refueling can be kept reasonably secured. And if you're referring to the Canadian equivalent of an airborne White House, it's not like anybody really needs Shiny Pony and his minions safe and secure at 40,000', barking orders to NDHQ and desperately trying to recall the launch code sequence. Personally, if everything goes sideways, I'm OK with them having to run and duck for cover, same as the rest of us. :mrgreen:
---------- ADS -----------
  

RVR6000
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 363
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#14 Post by RVR6000 » Sun Dec 10, 2017 10:08 pm

When the Chinese came to Ottawa it was non-stop on a 747-400. I think it’s time for an upgrade to the 310, maybe the new 330NEO or the 350. For a G7 nation I think we can do a lot better then a clapped out 310.
---------- ADS -----------
  

lownslow
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 963
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 8:56 am

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#15 Post by lownslow » Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:05 am

RVR6000 wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 10:08 pm
When the Chinese came to Ottawa it was non-stop on a 747-400. I think it’s time for an upgrade to the 310, maybe the new 330NEO or the 350. For a G7 nation I think we can do a lot better then a clapped out 310.
Maybe so, but since you and I don't want to pay for it then the cost will have to come out of somebody else's budget. What service would you like downgraded?
---------- ADS -----------
  

RVR6000
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 363
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: CanForce to China with the PM

#16 Post by RVR6000 » Mon Dec 11, 2017 5:33 am

lownslow wrote:
Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:05 am
RVR6000 wrote:
Sun Dec 10, 2017 10:08 pm
When the Chinese came to Ottawa it was non-stop on a 747-400. I think it’s time for an upgrade to the 310, maybe the new 330NEO or the 350. For a G7 nation I think we can do a lot better then a clapped out 310.
Maybe so, but since you and I don't want to pay for it then the cost will have to come out of somebody else's budget. What service would you like downgraded?
Here’s a few.

1. Tax funded safe drug use sites (the govt. green light to shooting up)
2. The funds from the ‘imaginary’ carbon tax, no clue to which bureaucracy that money is going to currently.
3. Cut down the massive payouts to certain groups (suspected former terrorist, lgbtq community)
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”