It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

European Hercules replacement

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 03:55 PM
link   
The U.S plans to replace it's C-130s sometime next decade with a non stealthy aircraft, and a dozen or so stealthy aircrafts for special ops.

Also I've seen some drawings of a European version of the C-17.




posted on Jun, 28 2005 @ 05:37 PM
link   
The RAF has I believe 3 C-17s currently in service. I can't remember the exact number, but it's not many, and are considering purchasing more as needed.



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 05:18 AM
link   
Greetings,

At the minute the RAF had orginally wanted the C-17 for a number of reasons, with the retirement of the Belfast, the RAF lost its only long distance strategic heavy lift tranporter, with the increased operating requirements, the C130 fleet just haven't been able to keep up, not to mention the fact the C130s just can't carry the load that the RAF needed to be transported. It was either buy, hire or rent aircraft, the RAF choose to rent aircraft from the Beoing, rather than rent a Antrovo aircraft. The conditions from beoing were simple, no paradrops, no dropped loads, no rapid tactical loads and finally, they weren't to be used in the Tactical transport role.

Basically after these 4 entered 99 Squadron, the RAF frankly just don't want to lost the capability, they have bought those 4 aircraft and ordered another 3 or 4. To be honest, I am not sure if the RAF really want the Airbus replacement, they may see the want the C-17 as the Herk replacement.

- Phil



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 05:57 AM
link   
In the past decades I have heard a lot of good things about the C-130. I will be sory to see it go, but I guess as things do unfold, it will half to leve service one time or another.



posted on Jun, 29 2005 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
I don't know enough about what advantage the A400 holds over the new generation Hercules, I must look into that, but seeing as the whole customer base for thew A400 already flies the C-130 there must be something pretty substantial as they still need to make a profit on the world market with this plane and if it was no better than the established and trusted competition it wouldn't be worth building at all. Like I said before though, research needed before I really try to answer that point.


The main advantage is simple - it transports more payload. As I already said it can take 25-30 tons - that's enough for infantry combat vehicles like Warrior or Bradley. Of course the Hercules can be made longer with better engines etc., but it cargo-bay has still limited width. The A-400 should be wider so it will have also better potential for future development.



posted on Jun, 30 2005 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
I think a Canadian purchase is vastly more likely than a US one in reality, Canada is a good customer for quite a bit of our tech as seen in the purchase of the Hawk and EH 101 Cormorant.


Oh that may be a tough call esp after P&W Canada was burned when they bid for the engines.



posted on Jun, 30 2005 @ 11:47 AM
link   
They could always put the engines on any Canadian ones



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join