“Deployability is critical because tankers are bad tenants. Most runways can’t handle their weight and their size limits the number that can be stationed on any airfield. The bigger and heavier the tankers are, the fewer airfields can accommodate them.
The Boeing tanker, a version of the 767 jetliner, has a maximum takeoff weight of 395,000 pounds. It’s 159 feet long and has a wingspan of 156 feet. The NG-EADS Airbus 330 tanker’s max weight is 507,000 pounds. It is 192 feet long and has a 197-foot wingspan. My best scientific wild guess is that the NG-EADS aircraft will be unable to operate out of at least 20% of the airfields that could accommodate the right-sized Boeing tanker”.
He’s not accurate in this section of his article. The ability to operate from a particular airport depends on the aircraft’s footprint or how the weight is distributed by the tires. The ability to take off from a particular airport isn’t a function of whether it’s heavier or lighter but how much thrust is available given the aircraft’s weight. With more powerful engines the larger aircraft will not suffer in the performance dept. He’s right about parking requiring more room for the A-330 but the increased fuel carrying capacity will more than offset any of the deficiencies he cites.
Perhaps the AF should go to Airbus A-310 MRTT mto 360,000lb, 153' long 144' wimgspan.
Watch the Boeing groupies go "No! not a little tanker for the USAF!"
tankers carry only enuff fuel for their mission, and the a330 would have to carry more fuel because it burns more fuel per hour than the 767, one of the most efficient airplanes flying ( even tho its design is 20 years old ).
additionally, it the "number" of booms in the air that is important, so the more expensive a330 would end up having less booms in the air, something a fighter strike force running low on fuel would find unacceptable.
the 767 can actually climb to altitude faster than an F4 phantom, its climb rate is phenomenal.
One other , one would say very crucial factor, is its manueverability-the a330 has limits on its load factor, while the 767 can pull more than 2.5 gs if need be.
if you look at the air cargo fleets, you will see that the 767 has a large following in customers, due to its efficiency, capability, and reliability.
Unless his figures are wrong, he is right. You CAN’T take of from an airport because of a heavy plane.....because they will never let you land there to begin with. Nowhere did he say that the plane couldn’t take off because it was too heavy. He said it “will be unable to operate out of at least 20% of the airfields”.
By your logic the AF should buy 747 tankers.