Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: sukhoi-30mki

So, if they are going to have a compartment for troops, wouldn’t it substantially reduce the tanker capacity of a plane? Not to mention the fact that it becomes a very rich target full of fuel and troops.


5 posted on 03/30/2009 11:44:15 AM PDT by MyTwoCopperCoins (I don't have a license to kill; I have a learner's permit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: MyTwoCopperCoins

It’s supposed to be capable of doing both roles together, though that’s unlikely. Besides, its not in the class of dedicated troop carriers like the C-130, C-17 or IL-76.

And its most likely to have its own escort fighters while refuelling, so its not exactly a sitting duck.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/a330-mrtt.htm


6 posted on 03/30/2009 11:59:31 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins
So, if they are going to have a compartment for troops, wouldn't it substantially reduce the tanker capacity of a plane?

Not really. At present the limitation is using the normal airliner tankage, which still gives 111 tonne capacity - close to the Il-78M, which has no dual use capability at all.

Fitting tanks in the underfloor cargo holds of the A330 MRTT would boost the fuel load while still leaving the main deck cargo/pax area clear. The aircraft would become weight limited before main deck fuel tanks were needed.

But the present fit gives an already big fuel load with max. multi-role versatility

7 posted on 03/30/2009 5:44:55 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy ( As for a future life, every man must judge for himself between conflicting vague probabilities. - D)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson