If the A400M can't take off and land pretty much anywhere then we shouldn't even consider it. Hell, can an A400M do this?
Posted on 02/20/2010 8:27:23 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
I have already been corrected in a previous post
I have already been corrected in a previous post
I have already been corrected in a previous post
There was a report a month ago on the subject but i don’t remember from whom.
If the A400M can't take off and land pretty much anywhere then we shouldn't even consider it. Hell, can an A400M do this?
No sh*t! That program is under crisis with engine failures and risking chance to be unable to enter military service. If USAF needed 40t class transport, we just need to bring back Hanoi Taxi! We already got our own C-130J and don’t need those.
The C-17 Globemaster III line is still open and it's far more likely that we could see additional follow-on orders for the C-17 to replace the oldest C-5's instead of buying the A400M.
Instead of the old 141, do what the Russians are doing, buy more IL-76. Cheaper option even.
I have worked with this A/C very imressive and can use unimporved field, does not need specialty ground equipment and so on.
OTOH, nothing so sweet as the roar of 4 turoprops in full reverse and knowing your ride back home as arrived...
lol
Js are being built.
Yes. I have already been informed. Thanks
The C17 can carry a tank.
A400 can’t.
Done.
C-5s are being upgraded with new engines and cockpits.
And the fact the production line jigs are ready to crank out an additional 80-120 planes (at reasonable cost per plane) to replace the oldest C-130’s and C-5’s means buying more C-17’s are the cheapest option.
Alas, we’ll miss the famous loud whine of the TF39 engines on the C-5A’s and C-5B’s. The C-5M—using the same CF6-80C2 engine found on many modern airliners—sounds like a 747-400 on takeoff.
The A400M can carry the Army’s fancy new Stryker and MRAP vehicles, the C-130J cannot.
An improved C-130 “widebody” has been discussed by Lockheed Martin, but they are too cash strapped dealing with the F-35 cost overruns to fund the design themselves.
Currently, the Air Force is using C-17s to move these vehicles aroun in theater, which is a waste of the C-17s purpose as a strategic airlifter, not a tactical one.
In order to accomodate these new land vehicles, either the US would have to sink a few billion into development of a C-130XL, have a contest for a new design, or buy the A400M off the shelf at very attractive prices.
The cheapest and quickest solution is to purchase some A400Ms to retire our oldest C-130s.
There is also an avionics update and re-engineing program for the C-5. It was determined by the bean counters that the oldest C-5As were too old to last long enough for the re-engineing to pay for itself, so only the C-5Bs are being upgraded to C-5Ms. As the older C-5As are retires, something needs to fill that gap.
Bet you could make a heck of a smoothie with those props.
I swear I saw somewhere that zero's budget kills the C-17. Am I wrong?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.