Airbus A400M - Atlas C1

This. The Hercules legacy is far stronger than any additional performance brought by A400M. Plus C-17 and C-5, adding a fourth large transport to the U.S military fleet would be overkill and wasteful. Lockheed lobbyists would also hit the roof.
 
The RAF has proved the Atlas's rough field ability. Initial RAF trials were back in 2018 IIRC with Airbus themselves carrying out beach and rough grass field tests prior to that. Back in 2023 there was as well publicised RAF training session on Pembrey Beach in South Wales.

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EM-xtRyZZI4
Airbus rough field trials at Woodbridge back in 2016

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wr9PNiQLfbY
 
Unlike it's older siblings the J variant's short / rough field performance is actually pretty poor, a problem that has been continuously kicked down the road for a long time I believe.

And don't tell me the KC-130 is not "able to refuel at med to low alt and can land on dirt strip".
The older ones certainly. The KC-130J is another matter I fear.
 
Well, the object of the proposal is to have a faster tanker with bigger wet bags.
I have never intended to doubt about the KC-130 excelling there*. Just that KC-Z being dead, a mission involving large offloads of fuel closer to IADS, a bigger, faster aircraft than the KC-130 but with comparable vaunted dirt strip landing might offer an increase in Tactical capability, pushing the balance closer to what KC-Z could have offered.
How many KC-130 do you need to refuel a B-21 500nm from China coastline? How many Hercules to support identically a flight of NGAD?

There is not so many things you can realistically do with a spoon when it comes to vase transfer.

* For example, French Special Force just got their helo refueled by an A400 for the first time last month, relying on KC-130J until now.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom