3 ms·
> Airbus A400M could be served by the C-17 Aren't these rather different sorts of plane, despite the overall similarities? The C-17 uses jet engines, has a ra
by snogglethorpe 13y ago
> Airbus A400M could be served by the C-17
Aren't these rather different sorts of plane, despite the overall similarities?
The C-17 uses jet engines, has a rather big capacity, and is intended for landing on prepared fields, making it more of a "strategic" military transport.
The A400M, on the other hand, uses turboprops, has a smaller capacity, and is supposedly able to use rough landing strips, moving it more towards the "tactical" end of the military transport spectrum.
[Of course there are many other planes that might have served too, but each has various tradeoffs...]
- ckozlowski 13y agoThe C-17 has a rough field capability. You're correct though; the A400M was intended to fill a position between the C-17 at the high end, and the C-130 at the low end. The issues arose when it later became clear that there may not have been as much of a market for slot as originally envisioned. The C-17 handles vehicles easier than the A400M (where there's lower than expected weight restrictions on what can be carried) while not providing the savings expected for palatalized cargo that the newest models of the C-130(J) can handle. So it's being pressed from both sides. Of course, the C-17 had teething problems in the beginning. But it benefited from a better environment at the time. In any case, big item procurement is an utter mess these days. The money is drying up fast after the end of the cold-war, and the inefficient and wasteful structure that thrived during that time can no longer do so. So we get massively overpriced and delayed equipment.