For the A400M? That seems a bit premature, are you sure?

Lots of WIP at Brize, and a huge new pan…

You misunderstand, I meant scrap the PFI, buy the aircraft outright (ideally with another 6-8 airframes).

I knew what you meant, but it’s now past the point where it’d just be a case of “buying the aircraft”. There’s now a very large two bay hangar at Brize, and the sim and training centre soon to be built. Buying those outright would be more of a financial problem than purchasing a few C-17s! Very shortly personnel will start being trained (both civilians employed by AirTanker and sooner or later boys and girls in blue).

All to short a timeframe too. Less than two years till delivery at Brize – and frankly the PFI is probably a godsend in allowing the money needs to be spent elsewhere (new accommodation (badly needed to replace asbestos ridden buildings and houses now, and with Lyneham “moving” to Brize in 2011 they haven’t even started building new families quarters), new terminal perhaps, better airfield aids etc etc).

I’d much rather have an extra 5 C17’s and 20 C130J’s. No need for infrastructure changes, cheaper and proven aircraft, much more potential in the C130’s for alteration especially (special forces, refuelling, AC130 etc).

But in reality, as far as the UK is concerned how do we expect to afford another 5 C-17? As for infrastructure, massive changes would still be needed.

As for the C-130, there is no chance of delivery within 3 years of now, even if we ordered tomorrow. As for C-130 refuelling, it’d be pointless even thinking of it as it’s prohibited under the terms of the FSTA agreement.

We’d be better off if that monstorsity that is the A400M didn’t get off the ground, then Britain might buy some proper strategic lift.

Like what? Sadly we can’t afford anything bigger that’s American in sufficient numbers.

If you direct me to the source i might be able to figure exactly what you are refering to…

…I am VERY critifcal of what way Airbus handled the design of A400M.

Superb!:diablo:

I couldn’t see anyone wanting anything changed wrt the flowrate; it seemed to be more of a seeking of clarification due to an error on the part the authors of ATP-56B.

Can anyone tell me what the difference between the Hercules C3 and C3A is? I always get this muddled up is the C3 the short or long version?
While on this subject anyone know what all the different tanker marks are for? We have the 3 types for VC-10 and the 3 types for Tri stars. I thought i read somewhere that only 5 of the Tristars are tankers? are the C2 transports only? Is there any meaning to the different letters or numbers associated with these planes?

I won’t profess to being an expert on the C-130 or the Tristar, but I can fill in the VC10 gaps.

When the VC10 entered RAF service in 1966, we had the C1, a pure transport aircraft. This (essentially) is a standard VC10 fuselage, with the wings, we fin and engines of the super VC10. This aircraft became the C1K in the early 1990s, with the addition of wing refuelling pods. The fuel capacity is about 70t, it can take up to 137 pax. It also has a freight door and re-enforced floor. Historically these were 10 Sqn machines.

The K3s are ex East African Airways Super VC10s, and were converted in the early 80s along with some standard VC10s that became the (now extinct) K2 to reform 101 Sqn. These aircraft were fitted with wing pods, and a centerline hose. The also had a freight door in civil use (now sealed), which was used to insert fuel tanks in the fuselage, bringing the capacity for the K3 to 82t.

The K4 is an ex BA/BOAC Super VC10, converted after many years of storage at Abingdon in the early 1990s. Externally it is similar to the K3 (but didn’t have a freight door), with three hoses, but does not have the internal tanks in the fuselage, so it’s fuel capacity is (nearly) identical to the C1K. It can take limited pax (30 max IIRC), and aeromed, but is mainly an empty fuselage.

That’s about it…

Hiya Folks,
Is it just me that thinks that the VTOL F-35 is an overpriced bit of kit with limited capability which the UK cannot affort to buy anymore?

Sadly the UK can’t really afford to buy anything anymore.

How could we get 767 AEW later? What are the odds of 767 still being in production when we retire E-3?

More to the point, with the E-3D not even 20 years old (and having relatively modern engines and avionics), and potentially being mothballed in the near future, why would we want the 767AEW, which is not too different a platform and system – in fact, IIRC, it’s essentially the same mission system, but in the newer airframe?

The chances of the RAF getting more A330-200 tankers seem slim since the 14 Air Tanker 300-200’s will not all be in RAF service the at same time (except in critical situtions). Air Tankers will retain 5 that they will be able to lease to civilian operators.

I suspect the angle of the question was that if required, could the pool of aircraft be increased? Should the RAF require all 14 (which I suspect not) for a larger proportion of time, they may wish to seek to increase access to a larger pool of A330 (which wouldn’t necessarily need to be AAR capable or equipped with defensive aids for routine AT route) rather than continually rely on civilian charter. It’s an interesting balance.

I suspect the domestic AAR tasking may be a little less than originally expected when the competition was run, but AT tasking has probably increased (I doubt they anticipated the volume of troop moves back and forth to the ‘Stan pre 2001, and that it would last for well over a decade), as have trails (AAR deployments of FJ to theatre). The real challenge will come towards the end of 2014 as the VC10s start disappearing!