So, what is really the difference between those 3 planes. Which one is the best and which is the shittiest.
Cargo planes are wildly overrated, I don't really see the point, they should work on making high speed naval transports not dumping billions on cargo planes.
>>30370910
u forgot the y-20
>>30370994
>Cargo planes are wildly overrated
>>30370994
What if your destination is a land-locked country surrounded by hostile nations?
>>30371058
Why do you allow hostile countries to exist without invading them?
>>30371058
You would just have your high speed naval vessels trail cargo gliders behind them, then once the boats hit land they'd just release the cargo gliders which would fly the rest of the way.
>>30371097
>gliders
>flying more than 100 miles
>extremely low weight limit
>uncontrollable speed
>chances of smooth landing is 1/10
>>30371133
Gliders could be snatched off the top of commercial freighters with flight decks, by whichever aerial asset is availible, either bombers or cargo planes
Would be vastly superior to ferrying shit by helicopters.
Really, the idea you can supply an invasion by air is nonsense, most shit in afghanistan came by land.
>>30371097
Not everthing is like the movies, lad.
>>30370910
One is made with cheap Brazilian labor and is therefore shit.
>>30371009
>medium
>>30371251
>Really, the idea you can supply an invasion by air is nonsense, most shit in afghanistan came by land.
Not when the US hellfired some Paki's and they stopped the land route coming from Karachi. Then over 90% was coming by air.
>>30371251
Oh shit. Gliderfag is here. Run!
>>30370910
This one looks promising.
>>30371860
Also this one.
C-130J fixed railed system means it can be loaded with 436L pallets in a matter of minutes. No other system out there right now is as efficient.
Saw a thread some time ago that the A400M was pretty much dead due the engine problems.
Have they fixed that yet?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kawasaki_C-2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_KC-390
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A400M
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-70
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-130J_Super_Hercules
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAC/HAL_Il-214
All competitors.
>>30371636
It was coming by land through russia too.
And the pakis only closed the route for a few months
The Embraer has the power of meme magic on its side
https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20130629-0
>>30372814
NOV-JUL is quite a significant alteration in a war of constant logistics.
And yes, some land routes came through Russia. This is why I said 90% came through airlift at the time.
>>30372737
>>30372814
Also, all munitions were airlift into Afghanistan.
>>30372737
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-130J_Super_Hercules
that is not a direct competitor to all of those. the US does not have something in that class we have c-17s witch are bigger and c 130s that are much smaller and based on a legacy airframe for "cost reductions"(really so its not technically an earmark and the don't want to go thru a competition after what a shit show the tanker tender was)
>>30372933
C-17 is a strat airlift as well as tactical. C-130J is certainly in that class of purely tactical airlifter. C-130 is not based on cost reductions, it's based on capability. C-130's can land on almost nothing even at an incline or decline. Requires next to nothing runway length and a runway of all types of context as well.
Please stop talking if you don't know what you are going on about.
>>30372886
Thats just politics, they coulda shipped everything through russia if they wanted to
>>30372970
Can't land on water, and still requires a runway
It ain't a true STOL aircraft
>>30373003
>can't land on water
Neither can it's competitors. Also, C-130s have demonstrated that they are capable of unassisted carrier landings and takeoffs.
>>30373003
Since when were these requirements of STOL aircraft?
>>30373037
Has that ever been done again since 1963?
>>30373101
No, but the C-130J has a SHORTER takeoff distance than the legacy Hercs.
>>30371009
>y-20
>China
>>30371626
The Y-20 with its current engines is a medium lift.
>>30373416
I don't think Y-20 with its payload competes with those who are being quoted in the thread.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_Y-20
>>30370910
Superior plane coming through
>>30373465
The 66 ton payload claim is with engines that do not exist. Consider that the Y-20 is heavier than an Il-76 (mid 40 ton payload) while having comparable engines.
>>30373630
So, chinks lying?
>>30374044
Does a bear shit in the woods?
>>30374110
why tho?
>>30371914
Not a cargo plane
