Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
C-130J Or A400M - What's The Better Aircraft?  
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

The C-130J has a long and hallowed history but what the merits of each aircraft when compared amongst one another? If you were a potential customer looking to buy 100 aircraft, what would give you the better bang-for-buck? Does the A400M offer more payload and a longer range? I think the A400M has an even more modern and advanced flight deck than the C-130J?

http://www.theaviationzone.com/images/misc/a400m/bin/a400_07.jpg



28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMauriceB From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2489 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

hard to say. the A400M will be better, but also more expensive and it has yet to prove itself... while the C-130J already proved that its a great plane

User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

At the moment at least the C130J is superior, given that the A400M exists only on paper  Smile

Which will be better when they're both flying (if ever) only time can tell, and would depend heavily on the individual user (the aircraft that's best suited for me may be completely useless to you).

If I were to buy today I'd buy C130.
It's a proven design with all the problems worked out of it over the decades, there's a very large support base worldwide, you can get parts made in just about any jungle or desert workshop in the Middle East or SE Asia for example which is a great bonus  Wink
I'd also have a firm date on delivery and might even be able to lease some older model Hercs in the meantime to get my people trained up and my immediate transport needs covered.

In contrast with the A400M I'd sign up for what could very well turn out to be a pipedream.
I'd also be dependent on a politically unstable and unreliable entity for product support into the future (my assessment of the EU and its foreign policy).



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineMissedApproach From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 713 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 2):
At the moment at least the C130J is superior, given that the A400M exists only on paper

Exactly. There are some countries (guess who) that can't afford to wait ten years for an airlifter or they'll end up walking in the meantime.

The A400 has the potential to be the better airplane, but since it isn't in production yet there's also more room for political interference. Multinational/multi-service collaborations have a habit of watering down weapons systems & airplanes until they don't do anything really well.



Can you hear me now?
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13166 posts, RR: 78
Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Parts are in production for A400M, have been for some time, so it's getting beyond a 'paper' (or CAD) aircraft.
But until it flies, you cannot say, I note A400M already has exports beyond A400M partner nations.

Though C-130 has a remarkable heritage, ask the RAF about the frankly astounding length of time getting C-130J up to full service spec.

The US (quite rightly), wants the European NATO nations to dramatically upgrade their airlift capability.
A400M should do that at an affordable price, C-130J simply would not so.
C-17 is not affordable (the RAF did lease deal, though they are to buy them, but here we are talking about just 4, eventually 5, aircraft).

I wish that European NATO nations had taken up an offer a few years ago, from Antonov, to jointly buy and operate some R/R engined, updated cockpit/western avionic equipped, AN-124s.
In the same manner that the E-3 Awacs were brought and operated by NATO.
Even so, the A400M would still have been desirable.

C-130J has another problem, last year funding almost got cut to carry on production, this might be attempted again-this time successfully.
Certainly the USAF has not brought anything like the expected number of C-130J's, that LM must have envisaged when launching the J.

For most AF's, C-130J fits the bill, but other factors can and will come into play for export orders.


User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Buying Soviet (sorry, the PC term is "Russian" at the moment) aircraft would be the most monumentally stupid thing any NATO country can do (and yes, Turkey have done it).

A400M is bound to be massively expensive, if not in flyaway price than in the tens of billions of taxpayer money that have been and are being sluiced into it through other channels.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7943 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 5):
Buying Soviet (sorry, the PC term is "Russian" at the moment) aircraft would be the most monumentally stupid thing

Antonov is first and foremost an Ukrainian company.

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 5):
A400M is bound to be massively expensive, if not in flyaway price than in the tens of billions of taxpayer money that have been and are being sluiced into it through other channels.

And what channels would those be? The C-130J does not meet European requirements, the C-17 is too expensive and the only real competitor is the Ukrainian/Russian AN-70 "the most monumentally stupid thing" to buy as you have called it. So what the heck do you want?

[Edited 2006-01-15 21:44:21]


I support the right to arm bears
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

I think the A400 can carry almost double the payload of the C130-J faster & further. Contrary to the C130-J it will be able to carry APCs, IFVs, self-propelled artillery and medium helicopters.

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 2):
If I were to buy today I'd buy C130.
It's a proven design

Agreed, the C130 is in the air for 50 years.

I think although the aircraft have the same configuration, they are in different leagues. To put things in perspective:



User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Looks like the A400M will have a wider cargo deck which will eventually lead to an overall larger cargo capacity - would the A400M have any practical commercial use? It definately looks like a larger product than the C-130 - is it perhaps able to compete with a C-17 in terms or range, payload, and price?

Is the USCG interested in or at least not ruled out the A400M yet for their modernization plan?
http://www.wilcopub.com/wilcopub_images/images_A400M/23_g.jpg
http://www.wilcopub.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=prod_A400M


Also, where does new C-27J stand? The US Army is considering it but there might be a problem with the language between Air Force and Army pilots flying fixed wing aircraft.


User currently offlineDougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 32767 times:

Interesting topic for discussion.

For once la Wiki has what appears to be a good side by side comparison. The A400M will cost about half as much and carry about half as much tonnage as the C17.


One of the design criteria for the C17 was that it had to be able to accept an all-up M1 Abrams tank, which it can do handily, along with a fair amount of support troops and equipment. The floor beams are astounding to look at when one rides the trolley down in the belly as I did on a number of occasions to validate the locations of certain components.

Some suggest this is not so but there's a neat picture of an M1 driving down the ramp in this site as well as lots of good C17 information.

http://www.house.gov/saxton/mcguire_gallery.htm

It looks like the A400M may not be able to carry a heavy MBT as my latest edition of Tanks of the World shows the Leopard 2 at 55,150 kg, It should carry the AMX30 or -32 weightwise (don't know about volume wise) but it won't accommodate the Leclerc, the Chieftain or either Challenger.

Another design objective of the C17 was to be fully LAPES capable. Does anyone know whether the A400M will be?

Relative performance vs. C-17 strategic airlifter Aircraft Role Max. payload Max. (unladen) range Max. (cruise) speed Service ceiling Unit price
An-12 Tactical 44,090 lb (20,000 kg) 3,075 nm (5,700 km) M0.55 33,000 ft Out of production
C-130J Tactical 41,790 lb (18,955 kg) 2,835 nm (5,254 km) M0.58 33,000 ft $70m (est.)
A400M Tactical/strategic 81,500 lb (37,000 kg) 5,000 nm (9,260 km) M0.72 37,000 ft $80m (est.)
C-17 Strategic/tactical 170,900 lb (77,520 kg) 4,700 nm (8,710 km) M0.77 45,000 ft $178 million

Here in the states Nathan Bedford Forrest ( who knew a lot about a lot of things besides killing Yankees and using cavalry effectively) once said that the person who comes out on top "gets thar fustest with the mostest." It's worth considering when the ability to put people and ordnance on the ground in quantity becomes important, and how the decision to go cheap on the product can affect that ability.


User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 10, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR



Is it just me, or is that USCG A400M experiencing an engine failure?




2H4





Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11446 posts, RR: 76
Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 32767 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Excellent thread. These are two different airplanes, and giving away the valid point that the A400 has yet to be assembled, much less flown, I'd have to say that we are talking apples and oranges. I do believe that the price difference between the A400 and the C-130J is actually larger than depicted earlier (items I've read show the C-130 to be around 60million and the A400 to be closer to 90 million, but we don't know the final price on the A400 until the thing gets built and the current dollar value is adjusted.... For the money the C-130J gets you more airplanes for your dollar, and the A400 gets you more airplane at higher cost. The question is this...do the countries who are ordering it need the capability to lift everything short of an MBT, and can they afford anything better. If they need to lift larger objects than the Herc, and can't afford the C-17 then the A400 meets their needs better....

If they don't need to buy an airplane with that capability (because they can lease strategic lift when needed) then the Herc is their airplane.

I'd say that the A400, when finally flown, will be an excellent airplane, and I'd be surprised if it wasn't. I'd also be surprised if there weren't some similar snags in the fielding of this brand new design similar to what LM experienced trying to push the systems into the J model for the RAF...

Quoting GDB (Reply 4):
Though C-130 has a remarkable heritage, ask the RAF about the frankly astounding length of time getting C-130J up to full service spec.

I've heard the LM version of this, and read some RAF viewpoints....what have you heard about the RAF's thinking for the reasons for these issues (which, thank God, seem to be resolved).

Quoting GDB (Reply 4):
Certainly the USAF has not brought anything like the expected number of C-130J's, that LM must have envisaged when launching the J.

Well, the spending priorities have been thrown off peacetime procurement for the last couple of years.....however it looks like they are extending the line so that they will be in position to replace older airframes with new ones as they wear out over the next decade or so.

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 8):
Is the USCG interested in or at least not ruled out the A400M yet for their modernization plan?

I don't think Deepwater has anything like that in mind. They are looking at ordering CASA 295s.

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 8):
It definately looks like a larger product than the C-130 - is it perhaps able to compete with a C-17 in terms or range, payload, and price?

No, it can't compete with the C-17 in payload, but it costs half...which is what it carries.

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 8):
Also, where does new C-27J stand? The US Army is considering it but there might be a problem with the language between Air Force and Army pilots flying fixed wing aircraft.

The Army wants it, but there is question about whether it can afford it. The USAF dropped the Fairchild C-123 without replacement in the mid 80's and the Army needs that capability. The C-23 Sherpa is a decent airplane, but it's not the best answer to the intra-theater needs of the USArmy.

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 9):
Another design objective of the C17 was to be fully LAPES capable. Does anyone know whether the A400M will be?

Well, it appears that the LAPES capability has been pretty much sent the way of the Fulton Extraction System.....somewhere in contingency, but not currently used. So I don't know if it's relevant. The latest cargo chutes can pretty much drop anything they used to LAPES.

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 9):
Some suggest this is not so but there's a neat picture of an M1 driving down the ramp in this site as well as lots of good C17 information.

http://www.house.gov/saxton/mcguire_...y.htm

Great article.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineDougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

From my perspective Airbus seems to have identified a nice market slot between the C130J and the C17 that has not been well served. Not served at all, to be concise. They should do quite well with it if the A400M fulfils the design criteria and is half as rugged as the C130.

User currently offlineA319XFW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 8):
Looks like the A400M will have a wider cargo deck which will eventually lead to an overall larger cargo capacity

The cargo bay width of the A400M is wide enough to take 2 Land Rovers side-to-side.
IIRC this was a requirement from the RAF (or an Airbus marketing technique to sell it to Air Forces with Armies who have the Landie!).


User currently offlineEchster From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 399 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 8):
Also, where does new C-27J stand? The US Army is considering it but there might be a problem with the language between Air Force and Army pilots flying fixed wing aircraft.

Last week, the DOD forced the Army and USAF into an MOU regarding the Army's FCA and the USAF's LCA. FCA being the Future Cargo Aircraft and LCA being Light Cargo Aircraft. Both services want new, light cargo aircraft to operate near the FEBA. The way it was heading, they were looking at different frames. The MOU gives them 90 days to come to an agreement on what they want in a frame and to, hopefully, agree to purchase the same aircraft. They'll replace the C-23s and C-123s (which the USAF never replaced). The Army wants 33 and the USAF numbers I haven't seen.


User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 12):
From my perspective Airbus seems to have identified a nice market slot between the C130J and the C17 that has not been well served.

not entirely true, the A400M is not a project which Airbus offered for sale to air forces. It came about as a procurement exercise, and EADS was then tasked to build an aircraft to those broad requirements.


User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7057 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 12):
From my perspective Airbus seems to have identified a nice market slot between the C130J and the C17 that has not been well served. Not served at all, to be concise. They should do quite well with it if the A400M fulfils the design criteria and is half as rugged as the C130.

I also believe the big advantage of the A400M is that it lies between the C130J and the C17.
I guess many potential countries that need an urgent replacement for their older Hercs (e.g. Canada) are having a though time and counting all the benefits of the C130J and the A400M. The question for them is:"Is it worth to wait another 5-10 years for a plane with a greater payload and new technologies (new engines, composite airframe etc.....) which also could lead to further delays or choose the
the most modern option being available which has maybe the disadvantage for some customers of being smaller. Denmark for example was one of the countries that choose against the A400 and opted for the C130J because they do not need the extra size being offered by the Airbus.
With Canada I am not so sure about this. Canada has troops in Afganistan and needs to carry a lot of cargo over a greater distance then most European Nato/ISAF countries. They could need a plane with more range and greater payload.
If I remember correctly Canada had ordered the C 141 back in the seventies but canceled the order because they were to expensive.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineDougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 15):
Quoting Dougloid (Reply 12):
From my perspective Airbus seems to have identified a nice market slot between the C130J and the C17 that has not been well served.

not entirely true, the A400M is not a project which Airbus offered for sale to air forces. It came about as a procurement exercise, and EADS was then tasked to build an aircraft to those broad requirements.

Well, call that serendipity then. It's a good place to be.

Any cargo airplane is a best guess, balancing first cost, cost of maintenance and operation, total cube, floor loadings and maximum height or width of the load against whatever alternate arrangements have to be made to move outsize or overweight loads. In other words, if your mission envisions landing equipment beyond your carrying ability, are you going to be able to get what you need to the theater of operations by other means? Are you ever going to need to land MBTs in an area served by 5000 foot runways? If it is, are Uncle Sam the Russians going to be able to get you handled out of their excess capacity?

Another good comparison has to be the history of usage, i.e., what sort of loads do you ordinarily carry and how often do you need to load to capacity or beyond, and what you're willing to pay for that ability.

This is all a most interesting subject and one I shall take up with my pal with the degree in transportation logistics.


User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 17):

Another good comparison has to be the history of usage, i.e., what sort of loads do you ordinarily carry and how often do you need to load to capacity or beyond, and what you're willing to pay for that ability.

there's also the forward factor, in that air forces look at the history of what they have not been able to do and build that into their forward planning.

That is probably the genesis of the A400M, taking experiences of not being able to do a job with a C-130 and writing them into the specification. The A400M offers a greater amount of payload flexibility than the C-130 cabin can accomodate, and using them alongside the C-17 in the RAF will give Britain an excellent airlift mix (in theory, although I'd have preferred investment in the C-17K proposal).


User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6385 posts, RR: 54
Reply 19, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Columba (Reply 16):
Denmark for example was one of the countries that choose against the A400 and opted for the C130J because they do not need the extra size being offered by the Airbus.

One major task for the RDAF transport fleet is supply work in Greenland. The A400M was hardly ever considered being much too large for that job and at least ten years late.

We had three C-130Hs. They were perfect for the job. Then came the 1990'es and all those wars, Gulf War, Yugoslavia, later Afghanistan, and they were loaded down with defensive equipment to such a degree that they could hardly make it to Greenland any more.

Several years ago four C-130Js were ordered as replacement. Including all the most modern war stuff. They were terribly expensive. One order had to be cancelled due to financial reasons, but it was reinstated a year or two later, and I think it has also been delivered now.

One of them is at work right now in Afghanistan. I remember reading not too long ago that it was rushing around the country collecting ballots.

The J is a much more capable plane than the old H, it's in an entirely different class.

Lockheed paid a handful of bucks for taking the old H's back - a small fraction of what the politicians originally estimated. I think that they now fly in Egypt. Maybe they bought a ton of rubber plugs to fill all the holes we drilled for those home made defense systems.

Our J's were among the very first. As usual they suffered from a huge delay. I heard that it was mainly software for the defense systems which caused the delays. I saw pictures of seemingly completely finished planes with Danish markings a year before they were delivered.

You can just forget those military transport planes as civil cargo haulers. They are much too specialized and much too expensive. A C-130J price of $70M was mentioned earlier in this thread. That could be correct for a bare bones plane. If I remember well, then we paid roughly $100M per copy some years back (maybe including a minimum spares package), and we have filled more stuff in after that.

In addition they will often be ruled out from civil service for noise reasons.

A comparison between the C-130J and the A400M is hardly relevant, both for time scale and capability reasons. The A400M is a much faster and much more long legged plane lifting twice as much. It is more like a mini C-17.

And while the Herc is a present day workhorse and has been so for fifty years, then the A400M will be the major European military heavy lifter from roughly 2015-2020 and thoughout this century.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineMissedApproach From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 713 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 19):
A comparison between the C-130J and the A400M is hardly relevant

I agree that they are two very different planes, but the fact remains that they are effectively competing against each other for orders.
While the Herc is fine within Canada it leaves a lot to be desired for overseas support. We don't have many vehicles that will fit inside & with the army hell bent on dumping everything in favour of the LAV chassis (including that Stryker piece of junk) we will soon have nothing that fits inside the Herc-unless it gets disassembled.
 Angry



Can you hear me now?
User currently offlineDougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 18):
there's also the forward factor, in that air forces look at the history of what they have not been able to do and build that into their forward planning.

That is probably the genesis of the A400M, taking experiences of not being able to do a job with a C-130 and writing them into the specification. The A400M offers a greater amount of payload flexibility than the C-130 cabin can accomodate, and using them alongside the C-17 in the RAF will give Britain an excellent airlift mix (in theory, although I'd have preferred investment in the C-17K proposal).

I concur. It's a total exercise in functionality.


User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6385 posts, RR: 54
Reply 22, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting MissedApproach (Reply 20):
I agree that they are two very different planes, but the fact remains that they are effectively competing against each other for orders.
While the Herc is fine within Canada it leaves a lot to be desired for overseas support. We don't have many vehicles that will fit inside & with the army hell bent on dumping everything in favour of the LAV chassis (including that Stryker piece of junk) we will soon have nothing that fits inside the Herc-unless it gets disassembled.

Huh MissedAproach, you say that "they are effectively competing against each other". But then afterwards it seems that you contradict yourself.

If one day you choose to conquer your big southern neighbor, the US of A, the Herc may be the perfect tactical transport.

But since present day jobs are peacekeeping or peacemaking on the other side of the globe, then something larger and longer legged - minimum A400M sized - is required. And you tell us that you have hardly anything left except troops and ammo which fits inside the Herc.

I think that proves that they do NOT compete against each other.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 32767 times:

I would buy that the C-130 and A400M are not exactly intended to be in the same class, so what replaces the C-130 then? Sounds like the C-17 may be pahsed out in preference to an all-new design by Boeing but I hardly think you'll be able to replace C-5's and C-17's with the same platform. The C-27's are great but not quite the size/class of a C-130, so what does LM say for example do to replace the -130?

User currently offlineMD90fan From Bahamas, joined Jul 2005, 2931 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (8 years 6 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 32767 times:

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 5):
Buying Soviet (sorry, the PC term is "Russian" at the moment) aircraft would be the most monumentally stupid thing any NATO country can do (and yes, Turkey have done it).

Why is it stupid? And what CIS aircraft did Turkey order?

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 19):
We had three C-130Hs. They were perfect for the job. Then came the 1990'es and all those wars, Gulf War, Yugoslavia, later Afghanistan, and they were loaded down with defensive equipment to such a degree that they could hardly make it to Greenland any more.

What were they loaded with? (names of the equipment)



http://www.devanwells.blogspot.com/
25 MissedApproach : Sorry, what I mean is that while they are not in the same class in terms of payload, range, etc, countries selecting Herc replacements are looking at
26 MDorBust : What's the best plane to replace a DC-3? Same thing with the herc.
27 Dougloid : What I can't figure is what this talk of yet another airlifter design from the House of Boeing is all about. Their YC14 lost out to the YC15 which bec
28 Prebennorholm : Armor of cockpit to protect crew Armor to protect hydraulic lines, pumps, actuators etc. Armor to protect avionics and other essential electric syste
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic C-130J Or A400M - What's The Better Aircraft?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Is The Greatess Aircraft Carrier Ever Built. posted Sun Feb 15 2004 02:36:44 by 747400sp
What Is The Best Aircraft Carrier Ever? posted Fri May 11 2001 16:21:41 by Braniff747
What's The Status Of The F-22? posted Mon Apr 3 2006 17:37:34 by AviationAddict
RAF Coltishall - What's The Latest? posted Tue Mar 14 2006 18:42:10 by LMML 14/32
So What's The Latest Scholarship On Area 51? posted Thu Feb 16 2006 04:30:37 by AerospaceFan
What's The Difference Here?-F-16C's posted Sat Jul 23 2005 23:53:31 by Jalto27R
What's The ETA Of The AF1 Sunday At MST? posted Thu May 5 2005 15:55:20 by KL911
What Kind Of Aircraft Is This? posted Wed Sep 22 2004 03:54:26 by FrontierCPT
Proposed B767 Tanker Is The Wrong Aircraft posted Thu Jul 22 2004 08:56:26 by Tasha
What's The Most Produced Jet Fighter? posted Sat Nov 30 2002 01:43:32 by FlagshipAZ
What Is The Greatess Aircraft Carrier Ever Built. posted Sun Feb 15 2004 02:36:44 by 747400sp
What Is The Best Aircraft Carrier Ever? posted Fri May 11 2001 16:21:41 by Braniff747
What's The Status Of The F-22? posted Mon Apr 3 2006 17:37:34 by AviationAddict
RAF Coltishall - What's The Latest? posted Tue Mar 14 2006 18:42:10 by LMML 14/32
So What's The Latest Scholarship On Area 51? posted Thu Feb 16 2006 04:30:37 by AerospaceFan
What's The Difference Here?-F-16C's posted Sat Jul 23 2005 23:53:31 by Jalto27R
What's The ETA Of The AF1 Sunday At MST? posted Thu May 5 2005 15:55:20 by KL911
What Kind Of Aircraft Is This? posted Wed Sep 22 2004 03:54:26 by FrontierCPT
Proposed B767 Tanker Is The Wrong Aircraft posted Thu Jul 22 2004 08:56:26 by Tasha
What's The Most Produced Jet Fighter? posted Sat Nov 30 2002 01:43:32 by FlagshipAZ
France To Buy C-130J If A400M Further Delayed posted Fri Jun 5 2009 14:30:43 by N328KF
What Is F7 Aircraft? posted Tue Dec 9 2008 11:20:46 by Dubliftment
Canadian EH101 Issues--what's The Fix? posted Sat Nov 8 2008 04:34:33 by Lumberton
What Type Of Aircraft Is This? posted Wed Jan 16 2008 12:19:35 by Mymiles2go
What's The Status Of The F-22? posted Mon Apr 3 2006 17:37:34 by AviationAddict
RAF Coltishall - What's The Latest? posted Tue Mar 14 2006 18:42:10 by LMML 14/32
What Is The Greatess Aircraft Carrier Ever Built. posted Sun Feb 15 2004 02:36:44 by 747400sp
What Is The Best Aircraft Carrier Ever? posted Fri May 11 2001 16:21:41 by Braniff747
What's The Deal With Beale Air Force Base? posted Sat Dec 11 2010 10:29:34 by 26point2
What's The Scoop On That New Chinese Fighter? posted Sat Aug 1 2009 19:09:07 by LHCVG
France To Buy C-130J If A400M Further Delayed posted Fri Jun 5 2009 14:30:43 by N328KF
What Is F7 Aircraft? posted Tue Dec 9 2008 11:20:46 by Dubliftment
Canadian EH101 Issues--what's The Fix? posted Sat Nov 8 2008 04:34:33 by Lumberton
What Type Of Aircraft Is This? posted Wed Jan 16 2008 12:19:35 by Mymiles2go
What's The Status Of The F-22? posted Mon Apr 3 2006 17:37:34 by AviationAddict
RAF Coltishall - What's The Latest? posted Tue Mar 14 2006 18:42:10 by LMML 14/32
What Is The Greatess Aircraft Carrier Ever Built. posted Sun Feb 15 2004 02:36:44 by 747400sp
What Is The Best Aircraft Carrier Ever? posted Fri May 11 2001 16:21:41 by Braniff747
What's The Deal With Beale Air Force Base? posted Sat Dec 11 2010 10:29:34 by 26point2
What Is The Greatess Aircraft Carrier Ever Built. posted Sun Feb 15 2004 02:36:44 by 747400sp
What's The Scoop On That New Chinese Fighter? posted Sat Aug 1 2009 19:09:07 by LHCVG
What Is The Best Aircraft Carrier Ever? posted Fri May 11 2001 16:21:41 by Braniff747
France To Buy C-130J If A400M Further Delayed posted Fri Jun 5 2009 14:30:43 by N328KF
What's The Deal With Beale Air Force Base? posted Sat Dec 11 2010 10:29:34 by 26point2
What Is F7 Aircraft? posted Tue Dec 9 2008 11:20:46 by Dubliftment
What's The Scoop On That New Chinese Fighter? posted Sat Aug 1 2009 19:09:07 by LHCVG
Canadian EH101 Issues--what's The Fix? posted Sat Nov 8 2008 04:34:33 by Lumberton
France To Buy C-130J If A400M Further Delayed posted Fri Jun 5 2009 14:30:43 by N328KF
What Type Of Aircraft Is This? posted Wed Jan 16 2008 12:19:35 by Mymiles2go
What Is F7 Aircraft? posted Tue Dec 9 2008 11:20:46 by Dubliftment
What's The Status Of The F-22? posted Mon Apr 3 2006 17:37:34 by AviationAddict
Canadian EH101 Issues--what's The Fix? posted Sat Nov 8 2008 04:34:33 by Lumberton
RAF Coltishall - What's The Latest? posted Tue Mar 14 2006 18:42:10 by LMML 14/32
What Type Of Aircraft Is This? posted Wed Jan 16 2008 12:19:35 by Mymiles2go
What's The Status Of The F-22? posted Mon Apr 3 2006 17:37:34 by AviationAddict
RAF Coltishall - What's The Latest? posted Tue Mar 14 2006 18:42:10 by LMML 14/32
What Is The Greatess Aircraft Carrier Ever Built. posted Sun Feb 15 2004 02:36:44 by 747400sp
What Is The Best Aircraft Carrier Ever? posted Fri May 11 2001 16:21:41 by Braniff747
What's The Deal With Beale Air Force Base? posted Sat Dec 11 2010 10:29:34 by 26point2
What's The Scoop On That New Chinese Fighter? posted Sat Aug 1 2009 19:09:07 by LHCVG
France To Buy C-130J If A400M Further Delayed posted Fri Jun 5 2009 14:30:43 by N328KF
What Is F7 Aircraft? posted Tue Dec 9 2008 11:20:46 by Dubliftment
Canadian EH101 Issues--what's The Fix? posted Sat Nov 8 2008 04:34:33 by Lumberton
What Type Of Aircraft Is This? posted Wed Jan 16 2008 12:19:35 by Mymiles2go
What's The Status Of The F-22? posted Mon Apr 3 2006 17:37:34 by AviationAddict
RAF Coltishall - What's The Latest? posted Tue Mar 14 2006 18:42:10 by LMML 14/32

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format