No announcement yet.

Tactical Transport.

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Tactical Transport.

    It's getting to civilised around here so.........
    The DoD go and buy say 6 C130's [as late a series as possable]
    and paint them a nice neutral grey with a company logo in self stick vinyl, and operate them as general cargo aircrafts with crews composed of Air Corps reserves, conditional on their flights must be only to and from this rock.
    They are not operated for profit but must be compeditive with other airliners, ie. no undercutting of commercial operations ect.
    In the event of them being required for humanaterian aid, troop transport, SAR support what ever,- off come the vinyl logos and on go the vinyl IAC insignia, in go the chaff launchers or whatever, [there are people better informed then me about such things: Aiden, CQ, ect] and the IAC tactical transport wing head into action, harms way, Berties latest holiday, :D , whatever.
    Now there is probally a liberary of EU rules and regs against this, but let's see if it can fly:D .
    Santa,:xlol: please send me a flame proof suit!!

    BTW, a similiar post will appear on Frank's site.
    Last edited by Turkey; 20 December 2003, 20:31.
    "We will hold out until our last bullet is spent. Could do with some whiskey"
    Radio transmission, siege of Jadotville DR Congo. September 1961.
    Illegitimi non carborundum

  • #2
    To me (not knowing much about the AC) that sounds like such a good idea that there must be some rule/law against it. If it could be done it should be done!


    • #3
      While there's certainly a need for a transport aircraft, the above set up would be highly unlikely. The government is planning the sale Aer Lingus, it's hardly likely to set up another semi-state air service.

      A more likely scenario would be the purchase of 1 or 2 small transports, like the CN-295 or C-27J.
      "The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land, walked back to the water, went back from the sand."


      • #4
        Highly unlikely, but it could pay for the training of air corps pilots even reserve pilots and crew....still think its a great idea Turkey!


        • #5

          I'd have one major issue with the idea: I dont know how competitive a military transport fleet could be vs a purely commercial transport company. There are a hell of a lot of potential plus sides to that idea though turkey.

          Also seeing as I'm an idiot I may as well ask a question: is a transport fleet financially viable, i.e. would 2 C-295's be worth it when we can just hire in an Antonov or two and move the entire force? The 295 can "only" carry 3 light vehicles (i presume this means jeeps and the like?) or 75 troops, the hercules can carry 3 APC's or 92 troops. So would the purchase of 2 Hercules be more practical seeing as they could carry the heavy stuff, removing the present complete need for hiring aircraft in?

          I know it would be better to have our own expertise in the field but is this viable, not just regarding Turks idea, but the entire question of operating large transports when hiring can be done, presumably much cheaper. Are ML troop Heli's a more important area?

          Just asking... dont kill me


          • #6
            Well an investment of 24m for two C-295s would give us a "hot" transport capability, the problem with DHL is that they wont actually fly combat missions, a small TT force can make all the difference in terms of sustaining troops on the ground landing at airstrips with a high likely hood of being fired upon.
            Throw in the possibility of aerial refueling of any future MLHs and your reaction forces get a lot more rapid.
            "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke