A singular tanker? Two is one and one is none.

It'll be grounded and up for sale in a decade.
You are probably correct. But Thailand does have a talent for maintaining small fleets of interesting aircraft long past their sell by day.
 
Looks like Poland is moving towards a purchase of 4 x A330Neo MRTT....and 10 x A400M. The A330 will obviously be equipped with booms....not sure if they intend to use A400M for refueling, at present the only aircraft they have that could use probe and drogue would be the forthcoming FA-50 Batch 20's, not sure if the Polish have any interest in helo refueling (for CSAR).


This purchase would mean that Europe would have a fleet of at least 48 x A330 MRTT (15 France, 14 UK, 12 MMT, 4 Poland and 3 Spain)...but based on other nations joining, and increased user hours, it seems likely that the MMT fleet will need to increase by a further 3 aircraft in the near future, so the total European A330 fleet could reach 51...You also have to wonder if the Italian's are likely to go to A330Neo MRTT rather than KC-46 for their requirement for 6 aircraft to replace the 4 x KC-767....the programme to upgrade the 767 having been abandoned and amid increasing costs keeping the KC-767 going...wonder if the JMSDF would be interested in buying Italy's KC-767?
 
Last edited:
Mods - Could we change the thread title from 'RAF A330 MRTT Voyager' to 'Airbus A330 MRTT' please...there isn't a main post for A330 MRTT so a lot of general content has ended up here (and I'm as guilty as most...).
 
For Italy --> OPERATIONAL AND TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR “Multi-Role Heavy Tanker Aircraft”

Edit, note the delivery timeframe

3. Key Performance Parameters (KPPs)
3.1. Fleet consistency and delivery
The fleet SHALL consist of a total of 6 aircraft by the year 2030.
The entire fleet SHALL reach completion by the end of 2030.
In order to permit a timely acquisition, it is acceptable that the 6 aircraft could be pre-owned military tanker or civilian derived aircraft (airliner) to be tanker modified, keeping compliance with the requirement of 30 years of life cycle (as mentioned in requirement 129.).
- Threshold: at least 2 aircraft delivered by the year 2029 and the remaining by the year 2030;
- Objective: 2 aircraft delivered by 2028, 2 in 2029, 2 in 2030.
Such delivery plan implies the Contractor's ability to deliver the first aircraft in less than three years from the operating date of the acquisition contract, and therefore, in relation to the fact that the development of a new dedicated system design usually involves much longer timelines, it is essential to maintain low programmatic risk through the acquisition of already developed and already operative available robust technical solutions as opposed to substantial development or modification projects.
For all the above, the Tanker SHALL have been employed in AAR operations for at least 2 years.
 
Last edited:

Airbus delivers on average 4 MRTTs per year, but could double this output if needed (wich seems more and more likely)

The MRTT+ is expected to fly for the first time in 2028, with the first delivery in the first quarter of 2029.

Airbus is already in discussions with MRTT operators who are considering acquiring the MRTT+ variant... According to the author, Germany ( alone / without the MFF ? ) could be one of these customers.
Qatar also appears to be a potential prospect for the MRTT+


I would add that, according to Airfan, the Chief of Staff of the French Air Force has expressed a desire to order additional airframes, which i suppose would be MRTT+ variants ?
Apparently up to 9 MRTTs were airborne simultaneously during the tensions in New Caledonia last year, so a few additional airframes would not be excessive imo.
 
For Italy --> OPERATIONAL AND TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR “Multi-Role Heavy Tanker Aircraft”

Edit, note the delivery timeframe

3. Key Performance Parameters (KPPs)
3.1. Fleet consistency and delivery
The fleet SHALL consist of a total of 6 aircraft by the year 2030.
The entire fleet SHALL reach completion by the end of 2030.
In order to permit a timely acquisition, it is acceptable that the 6 aircraft could be pre-owned military tanker or civilian derived aircraft (airliner) to be tanker modified, keeping compliance with the requirement of 30 years of life cycle (as mentioned in requirement 129.).
- Threshold: at least 2 aircraft delivered by the year 2029 and the remaining by the year 2030;
- Objective: 2 aircraft delivered by 2028, 2 in 2029, 2 in 2030.
Such delivery plan implies the Contractor's ability to deliver the first aircraft in less than three years from the operating date of the acquisition contract, and therefore, in relation to the fact that the development of a new dedicated system design usually involves much longer timelines, it is essential to maintain low programmatic risk through the acquisition of already developed and already operative available robust technical solutions as opposed to substantial development or modification projects.
For all the above, the Tanker SHALL have been employed in AAR operations for at least 2 years.

A330Neo MRTT+ could 'just' meet the threshold requirement as the Thai's are expected to take delivery of the first aircraft in 2029. But it won't meet the objective threshold. Would hope the Italian's would prefer the A330Neo, with all of the advantages that would bring...but they could get A330 MRTT sooner.
 
According to the author, Germany ( alone / without the MFF ? ) could be one of these customers.

I'm not sure how that would affect MMT in practice. The German's could transfer their hours allowance to other nations who have increased demands, or pass it on to new nations joining (Nordic states for example). If Germany went alone though I suspect it wouldn't be for 4 A330 MRTT+ to directly replace the A310 MRTT/MMF capability...but would be like Canada's purchase of 8 MRTT for a large capability increase, particularly with the purchase of P-8 and F-35.

You never know...that figure of 48-51 could be more like 60 in the early/mid 2030's...thats a pretty robust AAR capability for Europe alongside A400, KC-130 and (the potential at least) of KC-390. If the Italian's get onboard it could be closer to 70 than 60...
 
Well, the main concern is with runway length and aprons surface. What kind of cities European are going to fight for? Would WWIII be reduced to the siege of Charles de Gaulle airport and equivalent?

Yes to transcontinental refueling capacities but what does the MRTT stands for when it come to defend remote corners of Europe where there isn´t enough airport with compatible runway length? Are we just signing a blank check to the Russians and else, just days after we guaranteed their financial bonds and stocks?
(oh, maybe I should have done better translating those latte lines in Russian to make an impact :eek: )
 
Last edited:
Well, the main concern is with runway length and aprons surface. What kind of cities European are going to fight for? Would WWIII be reduced to the siege of Charles de Gaulle airport and equivalent?

Yes to transcontinental refueling capacities but what does the MRTT stands for when it come to defend remote corners of Europe where there isn´t enough airport with compatible runway length? Are we just signing a blank check to the Russians and else, just days after we guaranteed their financial bonds and stocks?
(oh, maybe I should have done better translating those latte lines in Russian to make an impact :eek: )

The European Union alone has around 120 airports with runways longer than 3,000 m ... which should be enough length in most cases.

European Union​

total: 1,882​
over 3,047 m: 120​
2,438 to 3,047 m: 341​
1,524 to 2,437 m: 507​
914 to 1,523 m: 425​
under 914 m: 489 (2017)​

Europe also benefits from a growing fleet of A400M, which provides meaningful AAR capability and can operate from much shorter airfields.
 
Rwy length is not an indication of runway class (that include width information), apron surface and mass tolerance.
 
Last edited:
Well, the main concern is with runway length and aprons surface. What kind of cities European are going to fight for? Would WWIII be reduced to the siege of Charles de Gaulle airport and equivalent?

Yes to transcontinental refueling capacities but what does the MRTT stands for when it come to defend remote corners of Europe where there isn´t enough airport with compatible runway length?
You don't base the tanker force on the front line, or even the front line country.
 
For Italy --> OPERATIONAL AND TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR “Multi-Role Heavy Tanker Aircraft”
An interesting aspect is the engine requirement which is for CEAP/11.

The Aircraft SHALL be equipped with a 2 engines turbofan propulsion system. Emissions SHALL be compliant with CAEP/11 (Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection/11) requirements.
That would seem to invalidate the KC-46 OOTB as the PW4062 is not at CAEP/11.
 
In Spain
The Ministry of Defence is reportedly in negotiations with Airbus Defence & Space for the acquisition of additional A330 MRTTs to strengthen the capabilities of the Air Force and the Space Corps, which already exploits them within its 45th squadron, and thus improve the resources of the armed forces in the service of the State. The Iran-Contra case has once again highlighted the importance of these aircraft which, in addition to their capacity to transport troops and equipment, allow in-flight refuelling.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom