- Joined
- 18 October 2006
- Messages
- 4,623
- Reaction score
- 6,378
While I agree for deployment a larger aircraft like C-130 would be best, I would recall that the USAF Inc. , took the C-27J from the U.S. Army siting the holy writ of rolls and missions. Using existing aircraft for tactical refueling creates less potential for angst in the Pentagon.
The venerable CASA 212 might work but all of the aircraft used over the years for intel gathering are not designed to hang out at landing speed at a significant gross weight fraction.
This assumes that the U.S. Army would want to do more refueling other than MV-75.
There are other factors internal to the U.S.Army that are as daunting as aircraft. Namely people. Recently half of the Apache fleet was culled, not because commanders didn't want them. The U.S. Army suddenly realized they needed a lot of air defense units. The Air Cavalry Squadrons paid the bill. Building new units requires disbandment of others.
This why I think the most plausible to add a mission to existing aircraft and organizations.
The venerable CASA 212 might work but all of the aircraft used over the years for intel gathering are not designed to hang out at landing speed at a significant gross weight fraction.
This assumes that the U.S. Army would want to do more refueling other than MV-75.
There are other factors internal to the U.S.Army that are as daunting as aircraft. Namely people. Recently half of the Apache fleet was culled, not because commanders didn't want them. The U.S. Army suddenly realized they needed a lot of air defense units. The Air Cavalry Squadrons paid the bill. Building new units requires disbandment of others.
This why I think the most plausible to add a mission to existing aircraft and organizations.
