Embraer KC-390 Millennium

TomcatViP said:
The KC-390 has yet to prove its ability to operate from unpaved airfield.
Click to expand...

The 390 has a much better main undercarriage bogey arrangement.

On soft ground the C-130's aft main wheels tend to dig deeper into the furrow cut by the front wheels as there is no lateral displacement. One reason why the Transall was superior from unprepared strips.
 
The Transall had individually suspended wheelpairs though, whereas the C-390 (like the Japanese C-2) has an airliner-style 4-wheel bogie. I suspect the C-130's large diameter wheels also provide pretty good floatation, mitigating the problem you describe somewhat.
 
C-390 sales has been on a roll lately after a slow start. Reminds me of the Rafale.
but I guess this means that its also a nail in the coffin for KAI's MC-X project, as it seemed to be roughly the same size.. although slightly larger
 
helmutkohl said:
C-390 sales has been on a roll lately after a slow start. Reminds me of the Rafale.
but I guess this means that its also a nail in the coffin for KAI's MC-X project, as it seemed to be roughly the same size.. although slightly larger
Click to expand...
I agree that it can be very bad news for MC-X; even their hometown choose C-390 instead of KAI's.

maybe MC-X is terminated, changed as C-390-30, or going to totally different size
 
helmutkohl said:
but I guess this means that its also a nail in the coffin for KAI's MC-X project, as it seemed to be roughly the same size.. although slightly larger
Click to expand...
Deino said:
But I thought South Korea is aiming for an indigenous design?
Click to expand...
litzj said:
I agree that it can be very bad news for MC-X; even their hometown choose C-390 instead of KAI's.

maybe MC-X is terminated, changed as C-390-30, or going to totally different size
Click to expand...

MC-X has never been an official programme of record to begin with. It was a KAI proposal. Also, it was never meant to fulfill the demands of this recent ROKAF programme (Large Transport Aircraft-II programme) but was envisioned to be a long-term project.

Now, if you ask me about the plausibility of MC-X materializing, I should agree that it is low, and to be frank, the odds were never in KAI's favour to begin with imo.

We'll see how a possible cooperation with Embraer will pan out. They were known to be very interested in participating in possible Korean indigenous transport porgramme, but with their recent sales to KSA I'd expect that they'd not be that eager any more.
 
Last edited:
Any ideas as to what the KAI transporter looked like? If it was the same size as the C-390 then I could see why it was cancled, two cargo lifters in the same size catagory would mean that there is too much competition. Embraer have had a head start with the C-390 and have already had several export orders confirmed.
 
Congrats! C-390 order activity is really picking up pace recently, good to see. As for Korea, if they've decided to buy off-the-shelf in this size-class, I don't think an indigenous effort for something larger (with smaller markets both domestic and export) is in the cards. Might be a potential second chance for the A400M - they are already an Airbus Military customer.
 
That is the best idea for South Korea, obviously they have decided to go of the shelf C-390 instead of trying to build an equivalent transporter.
 
FighterJock said:
Any ideas as to what the KAI transporter looked like? If it was the same size as the C-390 then I could see why it was cancled, two cargo lifters in the same size catagory would mean that there is too much competition. Embraer have had a head start with the C-390 and have already had several export orders confirmed.
Click to expand...
3.-KAI-MC-X-multirole-cargo-transport-concept-model-JR-Ng-scaled.jpg
 
Maro.Kyo said:
MC-X has never been an official programme of record to begin with. It was a KAI proposal. Also, it was never meant to fulfill the demands of this recent ROKAF programme (Large Transport Aircraft-II programme but was envisioned to be a long-term project.

Now, if you ask me about the plausibility of MC-X materializing, I should agree that it is low, and to be frank, the odds were never in KAI's favour to begin with imo.

We'll see how a possible cooperation with Embraer will pan out. They were known to be very interested in participating in possible Korean indigenous transport porgramme, but with their recent sales to KSA I'd expect that they'd not be that eager any more.
Click to expand...
MC-X might be an idea if it's C-5/C-17 sized.
 
It depends on what the Republic of Korean AirForce wants in the future, whether or not it needs such a large transport aircraft to begin with.
 
FighterJock said:
That is the best idea for South Korea, obviously they have decided to go of the shelf C-390 instead of trying to build an equivalent transporter.
Click to expand...
As I've wrote directly above your post, that's not how it is planned out.

Trident said:
Might be a potential second chance for the A400M - they are already an Airbus Military customer.
Click to expand...
Atlas was part of the bid and lost to Millenium.
 
FighterJock said:
Any ideas as to what the KAI transporter looked like? If it was the same size as the C-390 then I could see why it was cancled, two cargo lifters in the same size catagory would mean that there is too much competition. Embraer have had a head start with the C-390 and have already had several export orders confirmed.
Click to expand...
Trident said:
As for Korea, if they've decided to buy off-the-shelf in this size-class, I don't think an indigenous effort for something larger (with smaller markets both domestic and export) is in the cards.
Click to expand...
Scott Kenny said:
MC-X might be an idea if it's C-5/C-17 sized.
Click to expand...
MC-X slots right in between C-130J-30/C-390 and C-2/A400M size. Comparison charts and graphics courtsey Seaseadam (https://blog.naver.com/seaseadam/223269340516)
 

Attachments

  • mcx,c390_측면_합체.png
    mcx,c390_측면_합체.png
    151.7 KB · Views: 154
  • mcx,c390_측면.png
    mcx,c390_측면.png
    230.3 KB · Views: 163
  • mcx,c390_정면2.png
    mcx,c390_정면2.png
    260.3 KB · Views: 165
  • mcx,c390_정면_합체.png
    mcx,c390_정면_합체.png
    91.2 KB · Views: 136
  • mcx,c390_정면.png
    mcx,c390_정면.png
    122.6 KB · Views: 141
  • mcx,c390_적재칸.png
    mcx,c390_적재칸.png
    119.1 KB · Views: 134
  • mcx,c390_상배면_합체.png
    mcx,c390_상배면_합체.png
    254.3 KB · Views: 130
  • mcx,c390_상배면.png
    mcx,c390_상배면.png
    135.3 KB · Views: 131
  • mcx,c390_비교표.png
    mcx,c390_비교표.png
    179 KB · Views: 136
Maro.Kyo said:
MC-X slots right in between C-130J-30/C-390 and C-2/A400M size. Comparison charts and graphics courtsey Seaseadam (https://blog.naver.com/seaseadam/223269340516)
Click to expand...
That's... Unfortunate. The US is going to have to replace C-5s at some point, probably in the early 2030s. KAI having a design for a 4-engine monster could put them in a good position for the C-5 replacement contract.
 
Josh_TN said:
There’s no way the US would contract that to a foreign country.
Click to expand...
I also have some doubts that KAI being able to produce a C-5 4-engined replacement without significant help externally.

KAI thus far only has a plan for a two engined aircraft slightly larger than the C-390.. and certainly much smaller than the C-17, let alone the C-5.
 
Scott Kenny said:
True, it'd probably have to be built in the US. Doesn't mean that it couldn't be a foreign design.
Click to expand...

Technically perhaps no, practically there is no possible way that will ever happen for several political reasons. And perhaps a couple of practical military ones on top.
 
Josh_TN said:
Technically perhaps no, practically there is no possible way that will ever happen for several political reasons. And perhaps a couple of practical military ones on top.
Click to expand...
T-45 Goshawk is an adjusted foreign design, designed by foreign company and majority manufactured in said foreign country. Then there is the B-57 too...
 
GTX said:
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for this.

https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-...pse-throws-cold-water-on-c-390/138078.article
Click to expand...

I knew about the JV implosion, but it looks like the joint marketing agreement may have lapsed recently as well. So maybe BAE instead of Boeing? (This agreement is for the Middle East. No idea who is in charge of marketing it to North America or the US.) Still a super long shot though.

https://www.airforce-technology.com...t-c-390-in-the-middle-east/?cf-view&cf-closed
 
Last edited:

Attachments

  • 20240420_Embraer-C-390_MPA.jpg
    20240420_Embraer-C-390_MPA.jpg
    131.7 KB · Views: 84
from link above

Austria plans to acquire four C-390s to replace its costly-to-maintain C-130Ks, with an estimated cost per unit ranging between 130 and 150 million euros. The first deliveries are expected by 2026. The C-390 was selected for its superior transport capabilities, capable of carrying Black Hawk helicopters or light tanks such as the Pandur Evo.

Meanwhile, the Netherlands intends to purchase five C-390s, thereby increasing its annual flight capacity from 2,400 to 4,000 hours. This expansion is justified by recent operational needs such as the 2021 evacuations from Afghanistan and increased demands on Europe's eastern flank.
Click to expand...
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom