Future European Strategic Transport

If they're stupid enough to want to fight in their own country I don't know what to tell you.

My question could have been better phrased. I meant: Did Europeans still see flying MBTs to other continents as a strategic priority for them?
 
My question could have been better phrased. I meant: Did Europeans still see flying MBTs to other continents as a strategic priority for them?
Debatable. Currently European (as in the European portion of NATO) strategic outlook is firmly concerned with Eurasia first and foremost. With the MENA region to a lesser degree, but in these cases transport via ship across the Mediterranean Sea seems more economical, effective and reasonable. But, as far as I am aware, nobody in Europe is planning to deploy Leopards and Leclercs in inner Mongolia, the Andes, Alaska or Australia anytime soon.

So, as @H_K pointed out, the main incentive for a "strategic airlift" type aircraft, which could only be supplied by Airbus, is to also capitalize on the commercial market regarding super heavy or oversized payloads which have been previously handled by the An-124 and An-225. An-124 is aging and Il-100 is still in development, so right now would be the time for Airbus to capitalize on that opportunity before a Russian or possibly even Chinese design comes around and takes up significant potential market share. Ultimately the military benefits are a nice extra, but not something that Europe in the current environment desperately needs. If anything something above the A400M that is more akin to the C-17 would seem more in line with current European interests, and something that could find further export customers, while the market for extremely large aircraft like the An-124 or C-5 is ultimately more limited.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom