Clark Griswold

One more thing on your comment, legit question for discussion not passive aggressive but in the Indo Pacom environment operating just outside the first island chain are small(er) systems really relevant given the distances, persistence on station, harsh marine environment, etc…? Small conventional systems equal small effects maybe the platforms will remain in traditional sizes but really just employ a lot more small attritable weapons/drones/etc… That case we will just have to mitigate and prepare for the targeting of those platforms Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

True but ultimately there is a required minimum size of platform to deliver the gas, cargo, magazine depth, etc… to be operationally relevant What is that sweet spot? Enough capability to enable or assist a large strike platform or basic formation of strike platforms Enough performance to egress when threatened without taxing the overall force in terms of DCA Enough range to operate from a reasonably safe distance and still provide effects Right now I think you’re probably looking at a large business jet or small airliner unless you can modify an in production military aircraft. Money doesn’t grow on trees so IF this was going to happen the biz jet is probably the most likely Proven operational history, high mounted rear engines and decent short field performance (weight and temp considerations factored) but if we want to bring Air Mobility missions into the fight, closer to the fights, then this kinda takes us back to the stealth or signature managed tanker air lifter idea. Good concept minus the VTOL nonsense About 130 sized, ramp, probably reasonable RCS, but with enough wing to not need a minimum of 7000’ to operate Honestly this would be our answer to China’s J-36 but we would be combining tanker, transport, bomber/arsenal, patrol/strike into one platform

Yeah I should’ve caveated that I guess the C-37 is what they wanna replace / supplement My druthers… a new large cabin jet converted for mil use needs to be the basis for a tanker, arsenal, awacs, medivac, vip transport I think a small airliner would work better for all that but just my two cents Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bombardier pitching the 8000 as platform for tanker https://aviationweek.com/defense/aircraft-propulsion/bombardier-pitches-global-vip-transport-tanker-usaf

RCAF getting a multi engine trainer, CT-145 Expeditor II, about 40 hours aircraft 55 hours simulator Sounds like they privatized most of their pilot training https://www.key.aero/article/canadas-new-trainer-aircraft-names-announced Just buy a ME trainer, earlier in this thread someone noticed that the T-7 buy would likely not meet the primary and continuing training requirements, you’re gonna need it. Fix the glitch early

Spartan COD

Just some more about the 346 https://theaviationist.com/2022/05/05/usaf-certifies-polish-m346-training/#

My guess is they will replace immediately what doesn’t work as well as something they might have that works better

Yeah but I think we could get this done even with the American MIC involved, the Israelis seemed to have this problem solved and operational by likely keeping it simpler https://www.twz.com/air/secretive-israeli-707-tanker-remote-vision-system-revealed-in-long-range-yemen-raid Another potential design and partner South Korean MC-X

That’s a good question Automate the boom, have the Co operate it or have a regular boom operator? My druthers would be for a real boom operator but I see the potential of a robo boom Speed of development is key here, go with the least risky but work on options Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Embraer developing a mil version of the E-190 E2 https://thedefensepost.com/2024/10/08/embraer-military-variant-aircraft/ Tanker version would have some of the engineering work done with this. This conceptual system seems like it would be possible to fit easily into the 190 Article for the USMC to convert to the KC-390 https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2024/may/new-tactical-tankertransport-aircraft-marine-corps-needs This is probably the service branch that makes the most sense to change out her 130s for 390s.

Swedes buying C-390 https://theaviationist.com/2025/10/06/sweden-buys-c-390-millennium/# Not clear if they are buying it with air refueling capabilities but another customer

The mind numbing repetitive ops of the NW/SW & GWOT planted a deep culture in AMC of thinking they were a military version of Fed Ex that will be extremely difficult to undo but possible I hope Concur on distributed logistics and support, the PLA is just begging us to try a Desert Storm like op plan to respond to a Taiwan aggression, MOB based and the assumption of sanctuary there So what or who is bill payer? 130s? If Brazil is cozying up to China, then a license built An-178 is my suggestion

Just adding for more material to discuss on smaller tankers / transports Bae 146 tanker https://www.flightglobal.com/uk-says-no-thanks-to-bae-146-tanker/111331.article Not selected but was interesting IMHO, the Bae 146 STA, side loading transport aircraft. https://www.key.aero/article/why-bae-146-side-loading-tactical-airlifter-failed