remplacement des c-130 hercules

AC-X Replacement Gunship

In late December 2001 a Department of Defense Program Budget Decision (PBD) called for purchasing at least eight additional AC-130U Spooky gunships, and initiating work on a possible replacement gunship aircraft. The PBD added funding to accelerate and fully fund an Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration for the AC(X) aircraft. The AC(X) could be either a further upgrade to the existing AC-130 an entirely new follow-on system. A formal procurement program for the AC(X) was expected to begin in Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05).

Special operators want the new gunship, or AC-X, to be much smaller than a C-130, with fewer crew members. They want it to be stealthy, with the speed and maneuverability of a long-range jet fighter. They want it equipped with directed energy weapons and non-lethal technologies, and it should be able to engage targets from any angle-above and below, front and back.

Les Hercules sont pourtant encore en très bon état, nan?

hmmmm.. je pense po mais cette version est MIEU ..J ATT VOS REPONSES SUR CETTE QUESTION

Sur quelle question?

Wildcat a écrit

Sur quelle question?

Sur l'opposition AC-X vs C-130… Enfin c'est ce que j'ai cru comprendre…

Ben j'ai pas vu de question posée, seulement des affirmations.

Après, si la question c'est est-ce quil est réaliste d''envisager de construire un avion furtif qui manoeuvrerait comme un jet tout en utilisant des armes énergétiques?.. Bon, ben en gros on connaît déjà, ça n'a rien de nouveau, on trouve même des plans de l'appareil sur le net depuis un bon moment.

Wildcat a écrit

Ben j'ai pas vu de question posée, seulement des affirmations.

Après, si la question c'est est-ce quil est réaliste d''envisager de construire un avion furtif qui manoeuvrerait comme un jet tout en utilisant des armes énergétiques?.. Bon, ben en gros on connaît déjà, ça n'a rien de nouveau, on trouve même des plans de l'appareil sur le net depuis un bon moment.

MDR Wildcat qui c'est qui a pris en charge la construction du X-wing sur Terre?
Et je ne crois pas que le X-wing soit furtif ^^

Blackbird :
- peux-tu donner la source de ton article (lien Internet, ou nom et date de la revue)
- merci de t'appliquer sur la rédaction de tes messages

pilou a écrit

Blackbird :
- peux-tu donner la source de ton article (lien Internet, ou nom et date de la revue)

Je le fais uniquement pour que rien ne puisse etre reproché à AM.net quant à la copie d'article. A l'avenir, merci effectivement d'accorder une certaine importance a la mention des sources.
AC-X Replacement Gunship
Source

pilou a écrit

Blackbird :
- merci de t'appliquer sur la rédaction de tes messages

Heu, là, je ne peux pas faire grand chose…

MDR Wildcat qui c'est qui a pris en charge la construction du X-wing sur Terre?

Ben Incom Earth Ltd, bien sûr.

Et je ne crois pas que le X-wing soit furtif.

Si, si, c'est bien précisé dans les romans.

Ben Incom Earth Ltd, bien sûr.

Hum ça ce tiens, je savais pô qu'ils étaient allés jusqu'à la Terre pour vendre leur vaisseaux, enfin bref j'éspère en voir passer un au dessus de chez moi bientôt.

Lockheed Martin C-130J Delivery Continues Modernization of Air Mobility Command's Combat Fleet

Lockheed Explores Niche For Widebody C-130

Lockheed Martin is studying widebody derivatives of its Hercules military airlifter able to carry larger loads, but believes the “C-130XL” would only be a niche product and not a replacement for its C-130J tactical transport.

The C-130XL is one of several concepts being studied to fill the “white space” requirement for intra-theater transport of heavy U.S. Army equipment in the 2020 timeframe, says Jim Grant, vice president of business development for global mobility.

“If today the C-130J can carry 95-percent-plus of everything in theater, in 2015-25 we still see the J carrying 90 percent of what the Army wants to move,” he says. “But there are some vehicles [such as the Future Combat Systems] that will be too big for the J.”

As a result, Lockheed Martin sees a “small white space to carry outsize equipment that will have to be moved by something,” Grant says, and it is looking at “how to fill that white space in the out-years.”

In addition to three notional sizes of larger C-130J derivative, the company is studying stealthy short-takeoff-and-landing (STOL) concepts for the Air Force and tiltrotor vertical-takeoff-and-landing (VTOL) concepts for the Army.

The Air Force and Army are trying to combine their battlefield transport requirements under the Joint Future Theater Lift program, but it is not clear whether their competing desires for STOL and VTOL capability can be reconciled in one program.

“There are things we don’t know,” Grant says. “What payload? What ranges? What runway conditions? If they need Hercules-size field operations, then could it be a derivative of the C-130?

“If it’s down in the 1,000-2,000 foot STOL, none of the aircraft out there can routinely do that,” he says. “If the Army pushes hard for VTOL, none of today’s aircraft can carry an FCS-size vehicle in a vertical environment.”

The three sizes of conceptual C-130XL being studied are targeted at payloads of around 62,000, 72,000 and 80,000-85,000 pounds — up from around 42,000 pounds for the C-130J. All would have a wider, but not necessarily longer, fuselage.

“If we size the payload bay to handle larger vehicles, how much do we have to change about the aircraft? Can we increase the STOL capabilities? That depends on the requirements,” he says.

While a 62,000-pound payload design could use the C-130J’s wing and engines, the larger concepts would require more changes. “What can we do with the current propulsion? At what point do we need different propulsion? We are looking at all options,” he says.

Lockheed Martin sees a C-130XL complementing and not replacing the C-130J. “It would run in parallel, to meet a very specific requirement,” Grant says. Although it could end up similar in size to the Airbus A400M, he does not foresee a big international demand for a larger Hercules. “You could see a small fleet within a fleet – someone with 12 Js and two to three XLs.”

EC-130 squadron surpasses 10,000 combat hours

Pour rappel, le EC-130, c'est ça :
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/ec-130e.htm
http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=182

Snow offers C-130 STOL upgrade to market