[quote][b][url=/v3/forum/%C3%A9tats-unis-31/topic/remplacement-des-c-130-hercules-636/?post=25547#post-25547]pilou[/url] a dit le 02/10/2008 à 22:21 :[/b]

[url=http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/C130100108.xml&headline=Lockheed%20Explores%20Niche%20For%20Widebody%20C-130]Lockheed Explores Niche For Widebody C-130[/url]

[quote]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.”[/quote][/quote]