A330MRTT News, Orders, Production And Testing

Stitch · Sat Nov 12, 2016 7:55 pm

Would the RCAF need something as large as the A330? The KC-46A would be similar in size to the A310 (so it should work with current basing facilities) and appears to offer significantly more fuel capacity (if I am reading the Wikipedia specs correctly) as well as better range.

ThePointblank · Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:48 am

Stitch wrote:
Would the RCAF need something as large as the A330? The KC-46A would be similar in size to the A310 (so it should work with current basing facilities) and appears to offer significantly more fuel capacity (if I am reading the Wikipedia specs correctly) as well as better range.

WIederling wrote:
ThePointblank wrote:
I don't think an CC150 Polaris replacement is in order for years; for one, all of them are late 1980's build aircraft with comparable few flight hours and cycles on them compared to ones used by airlines. As long as Airbus can provide support to the A310 fleet, and there are spare parts readily available, they will continue to fly.

Well, bunumuring asked:
Which way do you think Canada will eventually go? New or converted A330s? New Pegasus'? Converted 767s (ex-AC even)? Hand-me-downs from the US? That will be an interesting one to watch in the future!

Following your observation they'll go with MRTT ( when that comes up in the ?far? future ) ?

Going to tackle these two together as they are related questions.

I don't think size is going to matter; the flight line at CFB Trenton is big enough to handle larger aircraft regardless as it received a $860 million upgrade a few years ago to handle the C-17's and C-130J's. There is a new maintenance hangar, new warehouse, all of the taxiways and aprons were replaced and enlarged, a new ramp to the north west was built, the refueling system was changed from fuel trucks to a brand new underground hydrant system, plus a whole host of other upgrades.

Whatever the aircraft will be, I suspect it will depend on what the next fighter for the RCAF will be. As it currently leans, the F-35 is going to continue to be the future fighter, so it will most likely have a boom. I believe the aircraft will very likely be bought used and then converted.

Stitch · Sun Nov 13, 2016 6:32 am

ThePointblank wrote:
Going to tackle these two together as they are related questions.

I don't think size is going to matter; the flight line at CFB Trenton is big enough to handle larger aircraft regardless as it received a $860 million upgrade a few years ago to handle the C-17's and C-130J's. There is a new maintenance hangar, new warehouse, all of the taxiways and aprons were replaced and enlarged, a new ramp to the north west was built, the refueling system was changed from fuel trucks to a brand new underground hydrant system, plus a whole host of other upgrades.

Whatever the aircraft will be, I suspect it will depend on what the next fighter for the RCAF will be. As it currently leans, the F-35 is going to continue to be the future fighter, so it will most likely have a boom. I believe the aircraft will very likely be bought used and then converted.

Ah, well a conversion would almost certainly favor the A330MRTT, though IAI has done 767-300ER conversions for Columbia and Brazil with good results so perhaps that might be an option, as well.

WIederling · Sun Nov 13, 2016 9:38 am

Stitch wrote:
Ah, well a conversion would almost certainly favor the A330MRTT, though IAI has done 767-300ER conversions for Columbia and Brazil with good results so perhaps that might be an option, as well.

The Airbus MRTT product is more than a P2T conversion.

Dutchy · Sun Nov 13, 2016 10:25 am

WIederling wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Ah, well a conversion would almost certainly favor the A330MRTT, though IAI has done 767-300ER conversions for Columbia and Brazil with good results so perhaps that might be an option, as well.

The Airbus MRTT product is more than a P2T conversion.

what is the difference?

mafaky · Sun Nov 13, 2016 11:15 am

Turkish Air Force (TuAF) will eventually need the replacement of its 7 KC-135R tankers, which are pretty much aged even by now.

The two "natural" candidates will be the A330MRTT or the KC-46. But the chances of the former will be higher for several reasons:

1) Turkey's better relations with the EU in these last years... (Can't tell if the new Trump registration may improve the Uncle Sam-Turco relations, which have started to become sour in the last 3-4 years; several reasons why!...),
2) The fact that Turkish Airlines operate a large fleet of A330s (They currently operate 20 A332s, of which 15 are "grounded" for this winter operations and most of these may be returned to the lessors, asap. TK actually has only 5 A332s that are still on financial leasing plus another 8/to become 9 in 2017, A332Fs. But these 5 frames are already getting older; average 10-11 years, with pretty high cycles!... Plus 30/to become 37 in 2017, A333s).

WIederling · Sun Nov 13, 2016 11:29 am

Dutchy wrote:
WIederling wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Ah, well a conversion would almost certainly favor the A330MRTT, though IAI has done 767-300ER conversions for Columbia and Brazil with good results so perhaps that might be an option, as well.

The Airbus MRTT product is more than a P2T conversion.

what is the difference?

The MRT aspect :-)

( look into what the German A310MRT were designed to do.)
The 767 conversions are just Tt, 'T'anker ( and a bit of 't'ransport added in )

INFINITI329 · Sun Nov 13, 2016 5:40 pm

ThePointblank wrote:
Whatever the aircraft will be, I suspect it will depend on what the next fighter for the RCAF will be. As it currently leans, the F-35 is going to continue to be the future fighter, so it will most likely have a boom. I believe the aircraft will very likely be bought used and then converted.

Unless of course RCAF goes with the -C (naval variant) to maintain the hose and drogue system. But the C-17 needs a boom so that might be a moot point.

Stitch · Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:09 pm

WIederling wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
WIederling wrote:

The Airbus MRTT product is more than a P2T conversion.

what is the difference?

The MRT aspect
( look into what the German A310MRT were designed to do.)
The 767 conversions are just Tt, 'T'anker ( and a bit of 't'ransport added in )

The IAI 767-300ER's have main deck cargo doors and refueling booms (something the A310MRTT does not offer) so one could argue they are just as "Multi-Role" as the Airbus products.

WIederling · Sun Nov 13, 2016 10:55 pm

Stitch wrote:
WIederling wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

what is the difference?

The MRT aspect
( look into what the German A310MRT were designed to do.)
The 767 conversions are just Tt, 'T'anker ( and a bit of 't'ransport added in )

The IAI 767-300ER's have main deck cargo doors and refueling booms (something the A310MRTT does not offer) so one could argue they are just as "Multi-Role" as the Airbus products.

Yeah, sure. And that is not what the MRT was about.
That is about a versatile platform for freight, pax, med evac and med transport. IMU the same modules are available for the A330.
( you need the freight door though. another STC )

The T for Tanker was added last to the MRT"T"

then the ARBS was first flown on an A310 afair.
see: http://www.deagel.com/Tanker-Aircraft/A ... 95001.aspx

Now with the A330 platform available and new production A310 unavailable ...

Stitch · Mon Nov 14, 2016 12:02 am

WIederling wrote:
Stitch wrote:
WIederling wrote:

The MRT aspect
( look into what the German A310MRT were designed to do.)
The 767 conversions are just Tt, 'T'anker ( and a bit of 't'ransport added in )

The IAI 767-300ER's have main deck cargo doors and refueling booms (something the A310MRTT does not offer) so one could argue they are just as "Multi-Role" as the Airbus products.

Yeah, sure. And that is not what the MRT was about.
That is about a versatile platform for freight, pax, med evac and med transport. IMU the same modules are available for the A330.
( you need the freight door though. another STC )

And the IAI 767s have performed all those roles for the Columbian and Brazilian Air Forces, too. In fact, IAI calls them MRTTs because they have that same inherent role flexibility. *shrug*

ThePointblank · Mon Nov 14, 2016 1:57 am

INFINITI329 wrote:
ThePointblank wrote:
Whatever the aircraft will be, I suspect it will depend on what the next fighter for the RCAF will be. As it currently leans, the F-35 is going to continue to be the future fighter, so it will most likely have a boom. I believe the aircraft will very likely be bought used and then converted.

Unless of course RCAF goes with the -C (naval variant) to maintain the hose and drogue system. But the C-17 needs a boom so that might be a moot point.

My understanding is that the F-35A can be fitted with the probe and still retain the boom capabilities. The forward fuselage area by the cockpit is common to the F-35A and F-35C; this is where the probe would be fitted on the F-35C, and it is left empty on a F-35A. The changes would require re-certification of the aircraft as the weight and centre of gravity will change accordingly.

KarelXWB · Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:44 pm

NATO has taken another important step forward to improve its ability to refuel aircraft in mid-air, with three Allies looking to join a European programme to acquire new refuelling aircraft. Today (16 February 2017), Defence Ministers from Belgium, Germany, and Norway signed a Declaration of Intent to join a European multinational fleet of Airbus tankers, created by the Netherlands and Luxembourg. The two countries launched this initiative in July 2016 and a first order was made for two Airbus A330 Multi Role Tanker Transport aircraft, which are due to be delivered in 2020.

...

Defence Ministers from Belgium, Germany, and Norway signed a Declaration of Intent to join a European multinational fleet of Airbus tankers, created by the Netherlands and Luxembourg.

The new agreement allows other Allies to join the programme with the provision to enlarge the fleet to up to eight aircraft.

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_141382.htm

mjoelnir · Thu Feb 16, 2017 4:52 pm

WIederling wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Ah, well a conversion would almost certainly favor the A330MRTT, though IAI has done 767-300ER conversions for Columbia and Brazil with good results so perhaps that might be an option, as well.

The Airbus MRTT product is more than a P2T conversion.

It actually gives the same standard converting from a passenger A330-200 or as a new bird. It is nearly the same process. The added work is mainly in the wings It helps that the A330 has enough tankage that there are no fuel tanks with associated plumbing added. The Royal Australian Air Force got 5 new ones and now gets 2 converted ones.

JetBuddy · Fri Feb 17, 2017 12:39 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
NATO has taken another important step forward to improve its ability to refuel aircraft in mid-air, with three Allies looking to join a European programme to acquire new refuelling aircraft. Today (16 February 2017), Defence Ministers from Belgium, Germany, and Norway signed a Declaration of Intent to join a European multinational fleet of Airbus tankers, created by the Netherlands and Luxembourg. The two countries launched this initiative in July 2016 and a first order was made for two Airbus A330 Multi Role Tanker Transport aircraft, which are due to be delivered in 2020.

...

Defence Ministers from Belgium, Germany, and Norway signed a Declaration of Intent to join a European multinational fleet of Airbus tankers, created by the Netherlands and Luxembourg.

The new agreement allows other Allies to join the programme with the provision to enlarge the fleet to up to eight aircraft.

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_141382.htm

Great news. The press release from the Norwegian Department of Defence confirms that this triggers the option for six more aircraft for a total of eight.

https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/n ... id2539315/
(In Norwegian)

Mortyman · Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:53 pm

JetBuddy wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
NATO has taken another important step forward to improve its ability to refuel aircraft in mid-air, with three Allies looking to join a European programme to acquire new refuelling aircraft. Today (16 February 2017), Defence Ministers from Belgium, Germany, and Norway signed a Declaration of Intent to join a European multinational fleet of Airbus tankers, created by the Netherlands and Luxembourg. The two countries launched this initiative in July 2016 and a first order was made for two Airbus A330 Multi Role Tanker Transport aircraft, which are due to be delivered in 2020.

...

Defence Ministers from Belgium, Germany, and Norway signed a Declaration of Intent to join a European multinational fleet of Airbus tankers, created by the Netherlands and Luxembourg.

The new agreement allows other Allies to join the programme with the provision to enlarge the fleet to up to eight aircraft.

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_141382.htm

Great news. The press release from the Norwegian Department of Defence confirms that this triggers the option for six more aircraft for a total of eight.

https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/n ... id2539315/
(In Norwegian)

Great News ! and about time !

zeke · Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:12 am

Stitch wrote:
And the IAI 767s have performed all those roles for the Columbian and Brazilian Air Forces, too. In fact, IAI calls them MRTTs because they have that same inherent role flexibility. *shrug*

Boeing introduced fees in 2009 to cover airworthiness support for non Boeing conversions, there is a licencing system in place for Bedek for freighter conversions of the Boeing data, as far as I am aware that does not extend to the tanker conversions. My personal experience with IAI 707 conversions is the lack of support for the IAI conversions by the OEM resulted in limited availability and airworthiness of these third party converted tanker aircraft.

N837MH · Sat Apr 08, 2017 7:34 am

Hello~ My name is N837MH. I'm a Korean Aviation Spotter.

So, I have some question about S.Korea Airforce's A330 MRTT.

Do you have some information about S.Korea Airforce's A330 MRTT?

Just Anything. Like about assembly, plan, delivery.

If you have some news, please reply to me.

Thank you.
Cheers!!
From South Korea.
N837MH.

Dutchy · Sat Apr 08, 2017 10:52 am

I missed the fact South Korea had ordered the A330 in 2015. Apparently four are ordered.

According to wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A3 ... outh_Korea

South Korea[edit]
On 30 June 2015, South Korea selected the A330 MRTT aerial refueling aircraft for procurement. South Korea is to order four aircraft with deliveries planned to be completed in 2019.[53]

AngMoh · Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:19 am

Dutchy wrote:
I missed the fact South Korea had ordered the A330 in 2015. Apparently four are ordered.

According to wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A3 ... outh_Korea

South Korea[edit]
On 30 June 2015, South Korea selected the A330 MRTT aerial refueling aircraft for procurement. South Korea is to order four aircraft with deliveries planned to be completed in 2019.[53]

According to planespotters, the first one is c/n 1787 which should appear over the next 3 months. The last delivered a330 is c/n 1779.

https://www.planespotters.net/airline/S ... -Air-Force
https://www.planespotters.net/productio ... /A330?p=28

Not sure how reliable this is.

KarelXWB · Sun Apr 23, 2017 3:11 pm

Qantas MSN 892 has been converted to MRTT:

http://www.abcdlist.nl/photo/a330/mrtt039.html

KarelXWB · Sun Apr 23, 2017 3:14 pm

AngMoh wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
I missed the fact South Korea had ordered the A330 in 2015. Apparently four are ordered.

According to wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A3 ... outh_Korea

South Korea[edit]
On 30 June 2015, South Korea selected the A330 MRTT aerial refueling aircraft for procurement. South Korea is to order four aircraft with deliveries planned to be completed in 2019.[53]

According to planespotters, the first one is c/n 1787 which should appear over the next 3 months. The last delivered a330 is c/n 1779.

https://www.planespotters.net/airline/S ... -Air-Force
https://www.planespotters.net/productio ... /A330?p=28

Not sure how reliable this is.

MSN 1787 will soon fly to Spain for tanker conversion.

Airbus A330-200MRTT F-WWYO KoreanAirForce 20170421 Toulouse by steam60163, on Flickr

Dutchy · Sun Apr 23, 2017 9:08 pm

Esthetic very pleasing photograph! Beautiful with the mountains in the back drop.

KarelXWB · Mon Apr 24, 2017 7:43 am

MSN 1830 will be the first MRTT for the joint ops venture by The Netherlands, Norway and Poland.

bunumuring · Mon Apr 24, 2017 1:49 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
MSN 1830 will be the first MRTT for the joint ops venture by The Netherlands, Norway and Poland.

Hey KarelXWB,
I thought that Luxembourg was also involved in this, though I know they don't have any planes needing to be refuelled so I guess that they are interested in the cargo/personnel carrying capabilities of the MRTT...
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Cheers,
Bunumuring.

Dutchy · Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:13 pm

bunumuring wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
MSN 1830 will be the first MRTT for the joint ops venture by The Netherlands, Norway and Poland.

Hey KarelXWB,
I thought that Luxembourg was also involved in this, though I know they don't have any planes needing to be refuelled so I guess that they are interested in the cargo/personnel carrying capabilities of the MRTT...
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Cheers,
Bunumuring.

Don't they have an A400M coming in, although that one will be flown in cooperation with the Belgium, which isn't in the pool.

How sure are these joins venture ops? Whom orders these a/c?

moo · Mon Apr 24, 2017 5:24 pm

bunumuring wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
MSN 1830 will be the first MRTT for the joint ops venture by The Netherlands, Norway and Poland.

Hey KarelXWB,
I thought that Luxembourg was also involved in this, though I know they don't have any planes needing to be refuelled so I guess that they are interested in the cargo/personnel carrying capabilities of the MRTT...
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Cheers,
Bunumuring.

Its more to do with their obligations NATO wise than actual desires or interest in specific capabilities...

LightningZ71 · Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:26 am

Does anyone know if there wI'll be an A330-800MRTT? Or, would that get skipped for an A350 based solution?

zeke · Tue Apr 25, 2017 12:22 pm

The cargo doors and tanker mods have been certified as STCs to the A330 airframe, the choice of engine model is not really limited, they already have done the modifications to more than one engine type on the base frame.

I could see it as a viable model as the the neo will give additional range or additional offload.

KarelXWB · Wed Apr 26, 2017 8:43 am

A render of of the French Air Force MRTT livery:

http://www.defens-aero.com/2017/04/phot ... ivree.html

ITMercure · Wed Apr 26, 2017 10:54 am

I'll miss the French AF C-135 in dark blue and their early-707 simple but beautiful wings. That said, the drawing shows Trent 700 engines. Normaly the French AF outsources heavy checks/maintenance to Air France Industrie which has a sound knowledge of the CF6-80 (A310, 744, 767, A332) but not of the Trent. Can anyone confirm that the Trent got selected?

EDITED: just saw a picture of the French AF's first 330 during first flight before conversion to MRTT standard, and it had two Rollers. Suppose this combo best suited the French AF's operational requirements.

Slug71 · Wed Apr 26, 2017 4:07 pm

LightningZ71 wrote:
Does anyone know if there wI'll be an A330-800MRTT? Or, would that get skipped for an A350 based solution?

There is supposed to be but with only 6 orders for the A300-800NEO, who knows.

Dutchy · Wed Apr 26, 2017 5:23 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
A render of of the French Air Force MRTT livery:

http://www.defens-aero.com/2017/04/phot ... ivree.html

Looks nice!

breiz · Wed May 10, 2017 2:24 pm

First automatic refueling connection.
On March 21st, the flying MRTT testbed EC-HLA connected automatically 6 times to a Portuguese F-16.
Airbus embarked in the development of automatic refueling connection in 2015.
The functionality (image processing and automatic piloting of the boom) will be integrated to the MRTTs from 2019. No modification required for the refueling planes.

Channex757 · Wed May 10, 2017 3:41 pm

Slug71 wrote:
LightningZ71 wrote:
Does anyone know if there wI'll be an A330-800MRTT? Or, would that get skipped for an A350 based solution?

There is supposed to be but with only 6 orders for the A300-800NEO, who knows.

There are also structural issues.

The A338NEO has an updated wing that removes the additional structures that support the A340 outside engine in the design, and is used for the tanker version's hose pods. This structure is there as the wing was designed for both the A330 and A340. That means some work and testing would be needed to replace the capability on the NEO wing.

moo · Wed May 10, 2017 8:35 pm

Channex757 wrote:
Slug71 wrote:
LightningZ71 wrote:
Does anyone know if there wI'll be an A330-800MRTT? Or, would that get skipped for an A350 based solution?

There is supposed to be but with only 6 orders for the A300-800NEO, who knows.

There are also structural issues.

The A338NEO has an updated wing that removes the additional structures that support the A340 outside engine in the design, and is used for the tanker version's hose pods. This structure is there as the wing was designed for both the A330 and A340. That means some work and testing would be needed to replace the capability on the NEO wing.

I guarantee any certification for that extra structure would be done by analysis, and not physical tests, so its not exactly a huge undertaking.

Channex757 · Wed May 10, 2017 9:21 pm

Quite a bit of work though. reinforcement has to be added back, then testing for the new shape winglets and the pods. How will they perform with the changed airflow.

It might even be worth Airbus offering the existing version as the planes will be built side by side for a while.

Slug71 · Thu May 11, 2017 2:15 am

The refueling pod weighs significantly less than an engine though. Probably around a 10th of the weight. Dry of course.
Shouldnt need too much reinforcement.

Channex757 · Thu May 11, 2017 8:41 am

Slug71 wrote:
The refueling pod weighs significantly less than an engine though. Probably around a 10th of the weight. Dry of course.
Shouldnt need too much reinforcement.

reinforcement and pipework. The A340 wing was useful as it had the necessary internal structure to handle added pipes and pumps to support the pods.

Airbus has deleted this structure as a weight saving in the A330NEO. Some of this saved weight goes to offset the increased weight of the Trent 7000 engines. When the A330MRTT was being designed, that common structure in the wing between the A330 and A340 made adding the pods a lot easier.

The next big issue will be the wing itself as a whole and how the changed airflow impacts the pods and the aircraft flying close behind. That'll take a fairly hefty test program as no way will analysis by computer modelling be accepted by military clients. They deal in absolutes and hard evidence as loss of an asset in wartime could turn a battle.

zeke · Thu May 11, 2017 9:26 am

What you are saying is not correct. All of the tanker conversions have modifications made inside the wing. The structure the pods attach to is not the same as the pylon attaches to on the A340.

The outer engine location on the A340 provides for the wing to have the aeroelastic properties to install the additional mass outward on the wing. It also provided provisions to reticulate fuel/hydraulics/electrical systems to that location to the fuselage.

The A330 tanker conversion is a systems integration process, it's getting the fuel, hydraulics, and elerical/communications through the aircraft the refuelling points that takes the time. The structural modifications are minor in comparison.

Channex757 · Thu May 11, 2017 11:35 am

zeke wrote:
What you are saying is not correct. All of the tanker conversions have modifications made inside the wing. The structure the pods attach to is not the same as the pylon attaches to on the A340.

The outer engine location on the A340 provides for the wing to have the aeroelastic properties to install the additional mass outward on the wing. It also provided provisions to reticulate fuel/hydraulics/electrical systems to that location to the fuselage.

The A330 tanker conversion is a systems integration process, it's getting the fuel, hydraulics, and elerical/communications through the aircraft the refuelling points that takes the time. The structural modifications are minor in comparison.

My point is that the A330NEO will have a lot of the common structure deleted. That's a fact, Airbus have already said as much. They now see it as unnecessary weight so the internal structure of the wing will be modified and any new pod attachment in the future will have to take account of this "weakening".

The A330CEO carries round some additional weight as it was easier for Airbus to initially leave it in. You mention that above. Airbus then used that structure as a basis for the pods. The design meant that more commonality existed and wing production could be easier and cheaper at Broughton where the basics of the wings are built up. Other aircraft would need surgery to the outer wing to support the weight, trunking and aerodynamic stresses whereas the A330 already had the basics built into the wing thanks to A340 commonality.

Slug71 · Thu May 11, 2017 7:19 pm

I doubt it will be too complicated.
The fuel, hydraulic, and electrical lines go through the holes in the wing ribs. No change there. They'll probably follow current routing unless there is some improvement.
The pods dry weight is around 500kgs. A lot less than an engine. A340 strengthening in the current A330 MRTT wing is way overkill. I'd imagine a couple a extra ribs or some beefed up ones will do the trick.

zeke · Thu May 11, 2017 8:24 pm

Channex757 wrote:
My point is that the A330NEO will have a lot of the common structure deleted. That's a fact, Airbus have already said as much. They now see it as unnecessary weight so the internal structure of the wing will be modified and any new pod attachment in the future will have to take account of this "weakening".

Your point is not valid as it is not true as it applies to the A330. It does not matter what variant of the A330, they have to remove and add relevant modifications to handle the pod, which is very different to the pylon attachment. The A330CEO does not have bolt holes for a pylon mount where you could attach an A340 engine, that is specific A340 hardware which is only on the A340 wings. There was about a 5% difference between the A330 and A340 wing structures.

Slug71 wrote:
The fuel, hydraulic, and electrical lines go through the holes in the wing ribs.

Not really which is the point, the internal space in the wing is a we fuel tank, it was a fuel tank on the A330, and on the A340, so they made provisions to accommodate those services outside the wet wing. The routing of which has already been certified for bird strike, lightning strikes, and engine disk burst. That is the true advantage, it has the clearance to run those services to the A340 outer pod location. An aircraft that did not have that provision in the design will need to come up with novel ways to route the services and the certify that routing for the relevant damage cases.

Slug71 · Thu May 11, 2017 9:51 pm

Thanks for the clarification.

KarelXWB · Fri Jun 09, 2017 11:48 am

Germany is in the market for some A330 MRTT aircraft:

https://twitter.com/HelenHaxell/status/ ... 5068698624

moo · Fri Jun 09, 2017 12:06 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Germany is in the market for some A330 MRTT aircraft:

https://twitter.com/HelenHaxell/status/ ... 5068698624

Given that Germany seems to want to find significant issues with anything it buys, does Airbus want to sell MRTTs to Germany...?

WIederling · Fri Jun 09, 2017 1:03 pm

moo wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
Germany is in the market for some A330 MRTT aircraft:

https://twitter.com/HelenHaxell/status/ ... 5068698624

Given that Germany seems to want to find significant issues with anything it buys, does Airbus want to sell MRTTs to Germany...?

AFAIR going back in time the A310MRT and MRTT versions were developed for and with Germany ( based at the time on used A310 frames ).
( and the MRT capabilities on the A310 go well beyond anything the A330MRTT customers have ordered up to now.

Stitch · Fri Jun 09, 2017 3:19 pm

moo wrote:
Given that Germany seems to want to find significant issues with anything it buys, does Airbus want to sell MRTTs to Germany...?

Even if the A330MRTT was not a great choice, it's not like they have another option with most of the EU and the UK going that direction already. They're going to want to have the interoperability with those fleets, I imagine.

moo · Fri Jun 09, 2017 3:44 pm

Stitch wrote:
moo wrote:
Given that Germany seems to want to find significant issues with anything it buys, does Airbus want to sell MRTTs to Germany...?

Even if the A330MRTT was not a great choice, it's not like they have another option with most of the EU and the UK going that direction already. They're going to want to have the interoperability with those fleets, I imagine.

Thats a plus for Germany, but its not a plus for Airbus, and my point is that Airbus may not want to get into bed with Germany on something else that they can complain about...

Stitch · Fri Jun 09, 2017 3:51 pm

moo wrote:
Thats a plus for Germany, but its not a plus for Airbus, and my point is that Airbus may not want to get into bed with Germany on something else that they can complain about...

So what, Germany buys the KC-46A? :rotfl:

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net