Considering the previous proposal was a stretched A319,and now a A320, a A220 is probably too small.
It seems the A319MPA was a bit oversized. Now adding transport capability is maybe a solution for a problem that can be avoided..
I realized after I posted that, that the A220 is actually longer than the A319 and A320. So my bad on the size statement.
See my comment above in regards to the A220.
I have to wonder if the weapons bay size could be a slight complication? Doesn't look like very much flat room forward and aft of the wing box. Probably why the A319 was stretched?
Then again, the A223 is slightly longer than the A320, and they squeezed one into the A320 MPA design.
Hopefully it would have a boom receptacle instead of the drogue receiver though.
The problem many times when several nations try to get together for a large joint project, is that different goals arise and either some countries drop out or the end result is goldplated to try to please everyone. Think of NATO efforts to build common frigates, transport and refueling planes, helicopters or even assault rifles.
I would hope that by now, they have learned from the NH90, and A400m. I think any future joint project will have a stricter build standard and be run more like the F-35 is.
Modern technology makes design, integration, and multitasking much simpler though. And it's a very mission specific aircraft, which should make things easier too. Should...
I actually am a little surprised one of the A220 variants isn't the frame of choice.
Won't range/endurance be a factor under consideration?
Range between the A223 and A320NEO appears very similar. I'm sure they'll be equipped for inflight refueling too.
Last edited by Slug71
on Fri Aug 24, 2018 11:40 pm, edited 2 times in total.