Quote:
Originally Posted by 60wag
Doesn't the KC30 have a significantly higher lifting capacity with lower fuel consumption?
|
Consumption was about equal, but yes it does carry quite a bit more than the 767. It's also a much larger aircraft and IIRC has nearly double the takeoff length of the KC-767. The problem though, is that it was awarded the contract for a MEDIUM tanker and it's a large scale tanker, like the KC-10. There are future plans for a competition to build a new large tanker to replace the KC-10, which is what the Airbus A330-based KC-45A should've been considered for, and not for a medium sized tanker. They wanted something similar in size to the KC-135, which the KC-767 is.
Boeing aircraft are also far more reliable. Every time I've flown on an Airbus jet, the flight has been delayed because of one maintenance issue or another. Never once seen it on a Boeing jet, save for an occasional issue when we launch out a KC-135. Even then it's rarely a major issue.
__________________
'88 FJ62 W/ 253K miles, desmogged, stock SUA W/ full length Add-A-Leafs, Tuffy console, LED interior lighting, Mallory ignition, Ford Contour electric fan, four wheel discs, Aussie sliding windows
Don't cry like a bitch when you feel the pain...