PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Why no helo transport? Are we condemning our diggers to an easy victimology?
Old 25th Oct 2010, 05:38
  #114 (permalink)  
TBM-Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 4,283
Received 38 Likes on 29 Posts
B71, I don't think the issue for any M-1 Abrams deployment to A/stan is logistics. As you can see they can be flown in to an airhead. Ports/wharves etc are restrictions from another age - prior to the C-17!


QUOTE:
The C-17's ability to fly long distances and land in remote airfields in rough, land-locked regions make it a premier transporter for military, humanitarian and peacekeeping missions. It can:
Take off from a 7,600-ft. airfield, carry a payload of 160,000 pounds, fly 2,400 nautical miles, refuel while in flight and land in 3,000 ft. or less on a small unpaved or paved airfield in day or night.
Carry a cargo of wheeled U.S. Army vehicles in two side-by-side rows, including the U.S. Army's main battle tank, the M-1. Three Bradley infantry-fighting vehicles comprise one load.
Drop a single 60,000-lb. payload, with sequential load drops of 110,000 lb.
Back up a two-percent slope.
Seat 54 on the sidewall and 48 in the centerline.
TBM-Legend is offline