"requires de icing..." so what?
Do you actually understand the implications of keeping an aircraft as large as the A330 de-iced to the extent necessary to maintain the required RS? Given hold-over times and the number of available de-icing rigs, it would be like painting the Forth bridge...(as it used to be). The volume of de-icing fluid and austerity of the location make such an option very, very difficult and expensive - which is why the '10 would go into the hangar in poor weather. Not an option with the Voyager.
Beagle, are you really telling us specifications should be drawn up on the basis of the dimensions of one hangar?
Hardly. But if we're serious about defending Bennyland, the contractual decision to restrict AAR provision to an aircraft manifestly unsuitable in such an 'operational'
theatre was ridiculous. Consideration should have been given to converting a C-130J or two into a single-point tanker, pending A400M.
With your logic, I can only assume that you work in MB....
Evalu8ter, I didn't realise that the Chinook had been redeployed - or that AAR hasn't been considered necessary for the future RW fleet.....