# New from EMBRAER...



## Aramis (Apr 16, 2010)

Hello, guys...! I've been out for quite a while. I just got this image of the newest military airplane from EMBRAER. It's the KC-390, a military transporter jet which will replace Lockheed Hercules for Brazilian Air Force and maybe other air forces around the world. I have a friend who works in this project. He said there's a good expectation for the launching of this aircraft.


----------



## Waynos (Apr 16, 2010)

Yes it looks a good prospect and I'm surprised that only Brazil and Japan seem to be going for new C-130 sized transports. I'd have thought that would be a good market to go after.

This was originally supposed to use components from Embraers E-Jet family, such as the wings and tail, but they have moved away from that and it is now all-new


----------



## Aramis (Apr 16, 2010)

Yeah, that's right. My friend from EMBRAER told me that 390's size is quite the same of that of Hercules. The original projet has been changed many times according to what he told me. Now, it seems this artistic conception is pretty much the final look of this aircraft.


----------



## Aramis (Apr 16, 2010)

You guys can more of this aircraft at Embraer Defense Systems


----------



## vikingBerserker (Apr 16, 2010)

Very cool, and I'm pretty surprised as well as the lack of interest in aircraft of this size as well.


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 16, 2010)

This is the same airplane that Sarkozy stated he would buy a few and help with the launch, and the Brazilian president announced they were buying Rafael's. Ooops, he didn't mention that Brazilan AF commanders who were hosting a run-off for the fighter competition. Politics.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Apr 16, 2010)

Interesting, interesting, would be good to replace old KC-130 fleets.



> This is the same airplane that Sarkozy stated he would buy a few and help with the launch, and the Brazilian president announced they were buying Rafael's. Ooops, he didn't mention that Brazilan AF commanders who were hosting a run-off for the fighter competition. Politics.



Do you mean Rafales ?


----------



## Waynos (Apr 16, 2010)

This image shows the evolution of the design away from E-Jet components to the new bigger wing and T-tail of the current design. Embraer are a real go-ahead company who put certain, ahem, 'more established' aircraft companies to shame,


----------



## imalko (Apr 16, 2010)

Apparently turboprop engines are no longer in favor with new military transport aircraft designs. Probably same can be said for civil aircraft too. Fairchild-Dornier 338 being one example where turoprops were replaced with turbofans.

Embraer's project looks like a good solution to air forces wanting to replace the Hercules.


----------



## Waynos (Apr 16, 2010)

Two engines should, in the main, be better than four, even if the four are turboprops, and if Embraer can install GTF's, if they are ready, then that would become an excellent prospect


----------



## pbfoot (Apr 16, 2010)

Why though?" When you have the option to get an aircraft with a pedigree and track record , the 130


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 16, 2010)

Yeah.. that's my thougts Pb. Pay for a huge build/acquisition with little market in a relatively crowded niche demand. US, Russians, Italians, Brazil and Japan? Seems a little optimistic to me. But who knows, perhaps Brazil with their "vibrant" economy has $billions lying around to fund a development lifecycle. I won't hold my breath however.


----------



## pbfoot (Apr 16, 2010)

Their have been a few attempts before


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 16, 2010)

The artist interpretation certainly looks cool! But then again so does the Japanese Kawasaki C-2 or the Russian An-70.


----------



## Waynos (Apr 17, 2010)

pbfoot said:


> Why though?" When you have the option to get an aircraft with a pedigree and track record , the 130



For which you can also read 'old'. The basic architecture of the C-130 is 56 years old already and while of course it is an excellent workhorse and proven, the modern twin turbofan or GTF formula will offer operating cost advantages if Embraer are to be believed. It will also be able to give a more rapid transit time which can be important to the military.



Matt308 said:


> Yeah.. that's my thougts Pb. Pay for a huge build/acquisition with little market in a relatively crowded niche demand. US, Russians, Italians, Brazil and Japan? Seems a little optimistic to me. But who knows, perhaps Brazil with their "vibrant" economy has $billions lying around to fund a development lifecycle. I won't hold my breath however.



The global market for medium transports is potentially huge, just look at the C-130 for a prime example. I'n not sure why you are 'down' on Embraer/Brazil? From a standing start in 1968, through light aircraft and license build deals and moving onto their own designs they are now the 'Boeing' of region jet transports and also have a good military background to go with it. I greatly admire what they have achieved and I look at BAE over the same period and just think 'phht' (lower teeth against top lip and blow  )

As to rivals, only the Japanese C-2, which looks very similar and may even have informed the redesign of the Embraer IMO, is directly comparable.

The C-27J from Italy is smaller and shorter ranged and is also a 'heritage' design having begun as a VTOL transport project 45 years ago.

The An-70 is considerably larger and yes, more capable. I think this should have been pursued by Europe in place of the troublesome A400M but thats another story, it remains to be seen whether the noise issues of the propfan can be overcome to the degree that operations over populated areas are acceptable. If not that could be a major achilles heel to sales to smaller countries with urban airbases.

So yes, of course the C-130 is the haulage king, but there is no reason it HAS to stay that way, a transport fleet is a long term buy, maybe the newcomers are banking on air forces not wanting to be flying century old designs a few decades hence?


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 17, 2010)

Waynos said:


> The global market for medium transports is potentially huge, just look at the C-130 for a prime example. I'n not sure why you are 'down' on Embraer/Brazil?



Where did you get that impression? I said nothing of the sort. I just doubt the market exists that the Brazilians can overcome the current workhorses. And the GTF certainly has potential for fuel savings, but I'm not convinced that those savings have been calculated in a lower altitude operational environment with military application. To date all claims for GTF were civilian based operations at high altitudes (FL310 and above).

And don't dismiss the turboprop so readily, Waynos. Your speed claim efficiencies are not necessarily supported with military transport operations.


----------



## pbfoot (Apr 17, 2010)

I just think the 130 is too universal to replace at this point , almost every air arm flies them in one form or another, any bird from any AF can almost be be maintained anywhere in the world just because of the infrastructure for the 130 . 
Oddly enough and being totally serious 3 just passed over in trail


----------



## Matt308 (Apr 17, 2010)

Waynos said:


> The basic architecture of the C-130 is 56 years old already



And frankly this is just stupid silly.


----------



## Waynos (Apr 18, 2010)

Matt308 said:


> Where did you get that impression? I said nothing of the sort. I just doubt the market exists that the Brazilians can overcome the current workhorses.



The end of the passage I quoted before that question seemed to be quite dismissive of the country and the viability of the project, I'm sorry I misread you. I don't share your doubts for this project though, partly for a couple of specific examples. Firstly Frances endorsement of the type (should it happen) as a C-130 replacement should carry some weight internationally as it comes from a 'first world' military power and secondly, during the recent A400M contract debacle it became increasingly obvious that the RAF, a staunch C-130 operator for over 40 years and launch customer for the current C-130J model, was not happy at the prospect of buying more C-130's for the future instead of a new type. If these attitudes are replicated elsewhere things could look rosy for both new transports in the Herc's class. 



> And the GTF certainly has potential for fuel savings, but I'm not convinced that those savings have been calculated in a lower altitude operational environment with military application. To date all claims for GTF were civilian based operations at high altitudes (FL310 and above).
> 
> And don't dismiss the turboprop so readily, Waynos. Your speed claim efficiencies are not necessarily supported with military transport operations.



Point taken on the GTF, regarding turboprops of course the A400M went this route too, but the engine manufacturers have been promising new, cheaper to operate and maintain, turbofan engines for the 2015-2020 period for the past couple of years and everything depends on their figures being correct and Embraer demonstrating a genuine advantage to their own type. Its all a bit up in the air on that one but I have seen nothing yet to justify dismissal of the project.Of course the C-130 is an old favourite and todays C-47, but that doesn't mean it will carry on forever.



Matt308 said:


> And frankly this is just stupid silly.



Why?

It flew 56 years ago, the design of the structure is older than that. It is strong and durable and trustworthy and everything BUT....airframe design has progressed a lot in the last 50+ years, moving up the size scale the architecture of the C-17 is a world away from that of the C-133. Any thought of operating the C-133 today in place of the C-17 would be seen, quite rightly, as ludicrous, so why does the C-390 have to be a non-starter?

There seems to be an assumption here that these aircraft are expected to replace every C-130 and put an end to that programme? I am not saying this will 'kill' the C-130 - I agree with pbfoots point about commonality to a large degree here - I am just saying I think it stands a reasonable chance of success in the international market. If it sells 200+ it will still be a success, even if the C-130 HAS sold more than ten times that amount. I can't see the C-130 ever being usurped as the 2nd greatest military transport in history, but that doesn't mean nobody else can also have a bit of success. It will be a C-130 replacement for those air arms that do adopt it.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Oct 8, 2010)

What about the 20 commercial E-190s bought by the argentinian line Austral ? here some photos of the first 3 arriving in buenos aires domestic airport Jorge Newbery.

I can figure out already an In-flight refueling and/or AWACS variant for the argie Air Force.


----------

