And you can bet the Army is keeping a close eye on the program. In August, the service awarded the Lockheed/Kaman team $47 million to continue work on the K-MAX program—testing was done this past fall at Ft. Benning—while wrapping up a larger study on a full range of unmanned cargo options.Now we know...or rather we can take a guess at what Army leadership is up to. Don't want to continue the C-27? Fine. We'll work with the Navy/Marines and get the aerial cargo carrier we need by the back door. Plus we'll use UAV's to do it.
The tests will help the service build a formal program of record for an unmanned vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) capability, a program which we already know Textron/AAI is very interested. Steve Reid, the company’s senior vp and general manager for unmanned systems says that the company has signed a license agreement with Carter Aviation for a manned, four-person rotary winged asset that Textron is working on turning into an unmanned asset that the company feels “would do the cargo mission that’s being talked about” quite nicely. The Navy has also been busy with other unmanned options, including awarding Northrop Grumman a contract in September to supply twenty-eight MQ-8C Fire Scout VTOL-UAS’s (based on Bell’s 407 helicopter airframe), which the company has touted for its cargo-lugging capabilities
No Key West controversy.
No risk of losing the program.
Cheaper.
More versatile.
Direct delivery without having to go through another service.
Can team with reliable partners.
Awesome.
.
And a rather large disparity in range, payload, and speed. But when the politicians give the Army lemons they have to find a way to make lemonade.
ReplyDeleteHuh? K-MAX and the C-27J serve completely different purposes and aren't even remotely comparable.
ReplyDeleteThe USAF determined that the cases where they couldn't use the C-130 and needed a smaller airlifter were fewer and further between than they thought. That made the C-27 superfluous.
In other words, the C-130 serves the Army and Marines BETTER than the C-27.
totally disagree.
ReplyDeletehow is the USAF in a position to determine what supports Army missions better than the Army?
oh and the Marines were never part of this issue. CH-53's are getting rode hard to support forward outposts....a question of AF support was never in the cards.
When it comes to airlift, the USAF is in a far better position. It's their job to maximize aircraft and airfield capabilities.
ReplyDeleteThe Army needs, "X tonnes cargo and Y soldiers per day to airfield Z."
The USAF translates that into sorties by specific types of aircraft.
Having the Army asking for a specific type of aircraft to do the job is like me asking FedEx to only send my packages via 747. I really don't care how my package gets there, as long as it does.
The forward outposts serviced by K-MAXes and CH-53s likely can't handle C-130s OR C-27s, or they would.