The Dutch Air Force have ordered 5 KC-390 to replace their C-130H fleet of 4, effectively doubling fixed-wing airlift capacity not only because the KC-390 can lift more, but most of all because it's a lot faster.
Yes, Lockheed Martin has been building versions of this airframe for 70 years... they know what they are doing and have it down to a science. Quality Control is all that matters here. I couldn't help but notice the video skipped over landing, taxi, and takeoff specs the whole point of a turboprop cargo aircraft... also strap on 18k pounds of fuel via external tanks.
Well no. Hercules has better range and fuel efficiency per mile. There may also be other considerations not mentioned like take off distance and landing distance the Hercules is likely to be better at based on wing profile and slower speed. These are important consideration in military aircraft where runway lengths may be short. I’d also bet the Hercules can take off and land on less refined runway surfaces based in the landing gear of the C390.
Dear Mr. Anthony Warwick (6090): Please don't manipulate on what I said .... The KC-390 outperforms the C-130 in every category except flying low and slow. The only important consideration for the American government regarding the sale of US military hardware is to coerce others by any means, in doing what Washington wants them to do ... putting it simply. The KC-390 outperforms the C-130 in every category. Questions ???
@@costinhadacosta8474 manipulate ? All I said was that for a military aircraft the Hercules J has other considerations that may make it more favourable depending on what you need it to do. Special Forces love the Hercules J and I has a range of features that suit it for hostile environments. More engines and redundancy for starters. Hercules is a tough and reliable hombre.
@@anthonywarwick6090Well, it seems that many European and Asian countries have other interests, such as low costs, flexibility, fast operations and high availability!
@@anthonywarwick6090 No, not even those categories, the KC-390 has better flight range and fuel economy, the KC-390 has already done several tests on improvised and short runways and was successful, there are famous videos of the KC-390 on a dirt runway
KC-390 is much newer than C-130 so of course, it's going to be better than the old C-130 (and A400M) in almost every aspect. One key advantage that wasn't mentioned is that KC-390 uses only 2 engines while C-130 has 4 engines. This is a huge cost factor in terms of purchase and maintenance. Unless Lockheed introduces a new model, KC-390 holds the crown in this segment. Actually, a better comparison to KC-390 would be another newer plane, Kawasaki C-2, which is a slightly bigger plane than KC-390. Between the two, KC-390 is better because it's 40% cheaper in price. Ultimately, which plane one chooses will depend on the primary purpose. C-2 is bigger so can carry more but costs more. Personally, I think KC-390 is better for military purpose and C-2 for humanitarian aid purpose. I like KC-390 best because it's smaller and faster, which means less chance of getting shot down. Lockheed and Airbus got complacent and allowed Embraer to enter this segment. Embraer is now the standard to beat in this market.
I agree with you, but why do you add the A 400M? It´s in a higher class, designed to carry the German Puma IFV. If you want to compare the A400M then pls use the Japanese Airlifter, it is in the same range as the A400M.
I kinda wondered if knew what you were talkiing about or just putting some factoids out. I knew when youbsaid the J has a better windpspan your just facting and thats cool. Im a tactical airlift pilot. I fly the J the fact thst we have a longer wingspan is no a win as this would become more limiting to austere landing sites...trees etc..gotta remember its about how well the tool can used for its itended purpose. I see these comparisoon come up alot...one big difference with us having props is immediate blown lift and thrust response vs the turbo fan engine on the 390. Take those into consideration too.
@@Chris_at_Home Of course the C-17 as a heavy strategic airlifter beats the C-390. The C-390 is much more comparable with the C-130J, A400M and other such medium-sized tactical airlifters.
KC 390 is only for peacetime - only 2 engines makes it to risky for combat zone transportation especially under heavy ground fire. The Hercules is proofed thousand battletimes , the KC 390 looks nice on paper but has never taken one bullet....
How about losing an engine? What about loitering time? If you think Lockheed hasn't thought about the jet competition , you're clearly mistaken. There are so many variables with both planes and each plane will have its strengths and weaknesses. I hope the KC-390 does well, but the C-130 has earned its place and will not easily be replaced.
Hello, Mr. Todd! I'm pretty sure that bird can still fly without one of its engines. That's the level of quality and reliability we're dealing with these days. Anyways, have a nice day!
The Herk will still be flying and serving when these things are in the boneyard. You'll never get a jet with a supercritical wing to do the short field tactical airlift mission that the C-130 was designed to do. Fact.
The C-130J is a modern aircraft and only has about 50% of the part commonality from the original models. It has a glass cockpit, head ups display, improved wing and engines.
What happens if you need to land your jet plane on something other than cement? Unfortunately, wars and natural disasters are not always next to an airport.
Embrarer is a good company this jet will serve many countries well. But the 130 has been doing it for nearly 70 years.We a;so have larger globe masters and the galaxies so the US is positioned best out of all for logistics.
while the KC gets there faster the Hercules is lumbering along, making a wider target while carrying about the same load. The world cant wait for the Hercules to get there. 2023 vs 1950.
What about the difference between the two when it comes to Strat verses Tactical airlift? The CC130 was designed for austere locations, dirt runways, tactical airlift. Can the KC390 do the same as the CC130 when it comes to that? By the looks of the swept wings, the CC130 would beat the KC390 hands down! For strat airlift most countries use the C17, for tactical airlift the CC130 wins!
What utter BS, you fail to mention runway surfaces and take off and landing length requirements. Also Sweden and South Africa have not bought this plane and the EU favours the A400.
The KC390 is clearly a winner.The only problem is it is not American, and Embraer is not one of the military industrial complexes that monopolized the US defense for so long. The US should swallow pride and ask to produce the KC390 under license.Otherwise, the loser is American taxpayer ...😅😅😅😅
i'd take C-130J over it as i just love the herc. plus for transport i'd take the A400M C-2 C-17. the US would never buy it as we have our own and i'm sure Lockheed is already working on a C-130J replacement
Currently working on a C-130J replacement? Sigh. Why is our timing always so bad!? Indian Air Force just put out a contract for 80 planes in the medium category and C-130J, A-400M and C-390 are competing. Although I don't think IAF will go for C-130J as we already operate 12 of them. But if LM is working on a replacement, would have been great to get those instead. Now it seems it'll either be A-400M or C-390. Something similar had happened when IAF had tried to purchase more C-17 after the initial 10. The line shut down and in the end only one more was ordered. And now we are short on heavy lifters (only got 11 C-17 and 17 aging Il-76, instead of the 25 C-17 initially envisaged) in the IAF with no options in the market. :(
The Herc has turboprops which run at 100% rpm so the lag when moving the power levers forward it is much faster than waiting for a turbofan to spool up. Also the turboprop will have better takeoff and landing performance on shorter runways. It’s a common fact.
actually is the other way around. The old american c-130J costs twice as much as the brazilian KC-390. I'm portuguese so I know my country wouldn't buy an aircraft more expensive.
@@Macvallesantos1 Sorry, but that is not correct. The C-390 is less expensive than the A400M which I believe is about $170-180 million. Austria recently purchased some C-390 to be delivered in roughly 2027 and they paid 130 million Euros ($140 million). - Remember the C-130J facility has been around for over 50 years and all the manufacturing equipment and jigs only need modifying when the plane is upgraded so there are a lot less initial costs. Also jet engines are expensive compared to propeller engines. However, the maintenance cost for the C-390 (2 engines) is about the same as the C-130J (4 engines). Note that the purchase cost of the plane is only 30% of the entire cost of owning and operating the planes for 20-30 years. 70% of the cost is fuel and maintenance. Also the speed advantage of the KC-390 is something your country thought worth paying for. The US doesn't need C-130 to be as fast as it has the C-17 when speed is needed. The C-390 is a good plane.
@@Macvallesantos1This is a second reply. I have found confusing information on price with one stating 50 million, 85 million and the 140 million as mentioned before. I think the 50 million may have been the price the Brazilian Gov paid (guessing), Portugal paid 85 million, still a good price, and the higher price to other countries. So, 85 million per plane as maybe Portugal's government may have help pay for the development costs. It is a good price for Portugal and Brazil.
It will depend on who is buying, but on average both have the same price, we have to remember that some Hercules spread across some countries were not bought new from the factory but resold, which could reduce the price.
South Korea already bought KC390
Claro ! Ele é melhor que o hércules.
The Dutch Air Force have ordered 5 KC-390 to replace their C-130H fleet of 4, effectively doubling fixed-wing airlift capacity not only because the KC-390 can lift more, but most of all because it's a lot faster.
Yes, Lockheed Martin has been building versions of this airframe for 70 years... they know what they are doing and have it down to a science. Quality Control is all that matters here.
I couldn't help but notice the video skipped over landing, taxi, and takeoff specs the whole point of a turboprop cargo aircraft... also strap on 18k pounds of fuel via external tanks.
Seems like the KC-390 wins in every category.
Well no. Hercules has better range and fuel efficiency per mile. There may also be other considerations not mentioned like take off distance and landing distance the Hercules is likely to be better at based on wing profile and slower speed. These are important consideration in military aircraft where runway lengths may be short. I’d also bet the Hercules can take off and land on less refined runway surfaces based in the landing gear of the C390.
Dear Mr. Anthony Warwick (6090): Please don't manipulate on what I said .... The KC-390 outperforms the C-130 in every category except flying low and slow. The only important consideration for the American government regarding the sale of US military hardware is to coerce others by any means, in doing what Washington wants them to do ... putting it simply. The KC-390 outperforms the C-130 in every category. Questions ???
@@costinhadacosta8474 manipulate ? All I said was that for a military aircraft the Hercules J has other considerations that may make it more favourable depending on what you need it to do. Special Forces love the Hercules J and I has a range of features that suit it for hostile environments. More engines and redundancy for starters. Hercules is a tough and reliable hombre.
@@anthonywarwick6090Well, it seems that many European and Asian countries have other interests, such as low costs, flexibility, fast operations and high availability!
@@anthonywarwick6090 No, not even those categories, the KC-390 has better flight range and fuel economy, the KC-390 has already done several tests on improvised and short runways and was successful, there are famous videos of the KC-390 on a dirt runway
KC-390 is much newer than C-130 so of course, it's going to be better than the old C-130 (and A400M) in almost every aspect. One key advantage that wasn't mentioned is that KC-390 uses only 2 engines while C-130 has 4 engines. This is a huge cost factor in terms of purchase and maintenance. Unless Lockheed introduces a new model, KC-390 holds the crown in this segment. Actually, a better comparison to KC-390 would be another newer plane, Kawasaki C-2, which is a slightly bigger plane than KC-390. Between the two, KC-390 is better because it's 40% cheaper in price. Ultimately, which plane one chooses will depend on the primary purpose. C-2 is bigger so can carry more but costs more. Personally, I think KC-390 is better for military purpose and C-2 for humanitarian aid purpose. I like KC-390 best because it's smaller and faster, which means less chance of getting shot down. Lockheed and Airbus got complacent and allowed Embraer to enter this segment. Embraer is now the standard to beat in this market.
I agree with you, but why do you add the A 400M? It´s in a higher class, designed to carry the German Puma IFV. If you want to compare the A400M then pls use the Japanese Airlifter, it is in the same range as the A400M.
😂😂😂 the size has nothing to do with being shot down by advance hand held anti aircraft weapon you are such a 🤡🤡
KC 390 Milenium is the best value for money. Fly further, higher and faster
No its range is less than the 130 which is 3500 miles.But none the less the KC is newer technology and is selling well.
I kinda wondered if knew what you were talkiing about or just putting some factoids out. I knew when youbsaid the J has a better windpspan your just facting and thats cool. Im a tactical airlift pilot. I fly the J the fact thst we have a longer wingspan is no a win as this would become more limiting to austere landing sites...trees etc..gotta remember its about how well the tool can used for its itended purpose. I see these comparisoon come up alot...one big difference with us having props is immediate blown lift and thrust response vs the turbo fan engine on the 390. Take those into consideration too.
Yup this is definitely a marketing propaganda fir the kc 390 it sid not even mention other aspect of why its better
Apenas o americano não vai enxergar vantagens no KC390
Americanos odeiam assumir que os outros são melhores.
@@VinicioBr então porque eles têm vários Super Tucanos da Embraer?
We have the C-17 that beats the 390 in everything.
@@Chris_at_Home Of course the C-17 as a heavy strategic airlifter beats the C-390. The C-390 is much more comparable with the C-130J, A400M and other such medium-sized tactical airlifters.
KC390 é melhor, mais moderno e de manutenção barata - KC is better, more modern and cheap to maintain
*Kc 390 is best !*
*No comparations!*
You...Você precisa mesmo que eu fale qual é o melhor?? Kkk, o kc 390é super...
KC 390 is only for peacetime - only 2 engines makes it to risky for combat zone transportation especially under heavy ground fire. The Hercules is proofed thousand battletimes , the KC 390 looks nice on paper but has never taken one bullet....
How about losing an engine? What about loitering time? If you think Lockheed hasn't thought about the jet competition , you're clearly mistaken. There are so many variables with both planes and each plane will have its strengths and weaknesses. I hope the KC-390 does well, but the C-130 has earned its place and will not easily be replaced.
Com lobby dos Estados Unidos, não mesmo
C390 Millenium é o futuro C130 Hércules é o passado.
Até a Boeing já se interessou pelo C390 🤥
Hello, Mr. Todd! I'm pretty sure that bird can still fly without one of its engines. That's the level of quality and reliability we're dealing with these days. Anyways, have a nice day!
@@tiagodesouza1160 Portugese?
This doesn't seem to be how many countries in Europe and Asia think these days!
the Super H C-130 is a old concept airplane. Fact.
It shd.read "which", not "what". Pls correct.
The Herk will still be flying and serving when these things are in the boneyard. You'll never get a jet with a supercritical wing to do the short field tactical airlift mission that the C-130 was designed to do. Fact.
Thankyou for using standard measurement.
How many paratroopers it csn take both ? And how Many troops it can transport both ??
IF usa need compet avast KC390, must be made obter and modern air crack. Kc390 is a future.
The C-130J is a modern aircraft and only has about 50% of the part commonality from the original models. It has a glass cockpit, head ups display, improved wing and engines.
What happens if you need to land your jet plane on something other than cement? Unfortunately, wars and natural disasters are not always next to an airport.
No problem to use provisional airstrips.
Embrarer is a good company this jet will serve many countries well. But the 130 has been doing it for nearly 70 years.We a;so have larger globe masters and the galaxies so the US is positioned best out of all for logistics.
while the KC gets there faster the Hercules is lumbering along, making a wider target while carrying about the same load. The world cant wait for the Hercules to get there. 2023 vs 1950.
Depends on what you are doing , eg for maritime servalence, sometimes slower is better.
What about the difference between the two when it comes to Strat verses Tactical airlift? The CC130 was designed for austere locations, dirt runways, tactical airlift. Can the KC390 do the same as the CC130 when it comes to that? By the looks of the swept wings, the CC130 would beat the KC390 hands down! For strat airlift most countries use the C17, for tactical airlift the CC130 wins!
The KC-390 was designed to operate from the same locations as the C-130.
www.airway.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/kc-390-unpaved-1.jpg
Kc390 is the best.
Sweden ordered 6 units.
Depende! For the ones who believe in Santos Dumont as the father of aviation is the KC-390, to the others maybe the Whrigh brothers... is Kc130
KC-390 IS BETTER !
The coping from the Americans in these comments is hilarious
Same on every video.
What utter BS, you fail to mention runway surfaces and take off and landing length requirements. Also Sweden and South Africa have not bought this plane and the EU favours the A400.
The KC390 is clearly a winner.The only problem is it is not American, and Embraer is not one of the military industrial complexes that monopolized the US defense for so long.
The US should swallow pride and ask to produce the KC390 under license.Otherwise, the loser is American taxpayer ...😅😅😅😅
Why would the USA buy a 390 when it has the C-17 that makes the 390 look like a toy.
@@Chris_at_Home c17 is heavy lifter....
390 compared with C130 as medium transports, and
130 lost
The Airbus A400 is the best!
i'd take C-130J over it as i just love the herc. plus for transport i'd take the A400M C-2 C-17. the US would never buy it as we have our own and i'm sure Lockheed is already working on a C-130J replacement
Currently working on a C-130J replacement? Sigh. Why is our timing always so bad!? Indian Air Force just put out a contract for 80 planes in the medium category and C-130J, A-400M and C-390 are competing. Although I don't think IAF will go for C-130J as we already operate 12 of them. But if LM is working on a replacement, would have been great to get those instead. Now it seems it'll either be A-400M or C-390.
Something similar had happened when IAF had tried to purchase more C-17 after the initial 10. The line shut down and in the end only one more was ordered. And now we are short on heavy lifters (only got 11 C-17 and 17 aging Il-76, instead of the 25 C-17 initially envisaged) in the IAF with no options in the market. :(
Die c- 130 hat tatsächlich Vorteile gegenüber der KC-390.
?????
Kürzere Start-Landestrecke!
The herc turbo fans can't operate in man areas
The Herc has turboprops which run at 100% rpm so the lag when moving the power levers forward it is much faster than waiting for a turbofan to spool up. Also the turboprop will have better takeoff and landing performance on shorter runways. It’s a common fact.
😢😢😢😢😢😢😢A 400 M😉
C-130J cost about $70 million while the C-390 costs about $140 million. That should have been mentioned in the video.
actually is the other way around. The old american c-130J costs twice as much as the brazilian KC-390. I'm portuguese so I know my country wouldn't buy an aircraft more expensive.
@@Macvallesantos1 Sorry, but that is not correct. The C-390 is less expensive than the A400M which I believe is about $170-180 million. Austria recently purchased some C-390 to be delivered in roughly 2027 and they paid 130 million Euros ($140 million). - Remember the C-130J facility has been around for over 50 years and all the manufacturing equipment and jigs only need modifying when the plane is upgraded so there are a lot less initial costs. Also jet engines are expensive compared to propeller engines. However, the maintenance cost for the C-390 (2 engines) is about the same as the C-130J (4 engines). Note that the purchase cost of the plane is only 30% of the entire cost of owning and operating the planes for 20-30 years. 70% of the cost is fuel and maintenance. Also the speed advantage of the KC-390 is something your country thought worth paying for. The US doesn't need C-130 to be as fast as it has the C-17 when speed is needed. The C-390 is a good plane.
@@Macvallesantos1This is a second reply. I have found confusing information on price with one stating 50 million, 85 million and the 140 million as mentioned before. I think the 50 million may have been the price the Brazilian Gov paid (guessing), Portugal paid 85 million, still a good price, and the higher price to other countries. So, 85 million per plane as maybe Portugal's government may have help pay for the development costs. It is a good price for Portugal and Brazil.
It will depend on who is buying, but on average both have the same price, we have to remember that some Hercules spread across some countries were not bought new from the factory but resold, which could reduce the price.
Con el hercules ,temetes a cualquier tormenta ,y se lanperez prado ,con sus 4 motores y en conbate si pierde dos puede seguir volando
Mexicans all flexing in the comments cause they finally made one aircraft that's only slightly better than one that's 70 years old. 🤣
O melhor é o Kawasaki C2!
O Kawasaki é de outra categoria, maior que os dois! Não cabe a comparação. Está mais para o A400M.
O C2 não é desta categoria
Thankyou for using standard measurement.