@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 I may be wrong, some extremely harsh environments like Antarctica may still need them. Also, I believe that they still use only propeller airplanes to fly into the eyes of hurricanes.
@@citylimits8927 they fly 767s and 787s into Antarctica. I don’t think a 4 engine aircraft has an advantage. The C-130s going through a hurricane, have specific design features to become a hurricane hunter. At the time when they started doing that, all the best choice was the C-130. But I don’t think that has anything to do with having props. But maybe I’m wrong. I’m not an expert in Hurricane Hunters.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 Yes they fly them to Antarctica, but I don’t think they fly them to the South Pole. I believe that they still use only Hercules Aircraft for that role, unless that’s changed.
Amigos uma coisa é certa Aqui em meu país. o número de engenheiro aeroespacial que a boeing tem tirado da Embraer e grande, ainda sim continuamos produzindo engenheiros incríveis, a boeing já levou mais de 300 engenheiros da EMBRAER ,sem falar que o Brasil e um celeiro de engenheiros, basta ver o sucesso comercial da Embraer,as tecnologias desenvolvidas em parceria com empresas internacional, o c-390 e o primeiro de uma série de inovação tecnológica e segurança na aviação,tanto no campo militar como não aviação comercial, não digo isso por ser brasileiro não!, porque creio que competência e genialidade não tem nacionalidade e uma riqueza da humanidade em pro de nosso desenvolvimento. Enquanto vc vê acidentes como.o da boeing Max 8 ( erro de engenharia comprovada ), vc não vê acidentes envolvendo aviões da Embraer, não que não haverá, porque a um ser humano no cockpit, mais tudo e pensado e desenvolvido em pro da segurança e da tecnologia primeiro, para quem não sabe a aviões da família e-jets da Embraer que a fuselagem e feita de fibra de carbono a mesma dos carros de corrida . Abraço a todos .
The 130 J model has not been around for many decades. It has only been in service since the1990s, The older 130s have been around for decades but the J model is relatively new
I studied about the C-390 and it really is a great contender for C-130J. Anyway, Boeing is more embroiled in its internal conflicts. However I must say, terms like "destroy" are very sensational so I think a professional video on an educational topic should have a more appropriate title.
I'm sure this is a great aircraft, but the dirt landing requirements art way better in a C-130. 3000 ft for the C 130 vs. 4920 fro thhe C-390. That and the high stall speed of the C- 390 are going to be of concern to mission planners.
It only took 69 years to come up with a replacement. Let’s see if it can beat the C130. It may become a legend in its own right but it can’t destroy the awesome record that made the C130 a legend.
I have no problem with Embraer, they have done some impressive work with aircraft, I've flown on them many times, but this replacing the C-130J?? Um...nope. Maybe for some more budget constrained forces. And I'm a former C-130 loadmaster with 2,000 hours, Also these AI narrated videos are annoying.
My motto is, "If it ain't broke don't fix it!" C130 works just fine. 4 engines are more reliable than 2. Lose one engine on the C390 is half the thrust gone. Lose one engine on the C130 and you still have 75% thrust left. That and I love the awesome sound of a C130.
Cargo compartment is not wide enough, nor long enough. The aircrafts weight capacity is lacking. The loadmaster does more than operate the cargo ramp. Are the pilot and co-pilot going to load, unload the aircraft and do the weight and balance, make sure the cargo is secure. Reconfigure the aircraft for mission requirements in 2.5 hours? Take care of the passengers during flights and inflight emergencies? Have time for the their duties. I think not!
Nope. The A400M is far larger. The C390 will be a viable alternative to the C-130, especially given that hardly any Hercules customers routinely land on sand strips. Turbofans suck. Literally.
@@marcg1686 See, that is the sort of thing I didn't know. Which is why I would be interested to see a 3 way comparison. If only to make the point they are in different classes. But, C-390 and is jet while both C-130 and C-390 are both turbo props ... or am I wrong?
@@joblo341 The C-130 and A400M are both turboprops. Turboprops are better suited to tactical operations. The C390 will chew up a landing strip quicker than a turboprop because the pilots will use the brakes more and reverse thrust less. This is what happened in Afghanistan with the C-17. Integrating a prop/engine combination on a wing is way more complicated than integrating a commercial turbofan. It took Antonov ten years to get the propeller integrated on the AN70. And they know a thing or three about aircraft design. The C-130J was almost cancelled and all they had to do was integrate new propellers on a 35 year old design.
Can it land and takeoff from an aircraft carrier? The C-130 can and has! The 390 looks like a combination of a C-130 and C-17 no matter how you look at it.
Yes, it can. The thrust force of the KC is much stronger than the C-130's propellers. The KC needs one-third less runway to take off compared to the Hercules. 😆
@@paulowolanski3868 it’s never done it, therefore it can’t be claimed that it can. The C-130 can takeoff much faster if utilizing JATO. Either way there’s a reason the C-130 has been so successful and why it has remained a turboprop aircraft instead of being converted to turbofan. We can wait to see how the 390 does if it ever serves as long as the C-130. Until then it’s all speculation and claims. The video claims the 390 has much more advanced avionics as if the C-130 wasn’t in production anymore. New C-130 are outfitted with the latest and greatest avionics. Now that doesn’t mean export C-130’s get all the same systems as the US military gets. I never said the 390 wasn’t a nice looking aircraft because it is nor am I claiming it’s a bad aircraft because I’m sure it’s not. After all look at what it based on. Truthfully it should be compared to the C-17 since its turbofan.
Only about 50% of the parts used on the J model are the same as the original. It has been modernized with heads up display and a digital cockpit. 500 J models have been delivered as of a couple years ago and the 2,700 C-130 was just delivered. I don’t think it is going away or from a bygone era. Let’s see is 2,700 390s get built.
What is the minimum airspeed before it nosedives? Paratroops have to jump at 225 kph airspeed? C-130 is a great platform for paratroops. I wonder about this one. I don't know. I'd rather jump a 130. If I was needing to, that is. Which I'm not.
This sounds like a Sales add! The 130 was made for military, landing and taking off in a short distance. The 130 flies in hurricanes, the 130 has proven itself for 70yrs.
The KC-390, with its state-of-the-art avionics, flies higher, farther and faster than the neighborhood retiree. It can carry much more cargo and is cheaper than the C-130. Lockheed doesn't need luck, but a miracle, or at least another 8 or 9 years on the drawing board and prototyping to be able to launch a competitor worthy of the "new kid on the block".
MDS os estadunidenses falando em sabotagem, geopolítica só porque um país da América do Sul inovou e fez algo melhor que eles, tratando nós como latinos vira latas ! Somos latinos por uma questão de idioma, isso não nós torna inferior a ninguém ! O continente é um só, do norte do Canadá ao sul da Argentina somos todos americanos ! Sobre geopolítica só vou citar algumas iniciais B.R.I.C.S. Parabéns Embraer, referência mundial e orgulho nacional de norte a sul do Brasil.
C-17 want-a-bee's that's all they are, 390 is a jet, not a turbo-prop.. The Hurk, The Buff, The Bone, and the Thunder-Bolt 2 _ When your on Model 10 and have as many years on the same airframe.. Maybe.. American Aerospace - We'r still leading that race... The Hurk is your best friends 1976 Dodge in that it's rugged combat tested truck of a cargo plane.. And it dropping off much need supplies, or people into a runt dirt farm of an airstrip. Where only the helicopters come.. Jet's don't like rocks sand size or otherwise.. LONG LIVE THE HURK
Worse Brazil isn't even an allie. You would think that by now we would know that making deals with foreign companies for military supplies is best avoided.
Yes, if you wanna find god faster, like in boeing masterbuilt planes, the pride and joy made in “America” by trainees for the benefit of wall street shareholders. Wake up, we are not on the 60s anymore.
why you don’t use anymore your typewriter? 100 years proving mankind is wrong in changing to computers, since typewriter worked fine all long this time.
Such rubbish. It won’t “destroy” the C-130. It may replace certain functions but simply cannot replace the modern C-130H. Do your homework before you publish nonsense like this.
I appreciate your perspective. The C-130 has a long-standing reputation, and replacing it isn't an easy task. However, it's interesting because it can destroy the C-130 at some different roles
Ledo engano, a marinha América já fez teste de avaliação muito positiva sobre o kc-390, e ficaram impressionado, podem sim comprar o porque não? Segurança nacional? Se for esse motivo fútil vindo de um país amigo e aliado, então não devemos comprar aviões da boeing !!! Segurança nacional tbm.
USA NÃO COMPRAM PORQUE SÃO ARROGANTES, MAS AGORA ENCONTRAM UM CONCORRENTE MELHOR QUE ELES, E AGORA QUE USA ESTÃO SE CAGANDO DE MEDO DA RÚSSIA E DA CHINA, MAS AGORA TA ACABANDO A ARROGÂNCIA
@@gilsantos3021 You’re wrong mate… Embraer owns a company in portugal (OGMA) that manufactures parts for this airplane, but it still was engineered and made in brazil.
I had to check and see if I made this comment! 😇 I don't understand why they don't use measurements that are used in that particular industry world wide. This guy jumps from KPH for the Embraer to MPH for American built aircraft. I'm pretty sure they use knots for the most part. Just like marine.
The KC-390, with its state-of-the-art avionics, flies higher, farther and faster than C-130. It can carry much more cargo and is cheaper than the C-130. Enjoy!
I doubt it. The C130 has 2 major advantages. Turbofans might give this thing better overall performance and cruise efficiency, but the C130's turboprop gives it the advantage when the plane is flying low and slow, which is important, for example, when you're trying to get the plane into and out of small, remote dirt fields. This video makes the claim that the C390 can land in 1.5km, but a loaded C130 can do the same in just over 750m, a little more than half the distance. Reminder that the C130 is the plane that managed to take off and land on an aircraft carrier. The C130 also has the advantage of being really old, and really common. Old means spare parts and institutional knowledge on how maintain the plane is everywhere. Common means economies of scale makes spare parts really cheap. You also can't ignore the politics, because buying military equipment is ultimately a political question. Russia isn't buying F35s no matter how much it outclasses their own domestic designs, and the US is ultimately just has far more clout than Brazil. This thing might be useful for smaller air forces that could benefit from combining a long range transport with a more tactical transport, but for a larger force like the US military or the larger European militaries, that can afford fleets of C17s, the A400m is a better direct replacement for the C130.
Thats the reason why Germany and France bought the C130J as addition to the A400M. The A400m is no replacement for the C130 bcause it's much bigger and needs bigger air fields
Eu concordo que o C-130 é um avião que cumpre muito bem seu papel, porém o que faz o C-390, melhor, é a sua adaptação instantânea a qualquer missão, dentro da proposta da categoria... Este avião (C390), pode no mesmo dia transportar tropas, combater incêndios, reabastecer outras aeronaves, fazer salvamentos, o transformar em ambulância etc.
@@adeniltonfilgueira Which is why smaller militaries might like it, but larger militaries still won't adopt it. To begin with, "transport", rescue", and "air ambulance" are basically the same thing. As for refueling and firefighting, larger countries like the US or UK already have dedicated aircraft to do that. They don't need multirole aircraft, they have the need and ability to pay for more effective, specialized aircraft.
The Embraer New C-390 like this same just like Rafale's fighter plane and AIRBUS A330mrtt, A400m, Helicopter & fighter plane that will destroy Hercules plane, BOEING KC-46 Pegasus and BOEING's fighter plane for Indonesian National Army Air Force future.
Did I just watch two versions of the same video pasted together? The second half pretty much repeated most everything stated in the first half. I don't think this clunker will live up to what you claim. It's a brand new toy with lots of fancy pants electronics and such but, lose on engine or have an electrical failure and you are skating on thin ice. Also, it cannot go backwards on the ground nor can it deal with sand and dirt as easily as the C-130 because jets don't like dirt and stones! A few of those sucked into the engines and it becomes nothing but a truck on the ground or a storage unit. One thing that the AC-130 can do that this tin toy cannot do is loiter with lots of fire power waiting to make things interesting for the bad guys. I'm certain that the guys designing this thing never even considered such an adventure. I guess we will just have to wait and see how it works out over time. Somehow, I doubt it will be in production for over 50 years, though.
Be cool, gi joe, four engines, time has shown that it is an unnecessary redundancy and that it doubles the cost of this element, with an insignificant statistical advantage in terms of safety. In fact, the Kc-390 was designed to work on a general category engine, used in civil aviation, so that maintenance and replacement can be done anywhere. Projects today must strive for maximum efficiency at the lowest possible cost, without compromising safety, something that Boeing and Lockheed do not do today. The F-35 went into production with an endless list of design flaws and the government had to use all its policy to push these planes to NATO countries. As for Boeing, there is no need to say anything, to satisfy the greed of Wall Street, how many lives has it already cost?
The C-130J has had a good run, but the C-390 is the future of military transport. It’s amazing to see this level of innovation!
Never thought I’d see a serious competitor to the C-130J, but the C-390 is definitely up for the challenge!
thanks for your feedback
There may be situations where there is no substitute for four engines, but the C-390 is a major achievement for the Brazilians!
Yes!!
What situation would that be?
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 I may be wrong, some extremely harsh environments like Antarctica may still need them. Also, I believe that they still use only propeller airplanes to fly into the eyes of hurricanes.
@@citylimits8927 they fly 767s and 787s into Antarctica. I don’t think a 4 engine aircraft has an advantage.
The C-130s going through a hurricane, have specific design features to become a hurricane hunter. At the time when they started doing that, all the best choice was the C-130. But I don’t think that has anything to do with having props. But maybe I’m wrong. I’m not an expert in Hurricane Hunters.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 Yes they fly them to Antarctica, but I don’t think they fly them to the South Pole. I believe that they still use only Hercules Aircraft for that role, unless that’s changed.
The C-390’s adaptability is what sets it apart. This could be the start of a new era in military transport.
it’s going to redefine the standards for cargo planes
Amigos uma coisa é certa Aqui em meu país. o número de engenheiro aeroespacial que a boeing tem tirado da Embraer e grande, ainda sim continuamos produzindo engenheiros incríveis, a boeing já levou mais de 300 engenheiros da EMBRAER ,sem falar que o Brasil e um celeiro de engenheiros, basta ver o sucesso comercial da Embraer,as tecnologias desenvolvidas em parceria com empresas internacional, o c-390 e o primeiro de uma série de inovação tecnológica e segurança na aviação,tanto no campo militar como não aviação comercial, não digo isso por ser brasileiro não!, porque creio que competência e genialidade não tem nacionalidade e uma riqueza da humanidade em pro de nosso desenvolvimento. Enquanto vc vê acidentes como.o da boeing Max 8 ( erro de engenharia comprovada ), vc não vê acidentes envolvendo aviões da Embraer, não que não haverá, porque a um ser humano no cockpit, mais tudo e pensado e desenvolvido em pro da segurança e da tecnologia primeiro, para quem não sabe a aviões da família e-jets da Embraer que a fuselagem e feita de fibra de carbono a mesma dos carros de corrida . Abraço a todos .
As an aviation enthusiast, I love seeing new players like the C-390 push the boundaries. Can’t wait to see it in action!
same here, so excited
The C-390’s speed and versatility are impressive. This might be the boost military logistics need!
✈️✈️
The C-390 is showing that Embraer means business. This could be a turning point in military aviation.
Seeing how the C-390 stacks up against the C-130J is fascinating. Looks like we’re witnessing history in the making!
Looks like Embraer has created a real game-changer with the C-390. The competition just got tougher!
True
Embraer really outdid themselves with the C-390. Can’t wait to see how it changes the game.
same
The C-390’s performance stats are insane! This could shift the balance in military transport.
maybe
Never thought I’d see a worthy rival to the C-130J, but the C-390 is making a strong case.
agree
The C-130J has served us well for decades, but the C-390 looks like it’s ready to take over.
yep thanks for sharing your thoughts
Thanks for all nice Videos✈️
many thanks for your support
The C-130J is a legend, but it’s exciting to see what the C-390 brings to the table. Competition is always good for innovation.
yep thanks for your feedback
Embraer really stepped up with the C-390. The U.S. should definitely keep an eye on this one.
✈✈✈
The US military will never buy a foreign aircraft.
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 Will it be? USA acquired EMB-314 SUPER TUCANO.
The C-130J will always have a place in history, but the C-390 might just be the future.
fact
The better all round is still the C - 130, together with decades of more use, production and design experience, that is the logical conclusion.
@@thezaethundermaker8612 just because you want. 😂
If the C-390 keeps outperforming like this, it’s going to redefine the standards for cargo planes.
This could be a turning point in military aviation.
It’s not often you see a new aircraft with the potential to dethrone a classic like the C-130J.
👍👍
thanks for sharing your thoughts
130+130+130=390 🤔 ......Kc390 três vezes melhor....
O C130 representa o passado
KC 390 representa o futuro...😏👍
This is a wake-up call for Lockheed Martin. Time to innovate or get left behind!
C-130J is good too
@@FLIGAVIA When we buy a product do we want good or excellent? not to mention the value
The C-130J has been reliable, but the C-390 is bringing a whole new level of efficiency. Exciting times ahead!
cant wait
The versatility of the C-390 is impressive. It’s going to give the C-130J a run for its money.
thanks for feedback my friend
The 130 J model has not been around for many decades. It has only been in service since the1990s, The older 130s have been around for decades but the J model is relatively new
I studied about the C-390 and it really is a great contender for C-130J. Anyway, Boeing is more embroiled in its internal conflicts. However I must say, terms like "destroy" are very sensational so I think a professional video on an educational topic should have a more appropriate title.
Thanks a lot for your feedback!
It’s impressive to see a new aircraft challenge the C-130J. The C-390 seems like a real game-changer.
that's a great one
I'm sure this is a great aircraft, but the dirt landing requirements art way better in a C-130. 3000 ft for the C 130 vs. 4920 fro thhe C-390. That and the high stall speed of the C- 390 are going to be of concern to mission planners.
The C-130. Delivering passengers to the worst places on earth in the worst conditions for the last 60 years.
It only took 69 years to come up with a replacement. Let’s see if it can beat the C130. It may become a legend in its own right but it can’t destroy the awesome record that made the C130 a legend.
True.
Great plane !
True!
SECOND PROBLEM: STOL, let's see it back up.
SANTOS DUMON WAS THE FIRST TO PILOT A MOTORIZED MACHINE THAT TOOK OFF AND LANDED IN FRANCE IN PARIS. YOU NEVER SAY THAT, DO YOU????
Santos Dumont ... he first flew a airship round Paris then flew his Bis canard .. fixed wing aircraft. 🧙🏻♂️🇬🇧
O melhor Avião do mundo na sua categoria.
I have no problem with Embraer, they have done some impressive work with aircraft, I've flown on them many times, but this replacing the C-130J?? Um...nope. Maybe for some more budget constrained forces. And I'm a former C-130 loadmaster with 2,000 hours, Also these AI narrated videos are annoying.
Thanks for your feedback.
My motto is, "If it ain't broke don't fix it!" C130 works just fine. 4 engines are more reliable than 2. Lose one engine on the C390 is half the thrust gone. Lose one engine on the C130 and you still have 75% thrust left. That and I love the awesome sound of a C130.
Well said!
That's why it's the go to SAR craft for the USCG. Feather two engines for efficiency and loiter time.
One major issues, how about the price and the operational cost per hour?
Noted!
Infinitely lower than any competitor that has ever existed on the face of the Earth!
Destroy the C-130? Let me know when they build number 1,000 and we can re-evaluate that statement. In the past 10 years they've built 9.
High Five and a Beer on that one!
Can it back up on its own?
Cargo compartment is not wide enough, nor long enough. The aircrafts weight capacity is lacking. The loadmaster does more than operate the cargo ramp. Are the pilot and co-pilot going to load, unload the aircraft and do the weight and balance, make sure the cargo is secure. Reconfigure the aircraft for mission requirements in 2.5 hours? Take care of the passengers during flights and inflight emergencies? Have time for the their duties. I think not!
You raise valid concerns about the aircraft's limitations and the demanding roles of the crew. I will analyze it in the next video!
Seems like the Airbus A-400M would be a direct competitor as another new, only 10 year old, plane in the same market.
true
Nope. The A400M is far larger.
The C390 will be a viable alternative to the C-130, especially given that hardly any Hercules customers routinely land on sand strips.
Turbofans suck. Literally.
@@marcg1686 See, that is the sort of thing I didn't know. Which is why I would be interested to see a 3 way comparison. If only to make the point they are in different classes. But, C-390 and is jet while both C-130 and C-390 are both turbo props ... or am I wrong?
@@joblo341
The C-130 and A400M are both turboprops. Turboprops are better suited to tactical operations.
The C390 will chew up a landing strip quicker than a turboprop because the pilots will use the brakes more and reverse thrust less. This is what happened in Afghanistan with the C-17.
Integrating a prop/engine combination on a wing is way more complicated than integrating a commercial turbofan.
It took Antonov ten years to get the propeller integrated on the AN70. And they know a thing or three about aircraft design.
The C-130J was almost cancelled and all they had to do was integrate new propellers on a 35 year old design.
Can it land and takeoff from an aircraft carrier? The C-130 can and has! The 390 looks like a combination of a C-130 and C-17 no matter how you look at it.
Yes, it can. The thrust force of the KC is much stronger than the C-130's propellers. The KC needs one-third less runway to take off compared to the Hercules. 😆
@@paulowolanski3868 it’s never done it, therefore it can’t be claimed that it can. The C-130 can takeoff much faster if utilizing JATO. Either way there’s a reason the C-130 has been so successful and why it has remained a turboprop aircraft instead of being converted to turbofan. We can wait to see how the 390 does if it ever serves as long as the C-130. Until then it’s all speculation and claims. The video claims the 390 has much more advanced avionics as if the C-130 wasn’t in production anymore. New C-130 are outfitted with the latest and greatest avionics.
Now that doesn’t mean export C-130’s get all the same systems as the US military gets.
I never said the 390 wasn’t a nice looking aircraft because it is nor am I claiming it’s a bad aircraft because I’m sure it’s not. After all look at what it based on. Truthfully it should be compared to the C-17 since its turbofan.
Super
So nice
Parece que o C-390 vai deixa o C-130 respirando poeira😂
No, it won't, because it's not possible to leave what you've already left!
Santos Drumon he first.
The C-130J is a modern aircraft. It only has about 50% of the parts that were used on the original aircraft. The 2,700 C-130 was just delivered.
yep.
Try to fly on half of a airplane. I don’t know, i prefer flying in an entire one.
How does it compare to A400?
Not the same weight category
This plane ( C 130 Hercules ) is part of the past.
Yes but still loved
Only about 50% of the parts used on the J model are the same as the original. It has been modernized with heads up display and a digital cockpit. 500 J models have been delivered as of a couple years ago and the 2,700 C-130 was just delivered. I don’t think it is going away or from a bygone era. Let’s see is 2,700 390s get built.
What is the minimum airspeed before it nosedives? Paratroops have to jump at 225 kph airspeed? C-130 is a great platform for paratroops. I wonder about this one. I don't know. I'd rather jump a 130. If I was needing to, that is. Which I'm not.
In fairness they did show paratroopers jumping from the C-390 so, apparently if can accommodate that requirement.
Melhor alcance, velocidade, versatilidade e menor custo operacional na sua categoria. Só isso.
This sounds like a Sales add! The 130 was made for military, landing and taking off in a short distance. The 130 flies in hurricanes, the 130 has proven itself for 70yrs.
Yes, it is still amazing
Brasil 🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷🇧🇷👍👍👍
✈️✈️
New kid on the block, vs. the Veteran A/C with half a Century of refinements/improvements. Yeah good luck with that, Embraer.
The KC-390, with its state-of-the-art avionics, flies higher, farther and faster than the neighborhood retiree. It can carry much more cargo and is cheaper than the C-130. Lockheed doesn't need luck, but a miracle, or at least another 8 or 9 years on the drawing board and prototyping to be able to launch a competitor worthy of the "new kid on the block".
FYI: Not even watching this!
You SHOCKED and DESTROYED me with your click-bait titles for the last time!!!
BLOCKED(!!!) from suggested videos!!!
🇧🇷O KC390 é simplesmente espetacular
True.
Simply the best military aircraft in the world in its category!
Time for the US to design and build a new C-130 to match or exceed this air craft with the latest technology.
MDS os estadunidenses falando em sabotagem, geopolítica só porque um país da América do Sul inovou e fez algo melhor que eles, tratando nós como latinos vira latas !
Somos latinos por uma questão de idioma, isso não nós torna inferior a ninguém !
O continente é um só, do norte do Canadá ao sul da Argentina somos todos americanos !
Sobre geopolítica só vou citar algumas iniciais B.R.I.C.S.
Parabéns Embraer, referência mundial e orgulho nacional de norte a sul do Brasil.
Bravo 👏 👏 👏 👏
Don’t start selling your C-130 yet
No the Airbus is a beast .
C-17 want-a-bee's that's all they are, 390 is a jet, not a turbo-prop.. The Hurk, The Buff, The Bone, and the Thunder-Bolt 2 _ When your on Model 10 and have as many years on the same airframe.. Maybe.. American Aerospace - We'r still leading that race... The Hurk is your best friends 1976 Dodge in that it's rugged combat tested truck of a cargo plane.. And it dropping off much need supplies, or people into a runt dirt farm of an airstrip. Where only the helicopters come.. Jet's don't like rocks sand size or otherwise.. LONG LIVE THE HURK
How about the prize
Both are not comparable. Do compare with Kawasaki C-2 and AN-178
The best is the sound of too many baby crying here.
The us logging behind we got a competitor that's taking some of the market shares
ONE PROBLEM... IT ISN'T BUILT IN THE US...
:(
Worse Brazil isn't even an allie. You would think that by now we would know that making deals with foreign companies for military supplies is best avoided.
Yes, if you wanna find god faster, like in boeing masterbuilt planes, the pride and joy made in “America” by trainees for the benefit of wall street shareholders. Wake up, we are not on the 60s anymore.
LMAO - The 71 years of continuous C-130 production proves you are SO WRONG !!
why you don’t use anymore your typewriter? 100 years proving mankind is wrong in changing to computers, since typewriter worked fine all long this time.
I don’t think so !
I want to know more about your opinion...
My Bad! I thought this was a comedy channel. I got a few laughs on this plane.
Please share your opinion! I want to know more about my comedy potential!
nope not not a c130 killer
Yes, it is. Stop crying like a baby.
What about Airbus A400 flop?
Bye bye felicia. C390 is better
@@waynekeer
It's Smaller than the A 400
I sense a disturbance in the Force... like thousands of americans coping at the same time...
Such rubbish. It won’t “destroy” the C-130. It may replace certain functions but simply cannot replace the modern C-130H. Do your homework before you publish nonsense like this.
I appreciate your perspective. The C-130 has a long-standing reputation, and replacing it isn't an easy task. However, it's interesting because it can destroy the C-130 at some different roles
The is not one single thing the C-130H can do better than the C-390
Why is the us falling asleep with things like this
C-390 willl have to find own market. Largest customer, #USAF won’t purchase it for national security reasons. Currently have about 300.
Ledo engano, a marinha América já fez teste de avaliação muito positiva sobre o kc-390, e ficaram impressionado, podem sim comprar o porque não? Segurança nacional? Se for esse motivo fútil vindo de um país amigo e aliado, então não devemos comprar aviões da boeing !!! Segurança nacional tbm.
@@marcospblBrasil e EUA não estão na mesma prateleira, não da para Brasil exigir nada.
USA NÃO COMPRAM PORQUE SÃO ARROGANTES, MAS AGORA ENCONTRAM UM CONCORRENTE MELHOR QUE ELES, E AGORA QUE USA ESTÃO SE CAGANDO DE MEDO DA RÚSSIA E DA CHINA, MAS AGORA TA ACABANDO A ARROGÂNCIA
@@alcibiadestome9619 Brazil doesn't demand anything, the market demands it, make better planes than the KC-390 and you won't have any problems!
C-One hundred thirty... come on, nobody says that. Use your own voice so you don't sound so foolish.
AI created video !!
@@terrymichael5821 That's obvious and disappointing.
BS.
Portuguese plane
✈️✈️
Brazilian made and engineered...
@@thiagokborges no Friend, is portuguese
@@gilsantos3021 You’re wrong mate… Embraer owns a company in portugal (OGMA) that manufactures parts for this airplane, but it still was engineered and made in brazil.
Sweet dreams!
And... at some point, you woke up!
Quit with all the damn metric measurements , I'm done!
I had to check and see if I made this comment! 😇 I don't understand why they don't use measurements that are used in that particular industry world wide. This guy jumps from KPH for the Embraer to MPH for American built aircraft. I'm pretty sure they use knots for the most part. Just like marine.
C-390 replace the 130.😂😂😂😂😂The 390 cannot do the things the 130 has been doing for 50+ yrs.390 a poor mans 117.
The KC-390, with its state-of-the-art avionics, flies higher, farther and faster than C-130. It can carry much more cargo and is cheaper than the C-130. Enjoy!
All cargo aircraft are now inspired by the Ilyushin 76.
✈️✈️
Sou Brasileiro e dei o Linke Number 1000
An over-glorified C130 with turbine engines, that's all.
Thanks for your comment
What exactly do you expect from a cargo plane? You can't land a 747 everywhere!
@@brunoks6951 The C130 is not a 747!
I doubt it. The C130 has 2 major advantages.
Turbofans might give this thing better overall performance and cruise efficiency, but the C130's turboprop gives it the advantage when the plane is flying low and slow, which is important, for example, when you're trying to get the plane into and out of small, remote dirt fields. This video makes the claim that the C390 can land in 1.5km, but a loaded C130 can do the same in just over 750m, a little more than half the distance.
Reminder that the C130 is the plane that managed to take off and land on an aircraft carrier.
The C130 also has the advantage of being really old, and really common. Old means spare parts and institutional knowledge on how maintain the plane is everywhere. Common means economies of scale makes spare parts really cheap.
You also can't ignore the politics, because buying military equipment is ultimately a political question. Russia isn't buying F35s no matter how much it outclasses their own domestic designs, and the US is ultimately just has far more clout than Brazil.
This thing might be useful for smaller air forces that could benefit from combining a long range transport with a more tactical transport, but for a larger force like the US military or the larger European militaries, that can afford fleets of C17s, the A400m is a better direct replacement for the C130.
Thats the reason why Germany and France bought the C130J as addition to the A400M. The A400m is no replacement for the C130 bcause it's much bigger and needs bigger air fields
@@85daniel It's a bigger plane, but it can still take off and land in a pretty short distance.
Eu concordo que o C-130 é um avião que cumpre muito bem seu papel, porém o que faz o C-390, melhor, é a sua adaptação instantânea a qualquer missão, dentro da proposta da categoria...
Este avião (C390), pode no mesmo dia transportar tropas, combater incêndios, reabastecer outras aeronaves, fazer salvamentos, o transformar em ambulância etc.
@@adeniltonfilgueira Which is why smaller militaries might like it, but larger militaries still won't adopt it.
To begin with, "transport", rescue", and "air ambulance" are basically the same thing.
As for refueling and firefighting, larger countries like the US or UK already have dedicated aircraft to do that. They don't need multirole aircraft, they have the need and ability to pay for more effective, specialized aircraft.
Russia isn't buying F35s because it's overpriced junk and only brainwashed westerners mostly yankees think it outclasses Russian designs,
The Embraer New C-390 like this same just like Rafale's fighter plane and AIRBUS A330mrtt, A400m, Helicopter & fighter plane that will destroy Hercules plane, BOEING KC-46 Pegasus and BOEING's fighter plane for Indonesian National Army Air Force future.
im for AC130
✈️✈️
Did I just watch two versions of the same video pasted together? The second half pretty much repeated most everything stated in the first half.
I don't think this clunker will live up to what you claim. It's a brand new toy with lots of fancy pants electronics and such but, lose on engine or have an electrical failure and you are skating on thin ice. Also, it cannot go backwards on the ground nor can it deal with sand and dirt as easily as the C-130 because jets don't like dirt and stones! A few of those sucked into the engines and it becomes nothing but a truck on the ground or a storage unit.
One thing that the AC-130 can do that this tin toy cannot do is loiter with lots of fire power waiting to make things interesting for the bad guys. I'm certain that the guys designing this thing never even considered such an adventure.
I guess we will just have to wait and see how it works out over time. Somehow, I doubt it will be in production for over 50 years, though.
This plane wont work in the battle field one engine out its dead😢
Be cool, gi joe, four engines, time has shown that it is an unnecessary redundancy and that it doubles the cost of this element, with an insignificant statistical advantage in terms of safety. In fact, the Kc-390 was designed to work on a general category engine, used in civil aviation, so that maintenance and replacement can be done anywhere. Projects today must strive for maximum efficiency at the lowest possible cost, without compromising safety, something that Boeing and Lockheed do not do today. The F-35 went into production with an endless list of design flaws and the government had to use all its policy to push these planes to NATO countries. As for Boeing, there is no need to say anything, to satisfy the greed of Wall Street, how many lives has it already cost?
Ma quanti bot cinesi ci sono qui?????
No.