EADS C295 vs Alenia C-27J

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

14 years 4 months

Posts: 3,442

I found this analysis from a Spanish forum.. something seems wrong.. isn't the C-27J's advantage its much wider cabin? I heard Czechs and Poles unhappy with the C295?

Comparing C295 vs. C-27J as tactical transport aircraft
We'll try to asses the main contenders in the segment of intratheater airlifters on the base of technical facts.

1. CABIN

Length (m): C295 has 15.73 vs. C-27J has 10.53 --> C295 has the best mark
Floor Area (m2): C295 has 37.12 vs. C-27J has 25.8 --> C295 has the best mark
Volume (m3): C295 has 64 vs. C-27J has 58 --> C295 has the best mark
Troops: C295 has 71 vs. C-27J has 46 --> C295 has the best mark
Paratroops: C295 has 50 vs. C-27J has 32 --> C295 has the best mark
Pallets (88" x 108"): C295 has 5 vs. C-27J has 3 --> C295 has the best mark
Stretchers: C295 has 24 vs. C-27J has 18 --> C295 has the best mark
Roller System: C295 has 4 row (like C-130) vs. C-27J has 3 --> C295 has the best mark

2. PERFORMANCE

Range (nm): C295 has 3000 vs. C-27J has 3000 --> Equal marks
Runway required (ft / 5000kg / 1000nm): C295 has 2290 vs C-27J has 2750 --> C295 has the best mark, it has better STOL capability.
Trips needed for deployment of Rapid Reaction Force - unpaved runway (800 troops / 200 t in 48h): C295 has 37 vs. C-27J has 89 --> C295 has the best mark
Soft Runway Capability (CBR): C295 has 2 vs. C-27J has 4 --> C295 has the best mark
Payload range (t): C295 has 9 vs. C-27J has 9 --> Equal marks
Fuel consumption (max. ferry range / litre): C295 has 7700 vs. C-27J has 12300 --> C295 has the best mark, it offers fuel savings and therefore cost savings.
Endurance: C295 has 12 hours vs. C-27J has 10 --> C295 has the best mark, it offers 2 hours more search and rescue time.
MMH/FH: C295 has 1.14 vs. C-27J has > 7 --> C295 has the best mark
FAA Certified: C295 YES vs. C-27J NO --> C295 is the only fully certified
Maritime proven: C295 (and CN235) is used in more than 12 countries vs. C-27J not one--> C295 is the clear winner.

Conclusion:
According to the previous technical data, I think that is clear that C295 is superior than C-27J.

Beyond these facts, the superior multi-role C295 is proven in:

- Troop / paratrooper transport
- Cargo (pallets / equipment)
- Medical evacuation
- SAR
- Maritime patrol
- Passengers

The C295 multi-functionality makes it the superior choice as intratheater transport aircraft. No other tactical airlifter in its category can claim its clear advantages and versatility.

Important information/facts:

What is about the system prize and the maintenance costs in general between this both types?
General: The history shows, that the G-222 / C/27 Spartan had difficulties. It was a high manitnance aircraft. All users had enormous problems to keep them in service. I remember to hear that the C-27 is the ideal transport aircraft for airshows, but not for the real tasks.

Further information:
The C295 offers the best value for users, with lower acquisition and direct operating costs than any other aircraft in its category. The C295 is cheaper to purchase, maintain and operate than the C-27J. The C-27J’s fuel and maintenance needs give it operational costs that are over 60% more expensive than the C295’s.
The Spartan burnt much more fuel per hour than the C295 (as much as 60 per cent more), which meant the C295 could save as much as $300 million on fuel over the 30-year lifespan of a 10-aircraft fleet.

A greater endurance of 12 hours allows the aircrew to remain on-scene longer, collect more information, support other assets, and track targets for longer periods of time.

The C295 has more modern aerodynamics and non-hydraulic flight controls than the C-27J Spartan.

It's the only two-engine aircraft in its class that can carry five pallets, providing additional flexibility for intra-theater lift, with a cargo cabin that is the largest of any medium-sized military transport. The C295 can hold a "Hummer" wheeled vehicle with free space to spare. Since C295 has a longer fuselage it can carry more cargo pallets than the C-27J. C295 comes with a nifty pallet loading system, and is cheaper to maintain and fly.

Note: The Airbus CN-235MSP (HC-144A’s MSP) like the C295MPA is approximately 90 percent similar to the systems found on the HC-130H and HC-130J Long Range Surveillance aircraft, enabling commonality in training and operation.

The C295 has seen wide operational service, including missions to support coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. The US Army originally wanted the C295.

Note: The USAF had bought some C-27/G-222 in the eighties, and they were mothballed, because of diverse and huge technical problems. The same occurs in other air forces.

C295's ease of maintenance and low life cycle cost, as well as its operational capabilities represent a clear advantage over any other competitor.

Is this aircraft the Royal Australian Air Force and what the Royal Canadian Air Force need?

Gerardo Señoráns Barcala

Original post

Member for

17 years 4 months

Posts: 1,189

I found this analysis from a Spanish forum.. something seems wrong.. isn't the C-27J's advantage its much wider cabin? I heard Czechs and Poles unhappy with the C295?

sorry, I forgot, some pages worth reading, they`re grounded several times already(almost half a year once) due to avionic systems/software and engine malfunctions, they did not completed state trials in czech AF bcs not fulfiling requirements for Afghan deployment. Czech MOD even threatened to send back all CASAs giving supplier an ultimatum to solve problems within a short period. They also stoped sale of old An-26 in order to have backup if CASAs persist to have problems.

greetings
martinez

http://www.monitoruji.cz/ekonomika/408741/letouny-casa-nesmeji-do-afghanistanu
http://zpravy.idnes.cz/problemove-letouny-casa-se-po-ctyrech-mesicich-vraci-do-vzduchu-pwz-/domaci.aspx?c=A120202_193852_domaci_jj
http://www.natoaktual.cz/letouny-casa-opet-nesmi-do-vzduchu-jeden-mel-poruchu-f97-/na_zpravy.aspx?c=A111031_150726_na_zpravy_m00

Member for

14 years 4 months

Posts: 3,442

sorry, I forgot, some pages worth reading, they`re grounded several times already(almost half a year once) due to avionic systems/software and engine malfunctions, they did not completed state trials in czech AF bcs not fulfiling requirements for Afghan deployment. Czech MOD even threatened to send back all CASAs giving supplier an ultimatum to solve problems within a short period. They also stoped sale of old An-26 in order to have backup if CASAs persist to have problems.

greetings
martinez

http://www.monitoruji.cz/ekonomika/408741/letouny-casa-nesmeji-do-afghanistanu
http://zpravy.idnes.cz/problemove-letouny-casa-se-po-ctyrech-mesicich-vraci-do-vzduchu-pwz-/domaci.aspx?c=A120202_193852_domaci_jj
http://www.natoaktual.cz/letouny-casa-opet-nesmi-do-vzduchu-jeden-mel-poruchu-f97-/na_zpravy.aspx?c=A111031_150726_na_zpravy_m00

hehe, in the end, the old, obsolete Antonovs are still the more reliable work horse. long live the Ukraine and Ukranian barbie!

Member for

17 years 4 months

Posts: 1,189

hehe, in the end, the old, obsolete Antonovs are still the more reliable work horse. long live the Ukraine and Ukranian barbie!

dammit, we wanted to buy those czech antonovs....:)

P.S. the comparison you posted is weird indeed, I was inside cargo compartment of the C-295 and C-27 a few times, AFAIK I could not even stand upright in the C-295, when compared with C-27 which is definitely spacious. Though the C-27 flight compartment height could be lower due to stairs dividing the a/c floor area into two sections.

Member for

14 years 8 months

Posts: 594

I found this analysis from a Spanish forum.. something seems wrong.. isn't the C-27J's advantage its much wider cabin? I heard Czechs and Poles unhappy with the C295?

They have the same floor width at 2.45m, big enough for a 88x108 pallet, but the cargo box is longer is on the C295 as you data shows hence larger floor space.

What your data doesn't over is that the Max width of the C27J is 3.33m compared to 2.70 of the C295.

Member for

14 years 7 months

Posts: 630

That comparison is a definite case of cherry picking - it's a copy/paste from an EADS brochure!

For a more objective comparison between the C-27J and C-295, read here: http://www.avia-it.com/act/rassegna_aeronautica/rassegna/Editoriali_Marzo_2012/Policy_Analysis100_future_battlefield_airlifter.pdf

... basically the C-27J is superior in high threat environments (redundancy, speed, climb rate) or if you need to carry vehicles. The C-295 is superior from a cost of ownership perspective, to carry troops, or for soft fields. For pallets, they are about even (the C-27J carries fewer pallets, but each pallet can be 35% taller)

Member for

15 years 6 months

Posts: 1,006

we had some 'discussion' about the relative merits of the two planes a while back

although mainly in the context of the US Army . . .

Member for

22 years 7 months

Posts: 657

sorry, I forgot, some pages worth reading, they`re grounded several times already(almost half a year once) due to avionic systems/software and engine malfunctions, they did not completed state trials in czech AF bcs not fulfiling requirements for Afghan deployment. Czech MOD even threatened to send back all CASAs giving supplier an ultimatum to solve problems within a short period. They also stoped sale of old An-26 in order to have backup if CASAs persist to have problems.

greetings
martinez

http://www.monitoruji.cz/ekonomika/408741/letouny-casa-nesmeji-do-afghanistanu
http://zpravy.idnes.cz/problemove-letouny-casa-se-po-ctyrech-mesicich-vraci-do-vzduchu-pwz-/domaci.aspx?c=A120202_193852_domaci_jj
http://www.natoaktual.cz/letouny-casa-opet-nesmi-do-vzduchu-jeden-mel-poruchu-f97-/na_zpravy.aspx?c=A111031_150726_na_zpravy_m00

Casa joined with Omnipol and that worked, because the MoD selected the plane, but the MoD threated the czech company, not Casa. The software problems supposedly are from Omnipol.

Member for

14 years 8 months

Posts: 594

The two were also discussed and compared in the Baby Grizzly thread as well