It doesn't have STOL. STOL Requires taking off in less than 1,500 feet and clearing a 50 foot object at the end upon take-off. At 3:10 they published a take-off run of 1,903 ft.

Well done Lockheed Martin

@@johnaustin6673 Vi piacerebbe! purtoppo per voi Leonardo è un azienza italiana e tale rimarrà .Tenetevi le vostre porcherie che imponete al resto del mondo spacciandole per" the best " che non sono neanche personalizzabili in base alle esigenze delle singole forze armate ,quando siete nei casini come ad esempio con i mezzi anfibi dei Marines dell' ante guerra( mi riferisco a quella del vietnam) in cui muoiono soldati, annegati durante delle esercitazioni o nel caso delle fregate che si basano su disegni degli anni sessanta ed erano gia obsolete quando sono entrate in servizio poi vi rivolgete all' Italia in fretta e furia affinché costruisca il meglio che c' è sul mercato mondiale e proprio brutta l' invidia e anche l' ignoranza!!!!

It would not be what it is today without Lockheed Martin. It was good (had potential) Lockheed Martin made it great. Your Welcome

​​@@johnaustin6673 the only thing Lockheed did in Italy and across Europe was to bribe the governments to make them buy the f104 shit

Btw what is "Fule" and "lucklar" mean?

This aircraft isn’t in the same class as a C-130 or BAE 146.

@@nocalsteve no but its more than the 146 QT which they have/had 2 off.

I agree it's perfect for RAF its the go between A400M and like there BAe 146QT they had, also perfect for the SAS/SBS which is why we still have the Hercules at moment I believe.

RAF C-130J would probably serve for the next few years more, like 45 years more.

This aircraft was bought brand new by the US for Afghan Airforce, used for 3 years and then destroyed by backhoe by US contractors.

For every thing between a light plane/helicopter and a C130..... To land on unpaved runways......

Leonardo is blacklisted in India

I am aware of that, but how many years will the three helos supplied AW101 Imran will lie unused in hindon air station,it's really free supplied, since indian govt got back all the money.

@@ashutoshgupta6807 why

@@jameson1239i think bcz leonardo do business with Pakistan

The c-27j is far superior when compared to the c-295

buy an ATR or C-295 then

It's an evolution of the old G222

@Truth is a bannable offence apologies got it the wrong way around. In 2012, the USAF announced it was retiring 21 x C27Js and Alenia stated that if the USAF sold them to another country they would not support them. They were subsequently transferred to US SOCOM and USCG

@@michaelmulligan0 Australia bought them from the US. Currently not certified for battlefield operations.

The high fuel consumption is evident for an aircraft with unmatched load capacity and performance at that size. The windows are the same as those of any other military transport aircraft. The only difference is having additional ones allowing a wider view.

Expensive? What is the average unit cost?

It has the best performance than any other twin turbo prop military transport plane. It is far more superior when compared to the c-295.

Choosing the c-295 simply means having lesser needs, so we might as well buy aircraft with smaller capacities.

@@walterF205 however using a transport plane to supply an army outpost, you need a transport plane that can land in short runways and take a variety of loads. Like light military vehicles, generators, weapons systems, general supplies etc. Having a plane that can only take a limit amount of different cargo can leave these military outpost not getting what they need.

Speaking without knowledge, uh? Never heard about the G222? Go reading about it and speak then ;)