The Glade 4.0

I dunno, Müs ... looks an awful lot like a C-130 to me, especially given the number of variants listed on wiki. Who's to say it's not just a variant you haven't seen before? And while I'll grant you the range of the thing may have been greatly over-represented in the movie (but that's just par for the course in Hollywood, right?), the C-130 most definitely is capable of carrier-based take-offs and landings:

_________________
Go back to zero, take a pill, and get well ~ Lemmy Kilmister

Based on the scale of the humans standing on the cargo ramp, it looks too small to be a C-130 (or variant).


The size seems to be similar to a C-123, but with some heavy 'modernization'.

Here is a nice writeup on the Carrier COD testing on the USS Forestal.
http://www.theaviationzone.com/factshee ... restal.asp

As far as range, the C-130 was certainly capable of in flight refueling...

Oh, I know about the carrier stuff, I'm more thinking about the range stuff. They made a big deal about the gas when they got to where they were going, implying that they didn't refuel. Its really a minor thing, but it shows that there was not a lot of care put into the script.

I thought c-123 as well, but its two engine. It may be something european, but I don't know enough about furriner aircraft.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

AN-12

That looks about right I think.



So, *if* they had a single inflight (which I don't know if its capable of), the max range is ~3500 mi. Its about 7k miles from where they were to Seoul. They could just make it. But where did that inflight come from? Elmendorff maybe?

The A320 from Israel to GB is likewise alright. Its about 2k miles give or take. The -200 variant has a 4k+ range. But that flight has its own, ridiculous problems...

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

It's definitely based on a C-130. It might be a foreign variant, or something entirely fictional. I can't find any MC-130 variants that look like that. The vertical stabilizer is the wrong shape and that thing under the tail.. dunno what it's supposed to be.

As for operating it off a carrier, it can be done, but it's cumbersome and risky, which is why the C-130 as the COD system was never adopted. The other thing that the link doesn't mention is that it's so huge that it impedes doing anything else on the flight deck while the C-130 is operating.

Still, it could be done in an emergency.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Its an AN-12 Its not big enough to be a -130.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

They are indeed very similar. The differences are minimal in silhouette.



C-130 in profile


Anatov AN-12 in profile


Edit: The C-130 is *slightly* larger, and can load slightly larger cargo slots, but the overall load/capacity is very similar, as are their range and flight characteristics.

I haven't been following this thread, but that's rather obviously an AN-12. The obvious evidence is in the landing-gear assembles and the tail-cone shaping.

_________________

Yeah, I was assuming some sort of radome or other electronic thing in the rear and didn't even think about east bloc aircraft. The dome thing is the provision for a tail gunner; the Russians were putting tail guns on everything, even airliners for a long time after WWII.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-12

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."