A330MRTT or KC-30

[frank kramer]

The examples for either case are to be found everywhere. The aircraft that is built by the UK, Germany and Italy is known by the different users officially or colloquially as Typhoon, EF2000/Eurofighter/Eufi and F.2000 respectively, regardless of what the manufacturers call it, and it still is the same aircraft. The Tornado was known as PA200 in Germany and A.200 in Italy. The Dakota was known in the USAAF as Skytrain. The Hercules is known as the L100 by Lockheed, and under different other names by the USAF, depending on its role.

So, in short, there is not 1 truth out there; call it whatever rings your bell

[Canberra TT.18]

Frank
Don't want to be picky but L100 is the civil name Lockheed marketed the C-130/L382.

But air forces/countries all over the world give names or type numbers for the same types or subtypes.
C-130/L100/Hercules/CC-130/Tp84/T.10 etc.

Some like to use own (invented) names factory allocated type numbers and names or nicknames.
And yes PA200 and Tornado are the same aircraft. Germany tends to use factory type numbers. Lots of discussion on Flugzeugforum if it's a H145M, LUH H145LUH or BK117D3.

[Canberra TT.18]

KC-30M is de Klu typeaanduiding. Inmiddels zou de NAVO dit overgenomen hebben. Zo is het mij verteld

Site EATC calls it A330MRTT https://eatc-mil.com/en
as does Dutch Defensie site
https://www.defensie.nl/onderwerpen/int ... liegtuigen

No reference of KC-30(M).

And to add to this discussion why not KC-45 as this was type number given by the largest Nato member the USA (okay they cancelled the program) but use a type allocation used by Australia

And to add also the A330 (MMU/France and Spain?) are part of the EATC fleet. I don't think it is logical to use different types names in one system/organisation for the same aircraft type.

[ehusmann]

I like to be proven wrong.
But KDC-10 was official type in press release at the time it came into service.
As these where modified DC-10-30CF the T-255 was still a DC10-30CF

And the navy (MLD) had some sort of type allocation system for not US types
They were chronological
AH-12 for Wasp
SP-13 for Atlantic
H-14 for Lynx
AB204 were UH-1 eg.
The S11 comes right before the Wasps so from there they started counting?
Would be interesting to know if the NH90 would be SH/UH-15!?

Point being, those are names the Dutch military came up with on their own. No other armed forces in the world use those. So claiming that the "official factory name isn't KC-30M", doesn't make eny sense. It is a useless argument.

[frank kramer]

as I said: use whatever makes you (most) happy

[Canberra TT.18]

I like to be proven wrong.
But KDC-10 was official type in press release at the time it came into service.
As these where modified DC-10-30CF the T-255 was still a DC10-30CF

And the navy (MLD) had some sort of type allocation system for not US types
They were chronological
AH-12 for Wasp
SP-13 for Atlantic
H-14 for Lynx
AB204 were UH-1 eg.
The S11 comes right before the Wasps so from there they started counting?
Would be interesting to know if the NH90 would be SH/UH-15!?

Point being, those are names the Dutch military came up with on their own. No other armed forces in the world use those. So claiming that the "official factory name isn't KC-30M", doesn't make eny sense. It is a useless argument.

Funny Omega Aitr Tanker calls them KDC-10/Boom for the old Dutch ladies and KDC-10/MPTT for the hose version they operate.
Okay it is not an air force.

[Jovel]

KC-30M is de Klu typeaanduiding. Inmiddels zou de NAVO dit overgenomen hebben. Zo is het mij verteld

Site EATC calls it A330MRTT https://eatc-mil.com/en
as does Dutch Defensie site
https://www.defensie.nl/onderwerpen/int ... liegtuigen

No reference of KC-30(M).

And to add to this discussion why not KC-45 as this was type number given by the largest Nato member the USA (okay they cancelled the program) but use a type allocation used by Australia

And to add also the A330 (MMU/France and Spain?) are part of the EATC fleet. I don't think it is logical to use different types names in one system/organisation for the same aircraft type.

Zelfs de commandant van de MMU, de heer van der Biezen, noemt 'm in dit artikel KC-30

https://www.key.aero/article/dutch-defe ... raft-types

[Canberra TT.18]

KC-30M is de Klu typeaanduiding. Inmiddels zou de NAVO dit overgenomen hebben. Zo is het mij verteld

Site EATC calls it A330MRTT https://eatc-mil.com/en
as does Dutch Defensie site
https://www.defensie.nl/onderwerpen/int ... liegtuigen

No reference of KC-30(M).

And to add to this discussion why not KC-45 as this was type number given by the largest Nato member the USA (okay they cancelled the program) but use a type allocation used by Australia

And to add also the A330 (MMU/France and Spain?) are part of the EATC fleet. I don't think it is logical to use different types names in one system/organisation for the same aircraft type.

Zelfs de commandant van de MMU, de heer van der Biezen, noemt 'm in dit artikel KC-30

https://www.key.aero/article/dutch-defe ... raft-types

Can't read the whole article I'm not a member.
Last words I can read are Airbus A330 ... (MRTT)....

Article also mentioned 4 types replacing the F-27. Missing number 5, the Gulfstream which was and is an essential asset!

[Rabbit]

Briljant topic dit. Een nieuw hoofdstuk in ‘the Dilemma’s of Aircraft Spotting’.

[Key]

Oh yes, gotta love it. But no dilemma to me at all: these tanker-transports derived from the Airbus A330 based at Eindhoven and Cologne are called A330MRTT on all official websites of agencies involved in their procurement and operation that I come across, including the Dutch and German defence departments, the EART, NSPA and JAPCC. Therefore (and not for any other theory or reasoning), they are A330MRTT to me, contrary to for instance the Australian ones that are being called KC-30A by their operator. Simple as that.

Cheers,
Erik

P.S. (edit): Anyone feeling differently about it should enjoy their own conclusion!

[BaasG]

My penny in the bag

In the Vliegende Hollander 2018 (https://magazines.defensie.nl/vliegende ... 01/08-a330):

Nu nog toekomst, straks realiteit. De grijze toestellen, dan aangeduid als KC-30, krijgen allen de Nederlandse roundel, op de staart het MMU-logo en de registratie beginnend met de letter M (van MRTT).

[Alpha Kilo One]

Cynische modus aan:
Gelukkig is de vliegende Hollander nog nooit door iemand als onafhankelijke officiële bron gezien.

Ik kap er mee.

[Rabbit]

Zelfs de commandant van de MMU, de heer van der Biezen, noemt 'm in dit artikel KC-30

https://www.key.aero/article/dutch-defe ... raft-types

Funny, in this article the same Colonel Van der Biezen just calls it what it's called: A330MRTT

https://www.key.aero/article/going-dutc ... -mrtt-bill

[ehusmann]

onafhankelijke officiële bron gezien.

Contradictio in Terminis of the day

[Key]

My penny in the bag

In the Vliegende Hollander 2018 (https://magazines.defensie.nl/vliegende ... 01/08-a330):

Nu nog toekomst, straks realiteit. De grijze toestellen, dan aangeduid als KC-30, krijgen allen de Nederlandse roundel, op de staart het MMU-logo en de registratie beginnend met de letter M (van MRTT).

Hmja, in 2018 dacht DVH dat het type zo zou gaan heten bij de KLu (en meldt dat in slechts één fototekst bij het artikel). Misschien was dat toen ook wel de bedoeling maar gezien wat de organen van de officiële bronnen nu melden is het niet doorgegaan. Mogelijk interessant hieraan is het traject waarin zoiets besloten wordt. Dank weer voor de bijdrage!



Erik