Still defining the requirement. Do they dispense with the unique payload/very STOL/range combination that the Caribou offers and just replace it with more CH-47's or do they sacrifice some of the amazing STOL abilities for much a faster better payload alternative in the C27J? The jury is still out (Project is Air 8000 and its been kicking around in one form or another since the 1980's)What is the RAAF looking at longterm???King Airs are an interim solution to keep aircrews proficient and interested whilst a true replacement for the Caribou is purchased. Now we have C-17's there is no chance we will get A400's.
So why did the RAAF replace the ''bou's with the kingair's???? No confidence in the A400M???
A Chinook lifts a whole heap more and is more STOL than the Caribou (but inferior range - speed however is close! - its not for no reason that 'bou drivers talk about repairing bird impact damage on the trailing edge of the wing!). The Chinook will also accept the same payload pallets as the C 130's. The other option - C27J is powerful, versatile, offers the ability to tranship pallets direct from a Herc unlike the Caribou. But, not as STOL, and the tandem undercarriage can rip up waterlogged strips. The CN 235 and 295 have also been mentioned but are probably a slimmer chance.
The gucci solution would be Osprey - better payload, VTOL but horrendously expensive to buy and operate. Dunno, it could be that defence will fence sit for a while longer and see what airframes follow the C27 and CN235's. One idea could be the rumoured Quad tiltrotor or stealth STOL concepts being proposed, and in the interim buy more Chinooks.
