There have been many attempts to replace the C-130 Hercules multirole aircraft and it looks like the USAF will buy the next generation version, 'if it ain't broke don't fix it '.
The Airbus consortium are planning a mini-A400M to fill the gap, Brazil has come up with a turbofan powered alternative, likewise the Russians based around the An-12 and the Chinese copy plus the Japanese C-2.
Another aircraft that will need replacing is the C-17, whether the two will be merged into one aircraft as the alternative to the Airbus A400M or two separate models remains to be seen.

The Revell Airbus A400M whether in 1/144 or 1/72 scale is a challenging model kit to build, I'd be inclined to go with a kitbash using one of the C-130 kits.
A whifferter has changed the engines to turbofans.
The Roden An-12 Cub kit is a bit problematic but with a bit of bodging and quite a lot of swearing the results speaks for itself.
Then there's the C-17 , if you can afford the high prices for the 1/144 or 1/72 kits this too is worth a punt.
The Japanese C-2 sometimes comes up in 1/200 scale at a reasonable price and if you like your heavies then this is the project for you.

You may wish to add the Embraer 390 to the list although the current lack of any kit in any scale might make a model a bit problematic! In the real world however, the Dutch Air Force has already selected the 390 as its C-130 replacement.

Quote from: McColm on April 26, 2024, 10:11:48 PMThe Revell Airbus A400M whether in 1/144 or 1/72 scale is a challenging model kit to build,

You're not kidding!     

The 1/72 kit I built was a real pain, but I hear the smaller scale one is a bit better.

Quote from: PR19_Kit on April 27, 2024, 04:22:16 AM

Quote from: McColm on April 26, 2024, 10:11:48 PMThe Revell Airbus A400M whether in 1/144 or 1/72 scale is a challenging model kit to build,

You're not kidding!     

The 1/72 kit I built was a real pain, but I hear the smaller scale one is a bit better.

I agree  the  1/72 kit was a challenging build but, I don't mind that. It's worth the effort and, I have a second one to build. None of the build issues were insurmountable. I don't know about the 1/144 kit but, it doesn't interest me in the small scale. Biggest pain I thought was the hopelessly flimsy main undercarriage wheel attachments. Totally inadequate for a large,heavy model. I ended up drilling out the attachment points and using brass rod to attach the wheels to. Also, I assembled the undercarriage legs BEFORE attaching the wheel sponsons. I decided that doing it the way the instructions suggested was a bit fiddly.  As we are unlikely to get a more up to date kit in the one true scale and, at an affordable price I guess we just have to make do. It's just a shame (personal view only) that Revell didn't  give us the option to have the wing in dirty configuration with everything hanging off it. Looks much mote interesting !

Yes, I had EXACTLY the same problem with the landing gear. Sometimes they just don't think things through in their 'quest for accuracy'. 

The landing gear in the Revell C-160 has the same problem 

Quote from: PR19_Kit on April 29, 2024, 01:55:29 AMYes, I had EXACTLY the same problem with the landing gear. Sometimes they just don't think things through in their 'quest for accuracy'. 

Tell me about it!  . Sometimes, I think  a compromise is in order! 😉😊