Possible C130 Replacement?

webmaster

webmaster

Troll Hunter
Staff member
Its still long from going into production. Its one hell of a good looking transport/cargo plane though!
 
R

Red aRRow

Forum Bouncer
Corsair, if by "we" you mean Pakistan...then yes Pakistan is buying CN-235s but not from Turkey. Pakistan has ordered 4 CN-235s from Indonesia ...where they are made.
 
O

Oqaab

New Member
corsair7772 said:
No Way! The CN-235 is the replacement. Were already buyin 1 from Turkey
Click to expand...
CN-235 will not replace C-130s. Pakistan is also buying 6 used C-130s and the number of this aircraft will rise to 18.
 
U

umair

Peace Enforcer
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
shamayel said:
Corsair, if by "we" you mean Pakistan...then yes Pakistan is buying CN-235s but not from Turkey. Pakistan has ordered 4 CN-235s from Indonesia ...where they are made.
Click to expand...
Er! the Airtech CN-235 is ajoint venture between CASA of Spain and IPTN of Indonesia with shared manufacturing.
 
C

corsair7772

New Member
Verified Defense Pro
I say we buy the Y-8. Dont call me crazy yet. I compared the C-130 with the Y-8 and there both pretty much the same.

But 1 thing abt the CN-235. It has a low detectability feature meaning its ideal 4 those para-commando raids we did in 1965.
 
U

umair

Peace Enforcer
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #10
corsair7772 said:
I say we buy the Y-8. Dont call me crazy yet. I compared the C-130 with the Y-8 and there both pretty much the same.

But 1 thing abt the CN-235. It has a low detectability feature meaning its ideal 4 those para-commando raids we did in 1965.
Click to expand...
The most stupid Pakistani act of the whole war.
 
T

The Watcher

New Member
Whos got any info on Y-8 and CN-235?? If you could post pics and stats.

Pakistan needs to leave c-130s and move on to a higher level. A400m isn't bad either!
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
The C-235 is not a replacement for C130, it is a MUCH smaller transport plane. The A400M seems to be a good plane on paper, though it's future is far from secure. The participating countries keep cutting back on their planned purchase numbers, some pull out all together (Portugal) and there doesn't seem to be any new countries coming on board. They have pitched this aircraft very forcibly to the RAAF, but the last thing the RAAF needs at the moment is a new aircraft purchase...
 
gf0012-aust

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
CN-235 certainly doesn't have a "go quiet" feature. Its a stol hi wing which means that it makes a racket under load when taking off

Its a light transport as well, and as pointed out is originally a Spanish design from CASA.

Australia was looking at 235's as part of our Caribou replacement prog, we looked at the original Spanish product plus an Indonesian licensed built version.

In the end we killed the entire project off. As other more pressing requirements needed attending to (like C130J's)

The Y-8 hasn't been updated since 1987 and is far less capable than a Herc. (eg you can't carry vehicles in it) Its a great air ambulance, air taxi, but useless for transporting armed forces and their requisite motorised gear. No ramp for rear loading. It's like a 4 engined Fokker Friendship. ;)

as for the Mriya AN-225, no more are being made and the ones that do exist are making an absolute fortune for their operators by long leasing them to the UN etc... Australia leased one for a while. Nice heavy lifters, but I wouldn't want to buy one due to the typical russian problem with reliability (eg one got stuck in Afghanistan for about 2 weeks as they couldn't find spare parts for it)
 
S

shamsi

New Member
gf0012 said:
CN-235 certainly doesn't have a "go quiet" feature. Its a stol hi wing which means that it makes a racket under load when taking off

Its a light transport as well, and as pointed out is originally a Spanish design from CASA.

Australia was looking at 235's as part of our Caribou replacement prog, we looked at the original Spanish product plus an Indonesian licensed built version.

In the end we killed the entire project off. As other more pressing requirements needed attending to (like C130J's)

The Y-8 hasn't been updated since 1987 and is far less capable than a Herc. (eg you can't carry vehicles in it) Its a great air ambulance, air taxi, but useless for transporting armed forces and their requisite motorised gear. No ramp for rear loading. It's like a 4 engined Fokker Friendship. ;)

as for the Mriya AN-225, no more are being made and the ones that do exist are making an absolute fortune for their operators by long leasing them to the UN etc... Australia leased one for a while. Nice heavy lifters, but I wouldn't want to buy one due to the typical russian problem with reliability (eg one got stuck in Afghanistan for about 2 weeks as they couldn't find spare parts for it)
Click to expand...
My 0.02 Cents/Pence/Paisa/Lira/Euro:

The aircraft in development is "great" if they pay commision to the buyers. Maybe they can hire the French to write the contract.

Some mentioned the 1965 "raid" by Baluch regiment, SSG; so if you ask any of those meat heads in Woodland Camo about it, they generally change the topic. My skepticism aside, the HAHO infiltration is much better now, but if the delivery aircraft is detected (most likely), those commandos will never know what hit em.
 
J

joker

New Member
I think the PAF should go for the Antonov option mentioned by Corsair. I reckon the An70 would be a pretty good option for a potential C130 replacement. Dont know about the current status of the project through but last I read they were ironing out the glitches in the prototype. Cn235s were selected over the An72.
 
gf0012-aust

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
joker said:
I think the PAF should go for the Antonov option mentioned by Corsair. I reckon the An70 would be a pretty good option for a potential C130 replacement. Dont know about the current status of the project through but last I read they were ironing out the glitches in the prototype. Cn235s were selected over the An72.
Click to expand...
The first prototype collided with an An-72 during 1995. The An-72 involved in the accident managed to return safely but the An-70 was completely destroyed.

There is a second prototype, but it has had limited flying and is not thought to be an active test bed anymore.

Its last known flight was circa 1997
 
K

kilo_4que

New Member
I believe that considering that Pak-India relations are improving as of late. This would mean that Russia may ease of on not selling arms to Pak. Likewise, if this is so, we should aim to purchase a set of An-124 Condors. Dubbed the largest transport carrier in the world, the Condors are very reliable and extremely large
 
gf0012-aust

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
kilo_4que said:
I believe that considering that Pak-India relations are improving as of late. This would mean that Russia may ease of on not selling arms to Pak. Likewise, if this is so, we should aim to purchase a set of An-124 Condors. Dubbed the largest transport carrier in the world, the Condors are very reliable and extremely large
Click to expand...
The 124 is a substantial airframe to invest in when there is no clear doctrinal requirement for it.

larger aircraft can shift more in less time, but the infrastructure to support them is also by nature large as well. airfields need to be lengthened, hardened. maintenance issues are considerable.

I would rather have 5 aicraft of the C130 style platform taking off every 10 minutes from the flightline and know that if I lose one I don't lose the drop capability. Lose one 124 to a SAM or patrolling "hack" and your whole logsitics requirement just went to "custard". You not only lose the aircraft, you lose your entire logistics suite, plus if its mission critical, you may lose the sector conflict (and as a long extrapolation - the war)

5 smaller platforms gives you flexibility, gives you a staging advantage, allows more airfields to be considered as emergency way points, allows the logistics mix to be "mixed" - eg spread personal small arms etc over 5 aircraft rather than have them all in one and lose the lot.

Large aircraft are singularly vulnerable, single real time targets, whereas a rolling entry of 5 med-heavy lifters would keep the pressure up on any opfor as they would need to have a little more visibility to have effect.

Large aircraft are useful in benign environments. Otherwise they are a health hazard
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top