Military Aviation News and Discussion

Ananda

The Bunker Group
I don't find info that sole AN-70 prototype still flying. Usually Antonov put their flying model also under Antonov Airlines fleet, and I don't find that plane in their active fleet. Even the sole AN-225 once in the active fleet of that Airline.

Looking to Turkish media and forum, there's discussion on Antonov try to sell project to TAI on co-op for both AN-178 and AN-188. Turkiye seems so far shown only interest with AN-188. Both will use similar engine Progress D436, while playing on different categories of C-130 class (AN-178) and A400M class (AN-188). Problem with engine seems also why Antonov try to push AN-188 as AN-70 replacement. AN-70 Propfan using significant Russian components especially the blades.

So, I got impression even Antonov them selves already giving up on AN-70 even before the latest War development. On paper their strategy to focus on AN-178 and AN-188 has merit as those where majority military transport class market are. However even that market is limited, and mostly already hoged by C-130. We know how difficult Embrear to penetrate with their C-390, and Embrear is far healthier with far more resources then Antonov (especially under current situation).

If Turkiye or UAE will eventually invest on Antonov projects after the war conclusion, more likely they will try to revive either AN-178 or AN-188, rather then AN-124. Off course it is big 'if'.
 
Last edited:

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
It seems there’s growing interest in addressing tanker and strategic lift vulnerability. Industry has been invited to submit BWB concepts which offer better low observably and range. Industry could benefit by having the military pick up the R&D tab for BWB designs that could eventually become commercial products for airlines.

 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
So South-Korea and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to jointly develop a multirole transport aircraft.
It looks like its smaller than the Embraer KC390 and more in the class as the Dornier 328JET.
 

FormerDirtDart

Well-Known Member
So South-Korea and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to jointly develop a multirole transport aircraft.
It looks like its smaller than the Embraer KC390 and more in the class as the Dornier 328JET.
More like a direct competitor to the C-390 and the C-130J. Slightly bigger than a C-390 with more planned cargo capacity
More info when you're not fighting Janes paywall ;)

KAI expects the MC-X to have a maximum takeoff weight of 92 tons and an internal cargo capacity of 30 ton. Preliminary specifications released by the company during the DX Korea exhibition in 2022 show the platform will likely be a twin-engine aircraft with a range of about 4,350 miles, measuring 131 feet long, 44.3 feet tall and 135 feet in wingspan.
 
Last edited:

swerve

Super Moderator
C-390 is a bit bigger than C-130 & can lift up to 30% more cargo, & rather bigger maximum sized items: 40 cm wider, 20 cm higher, & longer.

This Korea/UAE proposal is a bit bigger still. It could compete with both C-390 & A400M (& C-2, if the Japanese start seriously trying to export it), depending on customer requirements.
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
So South-Korea and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to jointly develop a multirole transport aircraft.
It looks like its smaller than the Embraer KC390 and more in the class as the Dornier 328JET.
The model being shown here is definitely in the 328JET class, so either Janes are showing the wrong model or the new aircraft has windscreens 5-6 times the size of those found on the Herc or C-390.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
It isn't Janes. That model has been shown a few times by KAI, & in some of the pictures an information board headed MC-X is visible with it.

But look at Embraer's site. See the size of the cockpit windows on C-390? You can look at it from various angles. The MC-X windows definitely aren't 5 times their size.
Portal Embraer.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
So this new kind of system doesn't use the conventional aerodynamic control surfaces and also not direct thrust vector control like in the European Aster air defence missile, but this system manipulates the airflow surrounding the vehicle.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
This article should stir up some debate here and no doubt between the USAF and the USN, a role for the B-21 wrt maritime strike. Probably has some merit but I envision a real political $hitstorm between the two services. Australian B-21 fanboys will jump on this as well.

This would still require significant development. Allowing the USN to set up a squadron might ease the political issue and could benefit the USAF by having an increased B-21 procurement resulting in better pricing (optimistic wish?).

 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #732
Allowing the USN to set up a squadron might ease the political issue and could benefit the USAF by having an increased B-21 procurement resulting in better pricing (optimistic wish?).
The USAF would go to war over that suggestion. They have such an inferiority complex it's not funny.
 

FormerDirtDart

Well-Known Member
This article should stir up some debate here and no doubt between the USAF and the USN, a role for the B-21 wrt maritime strike. Probably has some merit but I envision a real political $hitstorm between the two services. Australian B-21 fanboys will jump on this as well.

This would still require significant development. Allowing the USN to set up a squadron might ease the political issue and could benefit the USAF by having an increased B-21 procurement resulting in better pricing (optimistic wish?).

I don't see why there would be any debate over roles and missions. The USAF has always had a maritime mission.
The B-21 is replacing the B-1. The B-1 was the first aircraft certified to deploy LRASM. Why would it be surprising for the B-21 to carrying on with this mission? The Rapid Dragon program is an inherently maritime strike program
 

FormerDirtDart

Well-Known Member
This military exercise looked interesting in its scope of how the R.A.A.F may use it , I don't know if feasible for R.A.A.F aircraft on to perform this exercise and how it might provide some options
NATO air forces have been doing this with frontline fighters for over half a century. It's not rocket science. I'm relatively sure the RAAF has the wherewithal to develop this capability. The biggest problem is infrastructure. Are there stretches of roadway to accommodate this operation where you might need them.
 

seaspear

Well-Known Member
NATO air forces have been doing this with frontline fighters for over half a century. It's not rocket science. I'm relatively sure the RAAF has the wherewithal to develop this capability. The biggest problem is infrastructure. Are there stretches of roadway to accommodate this operation where you might need them.
There is this article going into what other countries have done in the design of autobahns to accommodate this even Finland with a S/H using this I don't think it would take rocket science for a design tweak in federal funded highways to do this
Highway strips: The main roads that double up as secret military runways | news.com.au — Australia’s leading news site
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
NATO air forces have been doing this with frontline fighters for over half a century. It's not rocket science. I'm relatively sure the RAAF has the wherewithal to develop this capability. The biggest problem is infrastructure. Are there stretches of roadway to accommodate this operation where you might need them.
Outside of the major cities there are very few Freeways in Australia other than, Melbourne to Sydney and Sydney to Brisbane. There would be very few places in Northern and Western Australia where you could do this, thus the concentration on developing Bare Bases in the remote areas.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #738
The RAAF landed a Spartan on the Nullabour Highway back in 2017. There is a video of the event that was posted on Youtube by the RAAF which I have attached.
Spartan Landing
You could land and flyoff C-5, C-17, B-52, the AN225 (before it was destroyed :( ) on that long straight (90 miles??).
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
90 miles...thats even longer than those runways at Area 51.
That's suspicious....


Anyway, some news from East-Europe.

In August 2021, the Cyprus National Guard (Cyprus NG) was negotiating with a potential buyer for its fleet of Mi-35Ps, this seems to be Serbia.

The negiotations are still ongoing, and if closed succesfully, the first of 5 Mi-35s are expected to be delivered this year. After the final delivery, the Serbian Armed Forces will have nine Mi-35s in their active inventory.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Top