Garry

An-124 went out of production in 2004. Now, United Aircraft Corporation is collecting orders to resume its manufacturing from 2008. I heard that they have order for the first batch of 8 hulls.... the list price is $80mln for "plain" version and upgrades would be charged separatedly.... There would be 3 versions proposed - standard, expanded load, and with western avionics

joey

Russian transport planes sometimes may lack the special suits that comes with US transports, but they are very ruggedigised and very very bang for buck.

The MTA which India and Russia are designing with 40:60 work share, is going to have the traditional Russian ruggedisation with finer "packages"

__________________
www.techenclave.com
I'm very much gentleman :)

Opteron 146 EPAW (Venus SH-E4)||Asus A8N32 SLI Deluxe (Rev 1.02 & BIOS 1205)||Twinmos 1Gb Ram (2-3-3-5)||Geforce 6800Ultra (NV40C)||Creative X-FI Platinum||Seagate 7200.10 320GB SATA II (ST3300622AS)||Samsung 40Gb PATA (SP0411N)||Sony CDRW CRX230EE||SONY DVD-ROM DDU1621||Benq 1650||Antec NeoHE 500 Watts||Antec P180 (Custom Modded with Thermaltake Blue LED Smartfan and New Front Panel)||LG Flatron 775FT||Samsung Generic Keyboard||Copperhead

Jimmy

For starters it would be incompatible with several US systems without serious modifications that would basically call for the tear down/rebuilding of each airframe. For another the C-17 has a much longer range due to its aerial refueling capability. The numbers you see on wikipedia are on one tank of gas. Its also a more reliable airframe.

Again, I'm not going to say it sucks. The Soviets took a different approach to things, but to proclaim that its better because it can haul a couple of extra tons for a lower purchase price is disenginuous.

ZOOMAN

Then you don't understand "LOGISTICS" because that IS what it takes to make it a better Plane, and btw, if the AN-22 has refueling capabilities, it would have and even longer range, than it would generaly have, so that IS what helps make it a better plane than the C-17.

Officer of Engineers

That's it. I've had it with you idiot not looking through the threads and read what we, the uniformed membership, have posted and pretending to know more than we do ... which you obviously don't. Good bye.

__________________
Chimo

gf0012-aust

The advantage of staggered wheels though is in weight distribution and absolute load bearing.

distributed load bearing weight, weight means (usually) greater flexibility. it gives broader options for the loaders when packing. Its an issue of ground pressure.

Akita

1. C-17 costs more than An-124 because American systems cost more money.
BTW, they are worth it.

2. Antei has been out of production since Fred Flintstone. Maybe America could put the equivilant, the C-133 cargomaster back in production.

3. C-17 drinks a lot less fuel than Russian equivs, or C-5 for that matter. Her engines are quieter. Her engines can back her up a reverse slope while doing turnaround on improvised, dirt strips.

4.Her nav and defensive systems are Mil.Std 1553 bussed and entirely LRUs. (The shocky parts can all be unplugged and replaced, when defective, in moments.)

5. Onboard FBW flight control/auto-fly systems can automatically maintain station/trim and pitch while dropping whale-sized objects out rear ramp at night and in adverse weather at low altitude in unknown airspace. (According to rumor, loadmaster is only poor sap working during this amazing feat: drivers are up front popping corn in microwave while watching 'Diehard 9' on TV in crew rest area).

6. C-17 is ONLY equivilant load carrier not currently manufactured by a country threatening to re-target it's atomic warheads on European and North American cities.

You Russian fellas seem like real nice guys--and smarter than some. Do you really believe USAF and the US government are going to compromise national security by allowing a potential adversary to manufacture cargo planes, (or crop dusters fwiw), for OUR flyboys?

Come on now.

omon

yes, i agree, more and farther positioned tires will decrease load on runway, and increase stability, c5has 12 wheels per side, an has 10, but size of the tires makes a difference, i don,t know sizes of each one, nor i ever seen 2 next to each other, i know from experience, an lands just fine, i'd suspect if it has been an issue russians would adress it, now im curious what size of the tires on each one, i found no dementions so far, lots of pic. but i cant tell the size from them.

omon

i wouldn,t belive it for a second, and why would us even need russian transport, i think us has pretty good cargo planes itself. as far as i know russian jets aren,t even allowed in us(usually) due to noisy engines. at least that what russian pilot who flys aeroflot said a few yeas ago, the same reason why all russian airlines fly not russian planes to us.

Jimmy

Part of me thinks its a shame he got banned, because this post makes no sense whatsoever.

However mostly I'm not all that disappointed that he's gone.