Garry

Can anybody explain why american troops used An-124 for deployment of troops in Iraq if US has more than 50 operational C-5 Galaxy with capacity of around 135tons? The difference is around 15tons more payload with An-124 and 6,000km longer range, does not explain it.

Praxus

Perhaps they were Canadian troops?

The Canadians are renting a few AN-124's I believe.

lurker

All those An-124 are belongs to some commercial enterprise that moves big things across the globe.
I believe not only canadians but also S. koreans used them to get to Iraq.

__________________
Long time we thought that a million monkeys in front of a million typewriters would eventually type William Shakespeare's complete works.
After invention of the Internet, we understand that it's not true.

ZFBoxcar

since when are Canadians in Iraq?

Garry

Volga-Dnepr has transported US Apach by AN-124 to Afghanistan .... it is quite strage as Apach perfectly fits even smaller than C-5 transporters..... as for Iraq i think US used AN-124 as well , not sure though....

lurker

Yeah, mea culpa. Sclerosis probably

Praxus

I was thinking he saw pics of Afghanistan or something.

The US wouldn't use AN-94's if they needed more transports, they could rent civilian aircraft.

Garry

Just talked with Volga-Dnepr the Russian commercial cargo company which operates 10 of AN-194. They DID TRANSPORT US millitary cargo to Kuwait and earlier to Afghanistan..... His oppion was that AN-194 is more than 50% cheaper in opertion than GALAXY and US Army preferred using them to reduce the overly inflated budget of Iraqi compaign...... he also said that cooperation with US millitary started from Afghanistan when US did not want to risk their pilots and planes in the territory where much of the Stingers were still on hands and no support of Radars was available, while Russian pilots knew the territory quite well and required less navigation... during that operations they learned about better economics of using AN-194, so choise of AN-194 for Iraq was predetermined

Garry

Today Volga-Dnepr reported that they won the tender to be the main airlift facility for NATO before 2009 when first A-400 are supposed to be fielded. However the contract may be prolonged if A-400 programs would see delays

The contract assumes that Volga-Dnepr will station two most modern An-124-100 Ruslan aircraft in LEIPSIG and would provide four more in a week notice. NATO will pay Euro 650mln annually for this service.

An-124-100 is the most recent upgrade of basic An-124, the largest aircraft ever mass produced. The new upgraded Ruslan is capable of 150 tons for 9,000 km - 50% advantage over its major rival C-17 Galaxy. Ruslan can cary cargo units of up to 6.7 meters in diameter - slightly larger than Galaxy can. Moreover, upgraded An-124-100 has better fuel efficiency than Galaxy, which did not see any major engine upgrades for the last 10 years.

The major short-comming of Ruslan and Galaxy is that it requires special airstips capable withstand landing of these 200 ton giants.

http://www.voldn.ru/eng/comp/fleet/an124/lth.php

canoe

I can definately confirm there are NO Canadian troops in Iraq. Its possible there maybe a few officers on exchange or something but no troop presence is there given Canada was technically against the Iraq war.

Canadian troops are operating in Afganistian however.

troung

Victor Bout works cheaper then the USAF...

gunnut

If I were to guess then economics would be the factor for why we rent An-124 rather than fly C-5, and Garry confirmed it.

Why not hire someone else to do the same job if they can do it just as well and for cheaper?

Garry

One reported told me details of the contract - the contract assumes that two An-124-100, which are stationed in Germany, would be operated by 5 civil crews hired from NATO membered countries.... who would personaly pass approval of NATO officials. The delivery assimes six to eight month

NATO plans constant and active use of An-124 from Europe to Bagram base in Afghanistan, which has first class air strip capable of accepting these giants. The payment would be done per each flight and hours as if these aircrafts were simply freighted + some amount for them being idle in Germany. All operations must be done by personnel which passes NATO approval and by citizens of NATO member countries...... must be very expensive to hire them!!!

canoe

Related: sorta self explanitory.
http://www.sfu.ca/casr/mp-airlift-il76-2.htm

It comes down to buy an American C-17 for $250 million, or buy a IL-76MF for $40 million and just replace the avionics and engines with western equipment for an additional $15 million.

Short version of relivent stats:
*C-17*
Max payload: 77 tons
Range: 5185km (unrefuelled, with 72t payload)
Cost: $250 million (US).

*IL-76MF*
Max payload: 52 tons
Range: 5800km (40t payload)
Cost: $55 million (US) after purchase and upgrades.

Jimmy

The C-17 is more useful for tactical airlift, and it's certified to drop US paratroops. Plus the whole refueling thing, etc. There are capabilities the C-17 has that the IL-76 just cant do. That doesnt mean the 76 isnt a great aircraft, it just isnt the right one for the USAF to have in mass quantities.