Viv S wrote:Its got less to do with the efficiency and more to do with the fact that it weighs over 300 tons loaded.Most probably An 124 would have lower cost compared to any lift aircraft but the Il.
'Most probably' ? So what total lifetime did you assign the airframe and how did you price the operating cost?And if C 17 has rough lift capability so has An 124, after all C 17 have landed exactly at the same places in Afg where An 124s have.
Firstly, how come Afghanistan is the benchmark of rough field performance? And secondly, you're wrong and I've posted the youtube videos earlier on that thread, that prove that. AFAIK An-124s cannot be operated from a dirt strip.You are basically cherry picking facts to suit C 17. You want exactly a aircraft which will take 77 tonnes over 5400 kms. Exactly, nothing a little here and there would fit your plans.
In real world there is no such magical constraint, but hey you have defined the word strategic airlift by looking at C 17s specs and then say that only C 17 fit it.
This is precisely how, "Shortlisting" is done to ensure single vendor deals.
You have amply illustrated the process that I have been referring to.
The An-124 isn't in production and doesn't have any rough field capability. The IAF is interested in both. And one could be surprised at the IL-76 and C-17 getting produced at all, since they both can be replaced with the An-124 and C-5 respectively.
1) A C-17 has a service life of 30,000 hours. The An-124-100 is 24,000 but that was to be increased for new production aircraft.
2) A C-17 costs over $45000 an hour to operate. Commercial An-124s can be rented wet for between 25 to $30,000 an hour. Which is cheaper to operate you think ?
3) C-17s have landed at ONE rough field in Afghanistan, Camp Rhino, which was 7000 feet long. Period. And that was in 2001. Not since. What a benchmark!
4) The An-124 is unpaved field capable and certified. It says so here on the website of the factory that built them http://www.aviant.ua/eng/an-124.html Its just that the civilian airlines that fly them chose not to go to such fields with them. The unpaved runways the C-17s use are specially built to suit "unpaved" runways that allow C-17 operations.
5) The An-124 isn't in production?. Well I suspect there will be a time in the not too distant future when the C-17 plant will be closed and the An-124 plant will be running, Why? There is a high demand for civilian An-124s and none for civilian C-17s. Does that not tell you anything ?