amit wrote:
The basic truth which is being strenuously avoided is that there is no comparable aircraft to the C17 in production that could be tested out in a MRCA type of multi-vendor competition by the IAF.
The so-called new and improved Il76 and An124 exist on paper and in board rooms. It is not IAF's responsibility nor charter to bankroll the Russian companies to do the necessary R&D and building of production facilities to get the aircraft in production so that it can buy 10 or maybe 20 aircraft. And then the Russians make a profit by selling them to the Chinese in greater numbers.
I've posted on this Forum pictures of the new IL-76 production line at Aviastar. This is not an old production line. All IL-76s were bulit in Tashkent in the past.
[Folks cry blue murder due to the fact that the US sells arms to Pakistan,as they should rightfully. However, there's thundering silence over the fact that the Russian do the same with the Chinese - the Chinese operate more Il76s than do the IAF].
False. The Chinese purchased only 14 IL-76s, several of which have been domestically converted to AWACS.
To get around this fundamental truth we've had this amazing display of inanity that every theoretical plane from the 37 ton Airbus transport of which not a single copy has yet been built (and which has a potential order backlog of 180 odd aircraft), all the way to a 150 ton An124 (that the Russians may build for the US military if all the stars align) being touted as a better buy than the C17.
This was filmed in Berlin last week.
[youtube]dgALWWBg3qs&feature=fvsr[/youtube]
And this is a picture of the A-400M production line
http://www.aviationandmarineusa.com/900 ... 51x900.jpg
Yet one fundamental question remains unanswered:
1) How much would the 37 ton Airbus transport cost?
About 150 million.
2) How much would a "new and improved" Il76 cost?
In
This document, the Ulyanovsk "Aviastar-SP" plant general director, Mikhail Shushpanov is interviewed. He claims the IL-476 (streched, news engines, glass cockpit, new wing and 60 tonne paylaod IL-476) will sell for about 100 million.
3) How does/would a 150 ton version of the 120 ton An124 cost?
So far, An-124 production are just dreams. No one can put a price on that aircraft, but it will certainly cost more than the 100 million Il-476. If its costs more than about 150 million, it will probably never be produced for the commercial orders it needs to enter production will not materialize.
And how much would a service contract comparable with what Boeing is willing to sign the dotted line on would cost with these three vendors?
The question you should ask, is why doesn't the GoI not sign a similar contract with the Russians for the maintenance of the IL-76s?
Do note that apparently all the shouting against the C17 is because of the cost factor.
An the fact that its "unpaved short runway claims with big payloads" that is vaunted in every Press article is just a bunch of hot air.
Even Sanku ji hasn't yet taken the line that we shouldn't buy the plane because its a piece of crap!
Its an excellent aircraft, no one can say otherwise.
So cost should be the overriding consideration na?
Nope, the claimed runway performance is very important since, and I quote:
Chief of Air Staff Air Chief Marshal P V Naik told India Strategic that the aircraft had been chosen after a thorough study of its capability to take off and land on short runways with heavy loads, long range, and ease of operation.
If that statement is true, Boeing will have to demonstrate what is advertised everywhere: landing with a a 160,000 pound payload in a 3500 foot unpaved runway.
What Boeing has been performing so far is landing very short
while empty on long paved dry runways. Even the An-124 can do that. Its not the same thing as actually landing on a REAL short and unpaved runways that is only 3500 feet in length and that may or may not be dry, for in real life, one cannot alway count on runways being dry when we need them to be.
for years that how badly they are needed, how desperate the situation is. Nope none, Thus come Thus bought!
