Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Nato To Lease An124's?  
User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 6057 posts, RR: 3
Posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2493 times:

I just picked this up in the online edition of a Danish newspaper, and since a small search didn't reveal anything, I thought I'd post here.

Apparently, NATO is having problems aquiring capacity for some of the bigger operations, so now they want to lease 6 civilian Antonov 124's, so they can be called up with short noticed and use for transport. The idea is that they're going to be leased until 2012, when Germany & France will recieve 110 Airbus freighters.

Damn, I think this is one major breakthrough. 20 years ago, anyone suggesting that NATO leased Russian/Ukrainian/Soviet aircraft would have been laughed at.

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6491 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2395 times:

My alternate suggestion is that they go the C-17 route. They can always sell them to USAF after they're done.


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineContact_tower From Norway, joined Sep 2001, 536 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2283 times:

"My alternate suggestion is that they go the C-17 route"

They cost more then they taste, I'm afraid.


User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2280 times:

Extremely disturbing. I hope it will serve as a wakeup call to our politicians that they've gone too far scaling back but I doubt it severely (most likely they'll scale back even more so there's less to transport thus making more transports useless).



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineGalaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 24
Reply 4, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2234 times:

N328KF
From United States, joined May 2004, 117 posts, RR: 0
Reply: 1
Posted Thu Jul 8 2004 03:35:54 UTC+1 and read 162 times:
My alternate suggestion is that they go the C-17 route. They can always sell them to USAF after they're done.


No that wouldn't be the best route, A AN-124 can carry about 3x's the cargo of a C-17, go farther, can be cheaper to operate and finally the AN-124's are available.






"damn, I didnt know prince could Ball like that" - Charlie Murphy
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2995 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2228 times:

Suppose one of them (and I hope it doesn't) crashes. What would the NATO response be? We already saw a reactionary response from Spain this year when the Yak-42 bringing her troops home from Afghanistan went down. There was a huge uproar over "why were we using Soviet equipment?" with the insinuaition (incorrect as it may be) tht a Yak/IL/AN aircraft is too shoddy to be used by western forces.

And we shall see if the A-400M is in service by 2012. Seems that this lease will serve as another incentive for politicians to cut the program even more.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6491 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2220 times:

Three times by volume, not by weight. And the C-17 can land in strips that the An-124 can't touch. And it'd improve commonality. If it was good enough for the RAF, it's good enough for NATO.


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineGalaxy5 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2034 posts, RR: 24
Reply 7, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2216 times:

Actually The AN-124 capacity is greater by volume and weight. AS for runways, the 124 is more than capable at landing at enough runways to be much more cost effective than a C-17, hell, even the AF isn't landing C-17's on unproved landing strips in the middle of combat.


"damn, I didnt know prince could Ball like that" - Charlie Murphy
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6491 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2197 times:

I know the An-124 can haul more weight -- but I said 'not three times the weight.'


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14144 posts, RR: 62
Reply 9, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2088 times:

The German Luftwaffe is already leasing AN-124s and IL-76s for the Afghanistan operation. I see them every night on the military apron of CGN. I´ve seen AN-124s and AN-12s chartered by the Dutch Army. They often ship vehicles and equipment through the civilian side of CGN.

Jan


User currently offlineWhitehatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2092 times:

The RAF have been chartering An-124s for some time now to haul equipment into operational areas. It's no major issue.

The big Antonovs are flying in and out of Brize Norton as well as civil airfields.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Nato To Lease An124's?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
France To Lease A330-200 Tankers? posted Fri Oct 31 2003 16:36:57 by Shenzhen
Nato Moves To Acquire C-17 posted Wed Sep 13 2006 21:47:10 by Columba
Eads Consortium Set To Win Four Bln Euro Nato Deal posted Thu Apr 15 2004 13:21:36 by KEESJE
Pentagon To Compromise On Tanker Lease Deal posted Fri Nov 7 2003 01:21:53 by AvObserver
Air Force One To Changi? posted Sun Nov 12 2006 11:17:31 by Shinkai
US Senate Approves Selling 100 F-35's To Turkey posted Thu Nov 9 2006 11:30:01 by Wing
First To Fly The PC-21 - Singapore Air Force posted Fri Nov 3 2006 18:05:15 by Airimages
Boeing To Begin Ground Testing X48B posted Mon Oct 30 2006 10:11:16 by DEVILFISH
Orion 13 Might Be First Manned Return To Moon posted Fri Oct 27 2006 08:32:51 by AerospaceFan
"direct" Alternative To Ares I/Ares V posted Fri Oct 27 2006 07:20:10 by DfwRevolution

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format