YKA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (12 years 2 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2098 times:
Do you guys think NATO will buy the An-70? I cetainly hope so as it appears to be a very capable and advanced aircraft. Also the unique counter-roatating props give it greater efficency that that of the of conventional turboprops.
From the reports, it beats the C-130 in every aspect and is 98% compatible with NATO equipment which compared to the 42% as it the ca130. Seems the Antonov has produced a great aircraft, and it would be a shame if this aircraft was ingored in by the western world.
Wasilenko From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (12 years 2 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2029 times:
No way man, NATO wants to get A400M or M400A what ever it is called, I think airbus is already working on it. However, it would be great for both Russia and Ukraine if NATO would want to get some An-70!
I think were would be a lot of them in 10 years time in former Soviet Union especially Russia and Ukraine, there exist a great need to replace old An-12s production of which ended in 1972.
Cobra27 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (12 years 2 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2025 times:
Russia and Ukraine will produce 1-5 an-70 per year
And there wont be not other contries, because it is to expensive for the 3 world. 2 years ago Deustchland was thinking of ordering 50-100 an-70, but they change to even more expensive and far less capable A400M, because there was a fatal crash with an-70
CannibalZ3 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (12 years 2 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2018 times:
It would be really cool if the western world bought An-70s, but I think that for the most part, aircraft-producing countries, especially ones so capable as those in western Europe, will pretty much buy their own planes if they can. Most of the eastern European republics, in which there is a market, don't have the cash to buy any of these planes, which sucks because it would be really cool if I were to see one from time to time.
Spectre From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (12 years 2 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2009 times:
I think the main problem is the West's worry about safety issues. I don't mean any disrespect to Russian aircraft, but they have had problems over the years meeting the safety standards of the West. However, that aside, I would love to see East & West get together and build a couple of aircraft both fighter and transport. The marrige of the two technologies could bring up some interesting ideas.
What do you guys think??
Spectre From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (12 years 2 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2008 times:
I wasn't saying that there are any safety problems with the An-70, though I believe at least one has crashed. I think it is more to do with the general safety issues of Russian aircraft over the years. I believe a number of Civil Aviation Authorities refused certificates of air worthiness to a number of Russia built aircraft.
I am Not saying that Russian aircraft are unsafe now! I am under the impression that they are now meeting most, if not all of the required standards.
MikeN From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (12 years 2 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2009 times:
I was going to ask the same question, but I already know what his asnwer will be. He will claim that the A400M is a ripoff/copy of the An-70. I believe he has made this claim before, in another thread. He's totally incorrect and makes uneducated posts, such as this one, on a regular basis. I guess he feels that because his father once worked for Antonov, that he (LY744) is an authority/expert on the subject.
These two aircraft, the An-70 and A400M, have nothing in common but their capablilites. Both should be able to out-perform a Herk (maybe even the new C-130J), but they are having difficulty finding buyers.
For all of you people on here that want to compare these two newer-generation transports with the dated C-130 platforms go right ahead. Just do me one favor...... look at the Herk's service history, combat record, reliability rating, and the sheer number of aircraft produced and number of aircraft still in service right now before claiming that "such-and-such" aircraft is better or "such-and-such" aircraft is more capable.
LY744 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (12 years 2 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2000 times:
he he... If the An-124 is a copy of the C-5, the A400M is a re-painted An-70. Yeah, I made that claim before, but you didn't reply then. Anyways, even if the A400M is not an exact copy of the An-70, it still has more in common with it than you might think.
And yeah, the only replacement for a Hercules is an another Hercules. Those two a/c are not real replacements for the C-130.
The first An-70 prototype crashed in the mid 90's when it collided with an a/c that was escorting and taking pics of it. It was the crew's fault.
The 2nd An-70 was recently severely damaged after it crashed on T/O in Siberia. The a/c has since been restored to flying condition.
That makes it a total of about 15 days, without making any effort to prove that claim, or to respond in any way. I would appreciate if you would support your claim, MikeN. If you aren't going to, go ahead and say so.