ahussains
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2007
- Messages
- 454
- Reaction score
- 0
yes we have to think about the other resources like China a Russia and upto me the An70 or a IL-78 will be a nice selctions in place for the C-130 ... Any comment ?
Pakistan Air Force Transport
- Thread starter EagleEyes
- Start date
yes we have to think about the other resources like China a Russia and upto me the An70 or a IL-78 will be a nice selctions in place for the C-130 ... Any comment ?
Blackpearl
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2008
- Messages
- 403
- Reaction score
- 0
IL-78 aerial tankers are in Pakistan.....
At least one IL-78 is in Pakistan, opearted from Chaklala. The aircraft is flown by Russian crew. I suppose it is under going test and trial.
At least one IL-78 is in Pakistan, opearted from Chaklala. The aircraft is flown by Russian crew. I suppose it is under going test and trial.
fatman17
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 32,563
- Reaction score
- 98
- Country
- Location
kindly provide the source because the IL-78s which are being evaluated are going to be supplied by the Ukraine.!
fatman17
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 32,563
- Reaction score
- 98
- Country
- Location
i think PAF will stick with the C-130 because it is tried and tested and PAF has the capability to provide depot level maintenance for C-130s in the middle-east and asia (sans india).
if the PAF does decide to change their transport requirement then the Alenia/LM CJ-27 Spartan - tactical transport would be a ideal choice.
Quwa
Research Partner
- Joined
- May 16, 2006
- Messages
- 2,538
- Reaction score
- 47
- Country
- Location
The Russians are known for selling equipment through 3rd parties like Ukraine. Pakistan gave the IL-78 order in 2006, and they won't arrive until late 2008 or 2009. The 2-3 year wait makes me think these are new from Russia, but flown through Ukraine. If PAF wants more transports, it might get IL-76s as the IL-78 is mostly the same - i.e. we have infrastructure. Also, according to tphuang's blog, the Chinese will produce their version of IL-76/78 from 2012.
shehbazi2001
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2008
- Messages
- 580
- Reaction score
- 0
What I liked about C-130 was its ability to pick up agents or important cargo directly from the ground without landing, through a cable and hook on its nose. It was shown in a documentary called "Great Planes" of Discovery Channel. It was the MC-130 TALON version. It uses a Fulton Surface-to-Air recovery system. This system uses a Helium balloon for erecting the cable attached to cargo or agent to be lifted.
C-130 itself is legendary but the parachute system for delivery from altitude is not good as compared to Russian method. The method of delivering the armored and other vehicle or guns etc without shock from C-130 were not good. C-130 came at slow speed over the ground, opened its cargo door and the vehicle was ejected with open parachute.
On the other hand the Russian method for delivering cargo from altitude is excellent. The IL-76 drops its APCs, vehicles etc at altitude, parachute is deployed and when a set altitude arrives, the rocket motors of parachute ignites, landing the cargo safely without impact or shock.
Parachutes attached to the vehicles have rockets in them which are fired when the vehicle or cargo reaches close to the ground. It was shown in a documentary called "History of Russian Aviation".
C-130 itself is legendary but the parachute system for delivery from altitude is not good as compared to Russian method. The method of delivering the armored and other vehicle or guns etc without shock from C-130 were not good. C-130 came at slow speed over the ground, opened its cargo door and the vehicle was ejected with open parachute.
On the other hand the Russian method for delivering cargo from altitude is excellent. The IL-76 drops its APCs, vehicles etc at altitude, parachute is deployed and when a set altitude arrives, the rocket motors of parachute ignites, landing the cargo safely without impact or shock.
Parachutes attached to the vehicles have rockets in them which are fired when the vehicle or cargo reaches close to the ground. It was shown in a documentary called "History of Russian Aviation".
Sam Dhanraj
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2007
- Messages
- 450
- Reaction score
- 0
You reminded me of this video where LAPES went wrong
DopZgJaWstk[/media] - Military Air Drop Bloopers
Last edited by a moderator:
Blackpearl
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2008
- Messages
- 403
- Reaction score
- 0
why would PAF needs such systems like LAPES and 'picking off ' men & material from ground on its own C-130 fleet. what is really the significanc for us?
shehbazi2001
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2008
- Messages
- 580
- Reaction score
- 0
An Observation on the Military Cargo Aircraft.......and Passenger Airliners
This post is related to aircraft design but in fact its so much obvious that almost everyone related to or interested in aviation must have noted it.
I wanted to share my observation with the members of the forum.........
Almost ALL the military cargo aircrafts are high-wing designs and almost ALL the civil transporters are low-wing designs.
A high-wing design is one in which the wing is placed high on the fuselage.....for example look at C-130.....
For military cargo, take C-130, C-5, C-141, C-17, IL-76, An-124, CN-235, A400M etc ALL are high-wing designs. The old Bristol Freighter was also high-wing design aircraft.
For airliners, almost all Boeing and Airbus......take A380, A340, A310, A320, Boeing 747, B737, B777, B757, B727, B787, B767, B707, B717, IL-96 etc ALL are low-wing designs.
That was an observation but if someone knows the reasons behind it, it would be nice to share.
This post is related to aircraft design but in fact its so much obvious that almost everyone related to or interested in aviation must have noted it.
I wanted to share my observation with the members of the forum.........
Almost ALL the military cargo aircrafts are high-wing designs and almost ALL the civil transporters are low-wing designs.
A high-wing design is one in which the wing is placed high on the fuselage.....for example look at C-130.....
For military cargo, take C-130, C-5, C-141, C-17, IL-76, An-124, CN-235, A400M etc ALL are high-wing designs. The old Bristol Freighter was also high-wing design aircraft.
For airliners, almost all Boeing and Airbus......take A380, A340, A310, A320, Boeing 747, B737, B777, B757, B727, B787, B767, B707, B717, IL-96 etc ALL are low-wing designs.
That was an observation but if someone knows the reasons behind it, it would be nice to share.
x_man
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2007
- Messages
- 1,012
- Reaction score
- 1
Shehbazi...
Just for discussion sake, judge the two scenarios lets say how much effort will be required to load any military vehicle onto a Boeing 777 at a fully manned ,paved tarmac .compared to .loading the same vehicle onto a C-130 at an unprepared forward military airfield somewhere in desert......in case of C-130 ,trust me, you will only need two persons and probably two minutes one person to drive and other to guide him inside the aircraft .
While we can go at lengths to compare the Hi vs Lo wing designs, the hi wing is always preferred for military aircraft such as the C-130, C-5 and C17 ,so they can achieve quick loading and unloading as you do not want the planes sitting on the ground for long periods of time as they make easy targets. The capability of "ro-ro" (roll on, roll off) loading can only be achieved in high wing aircraft .
Also, the military transport aircraft must be able to operate of unprepared landing areas...this includes gravel, sand, grass, composite mat etc...With the engines mounted higher up....there is less chance of ingestion of FOD (foreign object damage like pebbles, nuts, metal pieces or other looses objects etc )
Although the high wing is a more stable design, but somehow the low wing design suits the requirements of Civilian world(airliners etc) they only operate from prepared surfaces and BTW it is cheaper to make a low wing design which is the primary concern with civilian aircraft designers... On other hand, with military planes, cost is a secondary consideration. The primary consideration for military planes is the ability to complete the mission in shortest possible time and survive damage.
P.S Have you ever seen a bird with low wings?.
.. God came up with the perfect design and we should benefit from that
Just for discussion sake, judge the two scenarios lets say how much effort will be required to load any military vehicle onto a Boeing 777 at a fully manned ,paved tarmac .compared to .loading the same vehicle onto a C-130 at an unprepared forward military airfield somewhere in desert......in case of C-130 ,trust me, you will only need two persons and probably two minutes one person to drive and other to guide him inside the aircraft .
While we can go at lengths to compare the Hi vs Lo wing designs, the hi wing is always preferred for military aircraft such as the C-130, C-5 and C17 ,so they can achieve quick loading and unloading as you do not want the planes sitting on the ground for long periods of time as they make easy targets. The capability of "ro-ro" (roll on, roll off) loading can only be achieved in high wing aircraft .
Also, the military transport aircraft must be able to operate of unprepared landing areas...this includes gravel, sand, grass, composite mat etc...With the engines mounted higher up....there is less chance of ingestion of FOD (foreign object damage like pebbles, nuts, metal pieces or other looses objects etc )
Although the high wing is a more stable design, but somehow the low wing design suits the requirements of Civilian world(airliners etc) they only operate from prepared surfaces and BTW it is cheaper to make a low wing design which is the primary concern with civilian aircraft designers... On other hand, with military planes, cost is a secondary consideration. The primary consideration for military planes is the ability to complete the mission in shortest possible time and survive damage.
P.S Have you ever seen a bird with low wings?.
.. God came up with the perfect design and we should benefit from that
shehbazi2001
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2008
- Messages
- 580
- Reaction score
- 0
ok u mean that with a high-wing design, the fuselage is relatively lower on the ground so that loading of cargo is easy. However it can be verified from photos too. Protection of engines from ground debris etc is valid and the observation of birds having high-wing design is really interesting.
Blackpearl
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2008
- Messages
- 403
- Reaction score
- 0
Another benefit of High wing configurationis that military transport aircarft like C-5 Galaxy, C-17 Globe master , is that these aircarft can 'Kneel Down"
The nose landing gear can reduce its height from the ground and so the whole aircarft can be bent down, while loading unloading. This feature is only significant where complete nose section is lifted up and material can be loaded/unloaded from the forward ramp. Again, as engines are already at a safe height, this is a safe feature, ---> Kneeling Down
In aircraft like CN-235, C-160 and C-130 it is not required.
The nose landing gear can reduce its height from the ground and so the whole aircarft can be bent down, while loading unloading. This feature is only significant where complete nose section is lifted up and material can be loaded/unloaded from the forward ramp. Again, as engines are already at a safe height, this is a safe feature, ---> Kneeling Down
In aircraft like CN-235, C-160 and C-130 it is not required.
Myth_buster_1
BANNED
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2008
- Messages
- 9,016
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
sorry to say this but please stop with the useless one liners.. please spare some time researching on your desire questions before you start flooding..
ejaz007
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Messages
- 6,533
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
Pakistan Eyes Boost in Transport, Lift
By USMAN ANSARI
Published: 3 November 2008
ISLAMABAD - Pakistan has sought to improve its air mobility capability as international commitments and domestic operations have grown. To date, this has mainly consisted of ex-Australian C-130E Hercules transports. However, beginning next year, programs to renew and expand current abilities should begin to come to fruition.
The most high-profile aspect of Pakistan's air mobility modernization is the Pakistan Air Force Multi-Role Tanker Transport (MRTT) program. Four Il-78 Midas aircraft from the Ukraine, equipped with a three-point drogue refueling system, will introduce this capability.
Though an Air Force spokesman could not verify the exact variant on order, he did confirm it was the tanker/transport and not the pure tanker version of the Midas.
Its 22,000-kilogram cargo capacity will bring considerable airlift capabilities, akin to the highly versatile Il-76 Candid, on which the Midas is based. The first aircraft is due to arrive early next year, he said.
The Air Force also is exploring the acquisition of tanker/transport aircraft from other sources. One reason is that the Il-78 is not equipped with a boom refueling facility, and therefore is unable to refuel the Air Force's most potent combat aircraft, the F-16. To rectify this, the Air Force is exploring the possibility of acquiring surplus U.S. KC-135 Stratotankers.
During an appearance before the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs subcommittee on South Asia on Sept. 16, Donald Camp, principal deputy assistant secretary for South Asian affairs, stated that the United States is "finalizing a comprehensive training plan" to help Pakistan with its F-16 operations, including aerial refueling.
No clarification from American military sources, however, was forthcoming on whether this would also include surplus Stratotankers.
According to defense analyst Haris Khan of the Web-based think tank Pakistan Military Consortium, Pakistan has also examined alternatives to the KC-135. European defense group EADS "has been talking to [the Air Force] to supply Airbus A330 MRTTs. However, the [Air Force] has been insisting on an MRTT capability built on an A310, which is no longer in production."
The reason for insistence on the A310 is Pakistan International Airline's long experience with the A310-300, he said. There may therefore be a more attractive long-term option to the KC-135.
Improvements in air mobility are not restricted to MRTTs. Pakistan is also establishing an airborne division. The Army has long sought to improve its air mobility, which has traditionally been a weak spot. The Army needs to support operations in the Siachen Glacier and Kashmir theaters of operations, in the ongoing standoff with archrival India; against al-Qaida and the Taliban on the Pakistan-Afghanistan frontier; and right down to the coastal areas.
The commitment on "the Frontier" in itself has pushed the Army to invest heavily in helicopters due to the difficult terrain. Recent acquisitions have included 24 Bell-412EPs, 10 AS 550 Fennecs, 35-plus Mi-17 Hips and several UH-1 Huey transport and utility helicopters.
As Khan stated, however, the Army is still looking to buy more Mi-17s, plus Mi-35 Hinds, CH-47 Chinooks and one dedicated version of a gunship helicopter, to establish an airborne division.
In connection with this, Pakistan is seeking further transport/utility types from America. According to Col. Robin Fontes, chief of the Security Assistance Office, Office of the Defense Representative at the American Embassy here, the U.S. military will shortly confer with the Pakistan Army to determine its "current and future aviation requirements. Once those requirements are defined, we will be able to recommend the most appropriate model(s) of transport/utility helicopters that meet the needs of the Pakistan Army."
The question of acquiring Chinooks is another long, drawn-out saga, as Pakistan had initially hoped to establish a heavy-lift capability through their acquisition in 1989. U.S. military sanctions in 1990, however, ended these efforts. Not only do these serve as vital force multipliers when it comes to air mobility, but also in disaster relief.
The absence of a heavy-lift capability was sorely felt in the relief operations following the earthquake that rocked the country in October 2005. U.S. Navy CH-53E Super Stallions and U.S. and British Chinooks instead did a sterling job in providing heavy-lift assistance under the wistful gaze of Pakistan's own rotary aviators.
Now, according to Khan, six stored CH-47Cs have recently been released for sale to Pakistan by Italy. It is uncertain if they will be purchased, but they currently represent Pakistan's best option of acquiring a heavy-lift capability.
Pakistan Eyes Boost in Transport, Lift - Defense News
By USMAN ANSARI
Published: 3 November 2008
ISLAMABAD - Pakistan has sought to improve its air mobility capability as international commitments and domestic operations have grown. To date, this has mainly consisted of ex-Australian C-130E Hercules transports. However, beginning next year, programs to renew and expand current abilities should begin to come to fruition.
The most high-profile aspect of Pakistan's air mobility modernization is the Pakistan Air Force Multi-Role Tanker Transport (MRTT) program. Four Il-78 Midas aircraft from the Ukraine, equipped with a three-point drogue refueling system, will introduce this capability.
Though an Air Force spokesman could not verify the exact variant on order, he did confirm it was the tanker/transport and not the pure tanker version of the Midas.
Its 22,000-kilogram cargo capacity will bring considerable airlift capabilities, akin to the highly versatile Il-76 Candid, on which the Midas is based. The first aircraft is due to arrive early next year, he said.
The Air Force also is exploring the acquisition of tanker/transport aircraft from other sources. One reason is that the Il-78 is not equipped with a boom refueling facility, and therefore is unable to refuel the Air Force's most potent combat aircraft, the F-16. To rectify this, the Air Force is exploring the possibility of acquiring surplus U.S. KC-135 Stratotankers.
During an appearance before the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs subcommittee on South Asia on Sept. 16, Donald Camp, principal deputy assistant secretary for South Asian affairs, stated that the United States is "finalizing a comprehensive training plan" to help Pakistan with its F-16 operations, including aerial refueling.
No clarification from American military sources, however, was forthcoming on whether this would also include surplus Stratotankers.
According to defense analyst Haris Khan of the Web-based think tank Pakistan Military Consortium, Pakistan has also examined alternatives to the KC-135. European defense group EADS "has been talking to [the Air Force] to supply Airbus A330 MRTTs. However, the [Air Force] has been insisting on an MRTT capability built on an A310, which is no longer in production."
The reason for insistence on the A310 is Pakistan International Airline's long experience with the A310-300, he said. There may therefore be a more attractive long-term option to the KC-135.
Improvements in air mobility are not restricted to MRTTs. Pakistan is also establishing an airborne division. The Army has long sought to improve its air mobility, which has traditionally been a weak spot. The Army needs to support operations in the Siachen Glacier and Kashmir theaters of operations, in the ongoing standoff with archrival India; against al-Qaida and the Taliban on the Pakistan-Afghanistan frontier; and right down to the coastal areas.
The commitment on "the Frontier" in itself has pushed the Army to invest heavily in helicopters due to the difficult terrain. Recent acquisitions have included 24 Bell-412EPs, 10 AS 550 Fennecs, 35-plus Mi-17 Hips and several UH-1 Huey transport and utility helicopters.
As Khan stated, however, the Army is still looking to buy more Mi-17s, plus Mi-35 Hinds, CH-47 Chinooks and one dedicated version of a gunship helicopter, to establish an airborne division.
In connection with this, Pakistan is seeking further transport/utility types from America. According to Col. Robin Fontes, chief of the Security Assistance Office, Office of the Defense Representative at the American Embassy here, the U.S. military will shortly confer with the Pakistan Army to determine its "current and future aviation requirements. Once those requirements are defined, we will be able to recommend the most appropriate model(s) of transport/utility helicopters that meet the needs of the Pakistan Army."
The question of acquiring Chinooks is another long, drawn-out saga, as Pakistan had initially hoped to establish a heavy-lift capability through their acquisition in 1989. U.S. military sanctions in 1990, however, ended these efforts. Not only do these serve as vital force multipliers when it comes to air mobility, but also in disaster relief.
The absence of a heavy-lift capability was sorely felt in the relief operations following the earthquake that rocked the country in October 2005. U.S. Navy CH-53E Super Stallions and U.S. and British Chinooks instead did a sterling job in providing heavy-lift assistance under the wistful gaze of Pakistan's own rotary aviators.
Now, according to Khan, six stored CH-47Cs have recently been released for sale to Pakistan by Italy. It is uncertain if they will be purchased, but they currently represent Pakistan's best option of acquiring a heavy-lift capability.
Pakistan Eyes Boost in Transport, Lift - Defense News
Similar threads
