Ukraine Antonov & Turkey jointly work on, An-188 Airlifter project

[Zuraib Qasit Khan]

Ukraine and Turkey to jointly work on An-188 airlifter project


May 2018 news aviation air force industry
POSTED ON FRIDAY, 04 MAY 2018 10:53


Ukraine and Turkey have agreed to jointly implement the production of the An-188 military-transport plane, Ukraine's state defense conglomerate Ukroboronprom said Thursday in a statement.

An-188 airlifter scale model unveiled at Eurasia 2018 airshow
(Credit: Antonov)

The cooperative agreement was reached during the Eurasia-2018 Airshow held in Turkey's southern province of Antalya on April 25-29, said the statement.

"The new aircraft will bring the Ukrainian-Turkish project to the list of world leaders. According to the results of negotiations with the Turkish delegation – headed by the Dr.Ismail Demir, Undersecretary for Defense Industries – it was decided to move to the practical implementation of the project in the near future," said Director General of the SC UkrOboronProm, Pavlo Bukin.

The An-188 aircraft, which is being developed by Ukrainian state-run aircraft producer Antonov, will be equipped with components produced by western countries and will meet the standards of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, it said.

The plane with a carrying capacity of up to 50 tons is set to transport military equipment of all types, construction equipment, helicopters, up to 300 soldiers, as well as humanitarian cargo, according to the statement.

The An-188 would be able to operate on unpaved airfields and land on short runways with a length of 600 meters.

https://twitter.com/x/status/989032915416776705

=====================================================

 

[Taygibay]

So a jet engined A400M, essentially.

I'm waiting for the project of new An124s
or even AN-225 being co-produced with An
eye on the SALIS replacement.

Turkey could join that gaining some ToT/exp.
and making money from the leasing activity.

Good day to you, Tay.

 

[Blue Marlin]

So a jet engined A400M, essentially.

I'm waiting for the project of new An124s
or even AN-225 being co-produced with An
eye on the SALIS replacement.

Turkey could join that gaining some ToT/exp.
and making money from the leasing activity.

Good day to you, Tay.

its a jet engined version of the an-70

its a bit bigger than the a400m
fun fact, the germans preferred the an-70 over the a400m but then politics changed that.

the chinese want to build an225s in china, the urkraine is working on the second an225 which has been a hull for some time.

i doubt the Chinese would be interested in the an-124 considering the y-20 will have larger variants which are in the 120-150 tonne payload, but that would be some time away.

 

[damm1t]

Ah I love this jv hunger strategy of our defense industry which is the fastest way to gain experience and tech.

 

[Armchair]

A great chance for Turkey to get a strategic lifter in the bag at low cost. Smart acquisition. As was the Saab 9-3 purchase. Fast way to develop industry rather than trying to reinvent the wheel like India.

 

[Beast]

So a jet engined A400M, essentially.

I'm waiting for the project of new An124s
or even AN-225 being co-produced with An
eye on the SALIS replacement.

Turkey could join that gaining some ToT/exp.
and making money from the leasing activity.

Good day to you, Tay.

Hi, An-124 and An-225 or C-7 is not as good as you think. Layman will think transport plane the bigger the better. But if u think from a military strategic value. These bigger planes than C-17 and Y-20 transport plane is not as practical in military sense as u think. First, they are too big and heavy that they require special long and bigger runaway to land. In military situation, there will be a limit of types of runaway for you to land. If your area of conflict is 1000km from the most suitable airfield and your main MBT has range of 500km. There is no point of such strategic airlift.

The reason why C-17 ,IL76/478 -and Y-20 are highly value by their respective countries are becos of their toughness and abilities to land on short and ill prepared runaway. This is something C-7, An-124 and An-225 cant do it. In combat context, these gigantic plane with more than 100 tons payload has little value.

 

[jhungary]

Hi, An-124 and An-225 or C-7 is not as good as you think. Layman will think transport plane the bigger the better. But if u think from a military strategic value. These bigger planes than C-17 and Y-20 transport plane is not as practical in military sense as u think. First, they are too big and heavy that they require special long and bigger runaway to land. In military situation, there will be a limit of types of runaway for you to land. If your area of conflict is 1000km from the most suitable airfield and your main MBT has range of 500km. There is no point of such strategic airlift.

The reason why C-17 ,IL76/478 -and Y-20 are highly value by their respective countries are becos of their toughness and abilities to land on short and ill prepared runaway. This is something C-7, An-124 and An-225 cant do it. In combat context, these gigantic plane with more than 100 tons payload has little value.

You are confused between the concept of "Strategic Airlift" with aircraft such as C-5 Galaxy, An-124/225 and "Tactical Airlift" C-17, C-130, A400M, Y-20, IL-76, IL-196

Both method are used, but they have different goal in mind.

Strategic Airlifter is used to support the whole theatre operation. Which can be described as a "Hub-to-Hub" services. You need large airplane with heavy load and long range.

Take US Military Operation in Afghanistan as an example. Strategic Transport would be flight originate from US Air Base in US Mainland to Bagram Air Base, Camp Bastion, KAF. Which serve as major logistic bases in country.

The advantage of using strategic airlifter would include diminished number of flight (You have to replace 1 C-5 flight with 3 C-17 flight with mid-air refuelling, which mean you also have to put a KC-10 somewhere) and item can be ship less fragmented, which mean less package and set up time. Like if I want to ship a 100 ton diesel generator, I can ship it whole in a C-5 which mean I can unload it and use it right-away, however, if I have to ship it using C-17, that mean I have to disassemble it to be carry by 2 C-17 and re-assemble it before I can use it again.

An-225 at Camp Bastion

What you are talking about is Forward Deployment, which is Tactical Airlift.

Tactical Airlifter is smaller, which mean each flight operating on a smaller cost where you can made multiple run on a single day. It served the Area of operation, and used to support combat operation in your AO.

Say for example, if I need to ship 50 tons of ammo (small arms, artillery and so on) from Bagram to FOB Fortress in Kunar, I would need a C-17.

 

[Taygibay]

Thanks for answering that, JH!

Have a great day both, Tay.

 

[Zarvan]

Pakistan should also join the project but on condition that we get engine technology

 

[Beast]

You are confused between the concept of "Strategic Airlift" with aircraft such as C-5 Galaxy, An-124/225 and "Tactical Airlift" C-17, C-130, A400M, Y-20, IL-76, IL-196

Both method are used, but they have different goal in mind.

Strategic Airlifter is used to support the whole theatre operation. Which can be described as a "Hub-to-Hub" services. You need large airplane with heavy load and long range.

Take US Military Operation in Afghanistan as an example. Strategic Transport would be flight originate from US Air Base in US Mainland to Bagram Air Base, Camp Bastion, KAF. Which serve as major logistic bases in country.

The advantage of using strategic airlifter would include diminished number of flight (You have to replace 1 C-5 flight with 3 C-17 flight with mid-air refuelling, which mean you also have to put a KC-10 somewhere) and item can be ship less fragmented, which mean less package and set up time. Like if I want to ship a 100 ton diesel generator, I can ship it whole in a C-5 which mean I can unload it and use it right-away, however, if I have to ship it using C-17, that mean I have to disassemble it to be carry by 2 C-17 and re-assemble it before I can use it again.

View attachment 472476
An-225 at Camp Bastion

What you are talking about is Forward Deployment, which is Tactical Airlift.

Tactical Airlifter is smaller, which mean each flight operating on a smaller cost where you can made multiple run on a single day. It served the Area of operation, and used to support combat operation in your AO.

Say for example, if I need to ship 50 tons of ammo (small arms, artillery and so on) from Bagram to FOB Fortress in Kunar, I would need a C-17.

Yes but C-7, An-124 and An-225 have nicked called Hangar Queen. Their serviceability and reliability are very low. I can bet 3 C-17 airlift will end up cheaper compare to one An-225. Tactical airlift plane will fit strategic airlift too. Unless you have some ultra oversize equipment.

Most military army and airborne equipment can fit C-17 and Y-20 capacity. They are more desirable and much low operation fees compare to bigger An-124 and C-7.

 

[Taygibay]

Yes but C-7, An-124 and An-225 have nicked called Hangar Queen. Their serviceability and reliability are very low. I can bet 3 C-17 airlift will end up cheaper compare to one An-225. Tactical airlift plane will fit strategic airlift too. Unless you have some ultra oversize equipment.

Most military army and airborne equipment can fit C-17 and Y-20 capacity. They are more desirable and much low operation fees compare to bigger An-124 and C-7.

Mate, please, stop trying to push this to sell
your planes. We have noting against chinese
aircrafts but they are not the right tool here.

Strategic lift was provided for many nations
and even NATO by An-124s for a reason.
Russia wants to stop the service and there
is thus both a need and an opportunity now.

That's what I wrote about and that Jhungary
explained!

I strongly applaud if China makes the best ...
say, hammers in the world and the latest model
has WiFi on it. However ... if I want to buy say,
a djembe, I'll be getting it from Africa no matter
how much noise fanboys make extolling the nice
noises their hammer makes depending on what it hits!

Have a great day anyway, Tay.

 

[Beast]

Mate, please, stop trying to push this to sell
your planes. We have noting against chinese
aircrafts but they are not the right tool here.

Strategic lift was provided for many nations
and even NATO by An-124s for a reason.
Russia wants to stop the service and there
is thus both a need and an opportunity now.

That's what I wrote about and that Jhungary
explained!

I strongly applaud if China makes the best ...
say, hammers in the world and the latest model
has WiFi on it. However ... if I want to buy say,
a djembe, I'll be getting it from Africa no matter
how much noise fanboys make extolling the nice
noises their hammer makes depending on what it hits!

Have a great day anyway, Tay.

You are talking nonsense. You like to daydream alot. Can't even walk and then want to run. Here you all countries except 3 countries can make Strategic airlifter and yet Turkey can't even make a C-130J equivalent and yet you want them to jump on An-124 or C-7.

I am just stating facts, if you are not happy. Dont reply to my post. Pakistan and western countries do not share the same value together. Western countries will always try impose values on Pakistan and think Pakistan is always lower than them.

It is in your pipedream for an overseas Pakistanis to think western countries is the best solution for Pakistan.

 

[jhungary]

Yes but C-7, An-124 and An-225 have nicked called Hangar Queen. Their serviceability and reliability are very low. I can bet 3 C-17 airlift will end up cheaper compare to one An-225. Tactical airlift plane will fit strategic airlift too. Unless you have some ultra oversize equipment.

Most military army and airborne equipment can fit C-17 and Y-20 capacity. They are more desirable and much low operation fees compare to bigger An-124 and C-7.

I don't know where you get that "C-5 (not C-7 by the way), An-124, An-225" are nickname hanger queen,

US uses C-5 extensively, and An-225 is basically the lifeline for Antonov Airline.

C-5 is designed to fly with lower sortie than C-17 or C-130 (because of the range and load), but by no mean they are not being used by the US Airforce. C-5 is the only plane that can replace a whole unit in battalion level (as the youtube video said) by lifting in an infantry unit in, and lifting the replacing unit out.

Tactical Airlifter such as C-17 is not a viable candidate for Strategic duty. You can of course fill it if you are lacking a C-5 or An-124, but that would not be in a long run.

You will need 5 to 6 C-17 to fly a single An-225 sortie of up to 250 tons, I highly doubt you can be cheaper to use C-17s to fly a An-225 sortie. Beside, if that is an oversize cargo, you cannot even do C-17 to begin with.

On the other hand, why the second An-225 were never completed is not because of they aren't needed, or money issue, rather, Majority of those part are from Russia and Ukraine stop getting them since the hostility begin between Russia and Ukraine...

 

[Beast]

I don't know where you get that "C-5 (not C-7 by the way), An-124, An-225" are nickname hanger queen,

US uses C-5 extensively, and An-225 is basically the lifeline for Antonov Airline.

C-5 is designed to fly with lower sortie than C-17 or C-130 (because of the range and load), but by no mean they are not being used by the US Airforce. C-5 is the only plane that can replace a whole unit in battalion level (as the youtube video said) by lifting in an infantry unit in, and lifting the replacing unit out.

Tactical Airlifter such as C-17 is not a viable candidate for Strategic duty. You can of course fill it if you are lacking a C-5 or An-124, but that would not be in a long run.

You will need 5 to 6 C-17 to fly a single An-225 sortie of up to 250 tons, I highly doubt you can be cheaper to use C-17s to fly a An-225 sortie. Beside, if that is an oversize cargo, you cannot even do C-17 to begin with.

On the other hand, why the second An-225 were never completed is not because of they aren't needed, or money issue, rather, Majority of those part are from Russia and Ukraine stop getting them since the hostility begin between Russia and Ukraine...

https://www.avgeekery.com/the-c-5-galaxy-also-known-as-fred-read-to-find-out-why/

 

[jhungary]

https://www.avgeekery.com/the-c-5-galaxy-also-known-as-fred-read-to-find-out-why/

So, you are basing your claim on a website and some aircraft historian nobody ever heard of?

By the way, C-5 was referred to FRED in the Airforce is because of the cost overrun on the project, not because it was a gas guzzler