Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Share
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2262
    Points : 2283
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Thu Sep 06, 2018 7:41 pm

    d_taddei2 wrote:
    eehnie wrote:Aircraft Industries, the company that produces the Let L-410 filed for bankruptcy in 2016. Historically it was a Czech company recently controled by new Russian owners that wanted to move the production of this aircraft to Russia. The main reason for this bankruptcy was the lack of orders for new aircrafts and monetary disadvantages caused by the depreciation of the Rouble.

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1889713.html

    Sued for bankruptcy of Czech company Aircraft Industries

    bmpd
    May 8th, 2016
    As reported on May 3, 2016 on the web resource aviaforum.ru , Czech aircraft company Aero Vodochody Aerospace today [May 3] filed a lawsuit recognizing the insolvent of another Czech aircraft company - Aircraft Industries (formerly Let, fully controlled by JSC "Ural Mining and Metallurgical Company "(UMMC), owned by Iskander Makhmudov) .

    According to the public, the total debt of Aircraft Industries exceeds 400 million kroons (14.8 million euros), including 38.3 million kroons (1.42 million euros) to Aero Vodochody. The problems of Aircraft Industries are related to the lack of orders and the sharp rise in price of L-410 aircraft on the Russian market due to the fall in the ruble against the dollar.


    l-410_uktus

    The last aircraft delivered to Russia by Aircraft Industries L-410UVP-E20 - board with serial number 3012 and temporary Czech registration OK-JPI, received in February 2016 by UMMC charter airline Uktus, based in Koltsovo (Ekaterinburg) (c) Aircraft Industries (via www.ato.ru )



    Ilona Plashkova, CEO of Aircraft Industries, said: "I am not authorized to comment on this situation, we will be able to make an official statement tomorrow, when the owners of the company arrive in Kunovitsy." I contacted them, informed them of the situation and expect a response from Russia. "

    Teresa Vrublova, representative of Aero Vodochody, said: "The issue of filing a lawsuit was a long time ago, but as a result of negotiations with Aircraft Industries this step was unavoidable.Currently, Aircraft Industries owes us 38.3 million kroner for the supplied L -410. Due to the financial problems of Aircraft Industries in December 2015, we jointly worked out a debt repayment schedule, but Aircraft Industries was unable to fulfill it.Aero executives offered to hold an additional round of negotiations with Aircraft Industries, but the shareholders of the company this proposal was rejected. "


    The bmpd comment . As our blog has already reported , Aircraft Industries is experiencing serious difficulties due to a sharp decline in sales of L-410UVP-E20 light passenger aircraft manufactured by the plant, primarily in the Russian market - the main market for these aircraft - and the corresponding termination of orders for these aircraft on the part of Russian small regional air carriers, which themselves in no small part found themselves in a difficult financial situation. Financing of the acquisition of L-410UVP-E20 aircraft by these carriers in recent years was mainly carried out by the authorities of the Russian regions, which actually stopped allocating funds for this because of the economic downturn. The purchase of L-410UVP-E20 aircraft by the Russian Ministry of Defense has also been discontinued .

    From 2008 to the present, Aircraft Industries produced 84 L-410UVP-E20 aircraft, of which at least 46 have been delivered to Russian customers. At the same time, comments on the web-site aviaforum.ru indicate the high cost of operating the L-410UVP aircraft -E20 in Russian conditions, caused by the high cost of spare parts delivered from the Czech Republic and Czech service. As a result, it is estimated, in Russia currently no more than a dozen L-410UVP-E20 aircraft are actually operated (without cars of the Ministry of Defense of Russia).

    The financial issues likely have been solved with public help, but the lack of orders has not been solved, and a good number of the last units of L-410 produced in the Czech Republic, remain in the hands of the company that produced them, without a delivery to a external client, like you can see here:

    https://russianplanes.net/planelist/Let/L-410

    Without a sale of these aircrafts previously produced, the launch of the production in Russia is very very difficult.

    But of course, no-one of the real data have a meaning for you. You prefer to ignore the real data. Your words and insults are empty of reality.


    Your last sentence sums you up perfectly you fail to accept the words of Rostec on the TVS 2DTS. Your quite simply a bigot.

    At the end of the day if the TVS 2DTS doesn't get built in the time frame given I will eat my words and if it does you can eat your words this I am happy to agree on.

    Many of your sentences prove your lack of technical and of management knowledge.

    The moderators should take into account your repeated insults.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7071
    Points : 7167
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  PapaDragon on Thu Sep 06, 2018 8:23 pm


    I just love when random online noobs try to teach veteran paratrooper about merits of different aircraft used for parachuting... lol1
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1356
    Points : 1534
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Thu Sep 06, 2018 9:59 pm

    Eehnie I keep forgetting your the Oracle of everything including being an engineer, technician, military strategist, economist, political expert, And aviation guru. Way beyond the likes of Rostec, ex servicemen, generals, presidents, those who build and sell military equipment as well as multi millionaire/billionaire salesmen and companies. I salute you sir lol!

    You fail to even recognise articles and statements by companies etc. Instead running roughshod over there articles and comments because you believe that your views are correct regardless you do it with everything on this forum. At least others accept when there wrong or accept articles and statements even if it's not what they want to hear. But always feel you are superior that. There's a word for it it's called bigot.

    Your last comments were completely ridiculous. You display all of the above fact.

    You failed to even see that I ended the argument saying that if they produce TVS 2DTS in the time then that you can eat your words and likewise if they didn't I would eat mine. It's called a settling a disagreement or compromise maybe that's something that you can't comprehend in your superior complex.
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2489
    Points : 3367
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Vladimir79 on Thu Sep 06, 2018 11:06 pm

    eehnie wrote:

    Spare parts market and second hand market can work still, and the Russian Armed Forces can take advantage of it, providing spare parts to the civil makets, but those who are purchasing one used An-2, very likely can not afford a new aircraft.

    The main problem of these aircrafts in civil makets is the profitability. It is significantly easier to make a profitable service with the purchase of a very low cost used An-2, than with a new aircraft of the same cathegory.

    This type of aircrafts are losing even the agricultural market for new units with the apparition of modern UAVs, that can be expensive in a first stage, but will have better price in the long term, because structurally the UAVs allow lower costs of production and operation.

    I am having a hard time following your argument.  You think that there is no market for relaunch of An-2 because a) helicopters are better and b) there are enough used An-2 they won't buy it?  The market for used An-2 gets smaller every year and is quickly disappearing.  The utility helicopters you advocate instead of it are several times more expensive and do not fill the same roles it is used for.  Now you are advocating UAVs for crop dusting?  Tell me which one has the capacity to do the job at the price?  The only drones with that kind of payload are about 10X more expensive than the composite An-2 and that doesn't include the control station.

    With the time, with the exhaustion of the oldest aircrafts, it is likely that parachute training evolves to situations closer to the reality of the war operations.

    So you think the same thing about fighter training too?  Should we get rid of prop trainers and advanced jet trainers and just stick them in the cockpit of Su-35?
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 2128
    Points : 2122
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Isos on Thu Sep 06, 2018 11:18 pm

    So you think the same thing about fighter training too?  Should we get rid of prop trainers and advanced jet trainers and just stick them in the cockpit of Su-35?

    If the price for su-35 provided by mike and LMFS in the su-30 thread is real, it wouldn't be a bad idea lol1

    17 million for an su-35 compared to aprox. 15 million for adv. Jet trainers like yak 130 ...
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2262
    Points : 2283
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Thu Sep 06, 2018 11:43 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:I just love when random online noobs try to teach veteran paratrooper about merits of different aircraft used for parachuting... lol1

    Can you explain me how the vehicles of the BMD-4(M) family will be used by the Russian Airborne Troops?

    It is obvious that a real combat operation where the Russian Airborne Troops be involved today requires transport aircrafts of at least around 20 tons of payload (= transport aircrafts of the size cathegory of the An-10/12, that are also of the same size cathegory of the Su-Superjet airliner).

    If you want you can ask to Vladimir79 which transport aircrafts were used for the training of parachuting with their armoured vehicles.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2262
    Points : 2283
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Fri Sep 07, 2018 12:24 am

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    eehnie wrote:

    Spare parts market and second hand market can work still, and the Russian Armed Forces can take advantage of it, providing spare parts to the civil makets, but those who are purchasing one used An-2, very likely can not afford a new aircraft.

    The main problem of these aircrafts in civil makets is the profitability. It is significantly easier to make a profitable service with the purchase of a very low cost used An-2, than with a new aircraft of the same cathegory.

    This type of aircrafts are losing even the agricultural market for new units with the apparition of modern UAVs, that can be expensive in a first stage, but will have better price in the long term, because structurally the UAVs allow lower costs of production and operation.

    I am having a hard time following your argument.  You think that there is no market for relaunch of An-2 because a) helicopters are better and b) there are enough used An-2 they won't buy it?  The market for used An-2 gets smaller every year and is quickly disappearing.  The utility helicopters you advocate instead of it are several times more expensive and do not fill the same roles it is used for.  Now you are advocating UAVs for crop dusting?  Tell me which one has the capacity to do the job at the price?  The only drones with that kind of payload are about 10X more expensive than the composite An-2 and that doesn't include the control station.

    No this is not my point.

    The main evidence about a lack of market for auxiliary/civil aircrafts (except trainers) between roughly 2.2 tons and 45.5 tons of Maximum Take-Off Weight is the lack of real orders of the real customers in the last decades. The rest are only comments about different cases with low sales to document the fact and the reasons that lead to it.

    Im not advocating for helicopters, Im signaling how the orders for helicopters are bigger and helicopters dominate de market. Neither Im advocating for UAVs, Im signaling that UAVs are entering on the market of agricultural aircrafts.

    Vladimir79 wrote:
    eehnie wrote:With the time, with the exhaustion of the oldest aircrafts, it is likely that parachute training evolves to situations closer to the reality of the war operations.

    So you think the same thing about fighter training too?  Should we get rid of prop trainers and advanced jet trainers and just stick them in the cockpit of Su-35?

    The case is different, totally different, because the An-2 was not designed for this purpose. The An-2 is doing this training job as secondary role, like the MiG-15 has been used in North Korea.

    If Russia needs some day a trainer aircraft for parachute training or auxiliary aircraft pilot training, Russia will find specific training aircrafts.

    In the case of the training for auxiliary aircraft pilots, the specific training aircraft would be very likely under 2.2 tons of MTOW. Like the Diamond DA42 but local, if the Yak-152 is not enough.

    In the case of the parachute jump training, I doubt even about the need of this kind of aircrafts, because the operational costs per jump of using bigger aircrafts for training is likely to be smaller. As example, to do 100 training jumps with a bigger aircraft is only necessary one aircraft and one fly. To do 100 training jumps with An-2, around 10 flies of one or several aircrafts are required.
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1356
    Points : 1534
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Fri Sep 07, 2018 8:42 am

    eehnie wrote:
    d_taddei2 wrote:...

    You proved to have zero brain and to talk happily about what you know not, and you continue in your line. Nothing to save of your comments.

    Eehnie on many occasions you show you have no brain and live in a fantasy world of your own. You have no military experience clearly. I remember when you were talking about getting rid of 82mm mortars a useless and than 120mm mortars were perfectly easy to be man portable which many others including me refuted your claims yet you said we were all wrong yet you have never man packed a mortar of any size in your life.

    And you contradicted yourself you were advocating the use of helicopters you stated that they could do the job better and quoted a list of states etc you even fail to see when you even contradict yourself. But you won't accept ever when you're wrong you have never done even when proven wrong.

    And sales being low is not necessarily and indication of it being useless there's many types of aircraft where only small numbers are built maybe because there a fill a unique role and not everyone needs that role. But you're talking about a successful aircraft being useless and having no future yet your the ONLY one who things it's useless and yet you can't accept your wrong even you believe Rostec are wrong and ex servicemen are wrong. At the end of the day there is a need for this type of aircraft regardless if you think it not. It might not see the same sales as An-2 but it will see sales and come into production. And with ever increasing sanctions it's even more likely Russia will produce such an aircraft.

    Also comparing a military transport aircraft to a passenger jet as if the su superjet is going to fulfil the same role when it was never designed for such. Parachuting men and parachuting armoured vehicles is a completely different requirement and obviously an An-2 was not designed for the latter but neither was an Ansat or ka-60.

    Parachute training normally gets done in small aircraft to begin with before moving onto larger aircraft with more men in the sky this is how the training is done and it would not be cheaper flying something bigger to drop 10 men. The British army never used big aircraft for jumps at the start of training. And at one point they even considered scrapping jumps in big aircraft for smaller aircraft the reason was if an aircraft was shot down it would be a mass loss of life and having smaller aircraft reduced the number of potential dead if an aircraft was shot down. In the end they didn't go for it due to lack of funds believe it or not and that they saw parachute drops as a declining tactic.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2262
    Points : 2283
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Fri Sep 07, 2018 1:07 pm

    The man is even unable of exposing the words of others like they are. It is obvious his low understanding hability and his wish of distorting the words of others to hide its own inhability. Always obsesed with the less modern part of the Russian arsenals, always talking about weird options like if Russia would be Mali, and unable to see how Russia moves forward.

    For the utility aircraft role, that combines small transport and small airliner roles, the reality is that helicopters dominate the markets. And the main reason for it is that helicopters are better adapted to what the custormers want offering them advantages over this kind of aircrafts. This is not to advocate for helicopters, it is only to expose the reality.

    Helicopters are the main option for the customers of air auxiliary/civil vehicles between roughly 2.2 and 45.5 tons of MTOW. India is interested in the Ka-226, China is interested in the Mi-46/AHL. The Russian civil airlines are interested in the Su-Superjet and in other bigger airliners. The Russian Armed Forces need transport aircrafts of at least the size of the An-10/12 (20 tons of payload). This is the reality. Not other.

    In the other side...

    All the successors of the An-72/71/74 have been unable to reach 50 units produced completed (this is also the Mi-46/AHL size cathegory). The production of the An-148/158/178 is being stopped in Russia by lack of orders:

    7th cathegory Airliner aircraft: An-148/158/178 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Antonov/An-148
    7th cathegory Transport aircraft: Be-200 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Beriev/Be-200
    7th cathegory Transport aircraft: Yak-44 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-44
    7th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Tu-414 https://web.archive.org/web/20070208060848/http://www.tupolev.ru:80/English/Show.asp?SectionID=124

    All the successors of the An-24/26/30/32 have been unable to reach 50 units produced completed (this is also the Mi-38 size cathegory):

    8th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Tu-324 https://web.archive.org/web/20070208060848/http://www.tupolev.ru:80/English/Show.asp?SectionID=124
    8th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Il-114 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Ilushin/Il-114
    8th cathegory Airliner aircraft: An-140 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Antonov/An-140
    8th cathegory Transport aircraft: Il-112 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Ilushin/Il-112
    8th cathegory Transport aircraft: Tu-130/136 https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/tu-136.htm
    8th cathegory Transport aircraft: MiG-110 http://avia.pro/blog/mig-110

    While the Yak-130 trainer surpassed this level of production successfully, the last successful transport/airliner aircraft in the size cathegory of the Mi-8 and Ka-27 families is earlier still. All the recent projects have been unable to reach 50 units produced completed:

    9th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Yak-48 http://avia.pro/blog/yak-48
    9th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Il-108 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-108
    9th cathegory Transport aircraft: Su-80 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Sukhoi/Su-80
    9th cathegory Transport aircraft: Be-112 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_Be-112

    All the successors of the Che-22 have been unable to reach 50 units produced completed (this is also the Ka-60/62 size cathegory), and a good number of units of the L-410 remain in stock without finding a customer that purchase them:

    10th cathegory Trainer aircraft: MiG-AT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-AT
    10th cathegory Airliner aircraft: M-302 http://www.airwar.ru/enc/aliner/m302.html
    10th cathegory Airliner aircraft: M-202 http://www.airwar.ru/enc/aliner/m202.html
    10th cathegory Transport aircraft: TVS 2DTS https://ruslet.webnode.cz/technika/ruska-technika/letecka-technika/sibnia/tvs-2dts/
    10th cathegory Transport aircraft: T-208 Eagle http://www.airwar.ru/enc/la/t208.html

    All the successors of the An-2/4/6 have been unable to reach 50 units produced completed (this is also the Mi-Ansat size cathegory):

    11th cathegory Transport aircraft: T-101/130/210 http://www.airwar.ru/enc/craft/t101.html http://www.airwar.ru/enc/la/t130.html http://www.airwar.ru/enc/la/t210.html
    11th cathegory Transport aircraft: T-207 http://www.airwar.ru/enc/la/t207.html
    11th cathegory Airliner aircraft: M-102 http://www.airwar.ru/enc/aliner/m102.html
    11th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Rysachok http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Technoavia/Rysachyok
    11th cathegory Airliner aircraft: MiG-125 http://www.airwar.ru/enc/aliner/mig125.html
    11th cathegory Transport aircraft: T-115 Niva http://www.airwar.ru/enc/la/t115.html
    11th cathegory Airliner aircraft: T-440 http://www.airwar.ru/enc/la/t440.html

    The last successful aircraft in the size cathegory of the Ka-226 is also earlier. All the recent projects have been unable to reach 50 units produced completed:

    12th cathegory Transport aircraft: T-517 Fermer http://www.airwar.ru/enc/la/t517.html
    12th cathegory Airliner aircraft: GM-17 Viper http://www.airwar.ru/enc/la/gm17.html
    12th cathegory Airliner aircraft: M-101 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Myasishchev/M-101
    12th cathegory Trainer aircraft: SR-10 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KB_SAT_SR-10
    12th cathegory Transport aircraft: SM92 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technoavia_SM92_Finist
    12th cathegory Transport aircraft: M-500 http://www.airwar.ru/enc/la/m500.html
    12th cathegory Transport aircraft: T-507 http://www.airwar.ru/enc/la/t507.html
    12th cathegory Transport aircraft: T-511 Aist-M http://www.airwar.ru/enc/la/t511.html
    12th cathegory Transport aircraft: LA-8 http://avia.pro/blog/la-8-aerovolga-tehnicheskie-harakteristiki-foto
    12th cathegory Airliner aircraft: SA-20P http://www.airwar.ru/enc/la/sa20p.html
    12th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Be-103 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Beriev/Be-103
    12th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Akkord-201 http://www.airwar.ru/enc/la/akkord201.html

    Checking case per case the market reality that these models suffered and are suffering, my words are perfectly understandable.
    To note that the far bigger and far more expensive An-124 surpassed 50 units produced completed.


    Last edited by eehnie on Tue Sep 11, 2018 12:46 pm; edited 3 times in total
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18073
    Points : 18633
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Fri Sep 07, 2018 4:46 pm


    The orders of An-2 after 1970 were minimal.

    They were simple to operate and easy to keep running and there was nothing else that could do the job.


    Many designs wanted to be the successor of the An-2, but failed both for military and civil purposes. The concept is outdated.

    there is nothing wrong with the concept and the fact that this new aircraft has been developed shows it is still a requirement... it is just that nothing has solved all the problems in a simple affordable way... we don't know if this model will succeed either... that US engine might be too expensive or difficult to maintain...

    For military purposes the An-2 has too low service ceiling. 4500m means the aircraft can not fly avoiding manpads.

    The weak IR signature would make it a very difficult target from that range...

    Of course the units in service still are used, but in the refered to the Russian Armed Forces very likely are under exhaustion in the mid-term and will not have replacement with aircrafts of its size cathegory. In this aircraft cathegory helicopters dominate.

    The An-2 is vastly superior to helos and is able to operate from austere strips in very primitive conditions with basic maintainence and support.

    It is only $1.5m per unit, that is the selling point. There are many countries that cannot afford more but still need this capability.

    That is cheap... you wont get a helicopter with this sort of performance for that price.

    A lot of previous attempts to replace the An-2 failed because they were too complicated or too expensive, or simply couldn't operate in the conditions the AN-2 can operate in.

    The farms need it for its high capacity and slow speed. I could see the market go into the thousands. It is not a competitor of helicopters which comes at a much higher price. It is not ordered heavily today because it has outdated parts, this will fix that.

    I remember reading somewhere that it is actually very popular in Canada and the US once it got clearance to fly... the big problem is that it is not allowed to be used commercially... which would normally cripple sales, yet they still seem to have sold some...

    Can you explain me how the vehicles of the BMD-4(M) family will be used by the Russian Airborne Troops?

    It is obvious that a real combat operation where the Russian Airborne Troops be involved today requires transport aircrafts of at least around 20 tons of payload (= transport aircrafts of the size cathegory of the An-10/12, that are also of the same size cathegory of the Su-Superjet airliner).

    If you want you can ask to Vladimir79 which transport aircrafts were used for the training of parachuting with their armoured vehicles.

    Not every transport aircraft needs to carry armour... delivering a group of 6-12 paratroopers does not need an Il-476...

    The case is different, totally different, because the An-2 was not designed for this purpose. The An-2 is doing this training job as secondary role, like the MiG-15 has been used in North Korea.

    The An-2 is used because it is ideal for the training role...

    A composite version with better performance would be even better...

    In the case of the parachute jump training, I doubt even about the need of this kind of aircrafts, because the operational costs per jump of using bigger aircrafts for training is likely to be smaller. As example, to do 100 training jumps with a bigger aircraft is only necessary one aircraft and one fly. To do 100 training jumps with An-2, around 10 flies of one or several aircrafts are required.

    For a major exercise you might want hundreds or even thousands of jumpers, but during training you might only want a dozen to jump... there would be an enormous cost difference between an An-2 or variant and an An-12 or Il-476.

    For the things the An-2 does no helicopter can do... they are much harder to fly, much much more expensive, and simply not an option...

    An An-2 upgrade as described is 1.5 million... you would not get an Mi-17 for less than 20 million and its operating costs would be much much higher...

    The requirement for a small light aircraft to operate on rough air strips and be easy to operate and cheap to operate and maintain... there is really nothing that comes close to the An-2 and if this new version is all it is cracked up to be it will continue operation for another 70 odd years...
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2262
    Points : 2283
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Fri Sep 07, 2018 5:58 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Many designs wanted to be the successor of the An-2, but failed both for military and civil purposes. The concept is outdated.

    there is nothing wrong with the concept and the fact that this new aircraft has been developed shows it is still a requirement... it is just that nothing has solved all the problems in a simple affordable way... we don't know if this model will succeed either... that US engine might be too expensive or difficult to maintain...

    You are ignoring the main weakness of the concept: The lack of sales. The lack of interest and orders of the customers.

    GarryB wrote:
    For military purposes the An-2 has too low service ceiling. 4500m means the aircraft can not fly avoiding manpads.

    The weak IR signature would make it a very difficult target from that range...

    Say it to Ukraine.

    GarryB wrote:
    Of course the units in service still are used, but in the refered to the Russian Armed Forces very likely are under exhaustion in the mid-term and will not have replacement with aircrafts of its size cathegory. In this aircraft cathegory helicopters dominate.

    The An-2 is vastly superior to helos and is able to operate from austere strips in very primitive conditions with basic maintainence and support.

    Your words against public specifications.

    GarryB wrote:A lot of previous attempts to replace the An-2 failed because they were too complicated or too expensive, or simply couldn't operate in the conditions the AN-2 can operate in.

    I remember you saying the Risachok was the successor of the An-2/4/6. But the Risachok also lacks orders. The numbers of An-2/4/6 are declining with the time, but there are not sales of their supposed successors. These aircrafts are not being useful, are not attracting to the custormers. Not even to the former users of An-2/4/6. While you continue ignoring the main problem, you will continue giving wrong opinions, like at the time of the Risachok.

    GarryB wrote:
    The case is different, totally different, because the An-2 was not designed for this purpose. The An-2 is doing this training job as secondary role, like the MiG-15 has been used in North Korea.

    The An-2 is used because it is ideal for the training role...

    A composite version with better performance would be even better...

    Then it is not ideal. Well, aircrafts for training of auxiliary/civil aircraft pilots are not a new concept. The development of this concept is leading to aircrafts in the mold of the Diamond DA42, that are under 2.2 tons MTOW. These aircrafts allow to smaller operational costs than the An-2 for the training of auxiliary/civil aircraft pilots.

    GarryB wrote:
    In the case of the parachute jump training, I doubt even about the need of this kind of aircrafts, because the operational costs per jump of using bigger aircrafts for training is likely to be smaller. As example, to do 100 training jumps with a bigger aircraft is only necessary one aircraft and one fly. To do 100 training jumps with An-2, around 10 flies of one or several aircrafts are required.

    For a major exercise you might want hundreds or even thousands of jumpers, but during training you might only want a dozen to jump... there would be an enormous cost difference between an An-2 or variant and an An-12 or Il-476.

    Under which conditions training jumps can not be grouped? This is not a realistic situation of management. Real exceptions would be minimal if existing.
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1356
    Points : 1534
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Fri Sep 07, 2018 9:00 pm

    eehnie wrote:The man is even unable of exposing the words of others like they are. It is obvious his low understanding hability and his wish of distorting the words of others to hide its own inhability. Always obsesed with the less modern part of the Russian arsenals, always talking about weird options like if Russia would be Mali, and unable to see how Russia moves forward

    Distorting words? I think that's you eehnie I have Never stated or compared Russia to Mali. And have never stated or put across that can't or how it moves forward. I am obsessed with less modern arsenals and weird options? That's very rich coming from you who talks about old arsenals and is COMPLETELY obsessed decommissioning and what YOU believe is exhausted and what is likely to be exhausted and what is useless in posts that almost take the whole page up this is FACT. I've commentsed on many things eehnie and most of my threads in relation to older equipment are well over a year old and you had no problems in contributing to the thread and making posts. So before you start to talk out of your ass take a closer look at yourself. Copying and pasting crap from websites that takes up most of the page nobody reads the crap. I ask questions looking for answers or views or contribute on areas I know. You however disagree with everyone and believe everything you put on this forum is gospel you can't never admit when your wrong nor can take advice or views from ex servicemen as credible information as was proven in the 120mm mortar discussion. Now I know why some have you on ignore. Your not an expert on everything eehnie it's about time you realised that.
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1356
    Points : 1534
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Fri Sep 07, 2018 9:31 pm

    Eehnie you stated "You are ignoring the main weakness of the concept: The lack of sales. The lack of interest and orders of the customers."

    Your ignoring what everyone has been saying nobody mentioned sales or stated that it would see the same sales as An -2 but that the aircraft was useful and that a replacement was need so who is doing the ignoring?

    As for training as I've already stated training starts off using small aircraft before moving up onto bigger aircraft with more troops being involved a novice jumper doesn't just get chucked into a large exercise being thrown out of a hercules along with 100's of others in the sky. In the UK they start of jumping out of a Britten-Norman Defender a few times before moving onto a hercules. Please observe this point.

    Theres already work being done on the building of the facility to produce the TVS 2DTS and they expect 200 to be built this was signed off by various Russian ministries and Russian helicopter holding company. I have never stated it will see the same sales as An -2 but I do see the benefits of having such an aircraft.

    As far as I am aware no An-2 was shot down in Ukraine. But I do know that it has a reduced signature and that the north Koreans reduced it further by replacing parts with wood lol. Although I ain't sure how effective it was.

    As many have said it's main strengths are cheap to buy maintain and operate as well being able to take off and land on rough ground. I think this topic has been talked to death now with you being the only one to think it's a useless design and concept and An-2 wasn't good. Everyone else thinks different. And I know that you will never accept these views of others or be swayed to change your mind. That's fine we can wait and see what happens to the TVS 2DTS as I've said before time will tell. Let's all agree to disagree I think this is a reasonable compromise to the debate because we all seem to be saying and covering the same points over and over again. Do you at least agree with that?
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2262
    Points : 2283
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Sat Sep 08, 2018 9:13 am

    Do you see how you distort the words? I said not you compared Russia to Mali. I said that with your obsession of talking about weird update options for really old material you talk about Russia like if it would be Mali.

    The process of decommissioning armament and auxiliary material is real and is deep, as we can see in news like this.

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t4072p50-older-warfare-performance-and-short-mid-term-decomissions#228905

    franco wrote:MOSCOW, July 4 (Itar-Tass) - RIA Novosti. The number of models of weapons and military equipment decreased in the Armed Forces of Russia from 2014 from 3,900 to 2,600 items, follows from the materials of the Book of Records of the Armed Forces, published on Wednesday on the website of the Ministry of Defense.

    "The type of weapons, military and special equipment of the Armed Forces developed in 2014 made it possible to reduce the branded composition of the weapons, military and special equipment fleet from 3.9 to 2.6 thousand samples," reads the materials of the RF Armed Forces Records Book.

    It is noted that such a reduction made it possible to reduce the costs of maintenance of machinery.

    A reduction of the composition of the Russian arsenals fromm 3900 to 2600 different items, means the total decommission of 1300 items since 2014. Just 1/3 of them, a 33.333%. And some items more will follow in the short-term and the mid-term.

    This is real, and something that you still assumed not. Many of the weapons (and their ammunition) for which you are finding always weird options are totally exhausted at this point in the arsenals of Russia. You will need to propose them to countries like Mali.

    In the refered to the aircrafts, you can prepare yourself for the total decommission in the following years of the Be-6/12, Mi-6/10/22, An-22, L-39, An-2 and surely something else of foreign origin. Do not blame me.

    If you see some of these aircrafts present in the Russian Armed Forces after the end of 2025, you will be able to say I was wrong on something.
    If you see some of the aircrafts marked in blue or purble in the list, in which Im including the TVS-2DTS, surpassing 50 units produced completed, you will be able to say I was wrong on something.
    If you see the Russian production of the L-410 to surpass 50 units produced completed, you will be able to say that I was wrong on something.
    If you see the Diamond DAt2 or other of the aircrafts marked in blue in the previous list, officially adopted and entering the Russian Armed Forces you will be able to say that I was wrong on something.
    And you will have also more opportunities for land and sea based material.

    But is unlikely you will find big mistakes in my words, because unlike you I know a little of what Im talking about. You has been insulting me in several comments, do not expect kind words from me.
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1356
    Points : 1534
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Sat Sep 08, 2018 11:54 am

    eehnie wrote:Do you see how you distort the words? I said not you compared Russia to Mali. I said that with your obsession of talking about weird update options for really old material you talk about Russia like if it would be Mali.

    The process of decommissioning armament and auxiliary material is real and is deep, as we can see in news like this.

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t4072p50-older-warfare-performance-and-short-mid-term-decomissions#228905

    franco wrote:MOSCOW, July 4 (Itar-Tass) - RIA Novosti. The number of models of weapons and military equipment decreased in the Armed Forces of Russia from 2014 from 3,900 to 2,600 items, follows from the materials of the Book of Records of the Armed Forces, published on Wednesday on the website of the Ministry of Defense.

    "The type of weapons, military and special equipment of the Armed Forces developed in 2014 made it possible to reduce the branded composition of the weapons, military and special equipment fleet from 3.9 to 2.6 thousand samples," reads the materials of the RF Armed Forces Records Book.

    It is noted that such a reduction made it possible to reduce the costs of maintenance of machinery.

    A reduction of the composition of the Russian arsenals fromm 3900 to 2600 different items, means the total decommission of 1300 items since 2014. Just 1/3 of them, a 33.333%. And some items more will follow in the short-term and the mid-term.

    This is real, and something that you still assumed not. Many of the weapons (and their ammunition) for which you are finding always weird options are totally exhausted at this point in the arsenals of Russia. You will need to propose them to countries like Mali.

    In the refered to the aircrafts, you can prepare yourself for the total decommission in the following years of the Be-6/12, Mi-6/10/22, An-22, L-39, An-2 and surely something else of foreign origin. Do not blame me.

    If you see some of these aircrafts present in the Russian Armed Forces after the end of 2025, you will be able to say I was wrong on something.
    If you see some of the aircrafts marked in blue or purble in the list, in which Im including the TVS-2DTS, surpassing 50 units produced completed, you will be able to say I was wrong on something.
    If you see the Russian production of the L-410 to surpass 50 units produced completed, you will be able to say that I was wrong on something.
    If you see the Diamond DAt2 or other of the aircrafts marked in blue in the previous list, officially adopted and entering the Russian Armed Forces you will be able to say that I was wrong on something.
    And you will have also more opportunities for land and sea based material.

    But is unlikely you will find big mistakes in my words, because unlike you I know a little of what Im talking about. You has been insulting me in several comments, do not expect kind words from me.

    Firstly I don't have an obsession something I've clearly pointed out and you fail to see my other posts because that's how you are. Also you clearly have an obsession with decommissioning that's a fact an obsession doesn't have to be fake or make believe you know. And what you completely fail to see in my posts is that they are not always directed at the Russian Armed Forces but rather for export markets or a solution for other countries. And as for insults it's as if you have done any insults to others. It's also fact that you clog up threads with massive copy and paste posts which almost take up the whole page. And I never questioned decommissioning on any of the aircrafts mentioned so you obviously have that wrong on my opinions. I was questioning the usefulness of the An-2 and production of the TVS 2DTS nothing else. I also posted another post of which you failed to observe and digest. But it's typical with people who like to see them as an expert on everything. You mentioned you know a little bit about the subject then that would imply that you don't know everything eehnie but yet you refuse to accept other people's knowledge on the subject just like the mortar debate you failed to accept the advice of ex servicemen and yet you have avoided to mention that in your posts back at me but that exactly what you do. You can't admit when your wrong and you can't accept that someone knows more about the subject than you. Nobody on this forum is an expert on everything. Majority of the time it's personal views and information obtained from the Internet which isn't always 100% credible we can all read up things on the Internet but its doesnt make us experts and the information we read might not even be 100% factual , small minority actually have military experience on here. Can I ask do you have any military experience? (Genuine question)

    This forum is about sharing views, news, information and experience and just you or I or anyone else posts something doesn't make it gospel. We have to accept people's experiences who actually have done military service. Your entitled to your view as am I as well as others are but our views are less credible than people's experiences and comments made from official sources.


    So as for the TVS 2DTS and the comments made by Rostec that's currently what I am going with that they state 200 will be made and that they are building production facilities and that it was signed off my various ministries and Russian helicopter holding company I personally think there might be a delay as there normally is and with sanctions. But like I said we will see. As for the L410 I can't see anymore being produced and I never expected anymore either. I already had a discussion on the diamond sometime back. As for decommissioning we have both talked about it and most of it is already out of service and likely being cannibalised for other countries still using the equipment as well scrapping but I won't go into detail. And also on my posts from well over a year or two on older systems you as I pointed out were quite happy to contribute to the thread so you too are guilty of being interested enough to contribute to the subject. As for weird upgrades these weren't directed as russian use but for export to get rid of older systems and make money as well as suggestions for other countries Cuba has done a lot of this north Korea as well syria has also done a few things as well. But the most outdated stuff should be scrapped or museum pieces or private collector's but I've also talked about that as well or have you forgotten lol.

    Anyway enough said on the subject and you didn't digest my other post or accept what said this was a conclusion to the debate with a compromise. But you didn't want that's fine.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2262
    Points : 2283
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Sat Sep 08, 2018 3:58 pm


    Still unable to see that if some item is totally exhausted Russia, and is out of production since decades, there is nothing to export.

    Better if you apply your forum behaviour lessons to yourself, before to insult me again.
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1356
    Points : 1534
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Sat Sep 08, 2018 5:37 pm

    eehnie wrote:
    Still unable to see that if some item is totally exhausted Russia, and is out of production since decades, there is nothing to export.

    Better if you apply your forum behaviour lessons to yourself, before to insult me again.

    Eehnie you just back up everything I've said about you. That you fail to answer questions fail to accept when you're wrong fail to see your the obsessed one. You always fail accept advice of those who know. I however don't act like this and it's very clear that I don't.  You still fail to see reason and think your right 100% all the time when in FACT your not. It's fine keep lying to yourself it doesn't bother me that you live a deluded life on here. Everything I've said about you is true and factual and everyone can see it. You fail to compromise which is another clear indication of your superior complex. So eehnie why won't you answer the simple questions? ???????

    Because you know that the true answers are not what you care to admit. You answer what you want and fail to answer or acknowledge other questions this is very clear in your posts
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2262
    Points : 2283
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Sat Sep 08, 2018 6:38 pm

    d_taddei2 wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    Still unable to see that if some item is totally exhausted Russia, and is out of production since decades, there is nothing to export.

    Better if you apply your forum behaviour lessons to yourself, before to insult me again.

    Eehnie you just back up everything I've said about you. That you fail to answer questions fail to accept when you're wrong fail to see your the obsessed one. You always fail accept advice of those who know. I however don't act like this and it's very clear that I don't.  You still fail to see reason and think your right 100% all the time when in FACT your not. It's fine keep lying to yourself it doesn't bother me that you live a deluded life on here. Everything I've said about you is true and factual and everyone can see it. You fail to compromise which is another clear indication of your superior complex. So eehnie why won't you answer the simple questions? ???????

    Because you know that the true answers are not what you care to admit. You answer what you want and fail to answer or acknowledge other questions this is very clear in your posts

    You are ridiculizing yourself until limits difficul to reach.

    You are really good showing your outstanding ignorance.

    You only have been cheerleading wrong arguments, and you pretend to force me to do the same.

    Better if you go to study something.
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1356
    Points : 1534
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Sat Sep 08, 2018 9:46 pm

    eehnie wrote:
    d_taddei2 wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    Still unable to see that if some item is totally exhausted Russia, and is out of production since decades, there is nothing to export.

    Better if you apply your forum behaviour lessons to yourself, before to insult me again.



    Eehnie it's you who is the ignorant one you clearly display this all the time not me. You completely fail to answer the simplest of questions but rather be selective if what you see. You continue to ignore ex servicemens advice and experienceS and believe that youran expert in everything you obviously have a superior complex which goes as far as blocking out everyone else's advice and makes you to not see or accept compromises and resolutions which you have displayed on this thread many times. Quite frankly it's becoming boring speaking to you it's like speaking to deluded drunkard having to repeat the same question without getting answer. You really are a deluded idiot and you complain about insults but you think it's ok for you to do them to others as I have seen to do to other members yet again this fits into your profile of your illness. I am done speaking to you and will happily ignore your comments you in fact destroy this forum with your drivel and destroy any reasoning or healthy debate with your superior complex as well as discredit ex servicemen you constantly do this you in any of your posts always have to disagree argue and have never admitted when you're wrong and never acceptedadvice this is fact. You should be ashamed at discrediting ex servicemens advice they have served you havent
    Eehnie you just back up everything I've said about you. That you fail to answer questions fail to accept when you're wrong fail to see your the obsessed one. You always fail accept advice of those who know. I however don't act like this and it's very clear that I don't.  You still fail to see reason and think your right 100% all the time when in FACT your not. It's fine keep lying to yourself it doesn't bother me that you live a deluded life on here. Everything I've said about you is true and factual and everyone can see it. You fail to compromise which is another clear indication of your superior complex. So eehnie why won't you answer the simple questions? ???????

    Because you know that the true answers are not what you care to admit. You answer what you want and fail to answer or acknowledge other questions this is very clear in your posts

    You are ridiculizing yourself until limits difficul to reach.

    You are really good showing your outstanding ignorance.

    You only have been cheerleading wrong arguments, and you pretend to force me to do the same.

    Better if you go to study something.

    Eehnie it's you who is the ignorant one you constantly ignore simple questions only choosing what you want to answer you constantly display superior complex behaviour you fail to even see or accept compromises and resolutions because your illness does not allow such. You always disagree with everyone and fail to accept advice and never admit when your wrong this is also a clear sign of your illness. As for insults you have done many insults to others on here but that's ok for you to do but not others yet again another sign of your superior complex behaviour. Quite frankly it's becoming boring speaking to you it's like speaking to deluded drunkard having to repeat the same question without getting answer. You should be ashamed of discrediting ex servicemens advice they have went through the training and served for there countries to which you haven't. You believe that after reading a handful of pages online your suddenly an expert on everything. I've tried to reason with you but you can't reason with someone who has a superior complex. This is the end I can happily skim over your long copy and pasted drivel and move on to the next post. I know that you will never accept advice or views of others or admit when your wrong. If you don't like what I have said feel free to put me on your ignore list I really don't care. You destroy this forum and destroy any healthy debate and discredit others who have more knowledge than you or try to offer real advice or information. Read digest and move on no need for a reply although I know that you will have to because that's the superior complex you have. Anyway I said many posts ago about a compromise you failed to accept or acknowledge it. This the end of it as far as I am concerned
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2262
    Points : 2283
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Sun Sep 09, 2018 1:02 pm

    You are unable to dentify who has and who has not proper knowledge about what we are talking about. Vladimir79 knows not how to do a proper market analysis. He proved it with his comments. The importance of the real demand is key. If the projections of future demand agree not with the real demand of the last years and even decades, there is a problem. Oversized projections of future demand are very habitual in failed business.

    My words prove my knowledge and your words prove your ignorance. This is a reality of which you will not escape.

    You only know to parrot stupid things and to insult. You can continue clowning yourself.
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1356
    Points : 1534
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Sun Sep 09, 2018 11:31 pm

    eehnie wrote:You are unable to dentify who has and who has not proper knowledge about what we are talking about. Vladimir79 knows not how to do a proper market analysis. He proved it with his comments. The importance of the real demand is key. If the projections of future demand agree not with the real demand of the last years and even decades, there is a problem. Oversized projections of future demand are very habitual in failed business.

    My words prove my knowledge and your words prove your ignorance. This is a reality of which you will not escape.

    You only know to parrot stupid things and to insult. You can continue clowning yourself.
    I keep forgetting eehnie that your also expert businessman and market analysis. All hail the Oracle.
    Yet again fail to answer questions because of your superior complex getting in the way this is now complete fact. Keep lying to yourself you are the clown who thinks he knows best.You even failed to read people's responses. Nobody expected it (TVS 2DTS ) to get to the same numbers of An -2 the whole discussion was on its usefulness and that a replacement was needed as well as talking about the NEW aircraft. I like I have mentioned before (not you notice with your illness) that time will tell if they produce the 200 mentioned but I and many others agree it's usefulness and that the TVS 2DTS is the replacement. You are the only one who thinks everyone else is completely wrong and knows nothing whatsoever and you are the only one who knows best. This has now become very evident and you simply cannot process that your not expert and that others may know more than you or that their experiences even count. Stop thinking you are the guru at everything because of your views and opinions. And actually listen to what some people who have experience or knowledge on. You might actually learn something. You just dismiss everything that people say because you don't agree. Your not ex services and maybe you should listen to experiences people have and learn something. You can have your views and opinions which is fine and so can others but when it comes to factual information don't let your opinions cloud the factual information being given. I've learnt quite a few things from GarryB who had knowledge in something that I had limited knowledge in. I listened and learned. Don't think you can't learn anything from anyone on this forum because you can. Stop thinking that after reading a handful of articles your any expert and everyone else is wrong.

    I believe that you said that it wont reach above 50 units (TVS 2DTS )produced time will tell. So Let's leave this an-2 and TVS 2DTS debate here. As you disagree with me and everyone else and we disagree with you on the subjects talked about. I am happy to end it like that. And time will tell who was right or wrong.





    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 7071
    Points : 7167
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  PapaDragon on Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:41 am

    d_taddei2 wrote:.....
    I believe that you said that it wont reach above 50 units (TVS 2DTS )produced time will tell. So Let's leave this an-2 and TVS 2DTS debate here. As you disagree with me and everyone else and we disagree with you on the subjects talked about. I am happy to end it like that. And time will tell who was right or wrong.

    50 units?

    They already have over 200 of them ordered.

    Also, new name of that aircraft is Baikal.
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1356
    Points : 1534
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:02 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    d_taddei2 wrote:.....
    I believe that you said that it wont reach above 50 units (TVS 2DTS )produced time will tell. So Let's leave this an-2 and TVS 2DTS debate here. As you disagree with me and everyone else and we disagree with you on the subjects talked about. I am happy to end it like that. And time will tell who was right or wrong.

    50 units?

    They already have over 200 of them ordered.

    Also, new name of that aircraft is Baikal.

    I've tried stating this to eehnie and these comments came from Rostec that they were already building the production facilities and that it had been signed off by various Russian ministries and Russian helicopter holding company and 200 to be built. But eehnie says no i am wrong and so is Rostec and insinuated that he knows the market better than anyone it seems even Rostec. He is after all an expert you know lol1 I given up speaking to him on the subject he doesn't or should I say can't process the acceptance of others views and experienceexperiences. But that's his choice.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2262
    Points : 2283
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:35 pm

    d_taddei2 wrote:
    eehnie wrote:You are unable to dentify who has and who has not proper knowledge about what we are talking about. Vladimir79 knows not how to do a proper market analysis. He proved it with his comments. The importance of the real demand is key. If the projections of future demand agree not with the real demand of the last years and even decades, there is a problem. Oversized projections of future demand are very habitual in failed business.

    My words prove my knowledge and your words prove your ignorance. This is a reality of which you will not escape.

    You only know to parrot stupid things and to insult. You can continue clowning yourself.
    I keep forgetting eehnie that your also expert businessman and market analysis. All hail the Oracle.  
    Yet again fail to answer questions because of your superior complex getting in the way this is now complete fact. Keep lying to yourself you are the clown who thinks he knows best.You even failed to read people's responses. Nobody expected it (TVS 2DTS ) to get to the same numbers of An -2 the whole discussion was on its usefulness and that a replacement was needed as well as talking about the NEW aircraft. I like I have mentioned before  (not you notice with your illness) that time will tell if they produce the 200 mentioned but I and many others agree it's usefulness and that the TVS 2DTS is the replacement. You are the only one who thinks everyone else is completely wrong and knows nothing whatsoever and you are the only one who knows best. This has now become very evident and you simply cannot process that your not expert and that others may know more than you or that their experiences even count. Stop thinking you are the guru at everything because of your views and opinions. And actually listen to what some people who have experience or knowledge on. You might actually learn something. You just dismiss everything that people say because you don't agree. Your not ex services and maybe you should listen to experiences people have and learn something. You can have your views and opinions which is fine and so can others but when it comes to factual information don't let your opinions cloud the factual information being given. I've learnt quite a few things from GarryB who had knowledge in something that I had limited knowledge in. I listened and learned. Don't think you can't learn anything from anyone on this forum because you can. Stop thinking that after reading a handful of articles your any expert and everyone else is wrong.  

    I believe that you said that it wont reach above 50 units (TVS 2DTS )produced time will tell. So Let's leave this an-2 and TVS 2DTS debate here. As you disagree with me and everyone else and we disagree with you on the subjects talked about. I am happy to end it like that. And time will tell who was right or wrong.

    You can continue making a clown of yourself.

    Everyone that learned enough in an engineering school, to pass an Industry Engineering M.Sc. program of 5 years in the university oriented to economic management, and learned about economic management, management of the production, marketing, strategic management, quality management, in adition to a strong program on mathematics, statistic, mechanical engineering and electric and electronic engineering, knows that what I say is right from a technical and economic point.

    Your words instead are empty of knowledge. You will not escape to this reality.

    As example, why are you even talking about the TVS 2DTS project in the Defense section of this forum if it is a civil project that includes a US engine that makes the aircraft not apt for the Russian Armed Forces?

    Obviously you expected this aircraft reaching the Russian Armed Forces like presented. Everything you say shows your ignorance.
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1356
    Points : 1534
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Mon Sep 10, 2018 4:23 pm

    eehnie wrote:
    d_taddei2 wrote:
    eehnie wrote:You are unable to dentify who has and who has not proper knowledge about what we are talking about. Vladimir79 knows not how to do a proper market analysis. He proved it with his comments. The importance of the real demand is key. If the projections of future demand agree not with the real demand of the last years and even decades, there is a problem. Oversized projections of future demand are very habitual in failed business.

    My words prove my knowledge and your words prove your ignorance. This is a reality of which you will not escape.

    You only know to parrot stupid things and to insult. You can continue clowning yourself.
    I keep forgetting eehnie that your also expert businessman and market analysis. All hail the Oracle.  
    Yet again fail to answer questions because of your superior complex getting in the way this is now complete fact. Keep lying to yourself you are the clown who thinks he knows best.You even failed to read people's responses. Nobody expected it (TVS 2DTS ) to get to the same numbers of An -2 the whole discussion was on its usefulness and that a replacement was needed as well as talking about the NEW aircraft. I like I have mentioned before  (not you notice with your illness) that time will tell if they produce the 200 mentioned but I and many others agree it's usefulness and that the TVS 2DTS is the replacement. You are the only one who thinks everyone else is completely wrong and knows nothing whatsoever and you are the only one who knows best. This has now become very evident and you simply cannot process that your not expert and that others may know more than you or that their experiences even count. Stop thinking you are the guru at everything because of your views and opinions. And actually listen to what some people who have experience or knowledge on. You might actually learn something. You just dismiss everything that people say because you don't agree. Your not ex services and maybe you should listen to experiences people have and learn something. You can have your views and opinions which is fine and so can others but when it comes to factual information don't let your opinions cloud the factual information being given. I've learnt quite a few things from GarryB who had knowledge in something that I had limited knowledge in. I listened and learned. Don't think you can't learn anything from anyone on this forum because you can. Stop thinking that after reading a handful of articles your any expert and everyone else is wrong.  

    I believe that you said that it wont reach above 50 units (TVS 2DTS )produced time will tell. So Let's leave this an-2 and TVS 2DTS debate here. As you disagree with me and everyone else and we disagree with you on the subjects talked about. I am happy to end it like that. And time will tell who was right or wrong.

    You can continue making a clown of yourself.

    Everyone that learned enough in an engineering school, to pass an Industry Engineering M.Sc. program of 5 years in the university oriented to economic management, and learned about economic management, management of the production, marketing, strategic management, quality management, in adition to a strong program on mathematics, statistic, mechanical engineering and electric and electronic engineering, knows that what I say is right from a technical and economic point.

    Your words instead are empty of knowledge. You will not escape to this reality.

    As example, why are you even talking about the TVS 2DTS project in the Defense section of this forum if it is a civil project that includes a US engine that makes the aircraft not apt for the Russian Armed Forces?

    Obviously you expected this aircraft reaching the Russian Armed Forces like presented. Everything you say shows your ignorance.


    Your rIghtfield anyone who attended such school will have those skills and your not one of them. And if one did say anything you would of course challenge them because of your illness. You also forgot business management and market research skills of which you also have none. And you also continue to fail to read the original post because of your illness I think it's about time you got some treatment. Because your the only clown on this forum in fact you're the court jester of the forum. You really do make me laugh with your deluded belief that your right and everyone else is wrong. You just copy and paste drivel. And think it's gospel because you posted it..

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:06 am