GarryB wrote: If we can talk about a replacement, the aircraft that has been replacing the An-22 has been the Il-76, the alone of the big aircrafts ordered in the last years until very recently. Now some orders of the Il-96 have been done. Maybe not an exact replacement but both aircrafts, the Il-96 and the Il-76, would be the replacement of the An-22 at least in fact.
One aircraft leaving service and another entering production is not evidence one is replacing the other.
the few Il-96s being built are not for cargo transport.
AFAIK they are for inflight refuelling tankers.
A role the AN-22 was never designed for or used for.
In the last 20 years about 45 units of the An-22 have been retired, and in the next 5? the remaining 11 (or 9) units will be retired. In the same period of time the Il-96 and the Il-76 are the alone big aircrafts that have been ordered and delivered.
You can call it like you want, but the fact is the fact.
The fact you are ignoring is that the Il-96s being produced are not for cargo transport, and the only Il-76s being delivered are the Il-476 which has a max payload capacity of 60 tons which is 20 tons short of the 80 ton payload of the An-22. This means that when the payload is heavier than 60 tons then either two aircraft will be needed or one An-124 will be used where previously one An-22 would have been used.
Not ideal because two Il-476s or one An-124 would use rather more fuel than an An-22, but when they are not available they have to use what they have.
Which aricrafts replaced them since the begin or the retirements in 1997?
If no-one replaced them, what happended with the loads that they transported before? Are waiting to the true future replacement of the An-22?
When an 80 ton payload aircraft is not available to transport your payload you either split up the payload and use several smaller aircraft, or you use a much bigger aircraft... either way the transport bill is higher.
When developing ground hardware including radar vehicles and equipment moved for the ground forces, they are generally designed around available air lift capabilities, so by withdrawing one weigh class of transport then you will always make air lift even more expensive because you will need more smaller aircraft or a larger aircraft... both of which burn more fuel.
The Il-96 was not designed to be a tanker, but it is now doing the work (with the first units delivered).
There is no aircraft in operational service designed from the outset to be an inflight refuelling aircraft.
Early models were adapted from bombers because they were large and could fly for long periods with a large payload (of fuel). Current popular models are based on airliners or large transport types... the Il-78 is an aberration in the sense that it is a heavy transport type not optimised for long range cruising like a long range airliner.
The Il-96 was never designed as an inflight refuelling tanker, but its attributes like low drag, very long range, and rather large size and relatively high cruise speed make them ideal for inflight refuelling tankers for long range strategic bombers.
It would also have lots of internal space for sensors and communication equipment making it ideal for JSTARS or VIP transport or large AWACS use.
The main question about a replacement like this of the An-22, is not in the features of the aircrafts. It is a lot easier than this. We are not talking about a future replacement, the replacement is being done. We need only to look at what has been done and at what is being done.
the replacement has been done... the An-22s are leaving service and the Il-96 is not yet in service, so we can assume that the Il-76 and An-124 are doing the jobs the An-22 would have done previously... they are the replacements... for now... but in the near future they will likely be suplimented by an aircraft in the 80-100 ton payload class because new land vehicles will require that payload capacity.
Who will replace the remaining units of the An-22? Who take the loads moved by these aircrafts. It is as difficult to identify them? No. New big aircrafts are being ordered, while some others are being retired. Oredered: Il-96 (modified) and Il-76/78/A-50. Retired: An-22 and Il-76/78/A-50. Nothing else because there are not changes in the fleets of An-124, Il-62 and Il-86/80, and new models of aircraft are too far to come.
There are no known orders for transport versions of the Il-96... only tankers AFAIK.
Your lies failed here, and nothing else to say... have the same luck in your next bid.
Large aircraft have a structure. If you change their purpose... ie from airliner to combat transport with nose and rear ramps then you pretty much have to redesign their basic structure.
In many senses the An-22 was a failure because its basic design was poor for paradropping supplies... that is why the VDV used Il-76s to transport their hardware despite the An-22 being able to carry rather more... the air flow around the rear of the An-22 was not ideal for paradropping vehicles by parachute... I rather suspect the redesign of the Il-96 would have been plain sailing either... far too expensive and risky when new designs had already been largely completed... they will just need new engines and they should be ready for production in a few years...
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
