Jump to content

C-17B In the future?

Griff13

By Griff13,
in Real Aviation

 Share Followers 0

Recommended Posts

Will7813

Will7813

Posted
Posted

Deep breaths everyone! I don't think any of this was called for, since no one took offence to anything Ross said until now.

It is funny watching people get worked up about these things though. :thumbsup:

Will

Link to post
Share on other sites
Raymond

Raymond

Posted
Posted

hiya

i can confirm the An-124 has rough field capability: its design is based around the requirment for the transportation of Topol ICBMs to remote parts of the russian federation replacing the older An-22... it includes 2 APUs, high flotation landing gear and has no external requirment for offloading cargo.

one of the more interesting environments its operated from is from improvised ice-covered tundra airstrips in Siberia in 1993.

regards

Raymond :salute:

Link to post
Share on other sites
martin_sam_2000

martin_sam_2000

Posted
Posted
:P We're even madder than the Canadians and they sold four of them to us. We even had some local comedians here yesterday poze as a Canadian motorcade at the APEC meeting and got within 10 metres of President Bush's hotel before some cops realized it was a ruse. Canada isn't even attending APEC, that's how on the ball all the security organizations here for APEC are, including our own. Just a Question on 150,000 lb bulldozers, would a D10 or larger fit in a C-17 complete? And let's not forget that the Antonovs were designed to operate in the wilds of Siberia into and out of rough unprepared strips and across soft ground. The C-17 is a great aircraft but can it lift 150 tonnes as can an An-124 or 250 tonnes as can the An-225? I think it will be a while before these Ukrainian airlifters are outdone by anything, simply becasue of where they were designed to operate.

:thumbsup:

Ross.

actually, Canada was at the APEC meeting. Harper was the only leader who wore the traditional hat durig the photo op.

sean

Link to post
Share on other sites
ross blackford

ross blackford

Posted
Posted

Hello Sean,

I stand corrected. It was reported here that Canada was not attending APEC. Mr. Harper probably did not have a huge motorcade like some other leaders, but the fact that the Chasers were are to get through numerous road blocks and Chas was able to emerge from the limo dressed as Osama within 10 metres of President Bush's hotel shows up a few glaring faults in the security arrangements. The fake I.D. cards they used really were a Joke.

:thumbsup:,

Ross.

Link to post
Share on other sites
martin_sam_2000

martin_sam_2000

Posted
Posted

yeah. it was quite the peice of news here to when it happened. but its nothing really new. ALOT of people pretend to be canadian so they can get better treatment/not noticed as much. there is a company in the states that sells canadian flag badges and pins for yanks who are travelling overseas cause we get treated better than them.

on the flip side, there are a lot poeple with bad intentions out there holding either canadian passports or faked canadian passports. its a double edged sword.

sean

Link to post
Share on other sites
ross blackford

ross blackford

Posted
Posted

:) Hi Sean,

That incident was a stunt carried out by some ABC comedians. Although it was quite funny it was also actually quite dangerous with snipers on many building roofs around that area. Both Canada and Australia have a lot of commonality with each other and now have another common thing; we've both bought the C-17.

:thumbsup:,

Ross.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Archangel

Archangel

Posted
Posted
Comparing the C-17 and An-124 is the apples to oranges deal ...

To different roles ... An-124 can carry more but can't carry loads to where there are sometimes needed ...

Gregg

Would it have been equally as funny had that car been packed with a few hundred pounds of Semtex and a timer and not some jerk wearing a robe?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Raymond

Raymond

Posted
Posted

lol that was the hilarity of it! :unsure:

the were expecting to get stopped at the first checkpoint, and instead got waved through 2 of them :wasntme:

loved the ID cards with the "insecurity pass" on them :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Will7813

Will7813

Posted
Posted

The stunt was carried out before the Candians arrived at APEC. They were there, just not yet. It was hilarious especially because they wholly expected toget stopped at the first check, not get waved through multiple ones! :thumbsup:

Will

Link to post
Share on other sites
ross blackford

ross blackford

Posted
Posted

:D Hi Tomcat Fanatic,

I don't think you're baiting the lion. I believe that the An-124 can get into rough strips as it has a high flotation undercarriage and lots of high lift devices on the leading and trailing edges and air brakes on the upper surfaces of the wings. Whether it could get into a 3000' strip fully loaded I'm not sure, but let's not forget that the maximum load of the An-124 is 150 tonnes and maximum take off weight is 400 tonnes. I'm not sure what the maximum load of the C-17 is but I doubt very much it's 150 tonnes. All Soviet era transports were designed to a requirement to operate in the rough with a minimum of support. Raymond said he has some pics somewhere of An-124s operating in Siberia on short rough strips. Perhaps he could find some and put them up for us.

We should remember that the Siberian tundra is frozen during the winter and just the opposite during summer when it's mud and slush, so an ability to operate in rough conditions is an essential requirement. The Russians had a completely differetnt design philosphy to the West. At the maximum landing weight of a C-17 it's possible that an An-124 could land on a 3000' rough strip. From personal experience flying lighties aircraft slow down more quickly on dirt because of the greater resistance, so any aircraft landing on dirt will naturally slow more quickly and thus reduce the landing run. Throw some water on that dirt to make it mud and the landing run decreases more unless you lock the brakes. By the same token the take off run with that same weight will also be longer, but most usually aircraft go into such strips heavily loaded and come out lightly loaded or empty.

Cheers,

Ross.

ps Just because we in the west haven't seen one or these birds doing it rough doesn't mean they can't. That AC-17 idea sounds like a good one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Griff13

Griff13

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Im still waiting for C-17 1/72 kit to do as a Gunship, now thay would be a great real world upgrade so to speak

Now that's a cool idea! I heard a while back (can't remember where) that they were going to try to make an airborne laser testbed of the C-17, but that didn't happen. That would be neat too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ross blackford

ross blackford

Posted
Posted

:cheers: G'day Griff,

How about an AWACS version? That would be a cool conversion and there'd be plenty of room for the operators. No need to operate from many miles away from the front from a long concrete runway. How about an Arctic/Antarctic transport version with retractable skis retracting into panniers which replace the standard undercarriage doors? What else? An Air/Sea rescue version with an IRB (stern drive inboard engine of course) dropped out the back to downed aircrew or others in peril on the high seas. A reconnaisance version with cameras pointing in every direction, images instatly uploadable to a command centre. I guess there could be as many versions as our imagination might like to think up.

Cheers,

Ross.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Followers 0
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...