Boeing may use Antonov An-72 as platform for FCA bid

FlightInternational.com ^ | 20/01/2006 | STEPHEN TRIMBLE

[ericthecurdog]

Precisely.

[dljordan]

"Them Russians sure build ugly airplanes! "

Yes, but they're very practical and take LOTS of abuse.

[dljordan]

" Don't the over wing engines help with short field performance?"

Don't know about short field performance, that would depend more on the wing design but the high engines would be great for rough, unpaved fields. The engines would be much less likely to sustain FOD (foreign object damage).

[1rudeboy]

A word of advice. When you see the words "chuckle, chortle, smirk, etc." enclosed in brackets after one of my replies, then it indicates that I'm not being serious. In this specific case, I was enjoying some Cold War humor.

[null and void]

...and welcome to FR, BTW...

[null and void]

*shrug* If you want big, robust, easy to maintain systems Russia is definitely a place to look.

Small, elegant, delicate stuff, Japan.

Cheap crap, China. (Note: This is how Japan started out)

We try to select the best the world has to offer for any given need...

[PAR35]

Where are the usual jingoistic cheerleaders from the refueling threads who whine that the USAF can't buy aerial tankers from Airbus which would be made in the US? They are strangely silent when Boeing talks about marketing Ukrainian aircraft.

[Finalapproach29er]

Oh great. Now we're going to copy the Russians in the field of avaition?

I'm surprised that plane can get off the ground.

[phantomworker]

Coanda Effect and its quieter than it would be if you hung the engines below the wing.

If the aerodynamics are that important, why isn't this concept being used on regular aircraft? Even though the engines might not pick up as much FOD (foreign object debris), it is not an efficient design. LOL! There must be politics involved in discussing this with Russia and Alenia. Politics is behind everything, imho.

[phantomworker]

They are strangely silent when Boeing talks about marketing Ukrainian aircraft.

One word: Politics

[hattend]

Oh great. Now we're going to copy the Russians in the field of avaition?

Actually they are copying a copy of their own design.

I wouldn't be surprised if Boeing went into their archives and dusted off the YC-14 blueprints just to see how to incorporate newer technology and metallurgy.

[Paleo Conservative]

If the aerodynamics are that important, why isn't this concept being used on regular aircraft?

I don't think most planes need to land on short gravel runways. It pays for the short field performance with extra structural weight in the wing and shorter range.

[phantomworker]

I'm surprised that plane can get off the ground.

That's exactly what I thought.

It pays for the short field performance with extra structural weight in the wing and shorter range.

But is the extra MTOW, max takeoff weight worth it?

[longtermmemmory]

So boeing does not have to pay someone some royalty by using the espianoge based design of the soviets.

something is not right here.

[dalereed]

"With the jet exhaust at overhead level, that sucka has got to be LOUD inside."

Cargo can't hear anything!

[Paleo Conservative]

But is the extra MTOW, max takeoff weight worth it?

Probably not for most civilian uses. As I recall this is a proposal for a military cargo plane in a class that is smaller than a C-130. The ability to operate from short primitive airstrips near combat zones is more important than the ton mile costs or range. The fact that it is smaller than a C-17 means a C-17 doesn't have to be used to send a small payload when the speed of a jet is needed.

[hattend]

Boeing is already building pieces of it's airliners in Russia.

Their marketing a Russian "homage" of their own design is a logical step, I guess. ;-)

[martin_fierro]

DUDE! Great find. Thanks!

Now all I gotta do is figure out how to save it and store it at Putfile.

[Fierce Allegiance]

And edit out the ad at the beginning.