Posted on 01/25/2006 10:28:11 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
Boeing may introduce a Soviet-era military transport jet as a new option for the US military's need for a new fleet of small airlifters, the airframer told Flight International in Washington, DC yesterday.
The Antonov An-72, a 70-seat jet with over-wing-mounted engines (pictured below in Aeroflot livery), is one of the options Boeing is considering to enter the US Army's pending Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA) competition, says George Muellner, Boeing vice president for Air Force Systems.
A Boeing evaluation team has visited Antonov headquarters in Kiev, the Ukraine, and both companies remain in active discussions, says Muellner.
The FCA competition is on hold for two months to allow army officials time to discuss blending the programme with a US Air Force requirement for a new light cargo aircraft fleet. Muellner says Boeing's plans will not be decided until the army unveils the final requirements for FCA.
As another option, Boeing also is in discussions to Alenia to join the Global Military Aircraft Systems team that plans to offer the Alenia C-27J Spartan. Raytheon and EADS CASA North America also plan to compete, offering the CASA C-295, CN-235, or both, depending on the army's final requirements.
The An-72, if Boeing were to offer it, would be the only jet-powered aircraft in the competition.
STEPHEN TRIMBLE / WASHINGTON, DC
ROFLMAO! Those commercials were some of the funniest ever. Anybody know where I might find them to download?
Actually the CN-295 is a stretched CN-235
CN-235 
CN-295 
That the current U.S. military requirements are the same requirements the Russians were designing to for years?
Really, that's not being sarcastic. Engineering design is driven by user requirements. The U.S. military is placing increased emphasis on rapid theater movement under austere conditions as a force multiplier, thus the emphasis on STOL performance into unimproved fields with limited TALCE support. As it turns out, the Russians already have some experience in designing in these environments.
We could (and have, in the past) design a new aircraft to meet these requirements, but it does pay to consider existing (even foreign) designs which may meet the user requirements.
You make some valid points.
LOL! Sick minds think alike.
You forgot to add, "after copying our technology." [chuckle]
Also, the exhaust over the wing gives additional lift; when you drop the flaps on that sucker (which are probably HUGE) it also gives downward thrust. That airplane probably has STOL performance.
That it is shaving a few bucks in order to win a contract?
That's one big airplane! It was built, I believe, to transport the never used Soviet space shuttle Buran.
Ok, yep sure!
I have a signed picture of Buzz Aldrin on the moon right over my shoulder, it must be a fake too.
It's now used for commerical heavy lift operations. History profiled it a few times on Modern Marvels, my favorite show.
What's sad is there are quite a few people out there who actually believe there is a vast conspiracy, with thousands of participants, covering up a 35 year old event.
I seem to recall that early in the process of designing and bidding on the C-17, Boeing had an offering with the over-the-wing jet engines. Performance on short and unimproved runways was supposed to the reason for that design. The plane pictured looks like a standard aircraft with the OTW engines kludged on for experimental purposes. IMO. IRRC. YMMV.
Thank you! I did remember correctly!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.