Ukraine's Arms Εxports

Ukraine supplied to South Sudan two combat training aircraft L-39



http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2133501.html

Deliveries of Ukrainian combat helicopters Mi-24 in Nigeria

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2176493.html

JohninMK wrote:Wow, if correct this is a serious order, 12 complete and 40 knock down kits.

Antonov and Beijing A-Star Aerospace Technology Co signed a cooperation agreement for joint development of the new An-178 short-range tactical transport aircraft. That was reported by diana-mihailova.livejournal.com.

The  contract №084 / 1098 / 16-156 requires the purchase of twelve Antonov An-178 at a price of 40 million. USD. For each, with an advance of 50% of the price of the first two aircraft, the first machine delivery should take place within 14 months after receipt of advance payment for the first aircraft in the amount of 100% of the contract price.

Contract №084 / 1099 / 16-156 signed for the supply of forty aircraft sets for assembly on the production capacities «Beijing A-Star Aerospace Technology Co» in China.

The An-178 is a short-range tactical transport aircraft. It was developed by Ukrainian Antonov design bureau. Its development commenced in 2004. It is based on civilian An-158 regional jet aircraft. Some modifications were made to adapt this aircraft for military service. It has a wider fuselage and is fitted with a rear loading ramp. This aircraft is a proposed replacement for the ageing An-12, An-26 and An-32 tactical aircraft most of which are worn-out already.

http://defence-blog.com/news/china-and-ukraine-to-jointly-produce-a-new-an-178-short-range-tactical-transport-aircraft.html

40 million per plane I hope.

JohninMK wrote:Wow, if correct this is a serious order, 12 complete and 40 knock down kits.

Antonov and Beijing A-Star Aerospace Technology Co signed a cooperation agreement for joint development of the new An-178 short-range tactical transport aircraft. That was reported by diana-mihailova.livejournal.com.

The  contract №084 / 1098 / 16-156 requires the purchase of twelve Antonov An-178 at a price of 40 million. USD. For each, with an advance of 50% of the price of the first two aircraft, the first machine delivery should take place within 14 months after receipt of advance payment for the first aircraft in the amount of 100% of the contract price.

Contract №084 / 1099 / 16-156 signed for the supply of forty aircraft sets for assembly on the production capacities «Beijing A-Star Aerospace Technology Co» in China.

The An-178 is a short-range tactical transport aircraft. It was developed by Ukrainian Antonov design bureau. Its development commenced in 2004. It is based on civilian An-158 regional jet aircraft. Some modifications were made to adapt this aircraft for military service. It has a wider fuselage and is fitted with a rear loading ramp. This aircraft is a proposed replacement for the ageing An-12, An-26 and An-32 tactical aircraft most of which are worn-out already.

http://defence-blog.com/news/china-and-ukraine-to-jointly-produce-a-new-an-178-short-range-tactical-transport-aircraft.html

That is actually huge order for todays standards.

Militarov wrote:

JohninMK wrote:Wow, if correct this is a serious order, 12 complete and 40 knock down kits.

Antonov and Beijing A-Star Aerospace Technology Co signed a cooperation agreement for joint development of the new An-178 short-range tactical transport aircraft. That was reported by diana-mihailova.livejournal.com.

The  contract №084 / 1098 / 16-156 requires the purchase of twelve Antonov An-178 at a price of 40 million. USD. For each, with an advance of 50% of the price of the first two aircraft, the first machine delivery should take place within 14 months after receipt of advance payment for the first aircraft in the amount of 100% of the contract price.

Contract №084 / 1099 / 16-156 signed for the supply of forty aircraft sets for assembly on the production capacities «Beijing A-Star Aerospace Technology Co» in China.

The An-178 is a short-range tactical transport aircraft. It was developed by Ukrainian Antonov design bureau. Its development commenced in 2004. It is based on civilian An-158 regional jet aircraft. Some modifications were made to adapt this aircraft for military service. It has a wider fuselage and is fitted with a rear loading ramp. This aircraft is a proposed replacement for the ageing An-12, An-26 and An-32 tactical aircraft most of which are worn-out already.

http://defence-blog.com/news/china-and-ukraine-to-jointly-produce-a-new-an-178-short-range-tactical-transport-aircraft.html

That is actually huge order for todays standards.

That is not an order, that is tech transfer.
Or have you ever heard of Beijing A-Star Aerospace Technology Co.?

Militarov wrote:

JohninMK wrote:Wow, if correct this is a serious order, 12 complete and 40 knock down kits.

Antonov and Beijing A-Star Aerospace Technology Co signed a cooperation agreement for joint development of the new An-178 short-range tactical transport aircraft. That was reported by diana-mihailova.livejournal.com.

The  contract №084 / 1098 / 16-156 requires the purchase of twelve Antonov An-178 at a price of 40 million. USD. For each, with an advance of 50% of the price of the first two aircraft, the first machine delivery should take place within 14 months after receipt of advance payment for the first aircraft in the amount of 100% of the contract price.

Contract №084 / 1099 / 16-156 signed for the supply of forty aircraft sets for assembly on the production capacities «Beijing A-Star Aerospace Technology Co» in China.

The An-178 is a short-range tactical transport aircraft. It was developed by Ukrainian Antonov design bureau. Its development commenced in 2004. It is based on civilian An-158 regional jet aircraft. Some modifications were made to adapt this aircraft for military service. It has a wider fuselage and is fitted with a rear loading ramp. This aircraft is a proposed replacement for the ageing An-12, An-26 and An-32 tactical aircraft most of which are worn-out already.

http://defence-blog.com/news/china-and-ukraine-to-jointly-produce-a-new-an-178-short-range-tactical-transport-aircraft.html

That is actually huge order for todays standards.

It's not even close to saving Antonov, but at least they have work. The planes will be all sold for 40 million, that is 3.2 million a piece. It's probably either the cheapest sale of tactical transport aircraft or the cheapest blowjob for the Chinese aviation industry ever. SKD kits will never sell beyond 1.5 million dollars. Way to go China, brand new TTA for 100 million dollars. Just perfect.

NB: This is not a tech transfer, it's Antonov trying to stay alive with over 350 million USD debt and about twice that in arrears and liabilities.

Aviant debt penalty alone was +600 million HRY which before crisis amounted to 80 million Euro. Rada just slashed Aviants debt penalty and left them with about 800 million HRY debt and zero liquidities. The State passed another moratorium on the "Russian debt", IE money paid to Antonov in 2012, then reimbursed by Yanukovich in 2013 to Russia because Antonov was doing jack. There's also the Motorsich chapter for the engines Antonov has ordered and still not paid.

http://en.lb.ua/news/2016/10/20/2137_rada_wrote_off_500m_hryvnia_debt.html

Thug life chose Antonov.

With the current ratio, Antonov's official debt should be around 80 million, real debt around 200 million. Aviants debt is around 20 million...

KoTeMoRe wrote:

Militarov wrote:

JohninMK wrote:Wow, if correct this is a serious order, 12 complete and 40 knock down kits.

Antonov and Beijing A-Star Aerospace Technology Co signed a cooperation agreement for joint development of the new An-178 short-range tactical transport aircraft. That was reported by diana-mihailova.livejournal.com.

The  contract №084 / 1098 / 16-156 requires the purchase of twelve Antonov An-178 at a price of 40 million. USD. For each, with an advance of 50% of the price of the first two aircraft, the first machine delivery should take place within 14 months after receipt of advance payment for the first aircraft in the amount of 100% of the contract price.

Contract №084 / 1099 / 16-156 signed for the supply of forty aircraft sets for assembly on the production capacities «Beijing A-Star Aerospace Technology Co» in China.

The An-178 is a short-range tactical transport aircraft. It was developed by Ukrainian Antonov design bureau. Its development commenced in 2004. It is based on civilian An-158 regional jet aircraft. Some modifications were made to adapt this aircraft for military service. It has a wider fuselage and is fitted with a rear loading ramp. This aircraft is a proposed replacement for the ageing An-12, An-26 and An-32 tactical aircraft most of which are worn-out already.

http://defence-blog.com/news/china-and-ukraine-to-jointly-produce-a-new-an-178-short-range-tactical-transport-aircraft.html

That is actually huge order for todays standards.

It's not even close to saving Antonov, but at least they have work. The planes will be all sold for 40 million, that is 3.2 million a piece. It's probably either the cheapest sale of tactical transport aircraft or the cheapest blowjob for the Chinese aviation industry ever. SKD kits will never sell beyond 1.5 million dollars. Way to go China, brand new TTA for 100 million dollars. Just perfect.

NB: This is not a tech transfer, it's Antonov trying to stay alive with over 350 million USD debt and about twice that in arrears and liabilities.

Aviant debt penalty alone was +600 million HRY which before crisis amounted to 80 million Euro. Rada just slashed Aviants debt penalty and left them with about 800 million HRY debt and zero liquidities. The State passed another moratorium on the "Russian debt", IE money paid to Antonov in 2012, then reimbursed by Yanukovich in 2013 to Russia because Antonov was doing jack. There's also the Motorsich chapter for the engines Antonov has ordered and still not paid.

http://en.lb.ua/news/2016/10/20/2137_rada_wrote_off_500m_hryvnia_debt.html

Thug life chose Antonov.

With the current ratio, Antonov's official debt should be around 80 million, real debt around 200 million. Aviants debt is around 20 million...

I belive they are to pay 40 million per aircraft, as that is the price listed by Antonov. Price for lifter variant is 40 mil, and goes up to 60 million for liner variant.

From Mihailova's blog I read only 40 million. There's no specification.

40 million a plane saves Antonov if they manage to build those 12 planes.
Still I don't know who will power as Motorsich is in the shitter itself.

At this point, the Chinese should simply offer a deal and buy the two, it would be easier than spend almost 3 billion dollars for 50 planes.

Export of Ukrainian "Smerch" to Azerbaijan

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2229288.html

Export of Ukrainian anti-tank guided missiles Falarick 90 and Falarick 105 in Belgium

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2234013.html

Nigeria has bought T-72M1 tanks and howitzers from Ukraine

http://defense-watch.com/2016/11/19/nigeria-has-bought-t-72m1-tanks-and-howitzers-from-ukraine/

Quick questions for the experts here. Ukraine seems to operate and/or export MBTs with Kontakt-5 ERA (Bulat, T-80UD and so on).

Do they have like huge USSR stocks?
Did they reverse engineer it?
Did they produce it locally all along?

Cheers guys.

KiloGolf wrote:Quick questions for the experts here. Ukraine seems to operate and/or export MBTs with Kontakt-5 ERA (Bulat, T-80UD and so on).

Do they have like huge USSR stocks?
Did they reverse engineer it?
Did they produce it locally all along?

Cheers guys.

Ukraine has had one of the most advanced ERA systems for decades, in part developed from K-5 experience and also in part for/from the Russian MIC synergies.

Mikrotek was part of the K-5 chain so there should be no problem sourcing the technical product, (their NOZH frangible ERA is a good upgrade from K-5).

KoTeMoRe wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:Quick questions for the experts here. Ukraine seems to operate and/or export MBTs with Kontakt-5 ERA (Bulat, T-80UD and so on).

Do they have like huge USSR stocks?
Did they reverse engineer it?
Did they produce it locally all along?

Cheers guys.

Ukraine has had one of the most advanced ERA systems for decades, in part developed from K-5 experience and also in part for/from the Russian MIC synergies.

Mikrotek was part of the K-5 chain so there should be no problem sourcing the technical product, (their NOZH frangible ERA is a good upgrade from K-5).

Was the original K-5 built/co-produced there during USSR day, for the T-80UD?
Oh crap. So sad to hear such prime tech is now in the hands of Maidanuts.

I seem to remember the Donbas militias capturing a few damaged Bulats. Any pointers on what they concluded?

I'm reading this from your info, thanks:
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product3705.html
http://www.sdtb.kiev.ua/sdtb_defence_en.htm

PS. What are these "4C20 and 4C22 elements" the K-5 bricks and wedges seen on T-80U/T-90A ?

KiloGolf wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:Quick questions for the experts here. Ukraine seems to operate and/or export MBTs with Kontakt-5 ERA (Bulat, T-80UD and so on).

Do they have like huge USSR stocks?
Did they reverse engineer it?
Did they produce it locally all along?

Cheers guys.

Ukraine has had one of the most advanced ERA systems for decades, in part developed from K-5 experience and also in part for/from the Russian MIC synergies.

Mikrotek was part of the K-5 chain so there should be no problem sourcing the technical product, (their NOZH frangible ERA is a good upgrade from K-5).

Was the original K-5 built/co-produced there during USSR day, for the T-80UD?
Oh crap. So sad to hear such prime tech is now in the hands of Maidanuts.

I seem to remember the Donbas militias capturing a few damaged Bulats. Any pointers on what they concluded?

Part of the ERA (explosive sheets and panels) were made at Donetsk KZ. Which was bombed twice by Ukropia. KMDB can make their own limited production, but mostly the Kiev reconditioning facility acts as quick draw for the ERA needs.

KoTeMoRe wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:Was the original K-5 built/co-produced there during USSR day, for the T-80UD?
Oh crap. So sad to hear such prime tech is now in the hands of Maidanuts.

I seem to remember the Donbas militias capturing a few damaged Bulats. Any pointers on what they concluded?

Part of the ERA (explosive sheets and panels) were made at Donetsk KZ. Which was bombed twice by Ukropia. KMDB can make their own limited production, but mostly the Kiev reconditioning facility acts as quick draw for the ERA needs.

Donetsk KZ made the bits and pieces for NOZH and K-1/K-5 or just the second?
From some reading on the NOZH, brick shape/size aside, they seem to market it as a completely new type explosive mix, that correct?

KiloGolf wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:Was the original K-5 built/co-produced there during USSR day, for the T-80UD?
Oh crap. So sad to hear such prime tech is now in the hands of Maidanuts.

I seem to remember the Donbas militias capturing a few damaged Bulats. Any pointers on what they concluded?

Part of the ERA (explosive sheets and panels) were made at Donetsk KZ. Which was bombed twice by Ukropia. KMDB can make their own limited production, but mostly the Kiev reconditioning facility acts as quick draw for the ERA needs.

Donetsk KZ made the bits and pieces for NOZH and K-1/K-5 or just the second?
From some reading on the NOZH, brick shape/size aside, they seem to market it as a completely new type explosive mix, that correct?

Actually they made bits and pieces for many ERA appliques. K-1/K-5/Relikt/Nozh on STA/Nozh for Duplet.

It's not "completely" new, its a frangible EFP counter-action ERA. Kaktus for instance was thought as the same idea as Duplet and Czech/Slovak multilayered Era. The difference is that KDMB thought the best defence vs APFSDS would be using mini EFP's.

It's probably the best system of the old Era, 100% contact reactive.

KoTeMoRe wrote:

It's not "completely" new, its a frangible EFP counter-action ERA. Kaktus for instance was thought as the same idea as Duplet and Czech/Slovak multilayered Era. The difference is that KDMB thought the best defence vs APFSDS would be using mini EFP's.

It's probably the best system of the old Era, 100% contact reactive.

I see what they've done. No more plate-shapped stuff, just different spec'ed little EFPs.



Smart.
What's Russia's response to this?

KiloGolf wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

It's not "completely" new, its a frangible EFP counter-action ERA. Kaktus for instance was thought as the same idea as Duplet and Czech/Slovak multilayered Era. The difference is that KDMB thought the best defence vs APFSDS would be using mini EFP's.

It's probably the best system of the old Era, 100% contact reactive.

I see what they've done. No more plate-shapped stuff, just different spec'ed little EFPs.



Smart.
What's Russia's response to this?

In what sense? Offensively? Bigger firepower. Defensively? APS and Kaktus/Relict are completely sufficient to cope with anything that could be thrown at them as of now (bar OTT weapons like taking a Shrike/Maverick/JDAM etc) Hellfire is already (in my opinion) bordering obsolete if the Afganit and Trophy 3Ddo deliver on their "iron dome" promises.

KoTeMoRe wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

It's not "completely" new, its a frangible EFP counter-action ERA. Kaktus for instance was thought as the same idea as Duplet and Czech/Slovak multilayered Era. The difference is that KDMB thought the best defence vs APFSDS would be using mini EFP's.

It's probably the best system of the old Era, 100% contact reactive.

I see what they've done. No more plate-shapped stuff, just different spec'ed little EFPs.



Smart.
What's Russia's response to this?

In what sense? Offensively? Bigger firepower. Defensively? APS and Kaktus/Relict are completely sufficient to cope with anything that could be thrown at them as of now (bar OTT weapons like taking a Shrike/Maverick/JDAM etc) Hellfire is already (in my opinion) bordering obsolete if the Afganit and Trophy 3Ddo deliver on their "iron dome" promises.

Aren't they a generation behind if their ERA tiles are still plate-shaped and not utilize mini EFPs? Which is my understanding of Relict. I have no idea about Kaktus or what Armata is meant to field.

KiloGolf wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

It's not "completely" new, its a frangible EFP counter-action ERA. Kaktus for instance was thought as the same idea as Duplet and Czech/Slovak multilayered Era. The difference is that KDMB thought the best defence vs APFSDS would be using mini EFP's.

It's probably the best system of the old Era, 100% contact reactive.

I see what they've done. No more plate-shapped stuff, just different spec'ed little EFPs.



Smart.
What's Russia's response to this?

In what sense? Offensively? Bigger firepower. Defensively? APS and Kaktus/Relict are completely sufficient to cope with anything that could be thrown at them as of now (bar OTT weapons like taking a Shrike/Maverick/JDAM etc) Hellfire is already (in my opinion) bordering obsolete if the Afganit and Trophy 3Ddo deliver on their "iron dome" promises.

Aren't they a generation behind if their ERA tiles are still plate-shaped and not utilize mini EFPs? Which is my understanding of Relict. I have no idea about Kaktus or what Armata is meant to field.

For that to be true the concept behind Nozh should be substantially better than Relict. The concept of mini-EFP to break sabot penetrators is interesting, but in many aspects not that different from the multilayered vision of the Relikt system. Dyna variants used on Slovak layout already shown the peel over angle. As I said, IMO its a good idea, only not exactly tested and still risky with higher velocity compounded rounds or biggr calibre (cue 140mm guns and Russian 152mm answer). With that in mind the system is a bit of oldschool ERA pushed at its maximum.

KoTeMoRe wrote:For that to be true the concept behind Nozh should be substantially better than Relict. The concept of mini-EFP to break sabot penetrators is interesting, but in many aspects not that different from the multilayered vision of the Relikt system. Dyna variants used on Slovak layout already shown the peel over angle. As I said, IMO its a good idea, only not exactly tested and still risky with higher velocity compounded rounds or biggr calibre (cue 140mm guns and Russian 152mm answer). With that in mind the system is a bit of oldschool ERA pushed at its maximum.

What about scaling up the EFPs? Make em bigger, chunkier. That could compensate bigger calibers.

KiloGolf wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:For that to be true the concept behind Nozh should be substantially better than Relict. The concept of mini-EFP to break sabot penetrators is interesting, but in many aspects not that different from the multilayered vision of the Relikt system. Dyna variants used on Slovak layout already shown the peel over angle. As I said, IMO its a good idea, only not exactly tested and still risky with higher velocity compounded rounds or biggr calibre (cue 140mm guns and Russian 152mm answer). With that in mind the system is a bit of oldschool ERA pushed at its maximum.

What about scaling up the EFPs? Make em bigger, chunkier. That could compensate bigger calibers.

Weight, and burden. Duplet armour, which is a multi layer would simply get unpractical for the current tanks (legacy Soviet designs).