The orders of An-2 after 1970 were minimal.
They were simple to operate and easy to keep running and there was nothing else that could do the job.
Many designs wanted to be the successor of the An-2, but failed both for military and civil purposes. The concept is outdated.
there is nothing wrong with the concept and the fact that this new aircraft has been developed shows it is still a requirement... it is just that nothing has solved all the problems in a simple affordable way... we don't know if this model will succeed either... that US engine might be too expensive or difficult to maintain...
For military purposes the An-2 has too low service ceiling. 4500m means the aircraft can not fly avoiding manpads.
The weak IR signature would make it a very difficult target from that range...
Of course the units in service still are used, but in the refered to the Russian Armed Forces very likely are under exhaustion in the mid-term and will not have replacement with aircrafts of its size cathegory. In this aircraft cathegory helicopters dominate.
The An-2 is vastly superior to helos and is able to operate from austere strips in very primitive conditions with basic maintainence and support.
It is only $1.5m per unit, that is the selling point. There are many countries that cannot afford more but still need this capability.
That is cheap... you wont get a helicopter with this sort of performance for that price.
A lot of previous attempts to replace the An-2 failed because they were too complicated or too expensive, or simply couldn't operate in the conditions the AN-2 can operate in.
The farms need it for its high capacity and slow speed. I could see the market go into the thousands. It is not a competitor of helicopters which comes at a much higher price. It is not ordered heavily today because it has outdated parts, this will fix that.
I remember reading somewhere that it is actually very popular in Canada and the US once it got clearance to fly... the big problem is that it is not allowed to be used commercially... which would normally cripple sales, yet they still seem to have sold some...
Can you explain me how the vehicles of the BMD-4(M) family will be used by the Russian Airborne Troops?
It is obvious that a real combat operation where the Russian Airborne Troops be involved today requires transport aircrafts of at least around 20 tons of payload (= transport aircrafts of the size cathegory of the An-10/12, that are also of the same size cathegory of the Su-Superjet airliner).
If you want you can ask to Vladimir79 which transport aircrafts were used for the training of parachuting with their armoured vehicles.
Not every transport aircraft needs to carry armour... delivering a group of 6-12 paratroopers does not need an Il-476...
The case is different, totally different, because the An-2 was not designed for this purpose. The An-2 is doing this training job as secondary role, like the MiG-15 has been used in North Korea.
The An-2 is used because it is ideal for the training role...
A composite version with better performance would be even better...
In the case of the parachute jump training, I doubt even about the need of this kind of aircrafts, because the operational costs per jump of using bigger aircrafts for training is likely to be smaller. As example, to do 100 training jumps with a bigger aircraft is only necessary one aircraft and one fly. To do 100 training jumps with An-2, around 10 flies of one or several aircrafts are required.
For a major exercise you might want hundreds or even thousands of jumpers, but during training you might only want a dozen to jump... there would be an enormous cost difference between an An-2 or variant and an An-12 or Il-476.
For the things the An-2 does no helicopter can do... they are much harder to fly, much much more expensive, and simply not an option...
An An-2 upgrade as described is 1.5 million... you would not get an Mi-17 for less than 20 million and its operating costs would be much much higher...
The requirement for a small light aircraft to operate on rough air strips and be easy to operate and cheap to operate and maintain... there is really nothing that comes close to the An-2 and if this new version is all it is cracked up to be it will continue operation for another 70 odd years...