IAF Eyes Additional Airbus C-295 to Phase Out Soviet-Era AN-32 Transport Aircraft

The Indian Air Force (IAF) is reportedly looking to expand its fleet of C-295 medium tactical transport aircraft as a potential replacement for its aging Soviet-era AN-32 turboprop transport aircraft, according to sources cited by the Hindustan Times.

The C-295, with its 5-10-tonne payload capacity, aligns well with the IAF's current operational requirements and offers capabilities comparable to the AN-32, which has been a cornerstone of the IAF's transport fleet for decades.

As the AN-32s approach the end of their service life, with retirement slated to begin in 2030, the C-295, with its production line expected to run until 2032, presents a logical successor.

The IAF has already committed to acquiring 56 C-295s, with 16 to be built in Spain by Airbus and the remaining 40 to be manufactured in India under a landmark deal that bolsters the country's domestic aerospace industry.

In addition to the IAF's procurement, the Indian Coast Guard is also poised to acquire six C-295 Multi-Mission Maritime Aircraft variants, further highlighting the aircraft's versatility.

Beyond these initial orders, there's also potential for follow-on purchases from paramilitary organizations like the Border Security Force, suggesting a bright future for the C-295 in India.

The move to replace the AN-32 fleet with the C-295 underscores the IAF's commitment to modernizing its capabilities and ensuring operational readiness for the years to come.

 

[Anant]

One only hopes some bright spark doesn't come up with the idea of simply using the C295 in the MTA tender.

Highly unlikely someone would, but just to be safe...

 

[Deepak Hegde]

The IAF already has the first c-295's delivered to them for use. Based on what they have seen so far, hope they can take a quick decision for replacing the AN-32's rather than delay to the very last minute. This will not only help the factory to plan better for deliveries, but will also help the IAF maintain fleet levels for transport.

 

[Sunny]

The only issue with C-295 would be high altitude performance. The AN-32 was specifically designed for India from AN-26 by then Soviet Union to meet the demands of operations for high altitude airfields in the Himalayas. The C-295 though a great transport is unlikely to perform as well as AN-32 in high altitude operations.

 

[Anant]

The only issue with C-295 would be high altitude performance. The AN-32 was specifically designed for India from AN-26 by then Soviet Union to meet the demands of operations for high altitude airfields in the Himalayas. The C-295 though a great transport is unlikely to perform as well as AN-32 in high altitude operations.

Minor correction: The An-32 was not designed for India. It was simply designed as an upgraded An-26 to perform better in adverse weather conditions. The IAF was looking at the time for a small transport aircraft, and the An-32 was promising, hence orders were placed. However, there is a gap of almost 6 years between the announcement of the An-32 project and India's orders.

 

[Sunny]

Minor correction: The An-32 was not designed for India. It was simply designed as an upgraded An-26 to perform better in adverse weather conditions. The IAF was looking at the time for a small transport aircraft, and the An-32 was promising, hence orders were placed. However, there is a gap of almost 6 years between the announcement of the An-32 project and India's orders.

I remember reading somewhere AN-26 was modified to meet Indian requirements, but I could be wrong.

 

[Anant]

I remember reading somewhere AN-26 was modified to meet Indian requirements, but I could be wrong.

Nope. The An-26 was modified to make it more suitable for operations in Siberia and to make it a better export offering. India and a number of other users found the upgrades to be good, and hence bought An-32@.

 

[Kira]

I remember reading somewhere AN-26 was modified to meet Indian requirements, but I could be wrong.

I believe that a lot of deals with the USSR were also very much political and diplomatic deals rather than strictly technical ones just to placate the Soviets due to some recent defence deals with the West.

 

[Kira]

As I had been saying before,the C-295 is very versatile and reliable platform and is now already being produced in India,so it makes sense for the IAF to keep ordering more of them in the future not or just replace the very obsolete Avros,but also the rapidly aging An-32 fleet.

 

[neil]

Can old AN 32 converted in small tanker refullers ,as IAF find shortage of mid air refullers or C 295 can be used as mid air refullers

Nope...They are too old with too little service life remaining in the airframe to make the conversion worthwhile or cost effective.

 

[Deven Korde]

Can old AN 32 converted in small tanker refullers ,as IAF find shortage of mid air refullers or C 295 can be used as mid air refullers

 

[NSR]

I believe AN-32 carries lot more tonnage than the C-295s.
C-295s will replace all Avros equivalently.

For AN-32 replacement and MTAs, India may choose Lockheed Martin C-130Js and C-130J-Improved to carry more tonnage and suitable modifications for Indian needs.
I think Lockheed Martin will transfer more TOTs than Airbus C-295s in which landing gear and all avionics comes from Span and France and TATA does only manufacturing of airframe and then does screw driving and welding jobs to complete it.

India must make a deep requirements study before choosing its transportation fleet aircrafts.

 

[Vijigishu ( विजिग्शु )]

The only issue with C-295 would be high altitude performance. The AN-32 was specifically designed for India from AN-26 by then Soviet Union to meet the demands of operations for high altitude airfields in the Himalayas. The C-295 though a great transport is unlikely to perform as well as AN-32 in high altitude operations.

They claim service ceiling to be 9000 meters. Even a little worse performance might do fine ig.

 

[Sunny]

I believe AN-32 carries lot more tonnage than the C-295s.
C-295s will replace all Avros equivalently.

For AN-32 replacement and MTAs, India may choose Lockheed Martin C-130Js and C-130J-Improved to carry more tonnage and suitable modifications for Indian needs.
I think Lockheed Martin will transfer more TOTs than Airbus C-295s in which landing gear and all avionics comes from Span and France and TATA does only manufacturing of airframe and then does screw driving and welding jobs to complete it.

India must make a deep requirements study before choosing its transportation fleet aircrafts.

Another option could be to revive the now abandoned AN-132 with co-development. We could ask for TOT and we will get an aircraft tailored for high altitude performance.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

They claim service ceiling to be 9000 meters. Even a little worse performance might do fine ig.

The service ceiling is marginally in favor of AN--32 at about 9.500m, while C-295 is rated at about 9,200m. However it does not make much difference as even C-295 is capable of operating from THOISE and Ladakh air bases. The biggest thing favoring C-295 is its superb maintainability and subsequently availability.

 

[Sandeep]

While the C-295 plane is a great transport plane with more modern capabilities however it can’t be used to replace our medium transport An-32 as its payload category is small.

We need to manufacture a medium transport plane which can carry at least 30T or more as these planes would be used to replace the An-32 planes which are the main work horse of the air force and military.

 

[Sandeep]

As I had been saying before,the C-295 is very versatile and reliable platform and is now already being produced in India,so it makes sense for the IAF to keep ordering more of them in the future not or just replace the very obsolete Avros,but also the rapidly aging An-32 fleet.

While the C-295 plane is a great transport plane with more modern capabilities however it can’t be used to replace our medium transport An-32 as its payload category is to small. We need a medium weight transporter that can carry at least 30T as this will be the next workhorse for our air force and military in general.

 

[Sandeep]

The service ceiling is marginally in favor of AN--32 at about 9.500m, while C-295 is rated at about 9,200m. However it does not make much difference as even C-295 is capable of operating from THOISE and Ladakh air bases. The biggest thing favoring C-295 is its superb maintainability and subsequently availability.

While the C-295 plane is a great transport plane with more modern capabilities however it can’t be used to replace our medium transport An-32 as its payload category is to small. We need a medium weight transporter that can carry at least 30T as this will be the next workhorse for our air force and military in general

 

[Sandeep]

The only issue with C-295 would be high altitude performance. The AN-32 was specifically designed for India from AN-26 by then Soviet Union to meet the demands of operations for high altitude airfields in the Himalayas. The C-295 though a great transport is unlikely to perform as well as AN-32 in high altitude operations.

While the C-295 plane is a great transport plane with more modern capabilities however it can’t be used to replace our medium transport An-32 as its payload category is to small. We need a medium weight transporter that can carry at least 30T as this will be the next workhorse for our military in general.

 

[Sunny]

The service ceiling is marginally in favor of AN--32 at about 9.500m, while C-295 is rated at about 9,200m. However it does not make much difference as even C-295 is capable of operating from THOISE and Ladakh air bases. The biggest thing favoring C-295 is its superb maintainability and subsequently availability.

9000 meters is the absolute ceiling for C-295, likely without any payload. AN-32 has a service ceiling of over 9000 meters.

 

[Sunny]

While the C-295 plane is a great transport plane with more modern capabilities however it can’t be used to replace our medium transport An-32 as its payload category is to small. We need a medium weight transporter that can carry at least 30T as this will be the next workhorse for our military in general.

The payload capability of AN-32 and C-295 is similar around 9 tonnes.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

While the C-295 plane is a great transport plane with more modern capabilities however it can’t be used to replace our medium transport An-32 as its payload category is to small. We need a medium weight transporter that can carry at least 30T as this will be the next workhorse for our air force and military in general

What do u mean? They both fall in same category of light transport aircraft. While AN-32 has a payload capacity of 6.7- 7.5 tonnes, C-295 has 9.2 tonnes

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

9000 meters is the absolute ceiling for C-295, likely without any payload. AN-32 has a service ceiling of over 9000 meters.

That's the standard payload flight performance. Nobody gives a service ceiling for an aircraft without cargo especially for a transport aircraft. Otherwise it does not make sense. The service ceiling declared by Airbus is upto 9 tonnes for an aircraft flying at 260 knots is about 30,000 ft which is just over 9,140 meters. That is close to weight of 70 fully equipped personnel.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

While the C-295 plane is a great transport plane with more modern capabilities however it can’t be used to replace our medium transport An-32 as its payload category is small.

We need to manufacture a medium transport plane which can carry at least 30T or more as these planes would be used to replace the An-32 planes which are the main work horse of the air force and military.

sinnce when did a sub 10 ton transport aircraft like AN--32 become a medium transport aircraft? it is essentially a light transport aircraft with a payload of about 7.5 ton. Always was and always will be.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

While the C-295 plane is a great transport plane with more modern capabilities however it can’t be used to replace our medium transport An-32 as its payload category is to small. We need a medium weight transporter that can carry at least 30T as this will be the next workhorse for our air force and military in general.

AN-32 is not a MEDIUM transport aircraft with 30 ton payload capacity.Please Do not misinform. It's payload is 6.7-7.5 tonnes, and as such C-295 is almost perfect replacement.

 

[Sunny]

That's the standard payload flight performance. Nobody gives a service ceiling for an aircraft without cargo especially for a transport aircraft. Otherwise it does not make sense. The service ceiling declared by Airbus is upto 9 tonnes for an aircraft flying at 260 knots is about 30,000 ft which is just over 9,140 meters. That is close to weight of 70 fully equipped personnel.

That seems unlikely. The C-295 is powered by 2600hp engines and the AN-32 with 5100hp engines. No matter how much the aerodynamic difference in design, they cannot have the similar payload/altitude performance. Also the AN-32 configuration is optimised for high altitude performance, unlike C-295.

 

[desigandu]

1. Right now we have an order of 56 (16 in Spain + 40 assembled in India starting 2026 of 5-8 per year) + 15 (between IN and ICG), so total of 55 to be built in India...Can we say accelerate to about 8-10 planes per year say by 2038, and make 100 odd domestically by 2035-2036, for domestic consumption...Can the TATA facility scale along with TOT, local supplier eco-system etc...And how is the contract structured with Airbus - can it enable this along with potential enhancements, modifications etc. - hopefully we have learnt from the past and signed better contracts...

2. Further MTA program should also be accelerated and signed with Lockheed and TATA with a domestic assembly line for 100s of planes - that way we have solved for transports upto 20 ton payload...

3. For heavy/strategic transports (IL76/78 and C-17s) From 20T-80T, we need a different solution, but should start planning asap...

 

[desigandu]

While the C-295 plane is a great transport plane with more modern capabilities however it can’t be used to replace our medium transport An-32 as its payload category is small.

We need to manufacture a medium transport plane which can carry at least 30T or more as these planes would be used to replace the An-32 planes which are the main work horse of the air force and military.

Per Google Gemini AI - payload comparison of C-295s vs. AN32s...Seems C295s can carry more payload than AN32...

The Airbus C295 is a tactical airlifter that can carry up to 9,250 kilograms (20,400 pounds) of payload. It can also transport up to 71 troops, 48 paratroopers, or 12 stretcher intensive care medevac patients. The C295's cargo hold is 12.69 meters long, 1.90 meters wide, and 2.70 meters high, and it can carry five standard 108-inch pallets of cargo or three Land Rover-sized light vehicles.

The Antonov An-32 is a twin-engine transport aircraft with a maximum payload capacity of 7,500 kg (16,531 lb). It can also carry up to 50 passengers, 42 paratroopers, or 24 casualties on stretchers with three medical personnel.

 

[ABHIJIT APSINGIKAR]

That seems unlikely. The C-295 is powered by 2600hp engines and the AN-32 with 5100hp engines. No matter how much the aerodynamic difference in design, they cannot have the similar payload/altitude performance. Also the AN-32 configuration is optimised for high altitude performance, unlike C-295.

That is what Airbus says on its spec sheet.

 

[desigandu]

One only hopes some bright spark doesn't come up with the idea of simply using the C295 in the MTA tender.

Highly unlikely someone would, but just to be safe...

Potentially, but unlikely given MTA payload needs (at least on paper) are 18-30 Tons...