Antonov An-72P Technical Data and Discussion

Antonov An-72P


image


Overview and History


The Antonov An-72 “Coaler,” though known by crews and engineers as the “Cheburashka,” was designed as a Short Take-Off and Landing aircraft which can operate from unprepared airfields. The An-72 originated as An-32, but was later fitted with jet engines. The first prototype flew on 22 December 1977, and the aircraft entered service in 1979.

The wings are high-mounted with two turbofans located in long pods mounted on top. Round air intakes extend from the front of the wings’ leading edges. The engines were placed on the leading edge of the wings to increase lift for STOL capability, with the jet exhausts blowing over titanium panels on the upper surface. The engine position also gives good Foreign Object Damage protection, which was very common when running aircraft on unprepared runways. The fuselage is circular with round, solid nose, upswept rear section, and a flush cockpit. The rear fuselage has a hinged loading ramp with a rear fairing that slides backwards and up to clear the opening. Up to 7.5 tons can be airdropped, and there are folding side seats for 42 fully-equipped paratroops or 52 passengers.

The An-72P is a maritime patrol variant with bulged observation windows, life-raft provision, cameras as well as offensive armament, including underwing rocket pods, a podded cannon on the undercarriage sponson, and bombs that can be mounted in the aft of the cargo bay; which could be dropped through the open rear ramp.

The An-74, a derivative of the An-72, features improved avionics and radar together with an extended wingspan and increased range. It was designed to operate in the polar regions where it can land on ice floes for resupply or rescue work. The An-71 AEW aircraft also featured the extended wingspan, along with a large radar dish on top of the tail.



The An-72P in game


The An-72P, with a top speed of 705 km/h (438 mph) and no Air-air weaponry makes it almost exclusively a strike aircraft. However, its allowance of the GSh-23L in a similar setup to the UPK-23 gun pod, allows it to have some Defence against other aircraft. It’s S-5K 57mm rockets, while not being of extreme precision do have decent anti-tank capabilities when used properly, and it’s four FAB-100 bombs are effective against ground targets of most size. It’s STOL capabilities and thrust reversal systems, as well as its rugged landing gear allow it to function effectively at its job and increase turn around time. I believe its mix of lower speeds and mediocre weaponry allow it to have a decent shot at being in the 6.0 to 6.7 range.


Specifications


  • Crew: 3 (Pilot, Co-pilot, & flight engineer)

  • Engines: 2x Lotarev D-36 Turbofan engine | 63.74 kilo-newtons of thrust (14,330 Ft-lbs)

  • Max speed: 705 km/h (438mph)

  • Max Take-Off weight: 34,500 kg

  • Empty weight: 19,050 kg

  • Fuel weight: 12,950 kg

  • Service ceiling: 11.8 km

  • Combat Range: 800 km

  • Take-Off distance: 620 meters

  • Landing distance: 420 meters

  • Bombs: 4x FAB-100

  • Rockets: 2x UB-32 (S-5K, 64 total)

  • Guns: GSh-23L (250 rounds)


image


Sources:


https://antonov.com/en/history/an-72

https://web.archive.org/web/20090107030001/http://www.m9.com.ua/en/vs/passenger/an-74/characteristics.html

https://www.generalequipment.info/AN-72P-100.htm


Other media:


image

image

6 Likes

Suggestions section

?

This is a full sentence

Suggesting an aircraft that’s not in game already should go into the suggestions section

Oh, yes, I know, this is a translation of the post that I made for the suggestion section, in the case it didn’t get accepted (cough cough, it’s already been declined)

1 Like

You just gotta wait, sometimes it takes a while, also I’ve seen people get muted for a little on the forums bc it’s technically a rule break.

If it got declined than just alter it to what they want and resubmit it

That’s why I asked a suggestion mod why it didn’t get accepted. I wasn’t joking when I said it was already declined btw.

Yeah just wait for that rather than trying to sneak one in at the wrong section

I get that, but I don’t wanna have to recreate the entire suggestion if it’s just a few things that need to be fixed, similar to what I did with this other post:

Oh cmon man it’s really not that bad

Just copy it before you submit and put it to it your notes app/folder incase it gets declined

Trust me when I say this being in the timeout corner on the forums isn’t fun.

Why would I get in trouble for posting this in the machinery of war section though? I also want feedback from other players and users, which is why I move it here while I wait for responses.

Also, got 3 posts about weapons systems that were took down last night, don’t know what that was all about. They were removed for being “inappropriate”

But if this isn’t were it belongs please tell me where or what to do with it.

1 Like

If you want to keep this post up, I recommend removing the Poll and In Game sections, as well as adding some more history/pictures. After that rename it to AN-72P Technical Data and Discussion. It should be all good after that.

Okay

1 Like

i thing that this aircraft is alike the Strikemaster → battlepass / Event

the fact it have an Heavy Engine Power and a large Wing Surface makes the aircraft to handle low speed far better than any 6.0/6.7 BR aircraft, coupled with GSh-23L guns which are currently pretty good and easy to use.
that makes it impossible to be in such low BR of 6.0/6.7 you’ve proposed.

Of course, the Aircraft low amount of Ground attack weapons would definelty be a drawback for Ground BR.

in facts, i would suggest you precise the following BR for that suggestion:
Air Modes : 7.3 BR
Ground Modes : 6.7 BR

as i feel those BR are fair.

While I agree, I feel like it’s too large of a target around this area, but if it was to ever get added, we’d just have to see.

Ar-234C is already a large target yet pulls incredibly well against 6.7/7.0 jet fighters - it’s already a 7.3

here we’ll got an even better aircraft overall.

i’m simply trying to make sense

1 Like

Ar-234 isn’t really large…
For a bomber its kind of small (It’s comparable in size to P-47)

An-72 meanwhile was originally a transport plane and I assume it’d have roll rate (turn rate maybe as well) comparable to that of a barn

Depends, it’s got a slim wing like on the BV 155, and a low pressure zone effect from the engines to increase lift.

Fair
But still keep in mind that it is based on a cargo plane
BV-155 was designed as an interceptor

Only thing over wing engines might be beneficial for is takeoff run

Video might show some maneuvering, can’t remember though.