Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

PapaDragon wrote:
Nothing with name "Antonov" will be produced ever again
Not in the Ukraine and most certainly not in Russia

Wrong, 12 AN-178s in Ukraine + 40 of them in PRC will be produced. 30 AN-178s for, & many AN-132s in, Saudi Arabia. It seems that you are not reading prev. posts!
http://www.aviationanalysis.net/2015/05/an-178-to-be-license-built-in-china.html https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.wordpress.com/2015/12/19/antonov-an-178/
http://quwa.org/2015/12/25/keep-an-eye-on-the-antonov-an-178/
http://airheadsfly.com/2015/05/09/saudia-arabia-will-build-its-own-an-132-aircraft/
http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/newsantonov-and-aqnia-aeronautics-sign-mou-to-deliver-30-an178s-to-rsaf-4759152
As of AN-22s, if needed, as a stop gap they could be produced under a different name/designation.

Production is picking up now, right? And that graph is misleading. Before 2008-12 most of those assets existed only on paper, more or less. I'm not sure, but I'd imagine that was partially the case even during the Soviet era, i.e. they didn't actually have 5 times the capability, more something like 3x. The overall readiness of the Russian military has obviously never been this good, certainly not since the collapse the USSR (of course it's quite a bit smaller), and I don't think their transport aircraft fleet is an exception. Does any country even have anywhere near as many Il-76-class aircraft in service, except the US of course? No...? China will of course also get there within the next 10 years.

Tsavo Lion wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:
Nothing with name "Antonov" will be produced ever again
Not in the Ukraine and most certainly not in Russia

Wrong, 12 AN-178s in Ukraine + 40 of them in PRC will be produced. 30 AN-178s for, & many AN-132s in, Saudi Arabia. It seems that you are not reading prev. posts!  
http://www.aviationanalysis.net/2015/05/an-178-to-be-license-built-in-china.html https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.wordpress.com/2015/12/19/antonov-an-178/
http://quwa.org/2015/12/25/keep-an-eye-on-the-antonov-an-178/
http://airheadsfly.com/2015/05/09/saudia-arabia-will-build-its-own-an-132-aircraft/
http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/newsantonov-and-aqnia-aeronautics-sign-mou-to-deliver-30-an178s-to-rsaf-4759152
As of AN-22s, if needed, as a stop gap they could be produced under a different name/designation.    

your knowledge on history is lacking. Even recent history. Most An contracts end up falling through. Also, antanov isn't a company anymore.

Ill see it to believe it. Those antanovs won't be made in Ukraine either. But I doubt they will be built at all.

Most, if not all of those cancelled/failed contracts were with Russia- I would like to see your references to prove otherwise. Other countries need them regardless of the past history. Even under a different name & management the designers & producers are going to be the same.

Tsavo Lion wrote:Most, if not all of those cancelled/failed contracts were with Russia- I would like to see your references to prove otherwise. Other countries need them regardless of the past history. Even under a different name & management the designers & producers are going to be the same.

you are aware that if it is local built, at most, a few individuals are sent abroad to help produce it. See T-80 story and the Al Khalid tank program. Or nearly everything else sold by Ukraine in the grand fire sale.

I mean also those aircraft & their kits produced in Ukraine. Recall AN-24/12 & Y-7/8, TU-16 & H-6, MiG-19/21 & J-6/7, IL-28 & H-5, Su-27/33 &
J-11/15/16. All of them were sold 1st & then produced "with Chinese characteristics" in PRC:  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_Y-7 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaanxi_Y-8 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_H-6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_J-6
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-7
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-28
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/shenyang-j11-multirole-fighter-aircraft-china/  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_J-15
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_J-16
If they could reverse engineer/modify & produce  them, surely the Russians could do it with AN-22 as well!

Tsavo Lion wrote:I mean also those aircraft & their kits produced in Ukraine. Recall AN-24/12 & Y-7/8, TU-16 & H-6, MiG-19/21 & J-6/7, IL-28 & H-5, Su-27/33 &
J-11/15/16. All of them were sold 1st & then produced "with Chinese characteristics" in PRC:  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_Y-7 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaanxi_Y-8 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_H-6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_J-6
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-7
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-28
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/shenyang-j11-multirole-fighter-aircraft-china/  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_J-15
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_J-16
If they could reverse engineer/modify & produce  them, surely the Russians could do it with AN-22 as well!

But they don't want to. Same goes for all its systems they are replacing. They will replace it with their own systems with ones they built and not bothered to reverse engineer cause even reversed engineered stuff as you may have noticed ended up problematic.

How do you know what they want or don't want? Pl. be more specific when replying. The Chinese modified/redesigned/modernized Soviet planes & put them in production. USSR copied B-29 as Tu-4. http://www.b-29s-over-korea.com/shortstories/russianclone.htm
Then they built Tu-85/95/142/114/126. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-85
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-114
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-126
The same with DC-3 & Li-2:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_DC-3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisunov_Li-2, leading to IL-14 & Y-6
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-14
Time will tell if modernized AN-22 (or its follow-on under some other name) will be built again, but it's not impossible, by any means.

They weren't completely replaced, at least 5 AN-22s are still active.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-22#Military

The remaining An-22s appear to be operated by an independent military transport aviation squadron at Migalovo. http://military.wikia.com/wiki/Antonov_An-22

AN-124 won't be produced any time soon. Although unlikely, it's still possible that AN-22 line can be restarted. PAK-TA is at least 10-15 years away from replacing/substituting the AN-124!

The cases of actual copying are very rare and usually because of time constraints... ala Mistral.

They wanted a helicopter carrier fast... they could have taken 10-15 years and designed their own from scratch and accepted the first model might not be the best but the second and third model would be good based on experience with the first... or they could have done what they did and bought the Mistral off the shelf and got them in a couple of years.

Obviously they didn't expect the French to be assholes, but in the end they got an intimate look at the complete design, they got to built part of each carrier, and now they can sell bits to the Egyptians, and they got all their money back... they didn't get the carriers they wanted but they hardly lost...

The DC-3 was not a copy... it was licence production.

And the An-22 is dead in Russian service... the Il-106 was to replace it, but their new transport family will have a light two engine member for that role... a four engine model for the An-124 role and a six engine model for the An-225 role.

The B-29s were handed to them... they already had four engined bombers but needed a new modern model quickly so it was deemed easier to just copy and then develop from that.

other copies like :

The Sidewinder was totally different from previous Soviet missiles... it was simple and basic, which were virtues, not drawbacks. They were modular. Nose tip was the seeker, then front control surfaces, then guidance and brain, then warhead, then the rear was rocket motor. They copied because it was quicker to simply copy than to wait for the designs of brand new missiles were developed to take advantage of the new design paradigm.

The Buran copied the shape of the US space shuttle because NASA had already spend billions testing all sorts of shapes and that was found to be the best... why waste time and money retesting?

The Buran itself was actually fundamentally different from the US space shuttle.

In design terms the US space shuttle was like a C-130 herc with an enormous external fuel tank and two huge solid rocket boosters to get it airborne. In comparison the Buran was a glider that sat on the back of the rocket that got it airborne.

The advantage of the Soviet system was that if you were building a space station you could take the 120 tons of Buran off the back of the energyia rocket and replace it with whole parts of a space station at 120 ton loads, while the space shuttle could carry 10 ton payloads it also carried ten tons of rocket engines into space and back as dead weight.

Other than that the claims of copying are amusing... the claim the Tu-160 is a copy of the B-1A, well there are designs showing all sorts of layouts from the Concorde and other aircraft of that period that suggest they came up with a similar shape for the solution to similar problems.

The claim the MiG-29 is a copy of the F-18 and the Su-27 is a copy of the F-15 is amusing when the F-15 is actually a copy of the MiG-25.

There is clear influence of the AT-4 and AT-5 from the Milan and HOT missiles.

But then the new western IFVs seem more influenced by the BMP than anything else.

Also the switch to smoothbore main tank guns seems to be a case of copying. Western countries didn't really embrace assault rifle concept till after they saw the AK being widely deployed.

The An-22 wont go back into production... it would make more sense to make more An-124s if that was even an option... An-22s have not been produced in quite a while... unlike the An-124.

AFAIK they have a few AN-124s in reserve that could be put back into service with an upgrade/overhaul.

With the upgrade of the armour of the Army over the next few years they will need an upgraded air transport system... I would suspect that will be starting soon.

http://function.mil.ru/news_page/country.htm

The analysis of the results of the scrapping process in the first half of 2017, detailed in the references 17.0001 to 17.0049 plus 17.0071 to 17.0072, gives the following results:

In the refered to non-combat auxiliary aircrafts and helicopters, there is not material from scrapping activity, but it has been the offer of some stored engines to auction:

Mi-6/10: 22 engines Mi-10 variant
Tu-134: 3 engines

This situation agrees with the real situation of the Russian auxiliary air fleet. At this point the scrapping process of the totally decommissioned aircrafts and helicopters seems finnished, while the worst units of the aircrafts and helicopters that are still in active service and/or in the reserve seem to be used as spare parts, like must be done. Today there is not an important process of decommission and scrapping of aircrafts or helicopters of the Russian auxiliary air fleet.

I tend to think that the first auxiliary aircraft or helicopter that can have this kind of process of complete decommission is the L-39, that can go to Syria.

GarryB wrote:
The DC-3 was not a copy... it was licence production.
And the An-22 is dead in Russian service... the Il-106 was to replace it, but their new transport family will have a light two engine member for that role... a four engine model for the An-124 role and a six engine model for the An-225 role. ..The B-29s were handed to them... they already had four engined bombers but needed a new modern model quickly so it was deemed easier to just copy and then develop from that. ..the F-15 is actually a copy of the MiG-25. ..The An-22 wont go back into production... it would make more sense to make more An-124s if that was even an option... An-22s have not been produced in quite a while... unlike the An-124. AFAIK they have a few AN-124s in reserve that could be put back into service with an upgrade/overhaul.

I meant: Li-2 was a copy of DC-3. 4 engine IL-106 is to replace the IL-76, not directly replace AN-22 &/AN-124, as its max payload is less. B-29s had emergency landings in the RFE while USSR was neutral vs. Japan & and interned there. F-15 was influenced by MiG-25, not copied from it. Their roles are different & Belenko defected in 1975, well after the F-15 design started. Neither AN-22s nor AN-124s were ever produced in what is now Russia- both were made in what is now Ukraine; any new Russian made AN-124 will also need to have different engines (not Ukrainian made) that may or may not work well- for the above reasons, that's why they want to produce IL-106s- but the AN-22 uses the same engines as TU-95/142. They are not dead yet, & there are probably still several that could be put in flight status. IMO, it would be less risky & quicker to produce more of them, some as amphibians, then wait > a decade (if not longer) for the new IL-76 (that they can't afford now in sufficient numbers, see prev. page), IL-106s & AN-124s.

PapaDragon wrote:

Tsavo Lion wrote:............... Neither AN-22s nor AN-124s were ever produced in what is now Russia- both were made in what is now Ukraine; any new Russian made AN-124 will also need to have different engines (not Ukrainian made)............  

Neither they plan to produce any.
They have old An-124 that they can overhaul and bring back into service and after that PAK-TA is taking over.
I honestly have no idea why are you so insistent on using obsolete platforms like An-22. It's a beautiful aircraft but it's time has passed. They should be in the museums.

So should many C-130s, yet they are still being flown by many AFs & firefighters! https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-130.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_C-130_Hercules#Operators
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/02/us/south-dakota-air-tanker-crash/index.html http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/35851622/16-dead-in-marine-c-130-crash-in-mississippi
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/07/01/indonesia-c130-crash-death-toll-at-141-as-search-effort-ends.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/engine-failure-impact-eyed-after-deadly-afghanistan-c-130-crash-n437731
The AN-22 isn't so obsolete- it surpasses IL-476 & C-17; even now many AFs don't have anything to lift 80T or even 50T with 1 plane. True, it hasn't been produced for a long time but there are now C-130Js, IL-476s, IL-96s, B-737-7/8/9s, H-6Ks, B-52Hs- all based on earlier models.

If Russia has as low production of transport aircrafts and helicopters is because Russia needs not more.

Russia is using the auxiliary air fleet inherited from the Soviet Union as must be done. A good number of the exhausted aircrafts in active service are being replaced still today by non-exhausted aircrafts of the same type that have been years in the reserve and must be used first until to be also exhausted.

The replacement with new aircrafts and helicopters will be done when needed only with new and modern aircrafts and helicopters of the demanded/succesful cathegories. And will not be done with aircrafts and helicopters of the unsuccessful/obsolete cathegories.

How many were in reserve before being brought back to flying status? Pl. provide references. Most of them were probably used for cannibalization, made into drone targets, sold abroad, or recycled for scrap. The same things happen at DMAFB! http://www.airplaneboneyards.com/davis-monthan-afb-amarg-airplane-boneyard.htm
This AN-22 was parked for 7 years & returned to airworthy status in February of 2016 in Ukraine: https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/back-in-the-air-tracking-the-antonov-an-22s-first-commercial-flight-in-over-7-years/
if they could do it, so can Russia.

Li-2 was a copy of DC-3

The Li-2 was a licence produced DC-3... paid for and legal.

Just check the wiki page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisunov_Li-2

4 engine IL-106 is to replace the IL-76, not directly replace AN-22 &/AN-124,

The 80-90 ton capacity Il-106 was intended to replace the An-22.

B-29s had emergency landings in the RFE while USSR was neutral vs. Japan & and interned there.

Like I said... B-29s were handed to them.

F-15 was influenced by MiG-25, not copied from it.

The F-15 was more a copy than anything else... it was a copy of what they thought the MiG-25 was. It copied the layout, which had never been used by an American aircraft previously...

Their roles are different & Belenko defected in 1975, well after the F-15 design started.

They copied the layout from photos... no previous US aircraft design had twin engines side by side and the same layout as the MiG.

They copied it.

Neither AN-22s nor AN-124s were ever produced in what is now Russia- both were made in what is now Ukraine; any new Russian made AN-124 will also need to have different engines (not Ukrainian made) that may or may not work well- for the above reason

Really?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviastar-SP

You might want to tell the Russians they never made An-124s....

And they have new engines in development that would be fine replacements...

So should many C-130s, yet they are still being flown by many AFs & firefighters!

This is not about being obsolete... it is about control of servicing and upgrades... the An-22 and An1124 are foreign aircraft designs... Russia needs Russian planes.

if they could do it, so can Russia.

They probably could but why revive an ancient foreign aircraft when they could develop a put into production a new aircraft that has better capabilities and is Russian?

Tsavo Lion wrote:

eehnie wrote:If Russia has as low production of transport aircrafts and helicopters is because Russia needs not more.

Russia is using the auxiliary air fleet inherited from the Soviet Union as must be done. A good number of the exhausted aircrafts in active service are being replaced still today by non-exhausted aircrafts of the same type that have been years in the reserve and must be used first until to be also exhausted.

The replacement with new aircrafts and helicopters will be done when needed only with new and modern aircrafts and helicopters of the demanded/succesful cathegories. And will not be done with aircrafts and helicopters of the unsuccessful/obsolete cathegories.

How many were in reserve before being brought back to flying status? Pl. provide references. Most of them were probably used for cannibalization, made into drone targets, sold abroad, or recycled for scrap. The same things happen at DMAFB! http://www.airplaneboneyards.com/davis-monthan-afb-amarg-airplane-boneyard.htm
This AN-22 was parked for 7 years & returned to airworthy status in February of 2016 in Ukraine: https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/back-in-the-air-tracking-the-antonov-an-22s-first-commercial-flight-in-over-7-years/
if they could do it, so can Russia.

Taking as example the fleet of the An-22 in active service today, a 60% of the current aircrafts in active servece returned from the reserve to active service in recent years.

These returned to active service after being years in the reserve:
https://russianplanes.net/reginfo/586 (returned after 12 years in the reserve)
https://russianplanes.net/reginfo/589 (returned after 9 years in the reserve)
https://russianplanes.net/reginfo/594 (returned 2 times after 2 and 4 years in the reserve)

And these not:
https://russianplanes.net/reginfo/568
https://russianplanes.net/reginfo/594

This seems to be a common practice. In the 1990s and 2000s a good number of aircrafts that were not exhausted have been in the reserve, and when others that remained in active service reached worse condition, these aircrafts returned, and are returning, while the units that have been in active service these years are the units canibalized.

In the case of the An-22, likely the potential of return is exhausted, but not in other cases, like the An-124 and the Il-76.

It is clear that the An-22 will not be in active service for long time, but until now it has not been problem to replace them with other aircrafts of the same or different size.  While I think it is positive and useful to have a new model of transport aircraft of the size cathegory of the An-22, there not really a hurry to have it before the An-22 totally disappear because other aircrafts will do the job of the remaining units of the An-22 when retired. In the last decades decens of units of An-22 have been replaced in its job by aircrafts of the same or different size when they have been retired. The same is likely to happen with the lasts.

Right, but if they had more $ they could build new upgraded AN-22s that could augment other planes. Yes, the Li-2 was built under license but had many changes from the original DC-3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisunov_Li-2#Design_and_development To me, copying means 100% exact replica. If the general layout is replicated it's not an exact copy. I misstated that Li-2 was a DC-3 copy. The F-15 isn't an exact copy of MiG-25, just like the SU-24 vs. F-111, B-1 vs. TU-160, TU-134 vs. DC-9, IL-86 vs. B-707, TU-144 vs. Concord, DC-6 vs. IL-18, VC-10 vs. IL-62, C-130 vs. AN-12, A-400M vs. AN-70, etc. Most, if not all, C-130s are too old now to be endlessly upgraded w/o compromising structural integrity & safety. It's time to ground & inspect all active birds & replace the bad 1s with those in mothballs- I saw dozens of them at DMAFB- until more C-130Js are built.

All in all for the whole period of the existence of the Ulyanovsk Aviation Industrial Complex 36 An-124 aircraft have been manufactured. http://www.aviastar-sp.ru/en/products_and_services/services/dorabotki_i_modernizatsiya/

I forgot about it, but it would be cheaper & easier to build more AN-22s since they know to build more complex AN-124 & IL-476! The IL-76s were being produced in Tashkent, Uzbek SSR, & then its production moved to the RF. So, it was also "a foreign made" according to your logic. Now its IL-476 derivative is produced on the same plant; the IL-106 follow on is still a paper plane. If they can't afford all 39 of IL-476 now, how many IL-106 will be ordered?

I forgot about it, but it would be cheaper & easier to build more AN-22s since they know to build more complex AN-124 & IL-476! The IL-76s were being produced in Tashkent, Uzbek SSR, & then its production moved to the RF. So, it was also "a foreign made" according to your logic. Now its IL-476 derivative is produced on the same plant; the IL-106 follow on is still a paper plane. If they can't afford all 39 of IL-476 now, how many IL-106 will be ordered?

It is not about pride... it is about design ownership... what if Russia builds 50 An-22s and the Ukraine takes them to the European court for illegal copying of their product and demands 10 billion in compensation... the European court would love to find in their favour and give them 100 billion in compensation.

The Il-106 is a new design designed to replace the An-22, so why not build it instead of an An-22?

If they needed 200 Il-476s now they would find the money. The fact that they don't want to spend the money to get all 39 straight away suggests the current need for that class of aircraft is not really that urgent and could be better spent elsewhere... like in a different weight class.

Existing Il-76s can be upgraded so there is no super urgent reason to make lots right now.

The An-22 on the other hand is pretty much leaving service and a replacement for it would be rather more use.

Equally the An-12 is getting long in the tooth and needs replacement too.

Good points. The workhorse IL-76 fleet is also a source of 10 used planes sold to PRC instead of the new that were never built in Tashkent.
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ain-defense-perspective/2012-11-30/china-orders-il-76s-it-awaits-il-476s-1 https://www.upi.com/Analysis-Sino-Russia-Il-76-row-Part-1/34371213281736/
Also, new A-100s & IL-78s tankers must be produced to replace the older models. They are betting on foreign sales as gov. orders aren't enough to make ends meet. There's no need for 50 new AN-22s, 15-20 max. would do, if there should be a need for them. $10B -100B in compensation is too big a figure; the RF can counter sue for $100M Ukraine got for AN-70 & other things. IL-214s will replace AN-12s & AN-72s , just like KC-390 will replace many C-130s; IL-112s will replace AN-26s. http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2016-04-11/india-out-russia-continues-developing-il-214-transport http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/meet-the-embraer-kc-390-the-jet-powered-challenger-to-1649242405 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Air_Force#Future_of_the_Russian_Air_Force

$10B -100B in compensation is too big a figure; the RF can counter sue for $100M Ukraine got for AN-70 & other things.

The point is not the amount... the point is that in a european court Russia is not likely to win unless it has a water tight case, and in this case I don't think they would have a water tight case.

Also, new A-100s & IL-78s tankers must be produced to replace the older models. They are betting on foreign sales as gov. orders aren't enough to make ends meet.

The Il-76 has been very successful... even NATO countries lease them and use them for deployments of NATO forces... an upgraded new build version should be pretty successful too.

There's no need for 50 new AN-22s, 15-20 max. would do, if there should be a need for them.

Such a small number does not warrant the expense and time to put back into production.

Better to wait and develop a unified design of twin, four and six engined aircraft family in the 80, 150, and 200+ ton payload capacity range to replace the An-22, An-124, and to provide services in the role the An-225 would have had for Russia if they had some.

For the space industry an aircraft able to carry large objects on their backs is very valuable and worth the cost.

IL-214s will replace AN-12s & AN-72s

They certainly will, but it will take time.

I doubt IL-106 financing issue will be resolved soon; they are a long way off before starting building the 1st prototype. If only 15-20 AN-22s are built, they would also produce new spares for them & most or all of the older 16 planes to keep them flying, so it would bring the total numbers to ~ 31-36, which would be adequate as a stop gap IMO.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Russian_military_aircraft They just restarted low rate production of IL-96s on gov. orders. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/il-96.htm http://www.rusaviainsider.com/vaso-build-two-il-96-300s-purportedly-russian-president/ http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2017-04-11/ilyushin-il-96-400m-widebody-taking-shape http://www.rusaviainsider.com/improved-ilyushin-il-96-airliner-to-fly-in-2019/ http://www.rusaviainsider.com/royal-flight-pegas-show-interest-il-96-400m-airliner/ https://themoscowtimes.com/articles/what-planes-will-russia-fly-if-boeing-and-airbus-ditched-over-sanctions-38787  If the PRC starts building AN-124/225s or their derivatives, why not sell some to Russia? Then the Aviastar can concentrate on those ILs & upgrading existing AN-124s.

I doubt IL-106 financing issue will be resolved soon; they are a long way off before starting building the 1st prototype.

AFAIK the Il-106 was close to serial production... it was just engine testing and funding and from what I have read the engines were amazing... there was simply no funding to put them into production and even if they managed to produce them there was nothing for them to do as in the 1990s the Army wasn't doing very much at all that transport aircraft would be useful.
Even if they had a full transport fleet right now the Syrian campaign would continue with ships because that is vastly cheaper and easier.

If only 15-20 AN-22s are built, they would also produce new spares for them & most or all of the older 16 planes to keep them flying, so it would bring the total numbers to ~ 31-36, which would be adequate as a stop gap IMO.

Only? There were less than 75 aircraft built of the type in the first place and they haven't been produced since the mid 1970s, and weren't made in Russia.

What makes you think the factory that made them in the 1970s is still able to make anything?

Better to let the plane die, transfer all the engines and spares to Bear units and build a new plane... the Il-106.

If the PRC starts building AN-124/225s or their derivatives, why not sell some to Russia?

Because investing money in Russian aircraft manufacturers is how they stay in business. Pissing money away to foreign countries is a great way to kill Russian aircraft companies.

Then the Aviastar can concentrate on those ILs & upgrading existing AN-124s.

Fuck An-124s, Russia needs to make Russian planes that suit her needs and get rid of foreign aircraft completely from their service.