Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Share
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1392
    Points : 1392
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  miketheterrible on Sat Jul 22, 2017 9:57 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:So, there's no legal inheritor of Antonov? RF can still sue the new entity that took it over to get $100M back if AN-70 derivatives are exported. BTW, Russia is legal inheritor of the USSR & can cause a lot more legal problems to Kiev if it wanted to.
    Russia is playing the game of being mister nice guy in order to win hearts and minds.
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 950
    Points : 1114
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Sun Jul 23, 2017 5:31 pm

    Sorry been out of the loop for a while. Has Antonov collapsed or been bought out/ transferred?
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1392
    Points : 1392
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  miketheterrible on Sun Jul 23, 2017 6:00 pm

    It was consolidated under a single military manufacturing branch. To be honest, that is probably the best bet for saving money while building what you need. But knowing Ukraine, it has probably been stripped.
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 950
    Points : 1114
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  d_taddei2 on Mon Jul 24, 2017 11:48 am

    Funding will be stolen and the plant will be reduced to almost nothing and no new aircraft and increased shoddy build quality
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16517
    Points : 17125
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:48 pm

    Russia wont get anything back from what was invested into the An-70 programme... all they can really do is continue to create Russian alternatives to Ukrainian aircraft and components and move forward with those.

    This will mean new Russian designs they can sell around the world to fill the gap between the no longer available Soviet designs and the too expensive or sanctioned western models.

    There will be no Russian models if they continue to revive An-22s etc.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5422
    Points : 5526
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  PapaDragon on Mon Jul 24, 2017 1:12 pm


    This chart shows level of contribution in construction of Antonov aircraft. As you can see there was never a point in time when Russia needed Ukraine's​ participation in construction of transport aircraft.

    It was in fact other way around. So can we please stop wasting time with inserting Ukraine in any discussion about manufacture of transport aircraft for anyone, least of all Russia?

    Antonov was never anything more than a name and is finished along with the Ukraine.

    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 189
    Points : 191
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Mon Jul 24, 2017 7:57 pm

    The designs & planes will live on:
    The Russian Defense Ministry has already begun efforts to ensure that its 20 An-124 aircraft will be inspected by OAK subsidiary Ilyushin. ..The flight range of a Mriya, equipped with a regiment of 2,000 troops and five heavy tanks, is over 2,500 km. This means that with a dozen such aircraft, the PLA would be able to transfer at least one tank battalion or division almost anywhere in Southeast Asia." https://sputniknews.com/europe/201609161045372782-antonov-aviation-giant-collapse-analysis/

    Y-9, H-6K, MA-600 & J-8 are examples of older aircraft designs evolving into new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaanxi_Y-9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_H-6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_J-8 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xian_MA600
    Clearly they are grasping for straws:
    https://sputniknews.com/military/201707061055284194-an77-prospects-analysis/

    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1392
    Points : 1392
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  miketheterrible on Mon Jul 24, 2017 8:42 pm

    Yes, designs will live on. The entity itself may be dead.

    As noted at MAKS. A huge portion of Ukrainian military technicians and engineers in Karkov and antonov joined Russian MiC. Of course they are undergoing lots of background checks and screening to prevent dangerous activity.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16517
    Points : 17125
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jul 25, 2017 11:09 am

    This means that with a dozen such aircraft, the PLA would be able to transfer at least one tank battalion or division almost anywhere in Southeast Asia."

    There were only two Myria aircraft built AFAIK and it was too expensive to keep one flying...

    Losing a whole division because of one S-300 battery is nothing to be proud of... and the An-225 has no rough landing capability when fully loaded so we are talking siting SAMs... even relatively small ones near the major airstrips for that last minute kill...

    Might be OK for Russia to quickly move elite forces from one side of the country to the other in a dangerous situation, but most of the time rail or sea transport is much safer if a little slower.

    BTW there is nothing wrong with the An-22, An-124, and An-225 designs, except that Russia does not have any An-225s, and its An-22s are old and need replacing. In such a situation it simply makes sense to develop a family of aircraft... they are already developing new engines... the PD-35 is being considered for the Il-96 to replace the four engines used with two PD-35s. In such a case two of the same new engines could be used on an An-22 replacement... scale it up a little and put four engines and you have an An-124 replacement and again if you scale it up a little further and give it a different tail structure to allow loads on the aircrafts back like large fuel tanks for space craft and of course six engines then you have a family of Russian aircraft that can be made of the latest materials of the newest design that can be sold around the world and produced in reasonable numbers for the next 50 years.

    Of course keep using the An-22 and An-124 until they are worn out... but don't keep them longer than they are needed...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 189
    Points : 191
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue Jul 25, 2017 7:25 pm

    AN-225s can be also flown into a secure areas like Sinkiang, Inner Mongolia, near North Korea, Yunnan & Tibet in any crisis on the PRC's borders. China can later sell AN-225 documentation to the RF- it would cost a lot le$$ than designing an IL-106 6 engine derivative. Actually, if more powerful engine is available, AN-225 or its derivative could use just 4 engines.  .."the PD-35 is being considered for the Il-96 to replace the four engines used with two PD-35s."- is there a reference for this? I wonder how long it'll take to finally create a twin engine IL-98. Those could be made into more efficient tankers & AWACS, replacing IL-78s & A-50/100 Then some of the latter could be exported/converted to pure cargo transports.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16517
    Points : 17125
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jul 27, 2017 12:45 pm

    China can later sell AN-225 documentation to the RF- it would cost a lot le$$ than designing an IL-106 6 engine derivative.

    Why would Russia buy that? They already produced the An-124... the An-225 is just an An-124 with two extra engines, extended body and new H shaped tail...

    It would not cost less to design a family of Il transports... the whole point of a family of aircraft design is to allow the cheap development of different size vehicles for different roles that are related but different enough that they cannot be performed by just one design.

    Actually, if more powerful engine is available, AN-225 or its derivative could use just 4 engines. .."the PD-35 is being considered for the Il-96 to replace the four engines used with two PD-35s."- is there a reference for this? I wonder how long it'll take to finally create a twin engine IL-98. Those could be made into more efficient tankers & AWACS, replacing IL-78s & A-50/100 Then some of the latter could be exported/converted to pure cargo transports.

    I think it was in the civilian Russian aircraft thread... the PD-35 is being developed from the new engine being developed for the Tu-160M2 and PAK DA... the former being a low bypass turbofan with AB, while the latter will more likely be a high bypass turbofan for subsonic flight.



    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 189
    Points : 191
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Jul 28, 2017 8:14 pm

    As I wrote- AN-124 Ruslan 2 derivatives under the new name АN-124-100-150М "Elephant": https://www.popmech.ru/technologies/news-378332-iz-ruslana-sdelayut-slona/ http://bmpd.livejournal.com/2742690.html No need  to wait for IL-106 on steroids! Also, I'm not sure they'll absolutely need AN-225 6 engine substitute- unless to use it also for space launches like PRC is going to. http://www.popsci.com/china-will-resurrect-worlds-largest-plane
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16517
    Points : 17125
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jul 29, 2017 8:21 am

    As I wrote- AN-124 Ruslan 2 derivatives under the new name АN-124-100-150М "Elephant":

    And they are upgrading the Su-27 in the form of the Su-35... do you think that means they will not buy PAK FA?

    Upgrades are normal, but at the end of the day they need replacements anyway, and creating a unified family of aircraft that are all Russian and use all Russian components with foreign components available for export customers makes much more sense... eventually they will need to replace them... now that they are developing a suitable engine it makes sense to start work now if they have not already started.

    Also, I'm not sure they'll absolutely need AN-225 6 engine substitute- unless to use it also for space launches like PRC is going to

    They have been using the Myasishchev VMT based transport for that role but was withdrawn as it was needed for parts of the Buran. In the last 20 years it would have had little use for the space industry though they might have used it just because it was available, but in the near future when the heavy lift rockets are being developed a new heavy lifter will be needed.

    Now that they are developing heavy space launch vehicles having a way to move large items in one piece makes more sense than ever before.



    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 189
    Points : 191
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Jul 29, 2017 6:57 pm

    These new АN-124-100-150Мs will be all Russian, not "foreign", if ever made for export, & it'll be many years before any IL-106 are built & exported, if at all, as IL-476s are cheaper & more capable than the legacy IL-76s they'll be replacing. It's more feasible to import 2 upgraded IL-76s/476s vs 1 IL-106/АN-124-100-150М, all things considered. The latter are going to be ready for production long before the 1st IL-106 prototype rolls out. Space vehicles can be easier, safer & cheaper transported by rail/sea to their launch points; unlike the long dead Buran that could land at alternate site & had to be brought back. So, IMO there's no rush to develop the all Russian "AN-225" at this point. Another possible Ruslan successor: http://www.rusaviainsider.com/insight-volga-dnepr-mulling-possible-ruslan-successor/
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16517
    Points : 17125
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jul 30, 2017 1:13 pm

    in the links you provided is this quote:

    Among the reasons for the appearance of this project named the moral and technical obsolescence of the An-124, its lack of competitiveness on the world market of air transportation of General cargo, shrinking resources and the increasing complexity of technical maintenance of An-124 and D-18T engines in the current political environment.

    АN-124-100-150Мs

    The new aircraft would not be called АN-124-100-150Мs... look at the links you provided... one of the images shows a comparative chart listing performance characteristics of TTS "Elephant", An-124-100-150M and Boeing 747-8F (C), ie they are talking about a brand new plane called the TTS and comparing its potential performance with an upgraded An-124 and the Boeing.

    & it'll be many years before any IL-106 are built & exported,

    It would make more sense to develop three models of the TTS with a twin engine shorter model with a wide internal cargo bay of 6.4m and the four engined TTS, and a new aircraft with 6 engines and an H shaped tail surface to replace the An-22, An-124, and An-225 respectively.

    as IL-476s are cheaper & more capable than the legacy IL-76s they'll be replacing.

    The Il-476 is not cheaper than old Il-76s... the D-30 engine is about 800K US dollars each... the new more powerful engines on the Il-476 would be at least 3 million each... which means in engines alone cost 12 million for the Il-476 compared with less than 4 million for the old less powerful less efficient models.

    This has nothing to do with the Il-476 anyway... it is not being replaced by these new aircraft... they are all in a heavier weight class... 80, 150, 250 tons compared with 62 tons for the Il-476.

    Space vehicles can be easier, safer & cheaper transported by rail/sea to their launch points;

    Duh... if it was easier and cheaper by rail OR sea they would never have bothered developing the An-225 or VMT in the first place.

    Why do you think they did that?


    Hahahahaha... that is like Pan Am saying they need something new to replace the 767... they don't make planes and likely wont front up the cash to actually make one.

    The TTS on the other hand is a Russian military project... the hint is the 6.4m width requirement... they also operate those old ukrainian aircraft that are becoming more and more expensive to operate... they have a factory that makes An-124s so they could easily use it to make replacements... the question is what are their requirements and what aircraft will they bother replacing.

    they might decide on a twin and a four engine model and leave the outsized heavy cargo loads to enormous airships... who knows...

    What they can't do is keep using An-22 and An-124s forever and now that a new engine is being developed for new bombers it makes sense to also use it for new transports.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 189
    Points : 191
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Mon Jul 31, 2017 2:42 am

    With fuel savings using the new engines, IL-476s'll be cheaper, & I meant also than IL-106s!. Pl. send them your suggestions what they should be developing, maybe they are better than their own! IL-106 falls between IL-76/C-141, C-17 & C-5/AN-124. Dozens of IL-76/78s (>247) were exported, but the same can't be said about C-141s (0), C-17s(~35) & C-5/AN-124(0, production in PRC is different, see below), so I doubt AN-124/IL-106 derivatives will be exported at all! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-76#Operators  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_C-17_Globemaster_III#Royal_Air_Force
    The concern “Antonov” ..will continue to exist, but not in Ukraine.. In the County, Pucan (Weinan, Shaanxi province) on an area of 124 square kilometers, completed construction of a Modern open production area Loango, where they will live and work for two thousand employees of the Ukrainian KB Antonov with family members.
    China skillfully implementing someone else’s design perfecting your technique. For example, in aircraft construction enterprise KAPK is working on AEW and tankers based on the Il-76. With the help of Ukrainian specialists, the air force, the PRC was able to complete the construction of three tankers from the Russian IL-76. Now the priority project is the production of super heavy transport An-225 “Mriya”, which will allow the transfer of up to 1,500 troops of the PLA anywhere in China. The second project is the formation of a production line of An-124-100. According to the plan Chinese strategists An-124-100 “Ruslan” will fill a vacant niche of heavy transport aircraft, and can seriously push the Russian Il-76, which are mainly supplied to the Chinese side after the repair. Ukrainian An-70 will replace the Chinese “Yun-30”. http://micetimes.asia/antonov-leaked-to-the-chinese-russian-engines-are-no-longer-needed/
    It's indisputable that, like the IL-76, the AN-124 still has growth potential, & its 2 new ~12 m stretched & widened variants (I don't care under what name) are being planned to be produced in the RF (contrary to ur earlier assertion), just like now with the IL-476/96-400.  The AN-225 & VMT were developed in the USSR for outsize now dead Buran, etc. It's not even feasible now or in the near future to have just 1-2 6 engine planes when a couple of modified AN-124s with 4 more powerful engines can do the same job, not unlike the 2 modified B-747s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuttle_Carrier_Aircraft
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16517
    Points : 17125
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Tue Aug 01, 2017 11:54 am

    With fuel savings using the new engines, IL-476s'll be cheaper,

    You would have to use them a hell of a lot before they used 10 million dollars worth of fuel savings each.

    Pl. send them your suggestions what they should be developing, maybe they are better than their own!

    The links you gave and the existence of the Il-106 suggest they already realise they need replacements for the An-22 and An-124.

    Making a family of three aircraft using the new PD-35 engines is what they have been planning to do for a while... and why not... it just makes sense.

    IL-106 falls between IL-76/C-141, C-17 & C-5/AN-124.

    No it doesn't really. It occupies the C-17/An-22 slot pretty perfectly.

    Dozens of IL-76/78s (>247) were exported, but the same can't be said about C-141s (0), C-17s(~35) & C-5/AN-124(0, production in PRC is different, see below), so I doubt AN-124/IL-106 derivatives will be exported at all!

    Volga Dneipr have a very good business leasing out Il-76 and An-124 aircraft to organisations that need them.

    The C-141 is just not a very good aircraft, and the C-17 is so expensive only the most dedicated suck arse chooses to afford them... you could probably buy 3-4 An-124s for the price of one C-17.

    The EU and NATO are regular users of Il-76 and An-124 aircraft.

    It's indisputable that, like the IL-76, the AN-124 still has growth potential, & its 2 new ~12 m stretched & widened variants (I don't care under what name) are being planned to be produced in the RF (contrary to ur earlier assertion), just like now with the IL-476/96-400.

    they will continue to upgrade the aircraft they have but in the case of foreign aircraft like the Antonovs they will seek replacement types... the PD-35 will provide a new engine that will allow the development and production of a replacement family of aircraft to replace the an-22 and An124 and to offer features only the An225 could offer.

    The difference is that they will keep their upgraded russian types like the Il-476 and il-96.

    The AN-225 & VMT were developed in the USSR for outsize now dead Buran, etc. It's not even feasible now or in the near future to have just 1-2 6 engine planes when a couple of modified AN-124s with 4 more powerful engines can do the same job, not unlike the 2 modified B-747s:

    When the PD-35 engine is ready they will likely replace the Ukrainian engines on the An-124 with them, but in the longer term those same engines will power the replacement for those ukrainian jets too.

    The same happened in armour... the current T-80s in service with the Russian Army have pretty much had all their equipment replaced with equipment from the T-90 to make it easier to operate and service in Russia.

    They will be the first to go as new models enter service.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 189
    Points : 191
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue Aug 01, 2017 8:46 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    With fuel savings using the new engines, IL-476s'll be cheaper,
    You would have to use them a hell of a lot before they used 10 million dollars worth of fuel savings each.
    Pl. send them your suggestions what they should be developing, maybe they are better than their own!
    The links you gave and the existence of the Il-106 suggest they already realise they need replacements for the An-22 and An-124.
    Making a family of three aircraft using the new PD-35 engines is what they have been planning to do for a while... and why not... it just makes sense.
    IL-106 falls between IL-76/C-141, C-17 & C-5/AN-124.
    No it doesn't really. It occupies the C-17/An-22 slot pretty perfectly.
    Dozens of IL-76/78s (>247) were exported, but the same can't be said about C-141s (0), C-17s(~35) & C-5/AN-124(0, production in PRC is different, see below), so I doubt AN-124/IL-106 derivatives will be exported at all!
    Volga Dneipr have a very good business leasing out Il-76 and An-124 aircraft to organisations that need them.
    It's indisputable that, like the IL-76, the AN-124 still has growth potential, & its 2 new ~12 m stretched & widened variants (I don't care under what name) are being planned to be produced in the RF (contrary to ur earlier assertion), just like now with the IL-476/96-400.
    they will continue to upgrade the aircraft they have but in the case of foreign aircraft like the Antonovs they will seek replacement types... the PD-35 will provide a new engine that will allow the development and production of a replacement family of aircraft to replace the an-22 and An124 and to offer features only the An225 could offer.
    The AN-225 & VMT were developed in the USSR for outsize now dead Buran, etc. It's not even feasible now or in the near future to have just 1-2 6 engine planes when a couple of modified AN-124s with 4 more powerful engines can do the same job, not unlike the 2 modified B-747s:
    When the PD-35 engine is ready they will likely replace the Ukrainian engines on the An-124 with them, but in the longer term those same engines will power the replacement for those ukrainian jets too. They will be the first to go as new models enter service.
    The IL-106 is 2nd top, in grey:
    At the time it broke up the USSR also had one other ongoing heavy lift aircraft project. This was the IL106, a project for a heavy lift aircraft that would have been capable of ferrying 80,000 kgs (80 tonnes) of cargo over a range of 5,000 km. That would have positioned the IL106 between the IL76 and the AN124, just as the analogous US C17 Globemaster was positioned between the C141 Starlifter and the US’s super heavy air lifter, the C5 Galaxy. The chaos that followed the USSR’s collapse brought the IL106 programme - the AN22’s intended replacement - to an end.  ..the Russians therefore now have a programme to develop heavy lift aircraft in the class of the IL106 and the AN124. The military’s name for this programme is “Prospective Airborne Complex of Transport Aviation” or PAK-TA. ..It seems that at least one part of this programme involves - unsurprisingly - reviving the IL106 project. ..the IL106 “….is going to be very big, weighing 80 to 100 tons…” These reported weights almost certainly refer to the planned payload of the aircraft rather than to its overall weight.  They may suggest the revived IL106 will be able to carry heavier payloads than the 80,000 kg (80 tonne) payloads of the original 1980s concept, with a payload carrying ability of up to 100,000 kg (100 tonnes).
    The revived IL106 will therefore be a different aircraft from the original 1980s design concept.. the IL106 will almost certainly use a different engine from the engine which was originally planned as part of the 1980s concept. ..was planned around the Kuznetsov NK92 engine, a very advanced engine of unusual design which was planned to have around 20,000 kg of thrust. The NK92 has never materialised despite protracted development so the IL106 will have to use a different engine. Assuming that the IL106 will be a four engine aircraft - as is almost certainly the case for an aircraft of this type - the engine will almost certainly be the geared turbofan PD18R, an engine also in the 20,000 kg thrust range. The PD18R is an expanded version of the existing PD14 engine which is now in series production.  Using this engine would be conservative and risk free, reflecting the overall Russian approach. Ilyushin officials say the preliminary plans of this aircraft will be finalised in 2017, and that the aircraft will be ready for series production around 2022-2023. This is a very tight timescale of just 5 to 6 years from design to production. It suggests the project is being given high priority. However it also suggests a conservative approach, drawing on research from the original IL106 programme of the 1980s, and using existing technology and engines, a fact which also strongly points to the PD18R as the likely engine. http://russia-insider.com/en/science-tech/revival-russias-aviation-industry-new-russian-transport-aircraft/ri13262
    The IL-106 exists only on paper. Time will tell if it be capable of replacing even baseline AN-124. It took some years to bring the IL-76 from 28T maximum payload to 47T on the IL-76M:
    The IL-76MD variant has an increased flight range and service life. The power plant and systems are identical to those of the IL-76M.
    The D-30KP turbofans finally went away only on these last 3 variants:
    The IL-76MF aircraft is a derivative of the IL-76MD, with the fuselage lengthened by 6.6m. The new PS-90A-76 engines give a 25% higher take-off thrust (16,000kgf) than the D-30KP engines on the MD variant. http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/il76 Maximum payload weight went from 40 to 60 tonnes, demanding wing reinforcement. http://airvectors.net/avil76.html#m2
    The IL-476 is the final stage of this maturation, with a max. payload of 52T, its PS-90A-76 engines consume 12% lesser fuel and offer an increased flight range of 18%. http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/-ilyushin-il-76md-90a-il-476-aircraft-russia/
    This occurred between 1971 & 2014, a 43 y. period: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/il-476-russia-begins-production-of-modernized-jet-transports-07569/
    The C-5 had a similar path between 1969 & 1998, a 29 y. period: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_C-5_Galaxy#Variants
    It's a big "IF" the IL-106 will ever be able to completely substitute the AN-124, its upgraded variants & follow-ons, IMO. The baseline can, but an upgraded AN-124 most likely won't be able to use Ukrainian engines as IL-76 & C-5 experience showed. Leasing AN-124s is a cheaper option than buying, & there is nothing else in the world to do the job as good.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1463
    Points : 1488
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Wed Aug 02, 2017 11:16 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:Well, the SSJ-100 was rejected by the military for having many foreign made parts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Superjet_100#List_of_companies
    but the MChS & MVD (replacing Yak-40) uses them: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/72/b5/ce/72b5ce19efd1f0f5721879cc39a79040.jpg
    http://superjet100.info/airline:mes http://superjet100.info/news:565
    http://aviationweek.com/paris-air-show-2017/sukhoi-plans-next-generation-superjet  http://tass.com/defense/956743
    The TU-204-500 & TU-214 aren't being considered as a candidate for TU-134 replacement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-204#Tu-204-500
    The  MC-21 and IL-114 have better commercial prospects & may have some military applications:
    http://atwonline.com/aircraft-engines/russia-s-mc-21-and-il-114-win-new-orders-maks-air-show?NL=AW-05&Issue=AW-05_20170720_AW-05_992&sfvc4enews=42&cl=article_4&utm_rid=CPEN1000001576407&utm_campaign=10983&utm_medium=email&elq2=9ce445563faa4e46901f46bd582acdb9
    http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/ilyushin-il-114/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-114#Variants
    http://nvo.ng.ru/concepts/2017-07-14/8_956_wings.html?print=Y

    I can not agree about the commercial prospect of the Il-114. After 25 years in production, I consider not this a commercial success:

    https://russianplanes.net/planelist/Ilushin/Il-114

    I neither expect a commercial success for the Il-112 variant. There is an interest of Ilyushin about to impulse the sales with some military contract, but I do not see a real need of them since I see the weight class of this aircraft clearly declining.

    In almost the same timeline the Tu-204/214 has been fairly more successful:

    https://russianplanes.net/planelist/Tupolev/Tu-204/214

    Clearly more demanded weight class. This aircraft would be the successor of the Tu-154. According to the reports this also seems to be the weight class of the MC-21, that can be a successor of the Tu-204/214.

    Being smaller but successfull again, I also see the Su-SJ100 as the natural successor of the Il-18/20/22 and the Tu-134. The work on components is being done also in other cases. I expect to see the Su-SJ100 ordered by the Russian Armed Forces in the future.

    https://russianplanes.net/planelist/Sukhoi/SuperJet-100

    Excluding training aircrafts, the last successfull Sovietic/Russian aircraft under the weight clas of the Su-SJ100 was the An-72/71/74 of the 1980s. The aircrafts under this size have very difficult commercial prospect, and their military applications and future orders should be also under strong analysis.

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t4312p75-russian-transport-aircraft-fleet-vta#189143
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16517
    Points : 17125
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 02, 2017 11:31 am

    The IL-106 exists only on paper. Time will tell if it be capable of replacing even baseline AN-124. It took some years to bring the IL-76 from 28T maximum payload to 47T on the IL-76M:

    As I said... the baseline Il-106 was originally designed to replace the An-22, which still needs replacing. They developed an engine for it and it was going to be a four engined aircraft with an 80 ton payload.

    Now however they need to replace a few aircraft and introduce a new one with an external load capacity for outsized loads...ie replacement for the An-225.

    The PD-35 is in development for the PAK DA, and is based on the 25 ton thrust engine of the Tu-160 and will likely be boosted to 30-40 ton thrust the same way the Su-27s engine is being improved to the new PAK FAs engine.

    With this new engine it makes little sense to go for 80 ton payload with four engines... with four engines it will likely have a 180 ton payload capacity so the twin engined aircraft will likely be an 80-100 ton capacity transport and a longer aircraft with a bigger wing and four engines will be the 150-180 ton capacity replacement for the An-124.

    In terms of the 6 engined super heavy transport they might only make 3 or 4 anyway so the real family will be lots of twin jets and a nice number of four jet models.

    It's a big "IF" the IL-106 will ever be able to completely substitute the AN-124, its upgraded variants & follow-ons, IMO.

    The Il-106 is not designed to replace the An-124... it is intended to replace the An-22... the only real question is will it appear as a single type or a family of transports... I don't think any other solution makes sense...

    The baseline can, but an upgraded AN-124 most likely won't be able to use Ukrainian engines as IL-76 & C-5 experience showed. Leasing AN-124s is a cheaper option than buying, & there is nothing else in the world to do the job as good.

    I rather suspect the same PD-35 engines for the new model transports could be fitted to the existing An-124 fleet to get those ukrainian engines out of service... other components will likely also be replaced to get Ukrainian parts out of service as quickly as possible.

    A new aircraft with a larger internal space makes sense for the new armoured vehicles of the Russian military. The three different weight capacity models with the three different engine configurations could all share larger internal cargo bay dimensions with the more engines having longer fuselages for greater capacity while remaining standardised airframes.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Firebird

    Posts : 953
    Points : 985
    Join date : 2011-10-14

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Firebird on Wed Aug 02, 2017 2:30 pm

    https://aircargoeye.com/is-this-the-heavyweight-successor-to-the-an-124/

    https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/picture-institute-shows-off-concept-for-an-124-succ-439871/

    Two interesting An-124 successor options.
    First is futuristic. The second is more "evolutionary version" of the An-124.

    Personally, I prefer the supersonic 23rd century looking one from 2015 : D
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 189
    Points : 191
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Wed Aug 02, 2017 11:30 pm

    GarryB wrote:... the baseline Il-106 was originally designed to replace the An-22, which still needs replacing. They developed an engine for it and it was going to be a four engined aircraft with an 80 ton payload. ..With this new engine it makes little sense to go for 80 ton payload with four engines... with four engines it will likely have a 180 ton payload capacity so the twin engined aircraft will likely be an 80-100 ton capacity transport and a longer aircraft with a bigger wing and four engines will be the 150-180 ton capacity replacement for the An-124. In terms of the 6 engined super heavy transport they might only make 3 or 4 anyway so the real family will be lots of twin jets and a nice number of four jet models. ..The Il-106 is not designed to replace the An-124... it is intended to replace the An-22... the only real question is will it appear as a single type or a family of transports... I don't think any other solution makes sense...
    ..The three different weight capacity models with the three different engine configurations could all share larger internal cargo bay dimensions with the more engines having longer fuselages for greater capacity while remaining standardised airframes.

    I've seen no indications that they plan a new 2 jet engine dedicated heavy cargo transport; the IL-98 discussed earlier could fill that role just like A330 MRTT & B-767-200ER/KC-46 does outside the RF. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A330_MRTT
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_767#Military_and_government
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_KC-46_Pegasus

    BTW, after the TU-126 production ended, they didn't have airframes available & had to base their next AWACS on the less efficient IL-76. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-126 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_A-50 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_A-100
    I wonder if theoretically the A-50/100s could be economically converted to cargo planes in the future.
    If built, I'm sure the IL-106 will become a family just like the IL-76 had, & eventually it'll replace it along with the AN-22; they'll also very likely build upgraded 4 engine planes based on the AN-124 as links in prev. posts show. It makes more sense than spending $Ms designing, testing & producing an all new heavy transport. The AN-225, if given better engines, could safely dispense with 2 outboard engines resulting in less weight, drag/fuel consumption, while keeping, if not increasing, its max payload. China may consider doing it later if the new engine is there. That's why I'm skeptical of the prospect of new 6-engine monster in the RuAF.


    Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Thu Aug 03, 2017 10:51 pm; edited 1 time in total

    T-47

    Posts : 207
    Points : 211
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  T-47 on Thu Aug 03, 2017 5:01 pm

    Finally I understand something Tsavo Lion wrote.

    Bro no offense but you should give a little attention to your paragraphing style. Mostly its quite hard to read what you wrote.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16517
    Points : 17125
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Fri Aug 04, 2017 8:33 am

    I've seen no indications that they plan a new 2 jet engine dedicated heavy cargo transport;



    An official OAK slideshow... not Volga Dneipr or some other user... OAK (OAK is UAC... you know United Aircraft Corporation... the Russian aircraft making company...

    this one:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Aircraft_Corporation#Organization

    And sure the idea of aircraft based on modular design is totally in keeping with their navy and now their army development plans and it is the most efficient use of new engines being developed for the Russian military, but they could still change their minds and just upgrade An-22s and An-124s despite their users complaining they are too expensive to operate now... but I think the billions invested in a new engine wont be wasted like that.

    What they are waiting for is the new engine to be fully developed for the PAK DA and Tu-160M2 aircraft that will use variants of it... the former in high bypass high thrust version and the latter being a low bypass high thrust version.

    the IL-98 discussed earlier could fill that role just like A330 MRTT & B-767-200ER/KC-46 does outside the RF.

    You are joking right?

    A transport plane that requires cargo to be lifted out sideways from large side doors is of no use to any military anywhere as a standard transport type.

    You need to be able to drive vehicles on and off front and back... neither would be possible with the Il-98.

    BTW, after the TU-126 production ended, they didn't have airframes available & had to base their next AWACS on the less efficient IL-76.

    There is nothing inherently wrong with the Il-78... with new more powerful engines and more efficient engines it actually has become even better.

    Being based on a medium transport instead of a heavy long range airliner means it can operate safely from a much wider range of airfields than the western AWACs aircraft can.

    That is an additional advantage for third countries like India or China... even though they seem to prefer Israeli radar systems it seems.

    I wonder if theoretically the A-50/100s could be economically converted to cargo planes in the future.

    Why?

    They are vastly more valuable as AWACS aircraft than as transports.

    An Il-96 AWACS platform would be a very good aircraft and an Il-96 inflight refuelling aircraft would also be very useful too, but getting rid of the few AWACS aircraft they do have would just be stupid.

    If built, I'm sure the IL-106 will become a family just like the IL-76 had, & eventually it'll replace it along with the AN-22;

    With the engine they had developed for it they could have replaced the Il-76 by developing a smaller two engined model for the 40-50 ton payload range, a four engined model for the 80 ton payload range and a 6 engined model for the 120 ton payload range, but that engine is dead and buried.

    They are spending money on the PD-35... it is for the PAK DA so there is no question that it might or might not get made. It is going to be made and so fitting it to the Il-106 airframe scaled to the role makes a lot of sense. Developing a new airframe shape is also possible but the engine for it remains and the power requirements means a twin engine, a four engine and a six engine version makes sense for the different payload ranges.

    Imagine a Bear with two PD-35 engines... reduced drag and weight should expand its flight envelope... but then that would probably not really be worth it.

    they'll also very likely build upgraded 4 engine planes based on the AN-124 as links in prev. posts show.

    Getting new engines into production and service makes sense and speeds up finding any problems or manufacturing issues the new engine might have.

    It is also a cheap quick way to improve the performance of existing types... just like fitting new engines developed for PAK FA to Su-35s, or new engines for the Tu-160M2 to the Tu-22M3M.

    At the end of the day however the An124 was designed and built in the 1970s and technology and materials have moved on.

    It makes more sense than spending $Ms designing, testing & producing an all new heavy transport.


    Yeah... every engineers dream is to get to prolong the life of an old transport plane instead of developing a new model with new capabilities and new materials and engines... NOT.

    You can only upgrade so far before it is cheaper and more effective to start from scratch with a new design.

    The AN-225, if given better engines, could safely dispense with 2 outboard engines resulting in less weight, drag/fuel consumption, while keeping, if not increasing, its max payload. China may consider doing it later if the new engine is there. That's why I'm skeptical of the prospect of new 6-engine monster in the RuAF.

    New lighter materials, new more efficient aircraft shape design and new more powerful engines will likely greatly improve performance, but new requirements also increase... carrying the fuel tank for a Buran space craft was the old requirement, a new one might be to carry the fuel tank for a super rocket to go to Mars that is twice as big.

    It can safely operate with 6 engines with large high drag out sized loads on its back, why reduce it to four engines and give it marginal thrust levels?

    Surely more power is better when in the transport game.

    With a four engined model losing one engine could cost you the aircraft with a heavy load... with a 6 engined model it might just make the flight an hour longer with one engine lost.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 189
    Points : 191
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Aug 05, 2017 12:41 am

    getting rid of the few AWACS aircraft they do have would just be stupid.
    I was just asking in case different planes were there for the role. What'll happen to A-50/Us when A-100s replace them? Or could they be modernized to A-100 standard? IMO not all, if any, of them could. IL-96TZ (tanker) project was cancelled.
    ..the PD-35..is for the PAK DA so there is no question that it might or might not get made.
    But will it perform well for all 3 categories of transports? It's all up in the air if u ask me. The plans for all new cargo a/c u describe may materialize only after many $Ms & years that Russia may not even have. The VMF was just given a task of becoming "2nd in the World" to ensure, among other things, "presence anywhere in the World Ocean". That also includes naval aviation component, land based & ship based (a/c carriers aren't cheap!), the Naval Infantry, & the CG; the Army (land forces), Border Guards, Emergencies Ministry & the new NG (former MVD troops) all must also have aviation support, incl. logistical. Nobody knows how situations in Ukraine, Korea, the ME, Caucasus, & the Baltics develop- if other series of wars erupt, how the RF economy would survive them? Russia's pockets aren't that deep even under the best of conditions. That's why in the near term, as u wrote: "they could still change their minds and just upgrade An-22s and An-124s", & as I was saying! Like the C-141 & IL-76MF, the IL-476 could also be farther stretched &/widened for le$$, the same with AN-124 or it's successor. The latter could be downsized & given 2 engines; alternately, if the IL-106 is built, there's no need for a twin engine 80T plane. BTW, I won't be surprised if the C-17 wings are redesigned & its fuselage stretched, (&/production restarted), as was proposed some years ago- but back then the USAF wasn't in hurry. Now it has shortage of C-5s & recently had to pull some out of reserves.
    http://australianaviation.com.au/2012/10/no-its-not-an-illusion-rare-il-76-visits-perth/
    http://www.airfighters.com/forums.php?m=posts&q=99
    http://www.businessinsider.com/air-force-c-5-galaxy-standing-down-after-landing-gear-malfunction-2017-7

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Oct 20, 2017 9:13 am