Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Share

    T-47

    Posts : 211
    Points : 215
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  T-47 on Sat Aug 05, 2017 6:45 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:IL-96TZ (tanker) project was cancelled.

    Seriously? From which source?
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 262
    Points : 264
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:02 pm

    RF DOD balked at the high cost of it:
    The Russian defense ministry has dropped earlier plans to buy several Ilyushin Il-96-400TZ air tankers after the industry failed to offer a cost-effective conversion of some aircraft that were previously built as Il-96-400T commercial freighters. Meantime, UAC’s Aviastar plant in Ulyanovsk has completed the first Ilyushin Il-78M-90A air tanker that is expected to commence flight trials shortly, several months behind schedule. .. Following the prototype, two more Ilyushin Il-78M-90A air tankers are on the production line. The Russian MoD has ordered 40 such aircraft. They are based on the Il-76MD-90A airlifter,.. In addition, the pressurized bulkhead in the rear fuselage has been strengthened. Unlike the older Il-78M/MK air tankers, the new version retains the rear loading ramp, so that it can also be used as an airlifter. The aircraft can carry between 167 and 245 soldiers, ... In addition to procurement of brand-new Il-78M-90As, the Russian defense ministry has ordered the modification of in-service Il-78M air tankers to extend their service life and provide a higher fuel transfer rate. The first of these was handed over to Ilyushin for this work earlier in the year. http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2017-04-17/russia-drops-plans-strategic-air-tanker

    Сделать из Ил-96 двухдвигательную машину можно будет, если в России будет разработан двигатель тягой 32–35 т, подчеркнули в компании. http://www.ato.ru/content/ilyushin-razrabotaet-passazhirskuyu-versiyu-il-96-400t?sea=30003
    - "conversion IL-96 to twin engine model will be possible if an engine with trust of 32-35T is designed in Russia".
    avatar
    Kimppis

    Posts : 342
    Points : 348
    Join date : 2014-12-23

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Kimppis on Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:54 pm

    So they plan to double the size of the tanker fleet? Currently VKS has around 20 Il-78s...
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 262
    Points : 264
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Aug 05, 2017 9:00 pm

    don't know, some older tankers may need to be replaced.
    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2717
    Points : 2755
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  franco on Sat Aug 05, 2017 9:06 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:don't know, some older tankers may need to be replaced.

    They have been short of Tankers since the breakup of the SU. Most of the Il-78's went to Ukraine, who changed them back into Il-76's.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 262
    Points : 264
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Aug 05, 2017 9:45 pm

    And sold 4 to Pakistan & 3 to PRC. http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.fr/p/transport-tanker.html#Il-78
    For VKS, 40 IL-78M-90A that can be used as freighters +28 Il-76MD-90A= 68 new cargo planes, or by their max payload =~12 AN-22s. The IL-106 can take its time being developed.


    Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Mon Aug 07, 2017 11:07 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    Kimppis

    Posts : 342
    Points : 348
    Join date : 2014-12-23

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Kimppis on Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:28 pm

    Yes, those 20 Il-78s need to be replaces, but they are ordering 40 Il-78M-90A, not 20... It would makes sense too, because 20 sounds kind of low, even if tankers are not a priority for Russia like they are for the US Empire.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 262
    Points : 264
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sun Aug 06, 2017 12:15 am

    They'll keep older IL-78s for as long as possible, from the post #177:
    ..the Russian defense ministry has ordered the modification of in-service Il-78M air tankers to extend their service life and provide a higher fuel transfer rate.
    With higher op. tempo more of them are needed now, not only to refuel VKS, but also navy fighters & ASW bombers.
    http://su-27flanker.com/2015/03/17/how-looks-air-refueling-click-to-see-su-24su-27su-34il-78-midas-hq-video/#
    http://www.deagel.com/library/Russian-Navy-Il-78-tanker-refueling-Tu-142-ASW-aircraft-during-military-parade-at-Kronstadt-naval-base-on-July-31-2017_m02017073100052.aspx
    This is a smart move to have new IL-78M-90As as dual use. That means more flexibility with less wear & tear. Also the crews will be trained for both types of missions. The USAF C-17s are being used extensively since 9/11/01 & I heard a rumour that at least 1 is already at the DMAFB boneyard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_C-17_Globemaster_III#United_States_Air_Force
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Sun Aug 06, 2017 11:54 am

    They will increase the number of inflight refuelling aircraft because the number of aircraft they have that can actually use inflight refuelling aircraft has dramatically increased.

    Previously only strategic bombers had inflight refuelling probes... now tactical aircraft are also fitted with them too.


    _________________
    “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

    T-47

    Posts : 211
    Points : 215
    Join date : 2017-07-17
    Location : Planet Earth

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  T-47 on Sun Aug 06, 2017 5:07 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:RF DOD balked at the high cost of it:
    The Russian defense ministry has dropped earlier plans to buy several Ilyushin Il-96-400TZ air tankers after the industry failed to offer a cost-effective conversion of some aircraft that were previously built as Il-96-400T commercial freighters. Meantime, UAC’s Aviastar plant in Ulyanovsk has completed the first Ilyushin Il-78M-90A air tanker that is expected to commence flight trials shortly, several months behind schedule. .. Following the prototype, two more Ilyushin Il-78M-90A air tankers are on the production line. The Russian MoD has ordered 40 such aircraft. They are based on the Il-76MD-90A airlifter,.. In addition, the pressurized bulkhead in the rear fuselage has been strengthened. Unlike the older Il-78M/MK air tankers, the new version retains the rear loading ramp, so that it can also be used as an airlifter. The aircraft can carry between 167 and 245 soldiers, ... In addition to procurement of brand-new Il-78M-90As, the Russian defense ministry has ordered the modification of in-service Il-78M air tankers to extend their service life and provide a higher fuel transfer rate. The first of these was handed over to Ilyushin for this work earlier in the year. http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2017-04-17/russia-drops-plans-strategic-air-tanker

    Сделать из Ил-96 двухдвигательную машину можно будет, если в России будет разработан двигатель тягой 32–35 т, подчеркнули в компании. http://www.ato.ru/content/ilyushin-razrabotaet-passazhirskuyu-versiyu-il-96-400t?sea=30003
    - "conversion IL-96 to twin engine model will be possible if an engine with trust of 32-35T is designed in Russia".


    Good find. But I still hope Ilyushin will find a way to present an affordable cost for MoD. Because the specs of Il-96-400TZs are very impressive and will make the bombers to go very long range missions.
    avatar
    Rmf

    Posts : 506
    Points : 493
    Join date : 2013-05-30

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Rmf on Sun Aug 06, 2017 9:50 pm

    no way. dual use is what sold il-78. transporter-refueler.
    avatar
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 24
    Points : 26
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:16 am

    Another article on the new cargo concept presented at Maks 2017.


    http://theduran.com/russia-unveils-new-giant-cargo-aircraft/
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 262
    Points : 264
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:54 pm

    http://theduran.com/russia-unveils-new-giant-cargo-aircraft/
    Allegedly it will be able to ferry 150T of cargo over 7,000 km..
    That's ~2x of max payload & >2x range of a loaded C-17:
    http://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104523/c-17-globemaster-iii/

    I always wondered, why the AN-124 has conventional, not T tail like on the IL-76, C-141/17/5? Isn't the air turbulence affecting horizontal stabilizers directly behind the wings?
    avatar
    Dorfmeister

    Posts : 21
    Points : 21
    Join date : 2013-11-10
    Age : 35
    Location : Belgium

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Dorfmeister on Wed Aug 09, 2017 12:58 am

    T-47 wrote:
    Tsavo Lion wrote:IL-96TZ (tanker) project was cancelled.

    Seriously? From which source?

    Interview of Yuri Slyusar which confirms that the IL-96-400TZ is still alive and kicking.

    https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/3360057
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:21 am

    I always wondered, why the AN-124 has conventional, not T tail like on the IL-76, C-141/17/5? Isn't the air turbulence affecting horizontal stabilizers directly behind the wings?

    It is my understanding that the conventional tail surface of the An-124 is fine for the purpose and was only changed with the An-225 because turbulence generated by large items on the back of the aircraft would reduce horizontal stability... having two vertical stabilisers and moving them sideways out of the air flow of things on the back of the aircraft solve the problems large items on the back of the aircraft created.

    In the case of conventional tail of the An-124... the fact that you call the An-124s tail surfaces conventional suggests they are normal, while the T tails of the other aircraft you compare them with must therefore be unconventional... perhaps a better question would be why the T tail configuration...

    From what I understand the T tail is popular with transport aircraft because it moves the turbulence from the tail area and raises it away from anything jumping out the back of the aircraft.


    _________________
    “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 : 262
    Points : 264
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:48 pm

    Interview of Yuri Slyusar which confirms that the IL-96-400TZ is still alive and kicking. https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/3360057
    As far as military transports are concerned, he talks about new IL-76/78s (using his production #s, it = 40 IL-78s will be ready in ~ 5 years),  w/o any mention of IL-96-400TZ in the discussion on the civilian IL-96-400, which btw, needs gov. help as it's not economically feasible in its present 4 engine form. Should oil prices go up, it'll be even less so. https://www.ruaviation.com/docs/5/2016/4/13/104/
    The conventional tail design is the most common form. It has one vertical stabilizer placed at the tapered tail section of the fuselage and one horizontal stabilizer divided into two parts, one on each side of the vertical stabilizer. For many airplanes, the conventional arrangement provides adequate stability and control with the lowest structural weight. About three-quarters of the airplanes in operation today, including the Airbus A300, the Boeing 777 and 747, and the Beech Bonanza A-36, use this arrangement.
    ..the horizontal stabilizer in the T-tail layout imposes a bending and twisting load on the vertical stabilizer, requiring a stronger, and therefore, a heavier, structure. These loads are avoided in the conventional design. There is also the possibility that at the high pitch angle usually associated with landing the airplane, the horizontal stabilizer of the T tail will be immersed in the slower and more turbulent flow of the wing wake. In some cases, it is possible to compromise severely the control function of the horizontal tail. Nevertheless, the T tail is the second-most common tail design after the conventional. Both major American transport plane builders, Boeing and McDonnell-Douglas, use the T-tail design. The Boeing 727, with its three fuselage-mounted engines, has a T-tail design, as do the variants of the McDonnell Douglas MD-90, formerly the Douglas DC-9. Other aircraft that employ the T-tail design are the Lockheed C-5A, the Gates Lear-jets 23 and 35A, the Cessna Citation CJ1, the Piper Lance II, and the Beech Skipper 77. http://what-when-how.com/flight/tail-designs/
    The T-tail sticks the elevators out of the disturbed air of the wings, prop, and (usually most of) the fuselage which gives you better elevator authority, and makes a tail stall less likely. .. using conventional tail leads to the fact that the airflow over the tail might be disturbed by the main wing and/or the engines and/or the fuselage. However, the downwash induced by the main wing on the flow is taken into account (for the cruise conditions) in the design of the tail in order to reduce some negative aspects of the interaction between the main wing and the tail. ..From a structural point of view, when flying transonic (or even supersonic) it is not good to have a T-tail configuration because it usually induces flutter on the tail.
    Finally, at a lower level but still a difference, using a T-tail increases the wake (compared to a conventional configuration, where the tail is almost in the wake of the main wings and the fuselage) behind your aircraft and thus the drag you need to overcome is larger. https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/1400/how-do-conventional-and-t-tails-differ
    Conventional tails have the advantage in terms of SYSTEM REDUNDANCY. Conventional tails can more easily equipped with hydraulic, wire, or mechanical systems that have no single point of failure. ..The conventional (lower) location for the horizontal stabilizer puts less stress on the vertical stabilizer. Therefore the vertical stabilizer can be lighter. ..Additional considerations are that the lower stabilizer location results in easier access for inspections and maintenance. https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080307040012AAP6aKl
    In the only 1 crash of AN-124, its tail design didn't cause it:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Irkutsk_Antonov_An-124_crash
    So, reduced weight, ease of design, construction & maintenance are the reasons the conventional tail was chosen instead of the T tail. The AN-70 also has it, but the A400M & Y-20 don't.
    avatar
    Dorfmeister

    Posts : 21
    Points : 21
    Join date : 2013-11-10
    Age : 35
    Location : Belgium

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Dorfmeister on Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:32 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    Interview of Yuri Slyusar which confirms that the IL-96-400TZ is still alive and kicking. https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/3360057
    As far as military transports are concerned, he talks about new IL-76/78s (using his production #s, it = 40 IL-78s will be ready in ~ 5 years),  w/o any mention of IL-96-400TZ in the discussion on the civilian IL-96-400

    You should learn russian, it'll be useful if you're really interested in russian stuff Cap'tain Obvious.

    "— Военные еще не отказались от производства Ил-96 в версии топливозаправщика?

    Нет, проект стоит на повестке дня. Разработка этого проекта предполагает создание целого мультифункционального комплекса. Этот проект нам интересен, к тому же, это продление жизни семейству Ил-96"

    This is an extract from the article I've linked earlier Rolling Eyes
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 262
    Points : 264
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Aug 11, 2017 8:21 pm

    OK, I missed it. To them, it's "alive", since they hope to get those orders, the reference I posted is from April 17th, the interview was printed on 7/18th, 2 months later. If there was any interest in the project, the gov. would confirm it by now. I don't recall any instance since the end of WWII of Soviet or RF gov. or sources "in the know" announcing of project cancellation & then changing its mind.
    I'm a native Russian speaker & don't need to learn it. Perhaps after the twin engine IL-98 or joint RF-PRC transport is built, we may see a tanker derivative, with Russian made engines. https://www.rt.com/business/344830-russia-china-joint-plane/
    https://www.rt.com/business/347492-russia-china-jet-engines/
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1637
    Points : 1662
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:58 am

    eehnie wrote:
    eehnie wrote:http://www.russiadefence.net/t4312p75-russian-transport-aircraft-fleet-vta#189061

    Between the 6 biggest cathegories aircrafts are dominant. Between the 5 smaller cathegories the helicopters would be dominant despite to be not present in all the cathegories, taking into account the success of the Mi-26/27 (bigger than the success of the An-72/71/74, with higher number of units produced). In the future I would expect:

    - Transport aircrafts to be successful in the 2nd to 6th cathegories (since 20 tons payload).
    - Airliner aircrafts to be successful in the 3rd to 6th cathegories (since 95-100 passengers + mid range >5000Km).
    - Helicopters to be successful in the 6th to 11th cathegories (until 20 tons payload).
    - Trainer aircrafts to be successful in the 9th and 11th cathegories.
    - Trainer helicopters to be successful in the 11th cathegory.

    The success is uncertain for the rest of the options. As overall rule, I would avoid to invest on them.

    I hope the people can see in this comment that not all the projects of aircraft and helicopter can be successful, that not all the projects of aircraft and helicopter must be ordered by the Russian Armed Forces. And even, in some cases there are configurations that allow not the success of a single project today. Finally I hope the people can see how there is a strong correlation between the success of the aircrafts and helicopters, and its presence in the Russian Armed Forces.

    Other options have been tested in Russia out of the quoted scheme. The last and most recent examples of Russian projects out of this scheme:

    1st cathegory Airliner aircraft: KR-860 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_KR-860
    1st cathegory Transport aircraft: An-225 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Antonov/An-225
    2nd cathegory Airliner aircraft:
    4th cathegory Helicopter: Mi-32 http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/mi-32.php
    4th cathegory Helicopter: Yak-60 http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/yak-60.php
    5th cathegory Helicopter: V-12 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Mil/V-12
    5th cathegory Helicopter: V-16 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_V-16

    7th cathegory Airliner aircraft: An-148/158/178 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Antonov/An-148
    7th cathegory Transport aircraft: Be-200 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Beriev/Be-200
    7th cathegory Transport aircraft: Yak-44 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-44
    7th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Tu-324/414 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-324
    8th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Il-114 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Ilushin/Il-114
    8th cathegory Airliner aircraft: An-140 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Antonov/An-140
    8th cathegory Transport aircraft: Il-112  Question  Question  Question http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Ilushin/Il-112
    8th cathegory Transport aircraft: Tu-130/136 https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/tu-136.htm
    8th cathegory Transport aircraft: MiG-110 http://avia.pro/blog/mig-110
    9th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Yak-48 http://avia.pro/blog/yak-48
    9th cathegory Transport aircraft: Su-80 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Sukhoi/Su-80
    10th cathegory Transport aircraft: Be-112 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_Be-112
    10th cathegory Trainer aircraft: MiG-AT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-AT
    11th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Rysachok http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Technoavia/Rysachyok
    11th cathegory Airliner aircraft: MiG-125 http://www.airwar.ru/enc/aliner/mig125.html
    11th cathegory Airliner aircraft: M-101 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Myasishchev/M-101
    11th cathegory Transport aircraft: SM92 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technoavia_SM92_Finist
    11th cathegory Transport aircraft: LA-8 http://avia.pro/blog/la-8-aerovolga-tehnicheskie-harakteristiki-foto
    11th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Be-103 http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Beriev/Be-103
    11th cathegory Airliner aircraft: Yak-58 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-58
    11th cathegory Transport aircraft: T-411 http://avia.pro/blog/hrunichev-t-411-aist-tehnicheskie-harakteristiki-foto
    11th cathegory Transport aircraft: Chaika L-4/42/44 http://avia.pro/blog/l-44-tehnicheskie-harakteristiki-foto
    11th cathegory Airliner aircraft: BT-4 http://avia.pro/blog/vt-4-tehnicheskie-harakteristiki-foto
    11th cathegory Transport aircraft: Yak-112 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-112
    11th cathegory Transport aircraft: Su-38 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-38

    Color code, the same than in the previous message. Bolded means doubt. A good number of these projects are living still, even in production, but not gaining traction, and is not expected a future change.

    Everyone of these projects wanted the succes, but no-one of them reached it, no-one reached 50 units produced. In adition to this, only the two Ukranian aircrafts reached a presence in the Russian Armed Forces. Note that some units of the Be-200 were ordered in 2013 but no-one has been delivered still, and I expect the order to be not done because of the changes that are coming in the ways to solve the maritime patrol role.

    The Il-112 also seems ordered to be in the Russian Armed Forces, but I doubt about the success of this aircraft because is being designed in a cathegory where the success for new transport aircrafts is unlikely, as we can see. I would not invest on this aircraft. The Mi-46 helicopter (with around 10 tons of payload and around 25 tons of max take-off weight) would be the alternative that I would support for this weight/size cathegory.

    Looking at the overall situation, the alone configuration out of the scheme that would be reasonable still to try, would be the option of an airliner aircraft in the weight/size cathegory of the An-124 (2nd cathegory). In Russia this option has not been tested still for airliners, but internationally the Boeing 747 and the Airbus A380 succeed. This configuration allows long range (over 10000 Km) with very high passenger capacity (over 500).

    The case of the PTS 240 transport aircraft for 240 tons payload would be also in the zone of uncertain results with unsuccessful precedent, but would be more acceptable, being part of a project that share costs with the philosophy of the 3 sizes, with the other 2 sizes (80 and 160) in zone of success. This makes it a bet of lower risk.



    Then we have the first part explained in the comments becoming a reality. As expected the contract for Be-200 for the Ministery of Defense has been cancelled. The aircraft will continue his civil path.

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t4640-be-200-multirole-amphipian#203418

    franco wrote:The contract for the delivery of Be-200 aircraft to the Ministry of Defense of Russia is terminated

    As RBC's agency reported on August 30, 2017, the Moscow Arbitration Court granted the claim of the Defense Ministry of Russia about the recovery from the PJSC "Taganrog aviation scientific and technical complex named after G.M. Beriev" as an unscheduled advance of more than 6.726 billion rubles.

       The specified amount was paid to the Ministry of Defense as an advance on the contract concluded in 2013 on the supply of five [actually six] Amphibian Be-200BC aircraft, but none of the aircraft was ultimately delivered to the agency.

       Based on the results of the case, the Moscow Arbitration Court decided to terminate the contract concluded between the Ministry of Defense and TANTK, to collect from the aircraft factory an unearned advance and 200 thousand rubles. duties in favor of the state.

    On the bmpd side, we recall that the PJSC "Taganrog Aviation Scientific and Technical Complex named after G.M. Beriev" (TANTK) concluded on May 23, 2013 with the Ministry of Defense of Russia a state contract for the supply of Russian Navy aviation to two Be-200BC aircraft and four modified aircrafts Be-200PS (without extinguishing function) with a total cost of 8.4 billion rubles. The delivery was to be made under the terms of the contract in 2014-2016, but the construction of these aircraft (serial numbers 03-09, 03-10 and 03-51 to 03-54), according to known data, did not advance further than the initial stage. It was reported that as early as in 2016 the Ministry of Defense of Russia suspended the implementation of this contract.



    Il-112 ? The time will say.

    My impression is that only the impulse of the Russian Ministry of Defense is keeping this project living, in a weight cathegory where the external traction (civil and/or foreign) should be important (like is being in the case of the Mi-46).


    Last edited by eehnie on Tue Dec 05, 2017 2:40 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 262
    Points : 264
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:33 am

    Lieutenant General Vladimir Benediktov, head of Russia’s military transport aviation command (Voyenno-Transportnoy Aviatsii, VTA), announced at the beginning of October that the Russian Air Force would require 150-200 new Il-76MD-90A transports by the end of the 2020s. ..The VTA currently has 144 Il-76 transports in service, the oldest of which was delivered to the Soviet Air Force around 1981. Up to 14 of them have been upgraded to the MD-90 standard with new PS-90A-76 engines in the last 10 years. Despite this, it is estimated that more than 50% of the current Il-76 fleet is grounded in a non-airworthy condition. This is putting an ever increasing strain on the ones that are airworthy.
    It is believed that five MD-90A variants have been completed, the first four as test aircraft and the fifth delivered to the VTA's 610th Centre for Combat Employment and Personnel Retraining at Ivanovo Air Force Base. http://www.janes.com/article/74711/russia-orders-vta-il-76md-90a-transports
    I was expecting this. W/o the AN-70, some of them'll need to take their roles as well: https://theaviationist.com/2017/10/03/russian-il-76-candid-modified-to-support-special-operations-conducts-flight-test-over-the-black-sea/
    The new order isn't certain; & he may be exaggerating the numbers needed. Stay tuned...
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:30 am

    Hopefully they build them...

    It would be cheaper to make 200 Il-476s than to make 100 Il-476s and screw around sucking up to the Ukraine making all sorts of concessions and BS to build 100 An-70s.

    More importantly I hope they upgrade the existing Il-76 fleet with new engines and avionics so they can be operating at a better rate too.


    _________________
    “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 : 262
    Points : 264
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:10 pm

    They could also build stretched IL-76MFD-90A to get more bang for the buck- then the procurement #s can be reduced. Not all old IL-76s can be modernized with new engines as their airframes won't last much longer. The AN-70 saga may continue to RF favour once the Kiev regime is gone. I won't be surprised if Russia builds it w/o Ukraine. The Chinese Y-20 uses a very similar fuselage & nose (the PRC could provide relevant documentation), while the propfan engines are Russian made. My guesses are as good as others'.


    Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:20 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Wed Oct 11, 2017 10:16 am

    It is basically a Ukrainian plane that Russia put money into... there will be no Russian An-70.


    _________________
    “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
    eehnie

    Posts : 1637
    Points : 1662
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:07 am

    Antonov as a brand is death. There is nothing that can be done to save it. No-one is interested.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 262
    Points : 264
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:36 am

    GarryB wrote:It is basically a Ukrainian plane that Russia put money into... there will be no Russian An-70.
    Unless Ukraine is swallowed by Russia & revives it. But even if not, I'm not putting a cross over it yet. If they could/are soon to start producing AN-124s/their follow-ons & move production of IL-76s from Uzbekistan, I don't see why the same can't be done with AN-70 &/ its proposed variants. IL-76 (old & new) is an overkill (in all aspects) as a substitute, & IL-112/114 are jokes compared with it.
    I can only agree to disagree on this beaten to death topic.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Dec 15, 2017 10:19 am