Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Share
    avatar
    Dorfmeister

    Posts : 23
    Points : 23
    Join date : 2013-11-10
    Age : 36
    Location : Belgium

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Dorfmeister on Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:58 pm

    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 : 18413
    Points : 18971
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 09, 2017 6:21 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.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 992
    Points : 990
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:48 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 : 23
    Points : 23
    Join date : 2013-11-10
    Age : 36
    Location : Belgium

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Dorfmeister on Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:32 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 : 992
    Points : 990
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:21 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
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 992
    Points : 990
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:33 pm

    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 : 18413
    Points : 18971
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:30 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.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 992
    Points : 990
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:10 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 1:20 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18413
    Points : 18971
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Wed Oct 11, 2017 9:16 am

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

    Posts : 2292
    Points : 2311
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:07 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 : 992
    Points : 990
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:36 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.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18413
    Points : 18971
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:53 am

    They could also build stretched IL-76MFD-90A to get more bang for the buck-

    The Il-476 is already stretched to take it from the 40 tons payload of the early Il-76 aircraft to about 62 tons of the current models.

    the Il-214 better known as MTA, is an An-12 size shortened Il-76 with two engines.

    I suspect they will go with the new heavy transport family using the new more powerful engines with a two engined aircraft in the 80-100 ton payload class, a four engined aircraft in the 120-150 ton payload class, and a six engined heavy transport for outsized external loads.

    The AN-70 saga may continue to RF favour once the Kiev regime is gone.

    If anything a shorter lighter Il-76 with prop fans could substitute for the An-70, but I doubt the An-70 has a chance.

    Unless Ukraine is swallowed by Russia & revives it.

    If the Ukraine collapses and Moscow has to recover the body, then the cost of fixing what was the Ukraine... even just a few regions... would cost so much there would be no plans for An-70 type aircraft for a very long time.

    IL-76 (old & new) is an overkill (in all aspects) as a substitute, & IL-112/114 are jokes compared with it.

    Not really... a smaller lighter Il-76 with new engines, but only two perhaps could perform the same role as the An-70 without costing too much.

    Il-112 and Il-114 are a totally different class of aircraft and to be honest would be rather more use to Russia than the An-70 would.

    The main user of the An-70 in Russia would be the VDV and to be honest the Il-476 would do a better job... especially with heavier equipment.

    There is a bit of pride involved too.... Russia could easily have given the An-70 programme to Ilyusion, or even Tupolev... they gave it to Antonov because of tradition and to keep the workers in the Ukraine working. The Ukraine threw it back in their faces, so there is almost no chance of the Russians doing something to help the Ukraine now even if the Ukraine asked nicely.... which they wont.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 992
    Points : 990
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Thu Oct 12, 2017 9:57 pm

    Downsizing IL-476 with 2 propfans/jets is a lot harder than just stretching it even more. If it's done, this plane may become the C-17 counterpart, if it's not widened, at least in payload, & with good export potential. Then the future IL-106 & AN-124 follow-ons #s may not be so critical. In related news, Japan's C-2 (with 30T payload) is offered to ME, at $173M(!) each:
    http://quwa.org/2017/10/09/kawasaki-heavy-industries-market-c-2-transport-middle-east/
    Comparable strategic airlifters include the propfan-powered Airbus Defence & Space (DS) A400M and Antonov (under UkroBoronProm) An-70. Russia’s VTA IL-76MD-90A is a jet-powered alternative. The Airbus DS A400M has a payload of 30 tons, with which it can fly a range of 4,500 km (and 6,400 km with a 20-ton payload). With a 35-ton payload, the An-70 can fly 5,100 km, but the platform is not in production. UkroBoronProm is hoping to revive the An-70 with U.S. industry support under the Antonov An-77 program. The IL-76MD-90A can reach 5,000 km with a 52-ton payload.
    For comparison, the latter costs $58M, ~3 times less. http://www.deagel.com/Support-Aircraft/Il-476_a000368004.aspx

    The IL-214 (with 20T payload) is still in development but the An-70 already been tested 2 y ago delivering military cargo in Europe & Africa. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-214#Specifications

    The An-70 exceeds.. the A400M (the purchase and operation costs of the An-70 are twice lower). The max.weight capacity of the An-70 is 47 tonnes.
    http://open4business.com.ua/ukrainian-military-transport-aircraft-an-70-passes-direct-test-in-africa/

    It's not about helping Ukraine under the present or next regime there - the AN-124 saga is a case in point. Russia could take the design, modify it & produce a derivative under a different name.
    Ukraine & Belarus will be eventually divided up among others like Poland was before WWI, so RF'll get only parts of it. Then it would make sense to call it "Russian &/ Eastern Slavic Confederation/Commonwealth" instead.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2292
    Points : 2311
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Thu Oct 12, 2017 11:49 pm

    eehnie wrote:Data by weight class, updated in 2017 from Russianplanes.net and other complementary sources:

    -

    Active 010 Reserve 016 Production 1984-Today An-124

    Active 005 Reserve 000 Production 1979-Today Il-86/80/96
    Active 006 Reserve 003 Production 1966-1975 An-22

    Active 146 Reserve 071 Production 1973-Today Il-76/78/A-50
    Active 007 Reserve 002 Production 1966-Today Il-62

    Active 004 Reserve 000 Production 1990-Today Tu-204/214
    Active 018 Reserve 003 Production 1969-Today Tu-154

    Active 000 Reserve 000 Production 2010-Today Su-Superjet100
    Active 031 Reserve 054 Production 1980-Today Mi-26/27
    Active 000 Reserve 000 Production 1976-2003 Yak-42/142: http://russianplanes.net/planelist/Yakovlev/Yak-42
    Active 064 Reserve 102 Production 1964-1989 Tu-134
    Active 048 Reserve 007 Production 1959-1985 Il-18/20/22/24
    Active 060 Reserve 059 Production 1957-1972 An-10/12

    Active 028 Reserve 019 Production 1985-Today An-72/71/74
    Active 000 Reserve 019 Production 1960-1980 Mi-6/10

    Active 159 Reserve 145 Production 1962-Today An-24/26/30/32

    Active 000 Reserve 000 Production 2017-Today Mi-38
    Active 089 Reserve 000 Production 2009-Today Yak-130
    Active 130 Reserve 074 Production 1980-Today Ka-27/28/29/31/32

    Active 000 Reserve 000 Production 2017-Today Ka-60/62

    Active 036 Reserve 000 Production 2013-Today Mi-Ansat
    Active 041 Reserve 000 Production 2004-Today Ka-226
    Active 000 Reserve 000 Production 1995-Today Il-103: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-103
    Active 000 Reserve 000 Production 1985-Today Yak-55/54/56: https://www.aviaport.ru/directory/aviation/jak54/
    Active 000 Reserve 000 Production 1984-Today Su-26/29/31: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-29
    Active 099 Reserve 240 Production 1977-1998 Yak-52
    Active 015 Reserve 005 Production 1966-1993 Mi-2
    Active 036 Reserve 038 Production 1950-1991 An-2

    Including all the most modern Russian and Sovietic successful aircrafts and helicopters with production over 50 units, plus the Mi-38 and the Ka-60/62 which mass production begins now, are expected to be a success, and have been ordered by the Russian Armed Forces. Not included foreign aircrafts that are likely to disappear soon from the Russian Armed forces (by sale, transfer to other governmental ministries or other way):

    Active 010 Reserve 000 Production 2009-Today An-148/158/178 in the weignt clas of the An-72/74
    Active 009 Reserve 000 Production 1997-Today An-140 in the weight class of the An-24/26/30/32
    Active 029 Reserve 070 Production 1970-2015 L-410 in the weight class of the Ka-60/62
    Active 200 Reserve 000 Production 1977-1998 L-39 in the weight class of the Mi-Ansat

    Green means production available for Russia. Blue means unlikely to reach the Russian Armed Forces. Purple is related with foreign aircrafts likely to disappear soon, and red is related with the proportion of units in active service or reserve produced in 1975 or before. Totally red means all the units in the Russian Armed Forces produced in 1975 or before. In the case of the An-2 only 2 units have been produced after 1975. In the case of the Mi-2 the number of units produced after 1975 is exactly the number of units in active service.

    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.

    According to this and recovering the results about priorities of my previous comment, that come from here, this would be the order of priority for non-combat aircrafts and helicopters:

    0.- Su-SJ100 (I expect some order from the Russian Armed Forces in the short term).

    1.- Mi-46 (in the An-24/26/30/32 size class with around 10 tons payload).
    2.- Il-214 40 or Tu-330 or Be A-40/42 (in the Tu-204/214 size class with around 40 tons payload).
    3.- Ka-102 (in the An-72/74 size class with around 15 tons payload).
    4.- PTS 80 or Il-106 (in the An-22 size class with around 80 tons payload).
    5.- Il-214 or Tu-230 (in the An-10/12 size class with around 20 tons payload).
    6.- PTS 160 (in the An-124 size class with around 160 tons payload).
    7.- Il-214 60 (in the Il-76/78 Be-A50 size class with around 60 tons payload).

    8.- Il-90 or Frigate Ecojet (in the Il-62 size class for double configuration: 1 mid passenger capacity + long range, 2 high passenger capacity + mid range).
    9.- Tu-304 or Comac C929 (in the Il-86/80/96 size class for high passenger capacity + long range).
    10.- New Helicopter (in the Mi-26/27 size class with around 20 tons payload.
    11.- MS-21/Yak-242 (in the Tu-204/214 size class for mid passenger capacity + mid range).

    While it would be interesting to see the first group in serial production before the end of 2025, the last group can be finnished between 2026 and 2050.

    Note that the PTS 240 would come as consecuence of the three sizes philosophy, but would not be prioritary in my view. The Il-PAK-TA is not in the list because would be for air transport in contested areas.

    I would expect the An-22 to be used in Syria until to be totally exhausted in the short term.

    Under this size thegorization by weight, the Ukranian An-70 would be in the size cathegory of the Il-76. It means it would be redundant with the Il-76, a little smaller but redundant. And from being a little smaller there is a disadvantage for the An-70. With 47 tons of payload is not assured that can afford to transport warfare on the Armata platform, being oversized for warfare on the Kurganets or Bumerang platforms.

    For smaller payloads I think it would be better for Russia to focus in the development of a new transport aircraft with around 40 tons of payload in the size cathegory of the Tu-204/214, like explained in the previous quote. The timeline exposed for the need of new aircrafts would be long enough for the development of the new aircrafts and helicopters coming.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18413
    Points : 18971
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Fri Oct 13, 2017 10:52 am

    Downsizing IL-476 with 2 propfans/jets is a lot harder than just stretching it even more.

    Make the wing smaller by taking out sections on each side and then shorten the fuselage by quite a bit and make it a 35 ton payload platform with twin engines to replace the An-70.

    Keep the standard Il-476 in production and develop a new family of transports with the bigger engines to replace the engines in the An-124.

    That way you end up with 4-5 transport types optimised for different weight loads but with only 2 different engine types.

    The IL-214 (with 20T payload) is still in development but the An-70 already been tested 2 y ago delivering military cargo in Europe & Africa.

    The AN-70 is not in competition with the Il-214... they are different types for different roles.

    The Il214 is supposed to replace all the 20 ton payload transports in the Russian VTA... ie they are replacing the An-12s.

    A two engined shorter lighter Il-476 will still be too big and too heavy to do that job.

    What they need is an An-70 replacement for the VDV... the An-70 has been tested but is not an option for the Russians... all the paperwork and most of the components are Ukrainian.... you might as well suggest the Russian naval Infantry adopt a T-84 Ukrainian tank design... it would be just as impossible.


    It's not about helping Ukraine under the present or next regime there - the AN-124 saga is a case in point. Russia could take the design, modify it & produce a derivative under a different name.

    The Russians don't have the An-70 design and even if they did the engines it uses are progress designs that are not in production anywhere.

    Without the engine it makes no sense to make it.  Without that specific engine it makes more sense to adopt an engine that will be in Russian service.... the PD-14... which is what the Il-476 will be using four of.

    Hey... there is an idea... why not reduce the size of an Il-476... ie shorter fuselage and shorter wingspan and take off two engines and make a little Il-476... maybe call it a Il-276.... in the 25-30 ton payload class with a 5,000km range.

    Ukraine & Belarus will be eventually divided up among others like Poland was before WWI, so RF'll get only parts of it. Then it would make sense to call it "Russian &/ Eastern Slavic Confederation/Commonwealth" instead.

    Even if there was a 100% guarantee that this would actually happen there is no time frame for it.... that might take 50 years.

    Even if it did happen there is no guarantee the An-70 and the factories that make all its parts wont be sold off to the highest foreign bidder way before then anyway and then where would Russian plans be?

    For smaller payloads I think it would be better for Russia to focus in the development of a new transport aircraft with around 40 tons of payload in the size cathegory of the Tu-204/214, like explained in the previous quote. The timeline exposed for the need of new aircrafts would be long enough for the development of the new aircrafts and helicopters coming.

    Previous weight classes were 20 tons = An-12, 40 tons = Il-76, 80 tons = An-22, and 100 plus tons the An-124.

    The An-12 is being replaced by the Tu-214 in the 20 ton payload class. The current production model Il-76s have moved to 60 tons payload in the Il-476 model and the An-124 is in the 120-150 ton payload class depending upon the model.

    Old model Il-76s could be given basic upgrades and keep them in the 40 ton payload class to fill the role of the An-70 but I think a reduced size model Il-276 would be interesting for the gap between the Tu-214 and the Il-476.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 992
    Points : 990
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Oct 20, 2017 8:43 pm

    Let me clarify: the IL-476 isn't a stretched IL-76, its dimensions are ~ the same, but with new materials & engines it can lift more & fly farther. If it was easy to downsize it or older IL-76, why develop the IL-214? Now it's official designation is IL-276, with 2 IL-476 engines it can haul ~20T: https://iz.ru/660576/aleksei-ramm-nikolai-surkov/il-276-idet-v-voiska
    They "need at least 55 units". But, I wonder the reasons why India has pulled out of it. Perhaps they opted for ANs instead?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18413
    Points : 18971
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Sat Oct 21, 2017 2:50 am

    Let me correct the clarification... The changes made from the first Il-76 to the Il-476 are in materials and structure and also engine.  The practical result is changes in Max take Off weight, payload, and range.

    The original Il-76s with payloads of 40 tons was called Il-76 and had a MTOW of about 155tons.

    The Il-76M had a payload capacity of 47 tons and a MTOW of 170 tons.

    The Il-76MD with the same engines and a MTOW of 190 tons had the same payload of 47 tons but longer range.

    The Il-76MF which is also sometimes called Il-76MD-90A has the new PS-90A engines and a MTOW of 210tons and a payload capacity of 60 tons. and a much longer flight range.
    avatar
    AMCXXL

    Posts : 242
    Points : 244
    Join date : 2017-08-08

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  AMCXXL on Sat Oct 21, 2017 6:31 am

    Kimppis wrote:So they plan to double the size of the tanker fleet? Currently VKS has around 20 Il-78s...

    Russia has about 22 Il-78
    13 of them are already modernized , and other 5 are in fligth , totalling the 18 of one regiment. The other 4 seems not to fly since some years ago, remaining in reserve in Diaglievo-Ryazan

    There are the next contracts about the Il-76 variants:
    41 Il-76MD airplanes to be modernized to Il-76MD-M
    39 NEW airplanes IL-76MD-90A (Il-476)
    31 NEW Il-78MD-90A (Il-478) for mixed role transport/refueling
    18 NEW IL-76MD-90A for transfromation in variants , included A-100 , by TANTK Beriev

    Two of the first bath of Il-76MD-90A will be transformed to Il-478 (refueling) in Ulyanovsk and A-100 (AWACS) in TANTK-Berieva (Taganrog)

    I supose the planing is to rise up another refueling regiment in the 2018-2025 period

    This year will be handed over 3 Il-76MD-90A and nex year the first two modernized Il-76MD-M


    One of the 3 Il-76MD-90A to receive this year in Ivanovo


    First Il-78M-90A (Il-478) in Aviastar (Ulyanovsk)


    First A-100 in TANTK (Taganrog)






    First modernized Il-76MD-M


    Last edited by AMCXXL on Tue Oct 24, 2017 10:43 am; edited 5 times in total
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18413
    Points : 18971
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Sat Oct 21, 2017 8:15 am

    AFAIK the difference between an Il-78 and an Il-76MD is large internal fuel tanks in the hold area and of course the inflight refuelling probes and extra external lighting for night refuellings and more close in navigation equipment.

    If this is the case then I would think a case could be made for most new Il-476s to be fitted for the inflight refuelling role but only a few to actually be used in the role so you have plenty of transport but also the potential plenty of tanker support if needed.
    avatar
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 992
    Points : 990
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Sat Oct 21, 2017 7:25 pm

    GarryB wrote:The Il-76MF which is also sometimes called Il-76MD-90A has the new PS-90A engines and a MTOW of 210tons and a payload capacity of 60 tons. and a much longer flight range.

    No, the IL-76MT fuselage was stretched by 6.6m & given new engines, resulting in the IL-76MF: https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/il-76mf.htm
    But
    The IL-76MD-90A is based on the same airframe and fuselage of IL-76TD-90 aircraft [with the same dimensions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-76#Specifications_.28Il-76TD-90.29.] The cargo aircraft integrates advanced features such as redesigned wing section, new cockpit with modern avionics and powerful engines. The aircraft has a length of 46.6m, height of 14.76m, wing span of 50.50m.. http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/-ilyushin-il-76md-90a-il-476-aircraft-russia/

    So, it's possible to stretch the IL-76MD-90A by at least 6.6m to equal the IL-76MF in length, thus increasing its max. payload even more.
    avatar
    AMCXXL

    Posts : 242
    Points : 244
    Join date : 2017-08-08

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  AMCXXL on Sun Oct 22, 2017 9:30 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:
    GarryB wrote:The Il-76MF which is also sometimes called Il-76MD-90A has the new PS-90A engines and a MTOW of 210tons and a payload capacity of 60 tons. and a much longer flight range.

    No, the IL-76MT fuselage was stretched by 6.6m & given new engines, resulting in the IL-76MF: https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/il-76mf.htm
    But
    The IL-76MD-90A is based on the same airframe and fuselage of IL-76TD-90 aircraft [with the same dimensions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-76#Specifications_.28Il-76TD-90.29.] The cargo aircraft integrates advanced features such as redesigned wing section, new cockpit with modern avionics and powerful engines. The aircraft has a length of 46.6m, height of 14.76m, wing span of 50.50m.. http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/-ilyushin-il-76md-90a-il-476-aircraft-russia/

    So, it's possible to stretch the IL-76MD-90A by at least 6.6m to equal the IL-76MF in length, thus increasing its max. payload even more.

    You do not need to enlarge the cargo hold to get more payload
    You can load gold ingots (60 tons = 3 cubic meters) or you can upload one MBT of 50 or 60 tons and you have space left

    The payload (weight=mass x gravity) is a question of power in the engines and aerodynamics (aerodynamic coefficient, wings surface, wing angles and ailerons ...)

    of course if you can carry more weight, in some cases you will need more space in the hold for certain things like soldiers and equipament, but the maximum possible payload to transport does not depend directly on the size(length) of the plane


    Last edited by AMCXXL on Sun Oct 22, 2017 10:11 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    AMCXXL

    Posts : 242
    Points : 244
    Join date : 2017-08-08

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  AMCXXL on Sun Oct 22, 2017 9:54 am

    GarryB wrote:AFAIK the difference between an Il-78 and an Il-76MD is large internal fuel tanks in the hold area and of course the inflight refuelling probes and extra external lighting for night refuellings and more close in navigation equipment.

    If this is the case then I would think a case could be made for most new Il-476s to be fitted for the inflight refuelling role but only a few to actually be used in the role so you have plenty of transport but also the potential plenty of tanker support if needed.

    Yes , it is an option
    In my country , for example, the transport aircraft regiment also has several refueling kits
    However, I think the Il-78 is not able to work as cargo plane. IN the case of Il-478 perhaps this is possible

    Now Russia has 4 regiments of two squadrons of Il-76 in the VTA
    By the numbers projected , the half will be modernized and the half will be replaced with new Il-476 (Pherhaps one sq. of Il-476 and one sq. of Il-76MD-M each regiment)
    There are projected in the future two new regiments and is posible those will be formed with mixed role Il-78M-90A (Il-478) , transport&refueling , if really only need to remove the refueling tanks
    With the number contracted now of Il-478 there are at lesat for the first new regiment


    Last edited by AMCXXL on Sun Oct 22, 2017 10:13 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18413
    Points : 18971
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Sun Oct 22, 2017 10:12 am

    However, I think the Il-78 is not able to work as cargo plane

    Well it hasn't simply because in the past the only aircraft able to use its services were strategic bombers and strategic cruise missile carriers so of course you would not jeopardise that capability by using your only tanker aircraft to transport goods around the place.

    When they start using more tankers for tactical aircraft then they will both need a lot more aircraft for the role but except for exercises wont actually be using them that much.

    I would suspect therefore if they make a lot of new Il-478s that much of the time they might be used as transports, while during major exercises or tests they could be used for refuelling instead.

    I would expect the regiments that support nuclear strikes will remain as tankers ready to top up bombers after they take off on their long trips, but for regiments that support tactical operations there can be more flexibility...
    avatar
    AMCXXL

    Posts : 242
    Points : 244
    Join date : 2017-08-08

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  AMCXXL on Sun Oct 22, 2017 1:29 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    However, I think the Il-78 is not able to work as cargo plane

    Well it hasn't simply because in the past the only aircraft able to use its services were strategic bombers and strategic cruise missile carriers so of course you would not jeopardise that capability by using your only tanker aircraft to transport goods around the place.

    When they start using more tankers for tactical aircraft then they will both need a lot more aircraft for the role but except for exercises wont actually be using them that much.

    I would suspect therefore if they make a lot of new Il-478s that much of the time they might be used as transports, while during major exercises or tests they could be used for refuelling instead.

    I would expect the regiments that support nuclear strikes will remain as tankers ready to top up bombers after they take off on their long trips, but for regiments that support tactical operations there can be more flexibility...


    Rusia also has ordered two Il-96-400TZ , a plane with similar role of Airbus A-330-MRTT

    https://rg.ru/2017/01/16/reg-cfo/novyj-letaiushchij-tanker-vks-rossii-stanet-transformerom.html
    Recall, the decision on the construction of tankers for VKS Russia based on the cargo version of IL-96 was adopted in 2015. Voronezh Aviation Plant (VASO) received a task to build two prototypes. One of the "flying tankers" is ready and passed the first tests
    Those flights that we conducted together with fighters showed that IL-96-400TZ is compatible with small planes, and compatibility with large ones we will already evaluate when conducting state tests, "said Nikolay Talikov, General Designer of IL Company.
    The second prototype is planned to be built by 2018. The aircraft will be equipped with universal refueling units УПАЗ-1, which have perfectly proved themselves on drillers Il-78. According to the requirements of the Ministry of Defense, the new aircraft should be able to distribute 65 tons of fuel at a distance up to 3,500 kilometers from the base airfield (IL-78 40 tons and 2,000 km
    To do this, on the lower deck of IL-96-400TZ will place tanks with fuel, on the upper there will be a passenger compartment and a cargo compartment. If the "flying tankers" from Voronezh justify the expectations of the military, VASO will receive a contract for the construction of 30 refuellers for the aerospace industry. On the basis of the IL-96, flying command posts for the FSB and the Defense Ministry were also created.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18413
    Points : 18971
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Mon Oct 23, 2017 1:24 am

    Their higher speed and larger fuel capacity make them more suitable to refuelling strategic aircraft....

    They would also be useful for refuelling conventional strikes... able to fly 3,500km with a Tu-160 or Tu-95 then offload 65 tons of fuel and then fly home would be very useful to extend the flight range of those aircraft.

    Obviously with no inflight refuelling capacity it could not do the same for the Tu-22m3, but I suspect it could also support Su-34 and MiG-31 aircraft for that matter.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:09 am