Do not be wrong Garry, the military have not own funding surces, who pay the bills is the Russian government that is also in charge of the solutions for the civil air transport.
Of course the Russian government was cooperation between military and civil requirements, but where things are needed by the military the military version is created and then the company that make the product looks at civilian variants... hense even civilian operated Il-76s have tail gun turrets that sometimes even have guns fitted in the civilian used models.
Sometimes it works the other way but not very often... the Il-96, which is an enlarged version of the Il-86 is going to be used by the Russian military in a tanker version.
There was no plan to create a combined civil military inflight refuelling aircraft because there was never a requirement for a civilian inflight refuelling aircraft, but the Il-96 is a large widebodied airliner that has already been developed... put new engines in it and it would be thoroughly competitive with anything comparable in the west like the Airbus A380 or Boeing 747.
Surely you mean the Mi-38, well, all them are today for sale for civil use.
The Mi-38 too... its greatest competition is the number and performance of the Mi-8 and Mi-17s still in production and service making their introduction not a high priority.
The Mi-34 is actually of more use because the Soviets outsourced light helos to the Warsaw Pact... the Mi-2 was a Soviet design but was not produced in the Soviet Union... just like the L-39 and L-29 trainers were not produced in the Soviet Union.
In earlier models like the Mi-2 and Mi-8, I do not know exactly if they were designed for military purposes only or not. In the case of being designs only to meet military requirements, maybe good luck, or maybe brilliant designs, but if both have been used for civil customers without changes, it is because their designs are meeting their requirements.
They were military first and foremost, but they worked well in civilian use too... in the case of transport helos there is often little to choose between civil and military requirements... both want good payload and good range and low operating costs.
Only it is possible to say this if we consider that all the Russian aircrafts and helicopters offered for civil use in the last 25 years have been a failure. I do not think this is right. We can see cases of relative success as explained. When a design has been good enough, it has been also a success in relative terms.
There is little chance for a Russian design in the last 25 years because its markets have completely changed... the main domestic customer... the Russian military and Russian government have only just started spending money again, and the entire warsaw pact and much of the former soviet republics wouldn't take Russian equipment if it was free because they want to brown nose to NATO or EU or both.
Despite this there are sales of Russian aircraft and sales will now dramatically increase with government purchases of military and civilian models. With these purchases production will start which makes further sales likely as the price will come down with other sales and current production and someone else paying for upgrades and improvements.
Not all the future models of aircrafts and helicopters for non-combat roles will succeed.
Obviously. But for aircraft that are needed to replace aircraft currently in service that wont remain in service forever but come from what are now hostile foreign countries like the Ukraine for the An-12, An-22, and An-124 then a replacement will be needed, and if accepted will be successful because a few other countries will purchase them too.
These would be the aircrafts and helicopters for non-combat roles that are in production and have been at least a relative success, or are in development and I expect a success (based mostly in the number of orders declared and other details). By weight class:
The An-124 is half Ukrainian and is now a dead end. They will upgrade, but will be working hard on a replacement family of aircraft to replace the An-225, An-124, An-22, and An-12. The An-140 will no longer be bought or produced... in fact they might sell the ones they bought to Iran as an option.
They are using the Il-96 in the tanker role but I doubt they will use it in the military for anything else.
The Il-76s will be replaced by Il-476, as will the tanker and AWACS models.
The Mi-26 will get Russian engines and will likely remain in service for some time.
The An-72 will likely be replaced as soon as possible.
They need to hurry up the production of Russian engines for the Ka-60 and indeed Ka-226T.
All the non-combat aircrafts of the size of the An-72/74 or smaller failed in the last 25 years, except the successful trainers.
Not they did not. Before the Ukraine went retard there was no space or requirement for light transports... An-24, An-26, and An-32 did a very good job and there was no reason to replace them... now there is.
Between the aircrafts and helicopters of the Russian Armed Forces with a lack of success, the An-148 is in the cathegory of the An-72/74, the An-140 is in the cathegory of the An-24/26/30/32, and the Ka-226 is in the weight cathegory of the Mi-Ansat.
The Antonov aircraft have sabotaged themselves... it does not matter whether they are perfect or crap... they will now be replaced.
The Ka-226T will be produced in India with the Russian military buying about 50 and India buying/making about 250 initially... I suspect it will be a success. The more so in Russia when it gets new Russian engines.