Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Share
    avatar
    Hole

    Posts : 1139
    Points : 1139
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 42
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Hole on Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:53 am

    Once again some dumbass "writes" an article and all gell brakes loose.

    If he compares the russian transport fleet to that of Amiland he sopuld note that at least half of their fleet is also not airworthy.

    marcellogo

    Posts : 119
    Points : 125
    Join date : 2012-08-02

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  marcellogo on Mon Oct 15, 2018 10:13 am

    Hole wrote:Once again some dumbass "writes" an article and all gell brakes loose.

    If he compares the russian transport fleet to that of Amiland he sopuld note that at least half of their fleet is also not airworthy.

    IL-76 were an huge advantage for Soviet Union: while their US equivalent i.e. the Lockheed C-141 was just a ferry plane limited to operate only on major air bases they have allowed them to move huge loads even to small front line airstrips and came back.
    Given than until the acquisition of C-17 they were limited to use C-130 for the role they were even forced to put heavy weight constraint to many of their projects in order to fit in them (and they kept in this practise even after the Globemaster went available scratch ) ending up in delaying or even cancel a lot of them for this reason (see Meads).
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18607
    Points : 19163
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Mon Oct 15, 2018 11:55 am

    As mentioned in the article the main problem is new engines.... and they take time.

    There is a new engine being developed for the Il-112V and production is waiting until it is ready I suspect...

    Evidence if evidence is needed that the Russians are not the aggressors... aggressors like NATO are able to mobilise and move forces rapidly to where they are needed to ensure local superiority to force the case... the Russians and the Soviets before them never had the logistics chain in place for the invasion and occupation of europe let alone anywhere else.

    Still not actually the end of the world... Russia needs a powerful air lift capacity right now like it needs a strong navy with 10 CVNs...

    Replacing the An-12, and An-26, and An-2 in the near term would be useful however... as well as ramping up production of the Il-476 and getting those PD-35s ready for service...

    IL-76 were an huge advantage for Soviet Union: while their US equivalent i.e. the Lockheed C-141 was just a ferry plane limited to operate only on major air bases they have allowed them to move huge loads even to small front line airstrips and came back.

    Both the An-124 and the Il-76 were vastly superior to their American equivalents... the C-5 and C-141 respectively but the Soviets never had a fraction of the number the US had... they never actually needed that many... only the VDV needs that sort of transport potential... for everything else ship transport is much more efficient if slower...
    avatar
    Hole

    Posts : 1139
    Points : 1139
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 42
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Hole on Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:32 pm

    In the 80´s Russia had some 650 Il-76 in service. Max. number of C-141 was 280.

    The production of the An-124 was interrupted, but 100 were planned, roughly the same number as C-5.

    The An-12 should have been replaced by the An-70, a program which didn´t proceed very well do to the turmoils in the so-called Ukraine.

    The Il-76 is the perfect transport plane for Russia, that´s why its modernisation to the Il-476 standard had the highest priority. The plane is in production and its numbers will grow. No need to hurry, there are enough Il-76 around.

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18607
    Points : 19163
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Mon Oct 15, 2018 11:35 pm

    The An-12 should have been replaced by the An-70, a program which didn´t proceed very well do to the turmoils in the so-called Ukraine.

    The 47 ton payload An-70 was supposed to replace the (at the time 40ton payload capacity) Il-76, not the 20 ton payload capacity An-12.

    The VDV was the driving force behind the An-70 as a better plane to drop vehicles and paratroopers from than the Il-76.

    The Il-476 was the Russian competition to the Ukrainian An-70... though the Russians probably put most of the money up for the An-70s development so it is not really fair to consider it to be a Ukrainian design.

    The An-70 looks like an interesting aircraft.... certainly better than the A400 NATO equivalent, but Russia is much better off with a Russian aircraft, and it will be even better in the future when they develop the Il-276 to replace the An-12 too.

    Perhaps with 2 x PD-35s an upgrade of the Il-676 could be developed in the An-22 payload class to complete the family...

    They have plenty of time... most military forces move by rail or sea anyway... it is just emergency forces like the VDV that needs transport capacity.
    avatar
    Hole

    Posts : 1139
    Points : 1139
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 42
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Hole on Tue Oct 16, 2018 10:31 am

    Quote: "In the early 80´s a decision was taken in the USSR to start design work on a medium military transport aircraft designated An-70 and its commercial derivative the An-70T; These Aircraft were to supersede the An-12 which was becoming obsolescent."

    From: Antonov´s heavy transports.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2340
    Points : 2357
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Tue Oct 16, 2018 2:38 pm

    The article is well focused in the refered to the models of aircrafts that will be required in the future, but I think there are three mistakes.

    - The Russian fleet of auxiliary aircrafts finished not still the reduction process started at the end of the Sovied Union. The reduction process is ongoing still and will continue longer.
    - In the refered to the maintenance of the An-22, at this point the total exhaustion of the aircraft is very near because some spare parts are very near the exhaustion, and there is not available material for repairs.
    - To confuse the PAK-VTA and the PAK-TA.

    The article is talking about to sustain the numbers of the Russian fleet of auxiliary aircrafts, but this is not in the plans of the Russian Armed Forces. The numbers are being reduced at the rythm of exhaustion of the current aircrafts, with few incorporations.

    At this point there are several evidences that show how Russia is not in need of new auxiliary aircrafts in the short-term.

    - The slow production and delivery of the ordered auxiliary aircrafts is a sign of limited need of new units.
    - The maintenance of part of the best aircrafts is being delayed, and it means these aircrafts are being reserved for use later.
    - Russia is priorizing instead, the use of units of the models less interesting to keep longer, or in other words, Russia is priorizing the use of units of the models which exhaustion is very likely planned faster. The maintenance for these aircrafts is faster.

    To note that serviceability rates will improve in the following years mostly by scrapping of the remains of the aircrafts in worst condition. This year scrapping activity on auxiliary aircrafts restarted intensely after some years.

    These are years to advance in the design of aircrafts of the new generation that must be ready approximately by the end of 2025.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18607
    Points : 19163
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Wed Oct 17, 2018 9:02 am

    Quote: "In the early 80´s a decision was taken in the USSR to start design work on a medium military transport aircraft designated An-70 and its commercial derivative the An-70T; These Aircraft were to supersede the An-12 which was becoming obsolescent."

    From: Antonov´s heavy transports.

    The driving force in Russia to buy An-70s was the VDV and it was Il-76s that they wanted to replace...

    Lets look at the specifics shall we?

    The origins of the An-70 can be traced back to the mid-1970s, when Antonov Design Bureau began preliminary design work on a successor for the An-12 twin-engine turboprop aircraft.[3] The Soviet Armed Forces, by the 1980s, were looking for a replacement for the An-12 and a complement to the Ilyushin Il-76 four-engine jet transporter; in 1987, the Ministry of Defence, with a new emphasis on air mobility, specified an aircraft with a quick loading time, the ability to operate from short unprepared airfields, could carry up to 300 troops, and have good operating economy.

    No version of the An-12 can carry 300 troops... that is just absurd... it might carry 60 people at most...

    avatar
    Hole

    Posts : 1139
    Points : 1139
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 42
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Hole on Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:50 am

    Look at your own quote again. "Replacement for the An-12".

    The most important capability of the An-70 was the short-field performance. And of course it should carry more troops/cargo than its predecessor.

    In the end it doesn´t matter anymore. An-70 is dead. cry
    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 3046
    Points : 3078
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  franco on Wed Oct 17, 2018 11:15 pm


    Another An-124-100 Ruslan has been overhauled in Ulyanovsk


    Reportedly, the An-124-100 Ruslan heavy transport aircraft (identification number 0605), which was thoroughly repaired at the Aviastar-SP enterprise, flew on October 16 of this year from the Ulyanovsk-Vostochny airfield and departed to the place of permanent deployment.

    According to published information, the aircraft was originally released by Aviastar-SP in February 1991. During operation, the aircraft flew 3164 hours, made 1414 landings at various airfields around the world. When the aircraft entered the company, its technical condition was assessed, after which, according to the airworthiness restoration program, the aircraft replaced the outdated components and also eliminated some of the damage that Ruslan received during operation. After the work, the life of the aircraft was extended by another 30 years.

    An-124-100 Ruslan passed a successful ground and flight test cycle, after which it was handed over to the customer.

    Earlier in Ukraine it was stated that repair, modernization and production of the new Ruslan aircraft is not possible in Russia, since only Ukraine owns these technologies, but it will not single out its specialists from Russia.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 12194
    Points : 12673
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  George1 on Thu Oct 18, 2018 4:56 am

    Last Russian An-148

    As reported in the Antonov-148/158/178 group on the social network VKontakte, on October 17, 2018 in Voronezh, the first and the last passenger aircraft An-148-100E built by PJSC Voronezh Aircraft Building Company (VASO, part of United Aircraft Building Corporation PJSC - UAC) for the Ministry of Defense of Russia. This car with serial number 44-02 and registration number 61735 was the third An-148, raised in the air in Voronezh in 2018, and, apparently, will be the last aircraft of this type built in Russia.




    Upon completion of the contract with the Russian Ministry of Defense for the supply of 15 specified aircraft, the further construction of An-148 aircraft in Voronezh will be frozen. Given the dubious prospects for the resumption of the construction of the An-148/158 series aircraft in Ukraine, it is likely that the aircraft that took off on October 17 with serial number 44-02 will be the last aircraft of this family to be built at all.

    According to known data, of the 13 received by the Ministry of Defense of Russia to date, under the specified contract of An-148-100E aircraft, nine are part of the 8th special purpose aviation division at the Chkalovsky airfield (Moscow region), two are part of the 33rd separate of the 6th Army Air Transport and Air Defense Mixed Aviation Regiment of the Western Military District (Levashovo, Leningrad Region), and two in the 30th Separate Transport Mixed Aviation Regiment of the 4th Red Banner Army Air Force and Air Defense of the Southern Military District (Rostov Before Well).

    According to the Ministry of Defense of Russia, the last two new An-148-100E aircraft under the contract of 2013 (aircraft with serial numbers 44-01 and 44-02) will arrive by the end of this year in the 390th separate transport mixed aviation regiment of the Central Military District, deployed at the Koltsovo airfield in the Sverdlovsk region. The pilots of the 390th regiment are being retrained to a new type of aircraft at the Chkalovsky airfield in the Moscow region.

    https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3381554.html
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18607
    Points : 19163
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:00 pm

    Look at your own quote again. "Replacement for the An-12".

    The most important capability of the An-70 was the short-field performance. And of course it should carry more troops/cargo than its predecessor.

    In the end it doesn´t matter anymore. An-70 is dead.

    To be honest, the Il-476 with a 60 ton payload is a much better aircraft, and the Il-276 twin engine derivative is a much better aircraft to be honest.

    Same internal dimensions as the Il-476 but shorter... it will be much faster than the An-12 or An-70 and it will be all Russian...
    avatar
    Hole

    Posts : 1139
    Points : 1139
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 42
    Location : Merkelland

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Hole on Fri Nov 02, 2018 5:26 pm

    Such a nice bird.



    You can almost hear the engines roar. Very Happy
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 2340
    Points : 2357
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  eehnie on Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:19 pm

    http://www.eizh.ru/articles/proizvodstvo/neustranimye-defekty-voronezhskie-samoletostroiteli-iz-vaso-podvodyat-gosudarstvo-sryvaya-sroki-vzle/

    Fatal defects: Voronezh aircraft builders from VASO fail the state, disrupting the take-off dates of the Il-112V military transport aircraft

    Неустранимые дефекты: воронежские самолетостроители из ВАСО подводят государство, срывая сроки взлета военно-транспортного самолета Ил-112В


    The delay occurs due to the fault of the enterprise management and due to the poor quality of the project documentation, the presence of a large number of errors in the drawings


    All the terms of the long-awaited takeoff of the Il-112B light military transport aircraft, for which the state has already spent 1.3 billion rubles of budget funds, have been thwarted.  It is curious that back in July last year, at the International Aviation and Space Salon MAKS-2017 in Zhukovsky near Moscow, Voronezh aircraft builders from VASO announced the takeoff of the Il-112V in the first half of 2018.  But this overly ambitious calculation of the company's management failed, and now his lightweight leadership is shamefully silent about the unrestrained promise.  Including about real, not fictional reasons for delays.

    However, according to information from sources familiar with the situation at the enterprise, the delay in the take-off of the Il-112B light military transport aircraft occurs due to the poor quality of the project documentation and the large number of errors in the drawings.  In addition, the VASO management already now faces a catastrophic problem.  Namely - the manufactured body of the aircraft, as noted by sources that do not advertise themselves at the factory, has a fatal (!) Defect.

    If you delve into the technical aspects of the catastrophic problem, it turns out that the fatal defect lies in the weight distribution in the center of gravity of the aircraft.  If we translate technical terminology into understandable words, it turns out that the nose of the Il-112B is many times lighter than the tail.  If this defect is not eliminated, the planes will simply crash upon landing.  And in order to solve this problem and not to bring the test of the plane into its catastrophe, it is necessary to mount a 5-ton plate into the nose of the aircraft.

    Thus, Voronezh aircraft builders from VASO are preparing a big and extremely unpleasant surprise for high state authorities from Moscow.  If a 5-ton slab is installed in the nose of the aircraft, then the IL-112V's carrying capacity will decrease by these five tons, and the aircraft will be able to lift only one ton into the sky.  Then the natural question arises: why does the state need such a plane with such a carrying capacity?  Moreover, if its production has already spent 1.3 billion rubles.  It turns out that breathtaking budget money just wasted on the wind.

    By the way, more recently, VASO has stated that the flight model of a promising lightweight military transport aircraft Il-112B has successfully passed the first leak-tightness and moisture-proof fuselage at its manufacturing plant.  They say that the installation work in the cockpit has been completed, and the delivery of all the basic blocks of navigation and other experimental equipment to the plant has also been completed.  It can be assumed that with such information VASO has caused dust to the customer, not showing the real flaws in the project.  After all, it was initially clear that the Il-112B center of gravity was incorrectly designed, and this logically led to an increase in the unnecessary take-off mass of the problematic aircraft.

    For reference: the Il-112V light military transport aircraft is intended for transporting and air landing of up to 5 tons of light weapons and military equipment, cargo and personnel, for transportation of a wide range of various cargoes during commercial operation of the aircraft.  In the future, the Il-112 was supposed to replace not only the An-26, which is 30–40 percent more in most parameters, but also to compete with the world transport aircraft of this class.  However, mistakes, miscalculations and sins of the management of VASO, which is a division of transport aviation of PJSC United Aircraft Building Corporation, have led to the fact that we can only dream of competition.  How long will these unrealizable dreams last - time will tell.

    PS Recall, a few days ago the regional business publication became aware of the initiation of a criminal case under Article 160, Part 3, of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation regarding an unidentified group of persons of the Voronezh Aircraft Building Company (VASO).    Currently, the apartments of individual employees of the company are searched.  The press service of VASO has not yet commented to our publication on the fact that a criminal case has been opened against an indefinite number of persons from among the employees of the locomotive of the regional industrial complex.

    If the article is right, this kind of mistake requires a complete redesing, like it is said.

    The Il-112 is basically a project in the low technological end of the aviation inductry. This would be a civil project, out of the military control, that in Russia is very high.

    If some mistake like this has to appear, it is likely to appear in a project like this, where the initial impulse begins from a weak understanding of the evolution of the market they want tu supply. I commented about it in the following analysis:

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t7684p100-utility-auxilliary-aircrafts-in-ruaf#236180

    No GarryB, no, I ignored not what aircraft has a chance and what not. I just analyzed it:

    - Exposing the reality of the Russian Armed forces almost coincident with the successful Russian aircrafts:

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t4312p225-russian-transport-aircraft-fleet-vta#212784

    - Exposing the recent and current reality of the Russian civil market and in which cathegories is the real demand:

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t7684p75-utility-auxilliary-aircrafts-in-ruaf#234643

    - Exposing the reality of the size cathegories that are failing for the different roles, with references to the different cases that succeed not:

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

    To note that most of these projects had nice plans that have not been becoming real, and to note that many of these projects are of companies included in the United Aricraft Corporation, but it made not them successfull.

    - Exposing also the list of projects with good prospect, which development would be most important in order to complete the current new generation of Russian armament and equipment of the first quarter of the XXI century, in adition to the Mi-38, Yak-152 and the rest of successfull projects of the generation:

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t7032-state-armament-program-2018-2027#204557

    eehnie wrote:Ka-60/62 (in the Che-22 10th size class with around 2.5 tons payload)
    Tu-330 (in the Tu-204/214 5th size class with around 40 tons payload).
    Mi-46/AHL (in the An-72/71/74 7th size class with around 15 tons payload).
    Il-106/PTS Ermak 80 (in the An-22 3rd size class with around 80 tons payload).
    Il-276 (in the An-10/12 6th size class with around 20 tons payload).
    PTS Ermak 160 (in the An-124 2nd size class with around 160 tons payload).
    Tu-304/Frigate Freejet (in the Il-62 4th size class for double configuration: 1 mid passenger capacity + long range, 2 high passenger capacity + mid range).
    New Aircraft (in the Il-76/78 Be-A50 4th size class with around 60 tons payload).
    CRAIC CR929 (in the Il-86/80/96 3rd size class for high passenger capacity + long range).
    Ka-40 Minoga (in the Ka/27/28/29/31/32/35 9th size class with around 5 tons payload).
    New Helicopter (in the Mi-26/27 6th size class with around 20 tons payload.
    MS-21/Yak-242 (in the Tu-204/214 5th size class for mid passenger capacity + mid range).

    - Exposing the list of projects of the successfull categories that would be redundant at this point, but have the option of becoming the basis for future developments of the future generation of Russian armament and equipment of the second quarter of the XXI Century:

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t7032p50-state-armament-program-2018-2027#213501

    eehnie wrote:Tu-334 (airliner aircraft in the Su-SJ-100 6th size class)
    Tu-230 (transport aircraft in the An-10/12 6th size class)
    Ka-102 (helicopter in the Mi-6/10/22 7th size class
    Ka-92 (helicopter in the Ka-27/28/29/31/32/35 9th size class
    Ka-90 (helicopter in the Ka-27/28/29/31/32/35 9th size class
    Mi-X1 (helicopter in the Ka-27/28/29/31/32/35 9th size class)
    Mi-54 (helicopter in the Mi-Ansat 11th size class)
    Ka-118 (helicopter in the Ka-226 12th size class)

    At this point the alone aircraft in the successfull categories which development I do not consider conceptually oriented to a modern demand would be the Be A-40/42. And as consequence, in my opinion, is the most likely to fail definitely.

    The difference between the number of not successfull projects in the size categories marked as successfull and unsuccessfull for every main role is really big.

    - And finally exposing the consequences of the weakest politically influenced contracts:

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t7032p125-state-armament-program-2018-2027#234248

    Nothing of this is casual, and the Il-112 and the TVS 2DTS have strong market trends against that the gouvernment of Russia is not forced to break entering very likely in economic loses, when they have at this point an alternative offer of competent helicopters that are prefered by the markets and by the Russian Armed Forces. The helicopters have their own flaws for combat purposes, but as  small airliner or transport auxiliary aircrafts are stronger in overall terms.

    Taking into account the new projects with good prospect, the gouvernment of Russia has also the option of placing the production of some new aircrafts and helicopters in the factories that today need better options to produce, without affecting to the natural replacement succession of the models produced in other factories (as example it would be logical to assign to VASO Voronezh the production of he CRAIC CR929 as successor of the Il-86/80/96):
    - Beriev Taganrog (Aircrafts): Several options, Tu-330, Il-106/PTS Ermak 80, Il-276, Tu-304/Frigate Freejet.
    - UZGA Yekaterinburg (Helicopters): Mi-46/AHL for Russian and other export markets.
    - Aviakor Samara (Aircrafts): Several options, Tu-330, Il-106/PTS Ermak 80, Il-276, Tu-304/Frigate Freejet.
    And very likely Russia will need to find new factories to produce UAVs (including combat UAVs).

    To add technical mistakes to a project based on a technically/conceptually weak basis only leads to more problems to continue forward.

    If the new is right, the mistake described is previous to VASO, but the VASO leadership should have not allowed the fabrication of the prototype, in order to reduce loses. This is a project in the low technological end and cheap in relative terms. Cheap also in terms of design.

    I would see logical the cancellation of the project. This is very likely what the leadership of VASO feared, and is very likely what we will see, if the news are correct. It means not big loses and Russia has almost ready technically/conceptually better alternatives like the Mi-38 helicopter, for both military and civil use in the role of air transport. For VASO is better to focus on the Il-86/80/96 and its successor.

    Of course someone will face the consequences of wrong decisions, if the new is right.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18607
    Points : 19163
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  GarryB on Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:12 am

    See the thing is that it does not ring true... in fact my bullshit alert is ringing loudly.

    If you are designing something and you find a fundamental flaw in the design like the one they suggest... WTF is the point of completing the prototype if it uses a flawed design?

    Why put ballast anywhere just to get it flying?

    The goal is to get a prototype of a plane that will actually fly built so it can be tested... not get this particular prototype flying... if there is a flaw in the fundamental design you fix the bloody thing... you don't put a bow on it and pretend there is nothing wrong.

    Kinda makes me call bullshit on this whole story until we hear more to be honest.

    And you can call it a simple cheap unnecessary aircraft all you want Eehnie, but at the end of the day there are a lot of An26s in service doing lots of jobs that bigger aircraft are just not suited to do... They will need something to replace them and the Il-276 will be too big for most jobs.

    If three of your mates need a ride home from the pub you get a taxi, which might be a car or a mini van... it wont be a full sized bus... because it is simply not practical to wait until there are enough people wanting to go home to fill the bus to make it worth the trip.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Nov 16, 2018 9:34 am