Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

I meant that it is not clear if they plan to start first with a updated version of the original il-106 project, with the same hold size and payload as in the preliminary design and powered (at least initially) by 4 PS-90A1 engines, or if they want to do a modernised An-124 under an Ilyushin name, powered by 4 NK23D (when and if they are ready).

But the Il-106 was essentially an 80 ton payload direct replacement for the An-22 at a time when the An-22 was obsolete and needed replacement with no Antonov replacement and assuming things went on OK that the Antonov design company would then develop what we now know as Slon.

With Antonov out of the picture they needed to adjust because not just An-22s need replacing now but also An-124s as well, and with development of these new more powerful engines they have scope to improve the An-124 design to a scratch build new plane.

This means the Il-106 could be revised upwards to do the job of An-22s and very early model An-124s with 120 ton capacity... so it would replace the An-22 and also do the job of An-124s where the load is not max... which is beneficial because the Il-106 is smaller and lighter and should be cheaper than the An-124.

But sometimes when the loads are heavy a bigger aircraft is needed so the Slon project is being stretched up to not just be a replacement for the An-124, but also potentially a replacement for the An-124 and An-225.

There is no huge market for An-225s... it is mostly users of large outsized payloads like engines and fuel tanks and model aircraft carried on the back of the aircraft.

The thing is that with four PD-35s they could make standard tail aircraft for the general purpose roles, but also 4-5 perhaps with an H tail with its back redesigned to allow payloads carried on its back.

For really bulky un-aerodynamic loads they could use an enormous fairing and use real brute force... four PD-50 engines....

The important point is that the production of either airplane in Ulyanovsk should not compromise the production of il76.

Totally agree... they need the Il-476 rather more than they need smaller or heavier aircraft... for those questioning if an Il-76 can carry tanks I see in the Serbian thread https://www.russiadefence.net/t207p150-serbian-armed-forces that they are delivering Upgraded T-72 tanks to Serbia via Il-76 aircraft, so they are used to transport tanks gradually.

Anyway, already the availability of a 80 tons payload il106 with 6 m wide cargo hold will make it the largest military cargo in production worldwide, and remove a lot of workload from the existing An-124.

And would be a very desirable transport plane for export I would suspect considering the only alternative is the C-17 which is eye wateringly expensive... I am just sad we have a government with its head up Americas ass because an 80 ton payload aircraft with strategic range would be ideal for us... right now we use C-130s which are more expensive than Il-76s but also slower, lower flying, and much shorter ranged.

With Il-106 aircraft we could visit out Pacific Neighbours without island hopping to refuel with useful payload weights... in fact instead of using up their supplies of expensive fuel we could deliver fuel supplies to them for a change...

Actually this should be probably the best initial option, as the PS-90A1 engines exists and are used also on the Il96-400M, so it would not be delayed by engines or other equipment availability. The only "annoying" part is to design and theb produce two different wings, one with 4 engines for the present and one with 2 PD35 for late 2020s

You don't have to redesign them... but you would have to put up with less impressive performance.

New wings is actually a common upgrade for aircraft... the Tu-95 got upgraded wing designs in the late 1970s for the Tu-142 and was further upgraded for the Tu-95s in use today that were made in the 1980s and 1990s... the Il-76 got new wings a couple of times to improve performance...

In fact they could have two standards... the Il-106 with four PS90 engines for domestic use and export with an 80 ton payload which will be rather useful and handy.... give it lots of high lift devices on the wings and rugged undercarriage for rough air strips... and then in 5 years time the Il-106M with a new wing and two PD35 engines to expand the payload capacity to 110 tons and probably extend range a bit for domestic use to start with and for export to key allies perhaps.

They could do something similar with Slon where they have the Il-xxx with normal tail and fuselage for An-124 replacement, and a T model with an H tail and modified body and back to allow large loads to be placed on the back of the aircraft...

Prior to 1943, the USSR used gliders & converted bombers to haul cargo before it produced C-47-derived Li-2s under license, which led to IL-12/14/18/62/86/96s. China used Antonov's help to design & produce her Y-8/9/20s. Turkey has to start somewhere.

The Soviets were licence producing DC-2s and DC-3s in the 1930s. They used converted bombers and gliders in the role because they were no longer effective in their original role.

they may need more, & also export them to non-EU nations.

They ordered 10 A-400Ms... not 100... if they do need more it wont be enough to justify the time and money that would need to be spent to make it happen.

For any customer Chinese or Russian transports will be cheaper and a more realistic prospect of actually being made.

Turkey will want to earn $ independently of them, so they won't undermine their own products by creating a competitor.

Countries that traditionally buy from Russia or China wont buy from Turkey, and countries Turkey can sell aircraft to traditionally would not consider Russian or Chinese made aircraft either... there is no overlap so there is no competition...

Besides, Ukraine will offer a better deal- like they did with ex-Varyag, CMs & other arms they sold around the world.

Those sales were possible because they already had the product.... they didn't have to make any more so even getting a dollar for the things was still a good deal for the Ukraine because maintenance costs for aircraft carriers is tens of thousands of dollars a year...

The Ukraine is only a viable partner if they can prove they can make the product in the numbers needed in the time available for the amount of money customers are prepared to invest in the project... there is no evidence they could do it even if they had the money and they don't have the money...

So if turkey and or ukraine want to build an airplane (of any kind) they need to import parts from either US, China, Russia, or from a bunch of EU nations.

True... and the obvious problem there is that any plane they do make will be in direct competition to the A-400M... which likely means EU sanctions on any country that takes part and extreme hostile attitude from EU and EU partner states... they wont want Turkey spending billions making an alternative to the A-400M, they want Turkey spending trillions buying more A-400Ms...

Turkey will be buying foreign made & developing her own aircraft just like USSR & the PRC did; putting all eggs in 1 basket may be cheaper but more risky. Thus, it's worth investing in its own industry instead of supporting some1 else's.

Building their own transport planes will get them kicked out of the EU industry and market... that would cost them rather more than anything they could save on a joint venture or even just buying off the shelf.

So, if they should fall from american grace, they may have problems in completing additional aircrafts.

Only a matter of time I suspect if BRICS continues, but lets face it... KRET can fill the Avionics gap and a new family of related engines would be as good for Brazil as it will be for Russian aircraft... they will be able to use a suitable engine size for any job...

The KC390 competes with the C-130J, & so far no problems for future sales .

So far, but if Brazil does not keep sucking up to the US then problems can occur... sanctions on aircraft is low hanging fruit that US senators can choose to hurt Brazil... even if the president of the time doesn't want to damage relations.

The Soviets were license producing DC-2s and DC-3s in the 1930s.

No, they didn't build any DC-2/3s then, only from 1940 onward. 

Countries that traditionally buy from Russia or China wont buy from Turkey, and countries Turkey can sell aircraft to traditionally would not consider Russian or Chinese made aircraft either...

Nations in Africa, SE Asia & L. America may not want to buy transports from Russia & China for political reasons, esp. if Turkish/Ukrainian An-77/188s can perform better than the KC-390, C-130J or Y-8/9.
It's not a zero-sum game as with Airbus-Boeing duopoly.

It took two years to convert the design to metric.

The Soviet Union received its first DC-2 in 1935. A total of 18 DC-3s had been ordered on 11 April 1936, and the government of the USSR purchased 21 DC-3s for operation by Aeroflot before World War II. A production license was awarded to the government of the USSR on 15 July 1936. Lisunov spent two years at the Douglas Aircraft Company, between November 1936 and April 1939 translating the design. One of the engineers who accompanied him to Douglas was Vladimir Mikhailovich Myasishchev. Design work and production were undertaken at State Aviation Factory 84 in Khimki (now a suburb of Moscow).[5] The Soviet version was given the designation PS-84 – Passazhirskiy Samolyot 84, passenger airplane 84 (i.e. made in GAZ/State Plant No. 84).

Nations in Africa, SE Asia & L. America may not want to buy transports from Russia & China for political reasons, esp. if Turkish/Ukrainian An-77/188s can perform better than the KC-390, C-130J or Y-8/9.

The risk seems to be pretty clear... Ukraine is burning any good will they had from former soviet equipment operators when they screw them...

Tsavo Lion wrote:

Countries that traditionally buy from Russia or China wont buy from Turkey, and countries Turkey can sell aircraft to traditionally would not consider Russian or Chinese made aircraft either...

Nations in Africa, SE Asia & L. America may not want to buy transports from Russia & China for political reasons, esp. if Turkish/Ukrainian An-77/188s can perform better than the KC-390, C-130J or Y-8/9.
It's not a zero-sum game as with Airbus-Boeing duopoly.

Again, if they do produce wings, fuselage and other structural parts, who provides all the rest?

Even if you accept that they could use 4 D-436 engines (the same one as in the An-148/An-178 and basically the only turbofan for transport or passenger jet produced currently by the ukraine), which is probably too small for it as it has between 7 and 8 tons of thrust according to the version, so it would need a decrease in payload and dimensions (there was a proposed derivative with 11,5 tons of thrust, but was never realised), you only solved the engine problem (with a compromise, of course)

What about all of the other equipments and components?

Antonov planes used to have about 50% of the parts and systems produced in Russia. Turkey cannot help with those. They can of course try to have suppliers from the EU, US or China design and provide systems for it, but it is not anymore an independent solution... actually a potential buyer will have to be even more wary, as there are many more nations that could hamper the sale...

If they buy from Russia or China at least there are no other countries involved.

i also copy here the great post of AMCXXL from another thread, so as to have detailed view of the transport aircraft numbers

AMCXXL wrote:
The composition of VTA today is:
- 117º , 196º , 334º and 708º VTAP: two squadrons of Il-76MD and one of An-2, total 18 IL-76MD and 12 An-2 each regiment
- 235º VTAP (in formation) squadron of Il-76MD, squadron of Il-476 and squadron of An-2, Total: 9 Il-76MD, 7 Il-476 and 12 An-2
- 81º VTAP: (in formation) squadron of Il.76MD, squadron of Il-76MD-M and squadron of 12 An-2. For the moment only known 2 Il-76MD and as much 2 Il-76MD-M
- 566º VTAP: squadron of An-124-100 and Il-76M (5 An-124 and 3 Il-76M), second squadron An-124 in reserve. Squadron of 12 An-2 at Tula
- 76º OVTAE: Ivanovo: An-22 , An-12, An-26
- 224º LO : 8 An-124 (at Sescha) and 16 Il-76MD (at the other VTAP airbases)
- 610º TsBPiPLS: 12 Il-76M
Also there squadrons of:
- An-26, An-72 and An-2 at Omsk part of 117º VTAP
- An-26, Mi-8 and An-2 at Ryazan , probably part of 196º VTAP
- An-26, Mi-8 and UAV at Plesetsk apparently part of 81º VTAP

out VTA also there are at least 6 Il-76MD at Chklovsky (8º ADON-223 LO), 2 Il-76MD-M at LII Zukovsky, and 2 Il-76M at Voronezh-VUNTs

In total should have 12 squadrons Il-76MD / MD-M / MD-90A (108 airplanes) and also other 24 between the other units, total 132 MD´s. Also 17 "short" Il-76M
For the moment I located 130 "long" MD´s (taking into account that 2 Il-476s are still lacking to complete the 235th VTAP squadron) and also 17 "short" M´s

Research tactical flight exercise with crews of military transport aviation

The UAC revealed the characteristics of a promising super-heavy transport aircraft

A significant expansion of the characteristics may be the possibility of parachute landing of cargo, and the possibility of operation on unpaved airfields will also become an important property, said Sergei Yarkovoy, First Deputy General Director of the United Aircraft Building Corporation.

MOSCOW, July 30. / TASS /. A promising super-heavy transport aircraft will significantly expand its characteristics compared to the An-124 Ruslan if it has a pressurized cargo compartment, the ability to land on the ground and the ability to drop cargo. This was announced in an interview with TASS by the first deputy general director of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC, part of the Rostec state corporation) Sergei Yarkovoy.

"A significant increase in performance may be the ability to parachute cargo. For this, it is necessary to create a fully sealed cargo compartment," he said.

According to him, also an important property in terms of using a promising aircraft will be the ability to operate on unpaved airfields. "If we generally talk about a super-heavy transport aircraft, then the direction is undoubtedly promising, including for civil aviation," added Yarkova.

He noted that at the moment with the Ministry of Defense, a promising appearance of the military version of the heavy transport aircraft (PAK-VTA) is being worked out.

The full text of the interview will be published on the TASS website .

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/12020845

Huge, very interesting interview with UAC:

Deputy head of the UAC: we are building up competencies in the construction of military transport aircraft

MAKS-2021, held from 20 to 25 July in Zhukovsky, can rightly be called a landmark for all domestic aircraft. Several new aircraft were demonstrated at once during the airshow. Aviation complex them. S.V. Ilyushin, a member of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) of the Rostec state corporation, presented the new regional Il-114-300, as well as the Il-76MD-90A transport aircraft and the new Il-78M-90A tanker, which is being created on its basis.

Following the results of MAKS-2021 and on the eve of another large-scale forum - "Army-2021", at which for the first time it is planned to publicly present another new military transport aircraft Il-112V, the TASS correspondent spoke with the first deputy general director of the UAC, and also the managing director PJSC "Il" Sergei Yarkov on the unique transport aircraft "Il" and the prospects for the development of this segment of the Russian aircraft industry.

- Sergey Vladimirovich, tell us more about the new Il-114, what are its advantages. Why is this aircraft so important for the domestic aviation industry?

“For the first time, we demonstrated the Il-114-300 to our potential customers and guests of the air show at a static exposition, showed the capabilities of the aircraft in the air. He participated in the daily flight demonstration program. This aircraft has a very promising niche in the domestic market. This is a small, unpretentious, but at the same time comfortable aircraft for passengers for regional transportation.

I would like to remind you that it is the "Ilyushin" design bureau that has a successful experience in creating aircraft for regional aviation. At one time, one of the flagships of short-haul transportation was the Il-14 turboprop. About 1.4 thousand of these machines were produced. They have found application in almost all industries. It was a workhorse that could be operated in Central Russia, and in remote regions, and even in the Arctic. It had many modifications for various purposes, flew all over the world, it was operated by airlines in two dozen countries, and was mass-produced not only in the USSR, but also in the GDR and in what was then Czechoslovakia. The first versions of the Il-114, developed at the turn of the 80s and 90s, became a natural continuation of this legendary line of regional turboprop aircraft.But radical changes in the country at the turn of the 90s suspended the project.

Today, creating the new Il-114-300, we rely on the existing groundwork, but we are completely modernizing all the systems and equipment of the aircraft, the suppliers of which are mainly Rostec enterprises. In this work, we focus on modern technical requirements and the needs of operators. Efficient after-sales service is a key element. Taking into account the experience of a ten-year operation of the Superjet, as well as in preparation for entering the MS-21 market, we are forming a single effective PPO system for all civilian products, including the Il-114-300. We will use the maximum of developments in this direction.

The aircraft is designed for operation in the regions of the Far North, Far East, Arctic, in conditions from -55 to +45. It can be based both on concrete and unpaved strips. It can even land on a snow and ice strip. Our aircraft is designed in such a way that it can be serviced "from the ground", without the use of additional equipment, which is sometimes not available at small regional airfields. It has a built-in gangway, which also makes it independent of ground infrastructure. Our aircraft will become a workhorse that will replace the "Antonov line" (aircraft developed by the Antonov Design Bureau, which remained in Ukraine after the collapse of the USSR - TASS note). "Anas" are getting old, no longer meet modern requirements,which apply to aviation and safety. Certainly, the new machines will provide more safety.

- And what are the prospects for the supply of this new aircraft for export? What can you offer to a wide range of potential customers?

- We are now discussing this issue quite widely and consider the Il-114-300 as a platform solution, on the basis of which it is possible to implement various projects, including joint development with foreign partners for foreign markets.

With all this, our main task is to satisfy domestic demand, given that an obvious shortage of new aircraft is forming on the regional aviation market due to the obsolescence of the existing fleet. We estimate the demand here at about 100 aircraft, which will be needed in the regions in the next 10-12 years.

Based on these plans, we are preparing our production facilities. We have the opportunity to go into production of 12 aircraft per year from 2025. There is already an interest in the new car from regional airlines. On the sidelines of MAKS-2021, an agreement was signed with GTLK and the Aurora airline for the supply of 19 Il-114-300s to ensure transport accessibility to the regions of the Far East. We plan to start delivering aircraft from 2023.

In addition, we are working with our federal executive authorities, the Ministry of Defense and other departments in a different direction - creating special versions. This will provide additional demand for about 50 aircraft. We are also proactively thinking in the direction of creating a four-engine car.

- What will be the peculiarity of the four-engine car?

- It will also be a platform solution that will provide advanced capabilities. It will be a vehicle of greater range and carrying capacity, but maximally unified with the Il-114-300. This will reduce the time and cost of creation, and in the future, the operator will be able to more efficiently use two platforms simultaneously.

- In theoretical terms, what are the possible options for the layout and operation of the Il-114-300 aircraft?

“Any equipment can be deployed on this platform. You can put the antenna, you can place the equipment on an external sling, you can use the internal space to install the equipment or put up operator stations there. What the customer wants, we will do it.

The fleet of Il aircraft of previous generations is gradually becoming a thing of the past, so the question of how to close the tasks is urgent. The main thing is that the car has already taken place, flew. An active test program is underway, several dozen flights have been made recently.

- Let's switch to the theme of Ilyushin's large planes. What is happening with the IL-96 line, what are the future prospects of this famous giant, and is there any in the 21st century at all ?

- Despite the fact that the outwardly IL-96 hardly changes, like any other foreign classmate, the aircraft is undergoing constant modernization. Now, for example, we have developed and are testing a new modernized digital flight and navigation complex that meets all the accepted ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization - TASS) standards in terms of navigation and other parameters, which will allow the aircraft to operate without restrictions in any region of the world.

In parallel, we use all the developments in the creation of the Il-96-400M - this is a version with a fuselage extended by more than 9 m (9.35 m) for civil aviation. As for the prospects, structural changes in the market, the appearance of a new engine with increased thrust may become an incentive for the further development of the platform. Therefore, we do not exclude the possibility of creating a twin-engine version of the aircraft. We are waiting for the results of the work of our colleagues from the UEC. And also we do not exclude the greater use of modern materials in the design, for example, the creation of a composite wing.

- That is, as soon as the engine is created, there will be further modernization of the aircraft?

- We are doing everything to be ready for this moment. Then we will look, discuss, make decisions. The Il-96 platform is very reliable, proven and at the same time is in continuous development.

- Let's move on to the military transport segment - the Il-76. Are there plans to further expand the capabilities of this aircraft? The last major modernization is the creation of the Il-76MD-90A. But does it correspond to the real tasks that are entrusted to it?

- Our main customer is the military transport aviation (MTA) of the Russian Federation. Ensuring the characteristics of the aircraft that will meet the tasks of military aviation is our absolute priority. We have begun serial deliveries of Il-76MD-90A aircraft to the Ministry of Defense. At the end of last year, three cars were handed over, this year we will increase the pace. In parallel, we are completing state tests of this aircraft. Thanks to deep modernization, the capabilities of the machine have been seriously expanded: we have increased the carrying capacity from 48 to 60 tons, which allows us to transport and drop additional equipment and cargo. At the same time, the efficiency of motors has increased. The new PS-90A-76 engines are superior in efficiency to the old D-30KP engines. Due to this, the range has increased, which makes it possible to plan transportation much more efficiently. We have supplied a modern airborne defense complex,to provide protection against various means of destruction of the enemy.

The aircraft is equipped with a modern flight and navigation system and an on-board communications system, which allow flying, providing all modern requirements, including civil ones, laying the foundation for possible further certification of a transport operator in a civilian version.

Taking into account the renewal of the fleet, the Il-76MD-90A will become the basis of the military transport aviation. Our priority is to increase the volume of supplies. We need to operate 12 planes a year. The IL-76 platform has been in operation for many years, is constantly developing, and has shown itself to be very good. At the same time, it is very promising, we will discuss its further development. If BTA has additional requirements, we will implement them.

- Are there any opportunities to compensate for the lack of the same An-124 Ruslan due to further modernization of the Il-76?

- Il-76MD-90A and An-124 are vehicles of different classes and sizes. "Ruslan" is designed to transport heavy equipment over long distances, and the Il-76 was originally a vehicle for working in conjunction with the Airborne Forces and solving other tasks of military transport aviation. Therefore, to move, for example, in the direction of further increasing the carrying capacity of the Il-76 to the size of the An-124, in our opinion, is not entirely advisable. It will just be a different plane. But we are working towards the development of super-heavy topics, using the scientific and technical groundwork available in the design bureau.

- Could you comment on how things are going with the development of the VTA PAK - a promising aviation complex for military transport aviation? They talk a lot about him, but is there already some specifics?

- We are working on a promising look with the Ministry of Defense, but I cannot tell you anything more specific due to the specifics of the topic.

- But, in your opinion, what should be its appearance?

- We focus on the customer, we can offer something, we can discuss, but our opinion is not key. We need to talk about the technical feasibility of those requirements that the customer makes.

If we generally talk about a super-heavy transport aircraft, then the direction is undoubtedly promising, including for civil aviation. It is necessary to once again analyze the optimal carrying capacity, taking into account the real practice of cargo transportation of this class, relying on the experience of operating the An-124, the economic parameters of such an aircraft and the infrastructure capabilities of airports. A significant expansion of the characteristics can be the possibility of parachute landing of the cargo. To do this, it is necessary to create a completely sealed cargo compartment. Another track to be worked out, which also expands the aircraft's capabilities in terms of use, is operation on unpaved airfields.

- If we talk about export and foreign markets for the IL-76, how is their development going, are there any interesting customers, potential proposals? Are you ready to offer something special to a foreign customer?

- We are ready to offer both the aircraft itself and the possibility of joint creation of specialized products on their basis, the implementation of localization programs in the interests of potential customers. Today we offer aircraft with a variety of after-sales service options. Moreover, as manufacturers, we can either fully undertake the maintenance of our equipment, or assist in the creation of the PPO infrastructure and training of personnel. We are following the global trend. The Il-76 is of great interest to our historical customers, all those who operate our aircraft. The Il-76 transporter is known all over the world. This aircraft has an excellent reputation. In total, more than a hundred machines have been exported.

Export versions of the modernized Il-76MD-90A and the Il-78M-90A tanker are of great interest to customers around the world, primarily in the Middle East and the Asia-Pacific region. Of course, the current operators of the previous generation IL aircraft are showing this interest.

The presence of a large fleet of Il-76 aircraft around the world is an important advantage. This park is in need of maintenance and modernization. For the company, this is an additional resource for ensuring economic sustainability and a groundwork for new supplies. We are actively cooperating with FSMTC and Rosoboronexport to promote our equipment. And I hope that the 76th car in its new guise has a good future.

- What to do with the existing Il-76 parks around the world? Do you have any modernization projects ready?

- We have a so-called modernization package - a set of solutions to improve the aircraft, expand its capabilities and operational characteristics, which we have worked out as part of the modernization programs for the existing Il-76MD aircraft fleet. On its basis, we offer our customers ample opportunities for fleet modernization, including remotorization.

- Let's move on to the small brother of the Il-76 - the newest Il-112V. To what extent can it replace the existing models, the same "Antonov" ones, and can it be used in the harsh conditions of the Arctic and in the desert? What are the prospects?

- Il-112V - this machine was originally created to replace the An-26 fleet. Accordingly, the terms of reference laid down the condition for basing on soils and in any climatic conditions. This machine is maximally adapted to the operating conditions for the Ministry of Defense. But when compared with the An-26, we have expanded the capabilities of this aircraft by increasing the size of the cargo compartment. It has become almost half a meter higher, which makes it possible to transport a large range of goods.

This machine is the first transport aircraft developed by the Ilyushin Design Bureau from scratch in the post-Soviet period. All modern systems are installed on the aircraft, and the solutions are maximally unified for seamless integration into the VTA system during aircraft operation.

And this unification is an important thing. Historically, it so happened that military transport aircraft were developed and produced in the USSR, mostly not on the territory of Russia. And what was developed in Russia, in the Ilyushin Design Bureau, the same Il-76, was produced in Tashkent. Therefore, in fact, we are now recreating the competence in the design and serial construction of military transport aircraft anew. We make all platforms as unified as possible with each other, wherever possible, primarily in terms of the set of equipment, in order to minimize the time for flight crew retraining and facilitate after-sales service.

- Now about technologies. To what extent, in your opinion, will the automation of air transport, including aircraft, reach the state when it will be possible to reduce the crew to a minimum?

- From the point of view of aircraft navigation, in our modern complexes, all the possibilities for piloting an aircraft by a crew of two are realized. But the tasks facing the military transport aviation are much broader, so each crew member performs his own function.

A distinctive feature and an important advantage of our aircraft is its autonomous basing. It happens that a plane arrives at airfields where there is no special infrastructure for servicing. Loading and unloading operations, all operations to prepare the aircraft for flight, even if there is a need to clean the aircraft from snow, are performed by the crew. Therefore, the number of crew members is dictated not only by piloting tasks, but also by the customer's requirements for service autonomy.

- That is, in principle, there are no restrictions? Can you do this now for a commercial customer, for example?

- From the point of view of piloting - there are no restrictions. If we carry out transport tasks for the transportation of goods from an airfield to an airfield, we can reduce the required number of crew members.

- And what about the introduction of domestic avionics? What fundamentally new devices are being prepared for implementation? How did you manage to organize import substitution?

- As for the introduction of new solutions, the modernization of our machines is precisely due to the improvement and renewal of systems and equipment. For example, a new digital flight and navigation system, a glass cockpit on the Il-76MD-90A provided completely different qualities of the machine. The aircraft was created entirely on domestic components.

As for "fundamentally new devices". You see, the UAC transport division does not build supercars. Our main product is reliable and unpretentious transport workers, trucks, capable of guaranteed fulfillment of the task in the most difficult conditions. Therefore, we have a rational and balanced approach here, assessing the need to implement new solutions in conjunction with the project economics. We always seek and find a balance, guided by common sense. The number of innovations must correspond to the need to solve specific problems.

- Do you have projects for the so-called green aviation?

- While this topic is closer to aviation science. But we are ready to act as partners for the implementation of promising projects. Today, the National Research Center "Institute named after NE Zhukovsky" is developing electrical power plants. We are ready to offer the IL-114-300 as a platform for testing new technologies. Therefore, we agreed to coordinate exploratory research in this part.

- You mentioned the composite wing during the discussion of the Il-96. What are your current capabilities for the production of composites, the degree of implementation of such materials?

- If we talk about the prospects, then the existing design, technological groundwork and the unique Russian technology of vacuum infusion, mastered by the Aerocomposite enterprise, on which competencies in the composite wing are concentrated in the UAC circuit, allows us to move towards the development of a larger wing for aircraft of another class - wide-body liners. Composites are a promising material, helping to reduce labor intensity, lighten weight, and achieve other important advantages. This is a modern track that all world manufacturers follow. We are working with composites, we are looking at where they can be applied in existing products, so that this is justified both from a technological and economic point of view. For example, such a seemingly trifle.In the Il-114-300, the elements of the air conditioning system were replaced with composite structures. In addition to the weight advantage, the anti-corrosion effect, this also gave a certain saving in space inside the cabin.

- With regard to corporate transformation and production development. Recently it was announced about the merger of the plants in Ulyanovsk and Voronezh, as well as the integration of OKB Myasishchev into IL. What are the goals of this association and what is the perspective?

- We have built within the extensive co-operation. Take, for example, any project, the same Il-112V - for it, the fuselage panels are made in Ulyanovsk, the fuselage, wing, engine nacelles and tail assembly - in Voronezh, the final assembly is also there. IL-114 - panels, hatches and doors are made in Ulyanovsk, in Voronezh a wing, tail unit and engine nacelles are made. In Lukhovitsy, the airframe elements are docked and the final assembly takes place. The number of internal relationships in the process of implementing any program is simply colossal! Therefore, we bring businesses together to eliminate unnecessary transactions, speed up internal interactions, and ultimately deliver significant cost savings.

- How could you comment on the technical re-equipment of your enterprises? Do you plan to purchase machine tools, introduce domestic technologies? Again, 3D-modeling, VR-technology ( the V irtual the R ealit y - virtual reality - approx Tass.) Now popular - something from this expected?

- Our production is tied to the development of programs and plans to increase the volume of aircraft production that we have. These programs have already been launched with the use of state support funds and our own investments in production.

Large-scale technical re-equipment has been carried out in Ulyanovsk and Voronezh. In Ulyanovsk, it affected all production facilities. A technological breakthrough is a new automated assembly line that uses modern digital technology. This is a domestic development, and such a line was first created in Russia for large transport aircraft. The first aircraft has already completed a full assembly cycle on this line and is now undergoing tests. Let me remind you that we are planning to reach production rates of up to 12 aircraft per year.

We develop and transfer data digitally. The next stage is the use of augmented reality technologies in the assembly of aircraft, which are now being implemented by our colleagues from the Sukhoi company. These technologies help in working with design documentation, eliminate errors, speed up the assembly process and the accuracy of operations. We also plan to implement all this.

At the same time, I emphasize again, it is important to maintain balance in everything and adhere to common sense. The use of innovative solutions and advanced technologies is not an end in itself. It must be economically justified, and the results must be really necessary for the customer, give him tangible usefulness and effectively solve his problems. From the most mundane delivery of military supplies to the execution of important humanitarian missions around the world. For example, our flagship Il-76MD-90A has all the possibilities for this!

https://tass.ru/interviews/12018121

Training flights of military transport aviation of the Western Military District

An interesting fact is that the photos show Antonov's planes. If the Ukrainians did not arrange the Maidan, they could continue to supply their aircraft to Russia. Now their aviation industry is in an extremely deplorable state, and Russia is trying to create a replacement for their aircraft. When Russia does this, they will completely lose the chance to return to the Russian market

Russian_Patriot_ wrote:An interesting fact is that the photos show Antonov's planes. If the Ukrainians did not arrange the Maidan, they could continue to supply their aircraft to Russia. Now their aviation industry is in an extremely deplorable state, and Russia is trying to create a replacement for their aircraft. When Russia does this, they will completely lose the chance to return to the Russian market

The aeronautical industry of the former Soviet Republic of Ukraine is a walking zombie. They have not raised any planes since the coup in 2013 and will not do so again.
What's more, if you look at how many planes they have sold in 15 years, practically none except to North Korea, Iran or Kuba, but none of them fly anymore given the high accident rate of their planes, even the newest ones.

Nobody is going to buy planes made in Ukraine.
If you change the Russian components for Western ones you get planes with Western prices, which Westerners are not interested in, Russia is not interested in them and poor countries cannot buy

AMCXXL wrote:The aeronautical industry of the former Soviet Republic of Ukraine is a walking zombie....

You were being quite generous with 'walking' part

They might as well just bury the corpse and focus on wood powered heating appliances

Russian_Patriot_ wrote:An interesting fact is that the photos show Antonov's planes. If the Ukrainians did not arrange the Maidan, they could continue to supply their aircraft to Russia. Now their aviation industry is in an extremely deplorable state, and Russia is trying to create a replacement for their aircraft. When Russia does this, they will completely lose the chance to return to the Russian market

The americans arranged Maidan.

AN-12 very low pass.

Flights of transport aviation crews of the Western Military District in the Leningrad Region

57-year old AN-12 flying like a charm

About the An-225

GarryB wrote:

Really sad sight. I was hoping she could be preserved

Its only use was for propaganda for Kiev... it was intended to support a space programme, shifting outsized loads from factories where they were made to launch pads... Ukraine has no space programme so it was a white elephant for them.

There was no way Russia could use it either... it is Soviet and therefore largely Ukrainian... the amount of upgrades and modifications needed... it makes sense to simply wait for Slon with its PD-35 engines.

Well, the An-225 had a strong association with Ukraine (mainly because of Ukrainian propaganda and of the use as commercial cargo transport in the recent years, forgetting its original purpose), but the An-124 has not the same implication, it is mainly associated with the Russian air force (and even Volga Dnepr has a larger an-124 fleet than Antonov airlines.

Furthermore both aircrafts were not mainly Ukrainian. Yes, Ukraine produced a considerable share of components, but more than 50% of the components were made in Russia anyway.

Finally, two third of all the an-124 ever built were assembled in Ulyanovsk. Even the plans (in 2013) between Ukraine and Russia of restarting An-124 production considered only the assembly in Ulyanovsk.

As far as the Slon, it is an interesting concept, but only a paper plane, that will have to go anyway to very long design, development and certification tests. The  An124 is the best aircraft in its class which passed already very long and expensive military and civilian certification... And with modern engines, avionics and internal systems could be even better.
So it would be much easier to upgrade the An-124 than to do a new aircraft (and apparently Ilyushin was already working into it)

This of course would be possible only if Russia takes control of Antonov and its Intellectual property rights and include it into UAC (United Aircraft Corporation). Same things could be done for motor sich and ivchenko progress in UEC United engine corporation).

This would ensure enough spare engines for current versions of an-124 and maybe a temporary restart of production in the current version until the new PD-24 engines are ready.

In this case I would not see much need of the Slon aircraft (also because in case of a need of a supersized aircraft they could just do in ten years a version of An-225 with two PD35 or even PD50 engines, maybe calling it An-335 in order to cancel references to the Ukrainian dream).

I would believe instead the original size of the il-106 would be a much more useful new project for the Russian military transport aviation industry to concentrate on.

So, to summarize:

Existing and new transport aircrafts to be kept in production

5 tons payload: il-112v
10tons payload: nothing (maybe new Antonov or Ilyushin project?
20-30 tons payload: either il276 or Tu330 (the an-178 has more bugs than the il-112v ever had) (or possibly brand new turboprop aircraft)
40- tons payload: ideally start of production of the An-70 (one of my favourite airplane projects, basically a much better aircraft than the European A400M)
60 tons payload:-il (4)76 (which has a relatively narrow cargo hold)
80 tons payload: new project (il-106)
120-150 tons payload: An124
More than 200 tons payload???? Possibly modified an225

This will also ensure maintaing the legacy of the design bureau created by Oleg Antonov (a Russian engineer born in the Moscow region)

This of course would be possible only if Russia takes control of Antonov and its Intellectual property rights and include it into UAC (United Aircraft Corporation). Same things could be done for motor sich and ivchenko progress in UEC United engine corporation).

I doubt it. It will always be a rival and competitor now, so throwing money at it wont get it to a point where it could solve any real problems or help Russia in any way.

The Antonovs in Russian service are obsolete except for the AN-124 and even it needs to be replaced.

The Orcs would rather burn their pride and joy biggest aircraft in the world than let Russia get it... tell me what you think the inside of the factory and documents currently looks like at the moment... all black and ashy?

Antonov was a good company that was useful to the Soviet Union and so was Motor Sich and Ivchenko... but they are gone and most of the Ukraine is gone now too... brainwashed and weaponised against Russia.

Russia has to stop bothering to kill the foot soldiers... the west doesn't care and it is not good for Russians to see them killing neighbours because of the shit the US gets up to.

This would ensure enough spare engines for current versions of an-124 and maybe a temporary restart of production in the current version until the new PD-24 engines are ready.

The money spent reviving these relics could be spent just making extra test prototypes and fast track testing of all the new engines they are working on... the faster they get them into new aircraft the better all round.

In this case I would not see much need of the Slon aircraft (also because in case of a need of a supersized aircraft they could just do in ten years a version of An-225 with two PD35 or even PD50 engines, maybe calling it An-335 in order to cancel references to the Ukrainian dream).

Slon should be a much better aircraft than An-124 and a more practical aircraft than the An-225... the An-225 was impressive and all, but its 250 ton capacity was never really in demand, its core use was outsized external loads and I think you will remember the previous platform for that role was from Myasishchev which was a converted bomber with a weight limit of about 15 tons.

These outsized loads are carried empty and are often not very heavy at all so all that engine power and size was mostly wasted making it a rather inefficient plane for even the Russian space industry.

I would believe instead the original size of the il-106 would be a much more useful new project for the Russian military transport aviation industry to concentrate on.

The Il-106 design could be used the way the Il-476 was used to create the Il-276, but in reverse... the Il-106 could be designed to be an 90 ton capacity transport, but with reduced fuel on takeoff a 110 ton capacity transport with inflight refuelling perhaps... that would mean most operations with An-124s could be performed with Il-106s so that they could get PD-24 engines and continue to do what they do until the Slon is ready with its four PD-35 engines and a payload capacity of about 180 tons standard. They could make most with standard tails and maybe 4-6 with H tails for external loads for their Space Industry.

This will also ensure maintaing the legacy of the design bureau created by Oleg Antonov (a Russian engineer born in the Moscow region)

They have no history of doing that sort of thing... Lavochkin and Polikarpov were not revived either...

5 tons payload: il-112v
10tons payload: nothing (maybe new Antonov or Ilyushin project?
20-30 tons payload: either il276 or Tu330 (the an-178 has more bugs than the il-112v ever had) (or possibly brand new turboprop aircraft)
40- tons payload: ideally start of production of the An-70 (one of my favourite airplane projects, basically a much better aircraft than the European A400M)
60 tons payload:-il (4)76 (which has a relatively narrow cargo hold)
80 tons payload: new project (il-106)
120-150 tons payload: An124
More than 200 tons payload???? Possibly modified an225

Interesting, but I find it easier to follow with the aircraft currently used and those that are replacing them...

An-2 will be replaced by the LMS-901 plus a twin engined larger aircraft.
An-24/26/32 twin engined transports will be replaced with Il-112/Il-114
An-12 will be replaced by the Il-276, but I would like to see the slightly larger Tu-330 be produced as well, just to get the replacement done quicker so they can both be exported too.
There is no real gap in the 40 ton capacity range, it was old Il-76s which have expanded to cover a wider weight capacity range... the Il-476 can be used at 40 tons over greater distances.
An-70 is dead, you are right it is better than the A400M but 8 years the new western masters will have quietly killed it because it represents very serious competition to their horse in the race.
I would expect the Orcs to destroy everything about it too.
An-22 replacement would be the Il-106 which like the An-22 would also be cheaper and lighter than using the An-124 for many roles which would make it popular and useful... I would actually make more Il-106s than were made of the An-22 and less Slon types or upgraded An-124s because the smaller lighter aircraft would be cheaper to buy and operate.
An-124 will be replaced by a combination of a lot of Il-106s and a few Slons.
An-225s will be replaced by a few Slons with H style tails for large external loads.

We do not know about Slon being better.
An-124 is not a relic of the past

The main problem of an124 were the engines.

As long as more modern engines (and possibly more powerful as well are available) it is a wonderful aircraft. Its upgrade potential is much higher than what the il76 had. Furthermore it has been produced in Russia, while before 2012 the il76 had been produced only in Uzbekistan.
Same things could be done for An-70 (including digitalizing the design, if this has not been done yet and possibly modernising its internal systems). Hopefully the Ukrainians did not destroy in the meanwhile all the technical paperwork for the An-70 (I do not know if Russia has copy of those , but at least for the An-124 Russia has everything it needs to produce the aircraft (except the engines)).

Antonov must not be a rival, it must be a Russian company registered in Russia and part of UAC


Anyway Antonov does not need to stay in Kiev.
The main factory in Kiev can be separated from Antonov and renamed back Aviant or even Kiev aviation plant. The main technical office (and the official company registration) can be moved back in Russia, e.g. in Moscow or in Ulyanovsk.

Antonov airlines (or what remains of it) could be incorporated in Volga Dnepr (anyway Dnepr was always part of its name).

In Kiev, in the office of Antonov design bureau they can organized a separate branch of the russian UAC and give some part of some projects (as European and American aeronautical and engine companies have technical branches in India or in Singapore...actually even Boeing has a technical branch in Moscow and those guys were the people responsible for the last cargo modification of the Boeing 747 (the 747-8f, with frontal doors).

As specified before, even with a design branch in kiev, the design authority and IP right of all projects must be kept (or moved for existing projects like An-70 and An-124) in Moscow

By the way those Russians engineers working for Boeing could be reintegrated back into UAC, and maybe something similar could be offered to the former Antonov and motor sich engineers currently working in China.
Furthermore there are many russian aerospace engineers working in the west,.. with the current situation, I can imagine a part of them considering about going back to Russia and work there, even with a lower pay.

On the other topic (engines) I believe the status of tooling and machinery in motor sich is not that bad, even if outdated (unless the Ukrainians destroyed them in the last couple of years), so they could restart production at least of the existing engine projects (D18t, d436, elicopter engines) and later move to produce parts or even new PD engines for UEC (as I said before, now all the western engines or components in new productions of SSJ100 and MC21 must be replaced)

We do not know about Slon being better.
An-124 is not a relic of the past

New materials, new construction techniques, new design... why would it not be better?

But at the core of the situation... it will be Russian.

The main problem of an124 were the engines.

They kept using An-22s long after An-124s were introduced which suggests a smaller lighter cheaper aircraft makes sense too.... hense the Il-106.

I would expect rather fewer An-124s and rather more An-22s would have been a better balance, so a new aircraft that comes in two engine layouts... one for 90 tons payload and one for 120 tons payload would be better all round... and the engines of the An-124 were always a problem... sadly they were not great engines.

The PD-35 and PD-24 will be much better all round.

Its upgrade potential is much higher than what the il76 had. Furthermore it has been produced in Russia, while before 2012 the il76 had been produced only in Uzbekistan.

I disagree... I think the range of uses and roles for the Il-476 are much wider, but also it will operate from more locations and perform more useful jobs than the much bigger aircraft would do... in fact I would say a mix of Il-476 and Il-106 would be more useful than using the An-124 with the Il-476.

I suspect the An-124 gets used for its internal volume and flight range more than its max payload weight...

Same things could be done for An-70 (including digitalizing the design, if this has not been done yet and possibly modernising its internal systems). Hopefully the Ukrainians did not destroy in the meanwhile all the technical paperwork for the An-70 (I do not know if Russia has copy of those , but at least for the An-124 Russia has everything it needs to produce the aircraft (except the engines)).

Honestly I would think the An-70 project is dead, and even if it wasn't they didn't have the engines either.

The An-124 might continue for a bit with new engines, but I doubt they will keep it forever.

They have working design bureaus whose job it is to make new useful aircraft to replace obsolete types in service... that is what they do.

Antonov must not be a rival, it must be a Russian company registered in Russia and part of UAC

The Ukraine as everyone knows is lost to Russia, and when this operation has finished at they withdraw at best bits of it will be pro Russia, bits will be neutral and large bits of it will remain corrosively anti Russian because it will be concentrated from all the anti Russian people from the rest of the Ukraine.

Antonov is people and the people who were there likely left for jobs elsewhere... taking the name would be like calling your brand new Bike making company Hardly Davison... It would not be the same... especially as they are new and can't be trusted to make motor bikes and would start out with scooters.

As specified before, even with a design branch in kiev, the design authority and IP right of all projects must be kept (or moved for existing projects like An-70 and An-124) in Moscow

That is the sticking point... I suspect they would rather destroy it than let Russia use it.

And that is the problem... do you think they have some super anti gravity technology or something?

Most of the best things about the An-70 came from Russia, including the performance requirements, and most of the money, I suspect the Antonov OKB probably did a go slow on the project to milk more money out of the Russians... it seems to me that is what they did most of the time.

By the way those Russians engineers working for Boeing could be reintegrated back into UAC, and maybe something similar could be offered to the former Antonov and motor sich engineers currently working in China.

Or they might be offered good paying jobs in the west... who knows.

Furthermore there are many russian aerospace engineers working in the west,.. with the current situation, I can imagine a part of them considering about going back to Russia and work there, even with a lower pay.

That is true... they might have to leave the west because of their treatment by angry idiots... I think it will depend case by case... when you leave a country often you change your beliefs to justify that and over time your experience in the west reinforces that belief... you would have to go home and open your eyes to see the real truth, but most people can't or wont do that and just live with the lies... lies can be easier to live with than having to fight all the time for the truth.

Most Americans leaving America often say it is because of Bush or Trump, but maybe they are just trying to fit in. Who knows what they actually think... do they even know?

On the other topic (engines) I believe the status of tooling and machinery in motor sich is not that bad, even if outdated (unless the Ukrainians destroyed them in the last couple of years)

Would be worth money and would be a serious competitor to western engine makers so lots of people would be interested in converting it to making wood stoves...

so they could restart production at least of the existing engine projects (D18t, d436, elicopter engines) and later move to produce parts or even new PD engines for UEC (as I said before, now all the western engines or components in new productions of SSJ100 and MC21 must be replaced)

We don't even know what boundaries these factories will be surrounded by, they might end up in a country that is only neutral to Russia and the west... the way Finland used to be during the cold war.

Money has been spent in Russia to deal with the problem of Orc engines and engine bits, I would think that would be enough to keep them running until the new engines are added to the fleet.

Now that Russia has started a concerted bombardment campaign of the Ukrainian weapons industry I do not think it will have much of a future.
Maybe there will be some design bureaus for civilian applications and engineers will be allowed to relocate to Russia. But I think the weapons industry will be pretty much dead.
https://tass.com/defense/1417945

To be fair the Ukrainians started the demilitarisation when they cut off their biggest customer.

BTW the Slon will not just be built with new materials and new technology and new construction and new design, but they also have 40 odd years of experience in operating the An-124 to reflect on and guide them in their new improved design.

When you are talking aircraft this size then they are very much niche aircraft... vastly too expensive for 20 ton mail runs of 1,000km or so.

For certain specific missions and roles they are not replacable.

I suspect they will build rather more IL-106s than they will build Slons because essentially the Il-106 replaces the very popular An-22 in all of its missions but also the An-124 in some of its missions too...

Where there was a weight and range overlap the An-22 was a much cheaper aircraft to use, but of course if it was bringing something back that the An-22 could not carry then the An-124 was used, but I suspect it was more often a case of taking something there and then filling up the plane with whatever needed to come back to make the return journey useful too.

If you were going to keep an Antonov I would have kept the An-22... the engines are currently upgraded and improved and used on their Tu-95s and Tu-142s...

But both programmes are over.

The development of a new Russian heavy transport aircraft to replace the An-124 Ruslan continues

The project of the new heavy Russian transport aircraft "Elephant", created to replace the An-124 "Ruslan", is not forgotten, work on the aircraft continues. Currently, TsAGI specialists are working on improving the aerodynamic layout of a promising transport vehicle.



As reported, within the framework of the project, two cycles of research into the aerodynamics of the aircraft have already passed, which resulted in a modification of the layout of the Elephant. The fuselage was enlarged for the purpose of transporting bulky cargo, the fairing of the wing-to-fuselage joint was reduced, it received new pylons of improved profile with engine nacelles corresponding to the PD-35 engine, and several options for wingtips.

Until the end of this year, the aircraft model with new elements is being studied in the T-106 variable density wind tunnel.

As previously reported, the design of the latest transport aircraft "Elephant" began in 2016 by order of the Russian Ministry of Industry and Trade. The project involves the creation of an aircraft according to the high-wing scheme with the possibility of loading through the bow. The carrying capacity of the aircraft should be 180 tons, flight range up to 7 thousand kilometers, speed - up to 850 km/h. The aircraft should be fitted with new PD-35 turbofan engines.

Other parameters (preliminarily): length - 82,3 meters, height - 24 meters, wingspan - from 87,1 to 88,3 meters, depending on the version. The maximum takeoff weight of a promising transport aircraft will be from 490 to 499 tons, and the empty weight will be 214 or 222 tons. In the future, it should replace the An-124 Ruslan transport aircraft.

https://en.topwar.ru/198775-razrabotka-novogo-tjazhelogo-rossijskogo-transportnogo-samoleta-na-zamenu-an-124-ruslan-prodolzhaetsja.html

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:
I agree on the An-124, less about the An-12 replacement.

Both An178 and an 70 are not of the desired size (An178 is too small and while I like the An70, it is way too big to be a replacement for the An-12.

But yes, it make no sense for Russia to concentrate on a An124 replacement now, especially when they absolutely need a modern 20 to 30 tons payload cargo plane.
An124 just needs a modernisation, new internal systems and new engines (while it can be probably produced in the current version for a few years, provided that Zaporozhye is still able to produce the engines).

Yes, that is the matter, after the cancelation of Il-276 project, there are not a clear candidate to replace An-12

An-178 is not really much smaller than An-12, the length is simillar and size the body of the fuselage also , despite which, the wingspan is somewhat less and the payload at 18t vs.21t and probably the range is also little smaller


THe data are wrong, payload C-390 is 26t and An-72 is 6t


Discarding that Russia build one new airplane from zero, the questions about the replacement of An-12 are:

- turbo fan plane or jet
- One Antonov after the war or a foreigng existing one built under license


the current options are:

Turbo fan:
Y-9 (chinese improved An-12)
An-70

Jet:
An-178
C-390 (Brasil as a BRICS country can be interesting to be a parthner in some military areas)



The main data according to the wiki

An-12 : Length: 33m / Payload: 21t / MTOW: 61t / Ferry RANGE Max Fuel: 5500 Km / Max fuel: 22t

An-178 : L: 32m / P: 18t / MTOW: 51t / FRMF: 5300 Km / Max fuel: 14,5t
Y-9 : L: 33m / P: 25t / MTOW: 65t / FRMF: 5700 Km / Max fuel: 23t
C-390  L: 35m / P: 26t / MTOW: 87t/ FRMF: 6300 Km / Max fuel: 23t
An-70: L:41m / P:47t / MTOW: 145t /  FRMF: 8000 Km / Max Fuel 38t



Of course the Y-9 is the most similar and compatible,

An-178 is somewhat ligther although but it does not seem important if it is only about domestic flights of regional range
Perhaps the PS-90A engines could be attached to it,
An-178 also has the adventage that production can be easily started in Voronezh where An-148 was produced

As for the C-390, it is the most interesting, I don't know if the Russian engines could also be attached to it to facilitate logistics

The An-70 is certainly somewhat larger in size and carries much more cargo, perhaps it would be more expensive to maintain, but it could serve to enhance the transport regiments of the military districts and fleets as the An-12 and similar aircraft certainly  nowadays  is a bit insufficient for Russia
Some western countries have replaced C-130 for A-400M that is very similar in size and performance to An-70, except for the max payload , that probably is oversized in AN--70


What are your views on these possible aircraft for the replacement of the An-12 ?

LMFS wrote:The development of a new Russian heavy transport aircraft to replace the An-124 Ruslan continues

The project of the new heavy Russian transport aircraft "Elephant", created to replace the An-124 "Ruslan",
Other parameters (preliminarily): length - 82,3 meters, height - 24 meters, wingspan - from 87,1 to 88,3 meters, depending on the version.

https://en.topwar.ru/198775-razrabotka-novogo-tjazhelogo-rossijskogo-transportnogo-samoleta-na-zamenu-an-124-ruslan-prodolzhaetsja.html

82 meters length ?
88 meters wingspan ?

this is the size of An-225, Buran space shuttle program will be resumed?
this is nonsensical, is the USSR back ?