Tsavo... why do you think creating a production base for an ancient plane like an An-22 would be cheaper and easier than putting the Il-106 into production early perhaps with reduced power engines to start with but intended to later be replaced by more suitable engines?
A factory to make An-22s would not be much good for making much else and the time it would take to digitise the design fully so it could be produced means a delay likely longer than any delay for any engine.
Making the Il-106 and perhaps scaling the Slon so it is essentially a bigger Il-106 is the best solution with an even bigger model for the An-225s job.
You stated the problem is numbers and that they probably wont make Slon in enough numbers to justify the design costs... well the costs of reviving an old design like the An-22 will cost MORE... because the design can't be scaled for reuse so all money spent on putting the An-22 back into production will only go to that.
Spending money on a family of aircraft for the An-22 replacement, the An-124 replacement and the An-225 replacement makes more sense and is much more efficient because you solve three problems with solutions that are related and therefore cheaper because solutions are reused.
A 100-110 ton capacity Il-106 with reduced fuel transport can replace both teh An-22 and the An-124 in its original version (120 ton capacity).
The new Slon with a 180 ton capacity will be an excellent replacement for the heavier later An-124 that could carry 150 tons in its upgraded version... and could also be used to carry similar loads over much greater distances.
An upgraded version designed for external payloads can replace the An-225 and old VMT transports... but you wont need more than a couple such designs so it makes no sense to make it a unique design... making it part of a family means its design is quicker and easier and cheaper.
In terms of engines they could start production of the Il-106 early with four engine positions and use 18 ton thrust PS-90A3 engines to begin with and its performance will be rather similar to the Il-476... maybe 70 ton payloads to start with but greater internal volume for larger (bulky) loads.
Within a few years the PD-35 will be ready and they can swap the four older engines for two PD-35s which should allow full spec performance, while those same PD-35 engines on the Slon would allow the 180 ton payload capacity with four engines (which actually would provide similar thrust to the An-225, but without the external drag of a large outsized external payload...)
The An-225 replacement wouldn't actually need more power... a larger wing perhaps even a smaller fuselage shaped to carry large items externally on its back and a huge H shaped tail structure and four PD-35 engines would actually get the job done without the enormous fuel consumption of the An-225...
The Il-106 could be speeded up with the wing from the Il-476 which can already mount the 18 ton thrust engines currently available, and design work can start for a twin engined PD-35 version.
The Il-476 could be further upgraded with a PD-20 or 22 later on to improve rough field performance, and perhaps a turboprop engine of a new type to allow An-70 like performance during air drops...
The Il-476 has a payload of 62 tons, so I don't see the need for any An-22
The An-22 was a very popular solid aircraft that they kept using as long as they could, but I agree trying to put it back into production now would not make any sense at all.
About "IL-106", this was a old soviet project, I dont know why some people still talks about that.
If some in this way is made, the most probable the name will be other.
It was developed in the 1990s as a direct equivalent to the US C-17 and was looking very competitive and was killed by Yeltsin... presumably at the suggestion of Bill Clinton and his cronies. It was intended to replace the An-22 and is still the best available option for that job, though upgrades and improvements should certainly be applied the basic design requirements have not really changed... the main issue today is the engine.
I very much doubt that something like this will be done again, especially in Russia, which does not need them.
It is not likely that Russia develops an expensive project of new aircraft for only 35 or 40 units and that including some orders from the civil companies that currently operate the An-124.
With proper maintenance and limited use, the An-124 can be in service until 2045 or 2050
The world wide market for a C-17 that cost maybe $80 million dollars with more range and more payload would be enormous if politics were ignored, but even ignoring politics its prospects actually look rather good.
I lean more towards a new MRTT version of the Il-96, with more powerful engines and a payload of 90t or so.
This aircraft is already in production and retake the MRTT Il-96TZ variant would be quite cheap compared to developing a new aircraft
The Il-96 is a civilian airliner and would be more comparable to the cargo versions of a 747 than a proper roll on roll off military transport.
There is likely need for both, but not by the Russian military.
In this moment Russia urgently needs a replacement for An-12, that is in its final stage.
In my accounts , by 2020 only remains about 50 as much in operation, ad every year the number will decrease and decrease.
Of course this may be partially resolved temporarily with the use of several Il-76MD in mixed transport regiments, but it is not ideal.
Totally agree... to the point where I think perhaps production of the Il-276 and the Tu-330 would make sense...
they were stored out in the open for years & the article I posted on prev. page stated that to bring most of them to flight status would cost as much as getting new planes. They r good for cannibalizing & scrapping.
They have the capacity to make new An-124s, but they are a stopgap aircraft till fully Russian aircraft are ready... there is no need to cannibalise aircraft in storage, in fact that makes no sense at all because they make Russian parts for everything except the engines so taking parts from old airframes that are not parts from engines or actually engines means you would be putting non Russian parts on new planes... it would make more sense to put those parts into production and replace worn out parts with new Russian parts.
Russia could make them w/o any Ukrainian participation.
There would be little value in ending up with new production An-22s... even with a full redesign and upgrade and putting it into production... it would be cheaper to put the Il-106 into production with upgrades and improvements...
IMO, such as successful plane should have a new lease on life.
I think so too but not at the cost of holding back new Russian planes that could also be successful.
The An-22 was a very good plane but the Il-106 could be very good as well... and is much newer from the ground up, and from teh press releases they are further improving the design.... from what I remember it was ready for preserial production when the Americans forced the Russians to kill it. The same way Hunter Biden was not investigated for fraud in the Ukraine... fire the people involved and kill off the investigation (further development and production) or no loans of money to you...
Made sense at the time... who would buy a Russian transport then with a hostile US opposing anyone who considered it... now though... things are different.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
franco
