An-124 Strategic Transport: News

Tsavo Lion wrote:It wasn't that hard to restart the IL-76/78 production in its latest version; the IL-106 is an entirely new plane, unlike the An-124 is going to be.

IL-76 never fully stopped production, there were a lot of mod versions of it. I am not 100% sure the IL-106 is entirely new or if it is based on the IL-76. If its completly clean sheet then it would be the a similar effort but you get a new design..

The Il-76s were all produced in Tashkent before this production run started at Ulyanovsk, & there's a bigger difference between the IL-476 & the IL-106 designs. Similar to An-12 vs. An-22.

Actually there is some unclarity on what the Il106 will be.

There are at least 3 possibility:

1)a modernized An124 under new name to avoid issues

2) a modernized version of the project from the early 90s, that was a cargo plane with 80 tons payload and a cargo bay 4.6 m wide (against the 3.2 of the il-76 and the 6.4 of the An124). It was supposed be powered by 4 turbofan engines with 18-20 tons of takeoff thrust... in this case probably the 17.6 tons thrust PS-90A1 could be acceptable at the beginning until the geared turbofan PD18R will be ready (and that could even allow a larger payload and range)

3) a brand new aircraft with about 80-100 tons payload powered by 2 PD35 engines (basically a scaled down Slon)

That is what I mean, look at the amount of programs Ilyushin/UAC Transport is involved in:

UAC is a big organisation that includes all the Soviet aircraft design bureaus except Antonov...

To make things even more complicated, all of them are urgent or rather "needed for yesterday"

That is not true. The An-124 replacements are not urgent... the Il112 and Il114 are progressing well to replace the Antonov twin props and the only other urgent plane is the replacement for the An-12, but as I mentioned... Tupolev can make Tu-330s to ease that problem, but long term the Il-276 should be a very good plane too.

So this is a tricky situation they are in, and as you say some planes will start to fall from the sky sooner than later, but there is simply no capability to get all of those projects ready in parallel.

The Il-96, Il-106, and Slon are all waiting on the PD-35, so until that engine is ready there is no actually much progress that can be made on those planes.

It may take also the roles of smaller planes like An-12 in case of critical condition of the fleet.

Without the needed engines for the other aircraft the priority should be the Il-276 because it uses the same engines as the Il-476 which are in production.

The whole idea of scaling down the Il-476 to replace the An-12 is a clever idea and was supposed to save time and money... well lets see them show that.

As to the new models that need to be designed, will they be capable to develop three of them (276/106/Slon) at the same time or will they give the smaller of them to Tupolev and the medium to Myasishchev? Possible since it will be a huge amount of work...

I would think the entire concept of the 276 suggest the company that is making the 476 should make it... the 106 was practically designed and ready to go... but now it waits for the PD-35 so giving it to another company will only slow the process I would think, and Slon is not really urgent at all and is also waiting for PD-35 engines.

I would say getting Tupolev to start building Tu-330s would be the best solution in easing urgency for the Il-276 but otherwise most other things seem to be on track or waiting for an engine.

I don't understand the il-96-400m project to be honest. Why?

A very good aircraft that could be made up to date and useful with new engines.

The cost of designing a new aircraft from scratch for the same engines would be expensive and would take 8 years.

This new aircraft with the Chinese is more for China than for Russia it seems.

I have always said Russia cannot just match the west, just with their military equipment, they need to deliver a peerless product.

Russian products will be cheaper.

The west is becoming more and more difficult to deal with.

That leaves Il-106, Slon and An-124 which basically do the same job and have massive overlaps

Restarting production of An-124 is most logical and efficient way to solve that problem

Why restart An-124 production... how many more do they need without a Russian engine? And when they have Russian engines why build Ukrainian planes?

I understand the factory that makes An-124s wants to make An-124s, but why not convert them to make Il-106s instead.... a smaller lighter aircraft with almost the same payload range capacity which is closer to the loads it will normally be carrying.

The An-22 was very popular because it was smaller and lighter and cheaper to operate.

With PD-35 engines the Il-106 will be smaller and lighter and cheaper to operate too.... and Russian.

Yeah but the new AN-124 is also a paper plane as they will not be able to build it in the same way. Look at what it is taking to get the TU160 production restarted.

The An-124 was a good plane but its engines are old and its design is Ukrainian and they are petty .

Experience of using the An-124 has led to modifications... the first ones carried 120 ton payloads and upgraded ones 150 tons... which suggests there is a niche for heavier payloads. They also kept operating An-22s long after other countries stopped using large long range aircraft with propellers, because its 80 ton capacity was useful.

So putting that together they decided they wanted a replacement for the An-22 and the An-124 going forward... mainly because of the bullshit they were getting from Antonov.

The Il-106 replaces and exceeds the An-22 but needs a PD-35 engine... two in fact. the Slon also needs the PD-35 as well... four of them.

Right now they can refurbish the old Ukrainian engines the An-124 uses so they can keep operating those for a while, but I suspect use of them increased as the An-22s left service.

The Russian company that built An-124s want to make planes... I can understand that... maybe they should be converting to making Il-476 aircraft and eventually can convert to Il-276s which they are going to need a lot of to replace the An-12s which are nearing the end of their lives.

Actually there is some unclarity on what the Il106 will be.

If one is the case then there should be no delay, because modernised An-124s are ready... though it would probably be called Il-124...

The third option sounds best to me, though the Il-106 being the older design I would say Slon is a scaled up Il-106... it makes sense to have related designs for what is essentially the same job with different max weights and different engines...

PapaDragon wrote:
Il-114 and Il-76-90A are complete

I am not referring only to the design task, but to what comes afterwards, which is often more labour and resource intensive. The Il-114 has still all the tests ahead, then setting up the production, then trainign and servicing the plane. A huge amount of work.

As to the Il-76, they are struggling badly for years to reach a minimally acceptable production rate, they have failed until now and only this year the serial production is starting proper. They already said that producing 10 units per year is going to be challenging, they need dozens of planes so this will keep them busy until the end of the state armaments program at least.

Il-96-400 is modification of existing aircraft so it's doable without too much strain

They are changing the guts of the plane and that means thousands of components and assemblies that need to be specified, sourced, qualified, procured, installed and tested. That is a LOT of work, even when I agree the risk is smaller than with a completely new model.

Il-276 is priority clean sheet project which has to be completed at all costs

Sure, but they are still thinking about Tupolev, because the work load at Il is simply surreal currently.

That leaves Il-106, Slon and An-124 which basically do the same job and have massive overlaps

Restarting production of An-124 is most logical and efficient way to solve that problem

I guess they are entertaining different possibilities to solve the strategic airlifting issue, also considering the civilian needs, the difficulties created by Ukraine and the substitution of the Antei. The topic is complicated. If they restart the An-124, they need an engine that they don't have currently and they would need to see what happens with Volga-Dnieper in terms of international operations and spares. That would not solve the need to replace the An-22.

I think they will overhaul the -124 f the VTA and use their engine spares for them while the NK-23D is prepared, that will give them the ca. ten years they need to design and test in parallel the Slon for super-heavy lift and the Il-106 or equivalent to have a plane that can operate from austere runways but still has a bigger capacity than the Il-76.

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:Actually there is some unclarity on what the Il106 will be.

There are at least 3 possibility:

1)a modernized An124 under new name to avoid issues

2) a modernized version of the project from the early 90s, that was a cargo plane with 80 tons payload and a cargo bay 4.6 m wide (against the 3.2 of the il-76 and the 6.4 of the An124). It was supposed be powered by 4 turbofan engines with 18-20 tons of takeoff thrust... in this case probably the 17.6 tons thrust PS-90A1 could be acceptable at the beginning until the geared turbofan PD18R will be ready (and that could even allow a larger payload and range)

3) a brand new aircraft with about 80-100 tons payload powered by 2 PD35 engines (basically a scaled down Slon)

There is one additional possibility, the one based on the oval fuselage Myasishchev M-60. Apparently that design was great in terms of creating lift and it would be interesting to use it.

GarryB wrote:UAC is a big organisation that includes all the Soviet aircraft design bureaus except Antonov...

UAC Transport is essentially Ilyushin. For sure they will mobilize every resource they have available, still things need to be coordinated and ultimately there are not so many specialists in those types of plane remaining. Remember what they said about the Il-112V, essentially they fucked up with the weight of the plane because they only had juniors doing the work.

That is not true. The An-124 replacements are not urgent... the Il112 and Il114 are progressing well to replace the Antonov twin props and the only other urgent plane is the replacement for the An-12, but as I mentioned... Tupolev can make Tu-330s to ease that problem, but long term the Il-276 should be a very good plane too.

The -124 is being overhauled at high tempo as we speak, and the situation with the engines is concerning. If you consider the increased demands to the VTA that can be expected and the time you need to develop any solution, there is definitely an issue that needs to be addressed, be it with additional Il-76, re-engining or restart of the -124 or whatever. But the fact that they don't produce neither the plane nor the engines is a serious vulnerability. Both -112 and -114 are urgent and seriously delayed, the same happens with the -276. What I mean is that you cannot ignore one program to concentrate on the others, so you have to split scarce resources and that makes working even more difficult and less effective. It is not easy to handle.

The Il-96, Il-106, and Slon are all waiting on the PD-35, so until that engine is ready there is no actually much progress that can be made on those planes.

On the one hand, the 96-400M does not need the PD-35. On the other, the conceptual design of the panes that will use the PD-35 needs to be ready by the time the engines are available or you will lose additional time. And that process needs to be coordinated with the freezing of the engine specs at all times.

Without the needed engines for the other aircraft the priority should be the Il-276 because it uses the same engines as the Il-476 which are in production.

The whole idea of scaling down the Il-476 to replace the An-12 is a clever idea and was supposed to save time and money... well lets see them show that.

Stop gap solutions are far from optimal on the long run, I assume they would like to have the -276 as a plane designed specifically for the task, with 2x PD-14, and not some hack based on the -76. But we will see, maybe they are forced to cut some corners.

LMFS wrote:

Il-276 is priority clean sheet project which has to be completed at all costs

Sure, but they are still thinking about Tupolev, because the work load at Il is simply surreal currently.

That leaves Il-106, Slon and An-124 which basically do the same job and have massive overlaps

Restarting production of An-124 is most logical and efficient way to solve that problem

I guess they are entertaining different possibilities to solve the strategic airlifting issue, also considering the civilian needs, the difficulties created by Ukraine and the substitution of the Antei. The topic is complicated. If they restart the An-124, they need an engine that they don't have currently and they would need to see what happens with Volga-Dnieper in terms of international operations and spares. That would not solve the need to replace the An-22.

I think they will overhaul the -124 f the VTA and use their engine spares for them while the NK-23D is prepared, that will give them the ca. ten years they need to design and test in parallel the Slon for super-heavy lift and the Il-106 or equivalent to have a plane that can operate from austere runways but still has a bigger capacity than the Il-76.

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:Actually there is some unclarity on what the Il106 will be.

There are at least 3 possibility:

1)a modernized An124 under new name to avoid issues

2) a modernized version of the project from the early 90s, that was a cargo plane with 80 tons payload and a cargo bay 4.6 m wide (against the 3.2 of the il-76 and the 6.4 of the An124). It was supposed be powered by 4 turbofan engines with 18-20 tons of takeoff thrust... in this case probably the 17.6 tons thrust PS-90A1 could be acceptable at the beginning until the geared turbofan PD18R will be ready (and that could even allow a larger payload and range)

3) a brand new aircraft with about 80-100 tons payload powered by 2 PD35 engines (basically a scaled down Slon)

There is one additional possibility, the one based on the oval fuselage Myasishchev M-60. Apparently that design was great in terms of creating lift and it would be interesting to use it.

Yes I was thinking at Myasishchev just after I finished posting the message. That is another option as well. Personally I like it quite a lot, but it is less traditional and more challenging.

The more sensible thing would be a sort of mixed approach, like with something ready in a relatively short time (e.g. the 30/36 tons payload Tu 330 (for which engines already exist) and modernized An124 under new name (if engines will be available soon), and start working on the development of a next generation (Slon, Myasishchev cargo, an 22 replacement), so that it can be ready by the end of this decade.

In the mean while, having restarted An-124 production (even under a different name will definitely help also the setting up of the manufacturing and assembly for both the An22 replacement and for the Slon)

I am not referring only to the design task, but to what comes afterwards, which is often more labour and resource intensive. The Il-114 has still all the tests ahead, then setting up the production, then trainign and servicing the plane. A huge amount of work.

That is right but the UAC is a large organisation and it is not just Il doing it on its own.

The design bureaus also have contractors and companies they work with, as well as factories to actually build the things they design... an advantage of all the companies working together should be that they can share the load, so while the Ilyusion division of UAC might be doing all these jobs they can spread the actual production out so no factories are doing nothing or next to nothing.

I would think think the factory twiddling its thumbs wanting to make more An-124s would be better tasked with making brand new Il-106s for the moment... maybe even make two versions for the export market... a four engined model and a two engined model... the four engined model with 18 ton thrust engines with an 80 ton payload capacity and a future twin engined PD-35 equipped model with a new wing... they could start making the four engined model for domestic use to replace the An-22 and take the extra load off the An-124s, and then when the PD-35 is ready a twin engined 100 ton payload capacity model perhaps that could take off with 110 tons with reduced fuel load and inflight refuel after take off to essentially match the An-124 in a smaller lighter aircraft that would be cheaper to operate.

The Il-276 is also important because the An-12 are about to start expiring, but Tupolev could start producing Tu-330s... but they need to start funding that soon if that is going to happen.

As to the Il-76, they are struggling badly for years to reach a minimally acceptable production rate, they have failed until now and only this year the serial production is starting proper.

They have had problems and are sorting them out. To prepare for Il-276 production they could set up a couple of extra production lines that could produce Il-276s for testing and Il-476s on their down time. The increase in production capacity for the Il-476 should get the number of aircraft they need to produce done quicker so some can be used for export orders but also some can be used to boost Il-276 production for domestic and export production too.

They are changing the guts of the plane and that means thousands of components and assemblies that need to be specified, sourced, qualified, procured, installed and tested. That is a LOT of work, even when I agree the risk is smaller than with a completely new model.

It is not hugely urgent really.

Sure, but they are still thinking about Tupolev, because the work load at Il is simply surreal currently.

I think giving them both the go ahead, because they are different enough to be useful in their own way. The Tu-330 is interesting but the Il-276 offers commonality and compatibility with the larger Il-476.

That leaves Il-106, Slon and An-124 which basically do the same job and have massive overlaps

I don't agree... the Il-106 is below the An-124 and should be cheaper to operate... especially the twin engined model, while the Slon is in a heavier weight class... the planes they are keeping in the long term are the Il-106 and the Slon so they will have the 60 ton class Il-476, the 100 ton class Il-106, and the 180 ton class Slon... so there is 60 tons plus between each aircraft... no overlap at all.

Remember what they said about the Il-112V, essentially they fucked up with the weight of the plane because they only had juniors doing the work.

Sounds like a cop out to me... when you have inexperienced people doing a project you get experienced people to go over their work to make sure there are no obvious mistakes.

I would add wasn't one of the light Antonov planes found to have a balance problem of about 2 tons in the nose too... sounds like an easy mistake to make... if not an obvious one... of course it could have been a change in weights somewhere else that was not properly balanced...

What I mean is that you cannot ignore one program to concentrate on the others, so you have to split scarce resources and that makes working even more difficult and less effective. It is not easy to handle.

I am not suggesting it is easy, but they don't have one set of engineers running from project to project like fire fighters fixing problems as they identify them.

What is critical is that aircraft that are no longer safe to fly get grounded... the features of smaller aircraft is their ability to land on rough airstrips and operate in more remote locations, but worst case scenario they could expand their transport options or look to improve runways to allow larger aircraft.

Lots of aircraft are due to expire shortly but they will know which ones get the most use and which ones whose use is going to increase over time.

Aircraft transport of armour and vehicles usually only happens to avoid land transport over third party countries... for instance the T-72s send to Serbia went on Il-76s... if they were going to Syria it would be much cheaper and much more efficient to send them by boat.

Many things transferred from one side of Russia to the other make sense to send by rail or boat most of the time.

Obviously the VDV need aircraft...

Stop gap solutions are far from optimal on the long run, I assume they would like to have the -276 as a plane designed specifically for the task, with 2x PD-14, and not some hack based on the -76. But we will see, maybe they are forced to cut some corners.

My understanding is the goal is commonality, so the Il-276 will have the same type of engines as fitted to the Il-476, but of course will only have 2 where as the Il-476 will have four. Otherwise the designs should be largely unified with the smaller lighter aircraft with a shorter fuselage and smaller wing, the cargo hold being the same dimensions except length which of course will be shorter.

The more sensible thing would be a sort of mixed approach, like with something ready in a relatively short time (e.g. the 30/36 tons payload Tu 330 (for which engines already exist) and modernized An124 under new name (if engines will be available soon), and start working on the development of a next generation (Slon, Myasishchev cargo, an 22 replacement), so that it can be ready by the end of this decade.

I agree except I would like to see the Il-106 fast tracked because as an An-22 replacement it will be cheaper to operate than a bigger heavier aircraft, but will fill a useful weight class... to start with it can be a four engined aircraft with 18 ton thrust engines with a payload of about 80 tons... if not the original engines of course... which could also be fitted to AN-124s as a replacement option.

I think the An-22 replacement and the An-12 replacements are the most urgent along with the An-24/26/72 replacements.

Production of the Il-276 makes sense but producing Tu-330s also make sense and would probably be interesting to former An-12 customers around the world looking at a replacement... because right now their choices are the expensive C-130J or some such letter, or an A400M which is also expensive, or something from Antonov which might be vapourware and your money disappears.

Slon is not hugely urgent and can wait till the PD-35 is ready.

In the mean while, having restarted An-124 production (even under a different name will definitely help also the setting up of the manufacturing and assembly for both the An22 replacement and for the Slon)

The Il-106 is the An-22 replacement and with its original engines they should start making it now instead of wasting time and money on more An-124s.

When PD-35s a twin engined Il-106 could be made that takes more of the An-124s load and then they can start looking at Slon with four PD-35s.

GarryB wrote:
I would think think the factory twiddling its thumbs wanting to make more An-124s would be better tasked with making brand new Il-106s for the moment... maybe even make two versions for the export market... a four engined model and a two engined model... the four engined model with 18 ton thrust engines with an 80 ton payload capacity and a future twin engined PD-35 equipped model with a new wing... they could start making the four engined model for domestic use to replace the An-22 and take the extra load off the An-124s, and then when the PD-35 is ready a twin engined 100 ton payload capacity model perhaps that could take off with 110 tons with reduced fuel load and inflight refuel after take off to essentially match the An-124 in a smaller lighter aircraft that would be cheaper to operate.

What you suggest would be ideal, but I would say without knowing the current status of the factory and its employees its hard to make that decision, also to what degree did they rely on any Ukranian imports to build the 124. (other then the engines we know off) can they use the new flight deck from the IL-76? In what state is the supply chain for resuming production? Are there any low hanging fruit for upgrades. Its in incredibly complex decision. Can't Russia offer to buy the Antonov name back from Ukranine for $10, after all it must really annoy Ukraine that their most famous and renown company has a Russian name.

GarryB wrote:That is right but the UAC is a large organisation and it is not just Il doing it on its own.

They are already helping, but in the end the transport aircraft specialists are not in Kamov or in MiG, they are at Il. For instance, all bureaus helped creating the documentation for the Tu-160, all factories produce pieces and assemblies for the different planes being manufactured by UAC independently of them doing the final assemply. All what you say is already happening, but you cannot create industrial might out of nothing in no time.

Here they explain the loss of market and capabilities in the past:

https://iz.ru/1133575/andrei-frolov-anastasiia-tyniankina/sbrosit-gruz-vernetsia-li-rossiia-v-lidery-eksporta-transportnoi-aviatcii

It is not hugely urgent really.

But it is, because all the time they don't have it they need to buy Western planes on which they can be blackmailed, apart from losing a huge amount of money to their enemies.

I think giving them both the go ahead, because they are different enough to be useful in their own way. The Tu-330 is interesting but the Il-276 offers commonality and compatibility with the larger Il-476.

If there is something they don't need right now, is yet another design to worry about...

so they will have the 60 ton class Il-476, the 100 ton class Il-106, and the 180 ton class Slon... so there is 60 tons plus between each aircraft... no overlap at all.

Exactly, and they will need to replace the Il-76 at some point in the future I guess...

Sounds like a cop out to me... when you have inexperienced people doing a project you get experienced people to go over their work to make sure there are no obvious mistakes.

I am just saying what Talikov explained. He lost his job later on so maybe you are right. In any case, the perfect oversight does not exist.

I am not suggesting it is easy, but they don't have one set of engineers running from project to project like fire fighters fixing problems as they identify them.

Are you sure? People tend to overestimate the amount of technical resources companies have...

Many things transferred from one side of Russia to the other make sense to send by rail or boat most of the time.

If you have the time, sure, but in order to gain the advantage on a conflict you need to amass troops faster than your enemy and that means airlift will be needed in the first hours and days, plus VDV as you say.

https://qn7veek3vy676ftip3x3nsvd5y--russtrat-ru.translate.goog/analytics/9-fevralya-2021-0010-2930

My understanding is the goal is commonality, so the Il-276 will have the same type of engines as fitted to the Il-476,

It is supposed to use the PD-14 from what I read, it makes sense, being a newer plane.

The Il-106 is the An-22 replacement and with its original engines they should start making it now instead of wasting time and money on more An-124s.

They need 10 years, minimum, and in the meantime the An-124 is going to be used harder than ever and need overhaul and pieces for the engines or new engines altogether.

BTW, to the planes discussed we need to add the Il-78MD-90A, A-50U, A-100, and the new tanker, transport and supersized transport versions of the Il-96, I was forgetting them too... tell me they are twiddling their thumbs

Airborne command post, then the A-60M flying laser, a ECM version of the Tu-214 or Il-76...

Hole wrote:Airborne command post, then the A-60M flying laser, a ECM version of the Tu-214 or Il-76...

The reconnaissance, AWACS and maritime patrol version of the Tu-204 too. They have like 20 models and versions to take care of between now and the next 10 years...

IMO the MS-21 will impact tu-204. They will very likely use the plateforms that are kept in hangar unused for specific roles build in small numbers like R version only if they make them before MS-21 is ready.

But ones MS-21 is ready they will use it. The models that will be bought in great numbers like MPA (maritime patrol armed) will be based on MS-21.

Then they will upgrade the tu-204 with MS-21 systems to standardize them.

What you suggest would be ideal, but I would say without knowing the current status of the factory and its employees its hard to make that decision, also to what degree did they rely on any Ukranian imports to build the 124.

My understanding is that they used to make An-124s and the upgrades were Russian... the only Ukrainian components are the engines and some parts in the engines are Russian anyway.

They are offering to make more An-124s simply because apart from the engines they are now fully Russianised.

In what state is the supply chain for resuming production? Are there any low hanging fruit for upgrades.

The companies in Russia that make parts or support the design are fine AFAIK, in fact they want production to restart because they probably want more work, but I would think it more valuable for them to be making more fully Russianized An-22 equivalents than Russianized An-124s... the problem is... have the goal posts of the Il-106 been moved to try to create something between the An-22 and An-124 to replace them both essentially, but to create a weight class above in the form of the Slon that might be an enlarged Il-106 with four PD-35s whereas the Il-106 has two... a sort of repeat of the Il-276/476 family.

Can't Russia offer to buy the Antonov name back from Ukranine for $10, after all it must really annoy Ukraine that their most famous and renown company has a Russian name.

That is not going to happen... Antonov is a brand name, one of the few Ukrainian brand names that has world wide recognition... they are not going to sell it to anyone... you don't sell a meal ticket for $10... their only chance for work is to under bid Russian companies looking for maintenance and support work for Antonov aircraft and other Soviet types of aircraft...

They are already helping, but in the end the transport aircraft specialists are not in Kamov or in MiG, they are at Il. For instance, all bureaus helped creating the documentation for the Tu-160, all factories produce pieces and assemblies for the different planes being manufactured by UAC independently of them doing the final assemply. All what you say is already happening, but you cannot create industrial might out of nothing in no time.

Here they explain the loss of market and capabilities in the past:

It is pretty clear that the civilian transport branch of UAC needs more design bureaus than just Ilyusion... they clearly need to add Myasishchev and Tupolev as components of that division too, the civilian branch has clearly been neglected and needs more resources and money spent on it.

But it is, because all the time they don't have it they need to buy Western planes on which they can be blackmailed, apart from losing a huge amount of money to their enemies.

The west is not going to ban Russian airlines from using western aircraft.... if Russian companies want Russian planes then they need to start funding development themselves... most of them seem happy using western planes for the moment which means it is not urgent compared with situations like the An-12 and smaller Antonovs running out of airframe life and actually urgently needing replacement.

The Russian military will fund solutions there... so it becomes the focus.

If there is something they don't need right now, is yet another design to worry about...

It is a ready to go aircraft design that will fill a gap in their inventory that is about to open up wide as An-12s are retired.

Being a 30-35 ton capacity transport makes it rather interesting on the international market with lots of potential.

Exactly, and they will need to replace the Il-76 at some point in the future I guess...

Look at how long the An-12s and C-130s have served... a replacement for the Il-476 is no where near the top of the list.

In any case, the perfect oversight does not exist.

No, it does not, which is why you make short term patches to continue and then longer term you sort out proper solutions.

Ooops the balance is wrong... we can't use this design it needs serious changes but adding ballast will allow us to complete all our other tests to find any other potential problems and then we can take a year or two to fix the balance problem and any other minor problems that crop up.

Once that is sorted out we will have a design that we can then put operational stuff in and test to see if it meets all the clients requirements and then start production.

Some people here seem to think.... OOOHHH NOOOO the balance is wrong... fire the managers and have the engineers all executed as enemies of the state... why are we unable to design planes any more...

Well designing anything is finding problems and applying solutions... there are normally lots of solutions for each problem, but the best solutions don't create more problems.

Are you sure? People tend to overestimate the amount of technical resources companies have...

The purpose of UAC is to reduce the number of managers... not the number of engineers.

If you have the time, sure, but in order to gain the advantage on a conflict you need to amass troops faster than your enemy and that means airlift will be needed in the first hours and days, plus VDV as you say.

They have lots of transports doing different things.... if it is urgent like a conflict... they can divert aircraft from other jobs to get this new job done, but most regions have all the equipment and armour and personnel that they need on site... the conflict in Georgia is a good example.

In the case of the Ukraine more forces were moved to the border in preparation but not urgently in a panic.

It is supposed to use the PD-14 from what I read, it makes sense, being a newer plane.

But by the time it gets them the Il-476 could be using PD-14s too.

They need 10 years, minimum, and in the meantime the An-124 is going to be used harder than ever and need overhaul and pieces for the engines or new engines altogether.

It was practically ready for building and testing the prototype in the late 1990s, they could build two or three prototypes now and test them and in two to three years time start producing them with their original engine that could also be used on An-124s if need be till replacement aircraft are ready...

BTW, to the planes discussed we need to add the Il-78MD-90A, A-50U, A-100, and the new tanker, transport and supersized transport versions of the Il-96, I was forgetting them too... tell me they are twiddling their thumbs

The UAC has to expand its transport and support aircraft branch to include other design bureaus, and I never said they were bored, but putting Ukrainian planes back into production is the opposite of what they should be doing... their focus should be on replacing them with Russian designs and getting rid of them from Russian service and in other countries around the world too.

Look at how long the An-12s and C-130s have served... a replacement for the Il-476 is no where near the top of the list.

Well, Russia planned that the An-70 will be ready in time, so now she needs a 4-5 dozen extra IL-476s to fill that gap, while China & the West have Y-9/20s, C-130Js & A400Ms.
Perhaps if An-124s production re-started, they would reduce the overall # of IL-476/106s needed.

GarryB wrote:It is pretty clear that the civilian transport branch of UAC needs more design bureaus than just Ilyusion... they clearly need to add Myasishchev and Tupolev as components of that division too, the civilian branch has clearly been neglected and needs more resources and money spent on it.

The transport branch is lead by Ilyushin but comprises already some other companies, none of them can bring in more resources than Il though. Tupolev has been already warned and in fact is being sued because of their delay with the Tu-160 IIRC, plus they have the PAK-DA too... there is glut of open projects in Russia that the industry has difficulty to digest, because of a compounded issue:

- The dead years have created a massive amount of needs to be satisfied
- The industry was almost killed and operates with a very reduced capability

It is what it is. They will overcome the situation, but as it happens with the shipbuilding industry, there is no point in closing the eyes and wishing it all is over. It will take years, investments, frustration and delays. Technical might is not created on a whim.

The west is not going to ban Russian airlines from using western aircraft....

Not while they think they can still sell, when they see the Russians are not going to buy further, they will screw them as hard as they can. And even if they hope for additional sales the US can decide it is time to disrupt air transportation in the country if they think the time has come to pull all stops. This can perfectly happen, if Russia does not get the 400M ready they cannot even start to overturn that situation.

The Russian military will fund solutions there... so it becomes the focus.

Yeah well, between extremely urgent and very urgent there can be nuances, but at least half of the projects if which we speak are needed now.

It is a ready to go aircraft design that will fill a gap in their inventory that is about to open up wide as An-12s are retired.

Being a 30-35 ton capacity transport makes it rather interesting on the international market with lots of potential.

I really envy how easy people outside of technical / industrial fields see things... designing, testing and producing a plane is a HUGE amount of work, critical in terms of safety and investments, and can only be undertaken if it is really necessary. You cannot start such programs because the plane is "nice to have". They must be absolute musts. Not that I say the Tu-330 is not ok, but bot Il-276 and Tupolev...seems a bit too much.

Look at how long the An-12s and C-130s have served... a replacement for the Il-476 is no where near the top of the list.

Sure. I just mean that maybe the Il-106 can replace the -76 in the long term.

Well designing anything is finding problems and applying solutions... there are normally lots of solutions for each problem, but the best solutions don't create more problems.

Of course. What I mean is that it takes time. When you are an experienced designer you see the problems coming and avoid them, when not, you have to learn by failing, simple as that.

The purpose of UAC is to reduce the number of managers... not the number of engineers.

In this case is not about reducing the number of engineers, on the contrary, about getting many more experienced designers to tackle the huge list of issues they are dealing with. This takes time and sometimes it is not even possible to be done, simply because there are not enough specialists in the country and you have to compete with other companies / branches of the economy for the best ones. Typically the best ones in aerospace went to Sukhoi, now there are other fields like UAV that very likely are attracting young guys. We are talking about thousands of highly skilled people that are needed, this is difficult for any country.

It was practically ready for building and testing the prototype in the late 1990s, they could build two or three prototypes now and test them and in two to three years time start producing them with their original engine that could also be used on An-124s if need be till replacement aircraft are ready...

They have to recreate documentation in the format that is compatible with production techniques now, plus update all outdated systems and maybe engines. They are not going to waste a huge amount of resources in reheating an already outdated design without bringing it to today's standards. And they have to produce and test it. This is many years work.

The UAC has to expand its transport and support aircraft branch to include other design bureaus, and I never said they were bored, but putting Ukrainian planes back into production is the opposite of what they should be doing... their focus should be on replacing them with Russian designs and getting rid of them from Russian service and in other countries around the world too.

We agree, the only comment I am making is that they have a lot of work beyond their current capabilities and that means delays and prioritization are going to be a constant for the next 5-7 years at least.

Perhaps if An-124s production re-started, they would reduce the overall # of IL-476/106s needed.

They are totally different weight classes... and honestly the ones they want to produce are the Il-476s and Il-106s because they are newer and smaller and cheaper to buy and cheaper to operate.

Russia can fill the gap by expanding production capacity for the Il-476 even further so that when there are enough Il-476s being produced any excess production capacity can start on Il-276 aircraft.

The An-124 production capacity could be used to make Il-106.

It is what it is. They will overcome the situation, but as it happens with the shipbuilding industry, there is no point in closing the eyes and wishing it all is over. It will take years, investments, frustration and delays. Technical might is not created on a whim.

Which is why, as I said, they have to ruthlessly prioritise... the An-12 is going first so Il-276 is more of a priority than An-124s, and the fact that the Il-106 is smaller and lighter and therefore likely cheaper to operate like the An-22 is then that would get priority over building more Ukrainian aircraft.

Not while they think they can still sell, when they see the Russians are not going to buy further, they will screw them as hard as they can.

Which is good... it means when Russia has Russian alternatives the west will impose sanctions but those sanctions will only force Russian airlines to buy Russian planes and get rid of their western aircraft.

Not that I say the Tu-330 is not ok, but bot Il-276 and Tupolev...seems a bit too much.

They are fruit from different trees... imagine they don't bother with the Tupolev and all of a sudden demand for the Il-276 is enormous but they miss out because there is not enough production capacity... remember right now the alternatives are enormously expensive C-130 variants that are slower that these Russian jets, and A400Ms, for which the Tu-330 is a closer match, but also likely different enough to be interesting.

Sure. I just mean that maybe the Il-106 can replace the -76 in the long term.

It seems to me that if they had lots of An-22s that it would be the An-124 being retired and the lighter cheaper An-22 continuing to operate.

Based on that I would think the smaller lighter cheaper Il-476 will be preferred to the heavier Il-106, which in turn will be preferred to the heavier and more expensive An-124.

When you are an experienced designer you see the problems coming and avoid them, when not, you have to learn by failing, simple as that.

Experienced means they have already failed a couple of times, or learned from someone else who has failed.

We are talking about thousands of highly skilled people that are needed, this is difficult for any country.

Now that there is huge demand perhaps the wages will rise to reflect that to attract workers.

They have to recreate documentation in the format that is compatible with production techniques now, plus update all outdated systems and maybe engines. They are not going to waste a huge amount of resources in reheating an already outdated design without bringing it to today's standards. And they have to produce and test it. This is many years work.

They have had 20 years to do that...

On the YouTube channel of the TK "Zvezda", a video of the training of the crew of the heaviest aircraft of the VTA of the Russian Aerospace Forces - An-124 "Ruslan", has appeared. As stated in the description for the video, the crew worked out piloting the aircraft with one "failing" engine out of four installed on the aircraft. The exercises were held in the Tver region.

According to the Zvezda reporter, who was on board the plane, although the An-124 is very large, it is operated by only two people - the commander and the pilot. At the same time, the crew includes several more people: navigators and engineers.

Most of that footage was of Il-76s...

Still nice though.

This is why they love that plane

Rob Lee
@RALee85
·
9 Jan
The single An-124 heavy transport aircraft carried 7 BMD-2 airborne armored vehicles from the 98th Airborne Division and a KamAZ truck. 114/
https://tvzvezda.ru/news/202219831

JohninMK wrote:This is why they love that plane

This is why I love that plane.

I remember at Farnborough Airshow in the late 1980s or early 1990s the pilot of one of the An-124s said that the lead pilot from the Red Arrows display team said to him he would love to fly a display with the An-124... to which the An-124 pilot replied, you and your team are welcome to display inside my aircraft...

I remember the video of the airshow showed a famous pub on the flightline when the An-124 came overhead with all the people in the street looking up in awe.

A few years later the An-225 landed there and a shot from the same pub where the commentator said... now this really is the big one...

The development of a promising heavy transport aircraft "Elephant" continues

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4552878.html

The fact remains taht the An-124 is not a new aircraft and while it has been upgraded, it was designed and built quite a few decades ago.

It is a Soviet plane but the engines and essential design are Ukrainian... time for an all new Russian replacement.

An important point is that while the An-124 was a very useful aircraft the An-22 was also very popular too and its 80 ton payload capacity and good range made it a useful aircraft between the 40 ton capacity Il-76 and the 120 ton capacity An-124.

The new Il-476 is a 60 ton capacity aircraft and this Slon (elephant) design is to be a 180 ton capacity aircraft meaning a rather big gap created by the An-22.

I would think a shortened Slon with a smaller wing and only 2 x PD-35s might fill the gap that the Il-106 would fill, but then if it is not urgent to get rid of the An-124s they could convert them to twin PD-35s and reduce their payload weight class to say 90-110 tons... but I suspect their goals of removing Soviet systems (not just Ukrainian but also Russian et al) from service should lead to Il-106 and Slon and Il-476 and Il-276 and perhaps the Tu-330 becoming the backbone of the military fleet.

I would think it would be worth while looking at an H tailed model of either Slon or Il-106 to provide the capabilities the An-225 used to provide, the engines of the An-124 and An-225 were the 24 ton thrust Ukrainian engines so the An-124 with 4 engines had 96 tons of thrust, while the An-225 with 6 engines had 144 tons of thrust... and a much bigger wing area.

With PD-35s generating 35 tons of thrust each the Slon would have 140 tons of thrust just with the four engines and of course rather lower drag so an H tail to allow bulky payloads on the back of the aircraft might be all that is needed to do the job.

The An-225 had a payload potential of something like 250 tons, but even Buran was only 120 tons fully loaded... most of the outsized loads carried externally on large aircraft for the space agency were empty and could be carried by bombers with payloads of 15 tons or less so weight is not really an issue.

GarryB wrote:The fact remains taht the An-124 is not a new aircraft and while it has been upgraded, it was designed and built quite a few decades ago.

It is a Soviet plane but the engines and essential design are Ukrainian... time for an all new Russian replacement.

An important point is that while the An-124 was a very useful aircraft the An-22 was also very popular too and its 80 ton payload capacity and good range made it a useful aircraft between the 40 ton capacity Il-76 and the 120 ton capacity An-124.

The new Il-476 is a 60 ton capacity aircraft and this Slon (elephant) design is to be a 180 ton capacity aircraft meaning a rather big gap created by the An-22.

I would think a shortened Slon with a smaller wing and only 2 x PD-35s might fill the gap  that the Il-106 would fill, but then if it is not urgent to get rid of the An-124s they could convert them to twin PD-35s and reduce their payload weight class to say 90-110 tons... but I suspect their goals of removing Soviet systems (not just Ukrainian but also Russian et al) from service should lead to Il-106 and Slon and Il-476 and Il-276 and perhaps the Tu-330 becoming the backbone of the military fleet.

I would think it would be worth while looking at an H tailed model of either Slon or Il-106 to provide the capabilities the An-225 used to provide, the engines of the An-124 and An-225 were the 24 ton thrust Ukrainian engines so the An-124 with 4 engines had 96 tons of thrust, while the An-225 with 6 engines had 144 tons of thrust... and a much bigger wing area.

With PD-35s generating 35 tons of thrust each the Slon would have 140 tons of thrust just with the four engines and of course rather lower drag so an H tail to allow bulky payloads on the back of the aircraft might be all that is needed to do the job.

The An-225 had a payload potential of something like 250 tons, but even Buran was only 120 tons fully loaded... most of the outsized loads carried externally on large aircraft for the space agency were empty and could be carried by bombers with payloads of 15 tons or less so weight is not really an issue.

Il-106 should be a plane similar to C-17, capable for unpaved landing strips, probably including some interesting design features for that operational concept and maybe even with lift-generating elliptic fuselage from the Myasishchev M-60

https://aviation21.ru/pak-vta-tyazhyolyj-transportnyj-samolyot-s-fyuzelyazhem-ovalnogo-secheniya/



M-60VTM, 80 t payload, 4000 km range. Position of the engines may be specially good to operate from unprepared runways

As to restrictions of "ukrainian" equipment, like D-18T engines for the Ruslan for instance, things are changing rather quick

LMFS wrote:

GarryB wrote:The fact remains taht the An-124 is not a new aircraft and while it has been upgraded, it was designed and built quite a few decades ago.

It is a Soviet plane but the engines and essential design are Ukrainian... time for an all new Russian replacement.

An important point is that while the An-124 was a very useful aircraft the An-22 was also very popular too and its 80 ton payload capacity and good range made it a useful aircraft between the 40 ton capacity Il-76 and the 120 ton capacity An-124.

The new Il-476 is a 60 ton capacity aircraft and this Slon (elephant) design is to be a 180 ton capacity aircraft meaning a rather big gap created by the An-22.

I would think a shortened Slon with a smaller wing and only 2 x PD-35s might fill the gap  that the Il-106 would fill, but then if it is not urgent to get rid of the An-124s they could convert them to twin PD-35s and reduce their payload weight class to say 90-110 tons... but I suspect their goals of removing Soviet systems (not just Ukrainian but also Russian et al) from service should lead to Il-106 and Slon and Il-476 and Il-276 and perhaps the Tu-330 becoming the backbone of the military fleet.

I would think it would be worth while looking at an H tailed model of either Slon or Il-106 to provide the capabilities the An-225 used to provide, the engines of the An-124 and An-225 were the 24 ton thrust Ukrainian engines so the An-124 with 4 engines had 96 tons of thrust, while the An-225 with 6 engines had 144 tons of thrust... and a much bigger wing area.

With PD-35s generating 35 tons of thrust each the Slon would have 140 tons of thrust just with the four engines and of course rather lower drag so an H tail to allow bulky payloads on the back of the aircraft might be all that is needed to do the job.

The An-225 had a payload potential of something like 250 tons, but even Buran was only 120 tons fully loaded... most of the outsized loads carried externally on large aircraft for the space agency were empty and could be carried by bombers with payloads of 15 tons or less so weight is not really an issue.

Il-106 should be a plane similar to C-17, capable for unpaved landing strips, probably including some interesting design features for that operational concept and maybe even with lift-generating elliptic fuselage from the Myasishchev M-60

https://aviation21.ru/pak-vta-tyazhyolyj-transportnyj-samolyot-s-fyuzelyazhem-ovalnogo-secheniya/



M-60VTM, 80 t payload, 4000 km range. Position of the engines may be specially good to operate from unprepared runways

As to restrictions of "ukrainian" equipment, like D-18T engines for the Ruslan for instance, things are changing rather quick

Well the Slon is very promising, but it is at least 7 or 8 years away from serial production. And also the new il-106 still requires some time.

The An-124, could be put in production even next year, if the engines from Zaporozhye were available...