Russian Civil Aviation: News

KomissarBojanchev wrote:My 2c:
If Russia can develop a 5gen fighter then there is absolutely no way or excuse it won't create a competitive airliner of any size.

Military and civilian industry and market are nothing alike.

Your comparison is flawed to put mildly.

Even if Russia could develop the Superjet with 100% domestic parts; I don't see what the point or benefit would be.

Better a plane with 40% domestic parts of which 100 units are produced and sold
Than a plane with 100% domestic parts of which 10 units are produced and sold

In which case would Russian industry, factories, workers, etc... overall have more orders and profits?
The maths isn't difficult.

Insisting on the overwhelming majority of parts being Russian - would amount to subsidisation and protectionism of one's own industries and enterprises, opting for their products even if they're inferior, less reliable or more expensive.
That makes sense to a degree to support your own high-tech industry, especially for military products, or for less sensitive, complicated machines.. but there's a reason no-one's doing that sort of thing for large civilian airliners.
Boeing, a US company (the most industrialised nation in the world), has a selection of modern planes available and none of them rely 100% on domestic American products; and in fact the more complicated the plane gets, the more it relies on other suppliers from all corners of the globe.

Civilian airliners are expensive. Very expensive; to both build and then keep running. It makes sense to buy the most cost-effective equipment you can get. Considering the hideous amount of kerosene that today's commercial airliners burn every flight; a Western engine that only uses 98% of the fuel a Russian engine does to produce the same amount of thrust would amount already to a massive increase in operational savings for the airline that would employ such aircraft; and naturally such a plane would be much more appealing to them. Likewise, landing gear and other mechanical sub-systems that need to be maintained and have their parts replaced less often would also offer a decrease in operational costs.
Even better if some of these parts suppliers can come aboard as partners to your project, and become co-investors in your airliner - mitigating your own costs and risks a little, or otherwise carry out your marketing needs abroad, cover some R&D for you or act as consultants for this and that. This BTW is exactly the case with the Sukhoi Superjet and it's worldwide alliance of suppliers and foreign partners.
Can you imagine any Russian company doing something like this?
lol

Apart from cost-effectiveness and various side-benefits - well simply put - the importance of the actual technical & operational characteristics of a huge, complicated, strategically important and potentially very profitable machine such a large civilian airliner; far outweighs any other considerations such as subsidising an extra few of your own domestic companies with orders or whatever. Civilian aerospace is a very competitive industry. And if you don't have the best plane - you won't sell - and all of your sub-contractors and suppliers won't sell either; no matter if none of them are Russian or all are Russian - they simply won't make any money and all the investment into your civilian airliner project will be lost too.
This is why the parts and suppliers chosen for the job must be the highest quality and most cost-effective; and it doesn't matter a damn or a dime where the hell they come from. It all comes to down to either your multi-billion dollar investment project failing or succeeding.

Everyone throws around the concept that the reason why sales are low is because the domestic variant is of lower quality, but the problem is, there really isn't much documentation stating that. On paper, the quality of the Russian made goods is the same as any other brand, maybe with some few exceptions where avionics is indeed somewhat behind. But my major thinking on this is that they move to a mixture of domestic and foreign is to have sales overseas with countries that are interested in purchasing a cheaper aircraft but have at least the sources for spare parts closer to home. Problem with this thinking though, is what reality will show, that majority of sales are of domestic consumption in Russia, and not abroad, with maybe 50 or so jets abroad, while rest are at home. As an example, the SSJ-100, they had problems with foreign suppliers, just like what people love to say about Russian domestic. So if that is the case, then both are the same. How would brake systems or landing gear from lets saying domestic Russian source, be much different than counterpart? It appears that landing brakes and or braking systems on various other Russian jets seem to work, but somehow, it wouldn't for SSJ-100? I am not denying that maybe foreign one is good. But what about domestic?

There are lots of factors, but not much is said. So technically, everything is ending up with pure speculation and as soon as one mentions what could be an issue, everyone goes haywire about it. Some people are far too sensitive, and I am starting to think westerners are (especially when you question their industry).

TR1 wrote:

KomissarBojanchev wrote:My 2c:
If Russia can develop a 5gen fighter then there is absolutely no way or excuse it won't create a competitive airliner of any size.

Military and civilian industry and market are nothing alike.

Your comparison is flawed to put mildly.

Designing a military aircraft  is a lot more difficult since a lot higher flight performance has to be achieved and a lot more abilities have to be figured out how to be incorporated into the design effectively.

the main criteria for designing a passenger jet are:
fuel economy
cost effective maintenance
good safety rating
engine noise
passenger comfort(although this more has to do with the airline servicing than the aircraft)

The main criteria for designing a modern air superiority fighter are:
Powerful radar
reduced RCS not jeopardizing performance
weapons load
advanced weapons load
ability to perform various types of missions
ability to supercruise
supermaneuverability
high climb rate
good ability for situational awareness
ability to perform on unprepared landing strips
incorporation of helmet and IR targeting systems

Russia can more or less incorporate these features on numerous of their aircraft yet has trouble with  incorporating the required design criteria for it's passenger jets?

sepheronx wrote:Everyone throws around the concept that the reason why sales are low is because the domestic variant is of lower quality, but the problem is, there really isn't much documentation stating that.  On paper, the quality of the Russian made goods is the same as any other brand, maybe with some few exceptions where avionics is indeed somewhat behind.  But my major thinking on this is that they move to a mixture of domestic and foreign is to have sales overseas with countries that are interested in purchasing a cheaper aircraft but have at least the sources for spare parts closer to home.  Problem with this thinking though, is what reality will show, that majority of sales are of domestic consumption in Russia, and not abroad, with maybe 50 or so jets abroad, while rest are at home.  As an example, the SSJ-100, they had problems with foreign suppliers, just like what people love to say about Russian domestic.  So if that is the case, then both are the same.  How would brake systems or landing gear from lets saying domestic Russian source, be much different than counterpart?  It appears that landing brakes and or braking systems on various other Russian jets seem to work, but somehow, it wouldn't for SSJ-100?  I am not denying that maybe foreign one is good.  But what about domestic?

There are lots of factors, but not much is said.  So technically, everything is ending up with pure speculation and as soon as one mentions what could be an issue, everyone goes haywire about it.  Some people are far too sensitive, and I am starting to think westerners are (especially when you question their industry).

Il-114 how many orders?
An-140 how many orders?
An-148/158 how many orders?
Tu-204/214 how many orders?
Il-96 how many orders?
An-38 how many orders?

Compare that to the interest generated by the SSJ and MS-21. Enough said.

x2 Python.

Kommisar:

I never said a civilian plane is more difficult. It is a VASTLY different market that requires vastly different standards and production facilities, that Russia simply lacked/lacks. Russia has an advanced military automotive industry, the civilian industry is a joke. Similar reasons, but catching up in Civilian front is even harder.

Now if you wanna argue it, yes, Russia could probably build an equivalent to any Airbus or Being airliner. At what cost? In what timeframe? Those are the real problems.

Superjet was exactly the right way for Russia to start creating a modern airline industry again. They made what they could, and subcontracted out where it was advantageous to do so. And that is why it is already outproduced/ about to overproduce this year every other Russian post USSR airliner.

May I remind you guys there is a Superjet competitor that is almost "all Russian/Ukranian". The An-148. How is it selling again these days? Nuff said.

The natural progression is more Russian components in future airliners. If you are expecting an all or 90% Russian airliner, dream on. It won't happen in our lifetimes. Comparative advantages will not go away, astronomical development costs are here to stay.

flamming_python wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Everyone throws around the concept that the reason why sales are low is because the domestic variant is of lower quality, but the problem is, there really isn't much documentation stating that.  On paper, the quality of the Russian made goods is the same as any other brand, maybe with some few exceptions where avionics is indeed somewhat behind.  But my major thinking on this is that they move to a mixture of domestic and foreign is to have sales overseas with countries that are interested in purchasing a cheaper aircraft but have at least the sources for spare parts closer to home.  Problem with this thinking though, is what reality will show, that majority of sales are of domestic consumption in Russia, and not abroad, with maybe 50 or so jets abroad, while rest are at home.  As an example, the SSJ-100, they had problems with foreign suppliers, just like what people love to say about Russian domestic.  So if that is the case, then both are the same.  How would brake systems or landing gear from lets saying domestic Russian source, be much different than counterpart?  It appears that landing brakes and or braking systems on various other Russian jets seem to work, but somehow, it wouldn't for SSJ-100?  I am not denying that maybe foreign one is good.  But what about domestic?

There are lots of factors, but not much is said.  So technically, everything is ending up with pure speculation and as soon as one mentions what could be an issue, everyone goes haywire about it.  Some people are far too sensitive, and I am starting to think westerners are (especially when you question their industry).

Il-114 how many orders?
An-140 how many orders?
An-148/158 how many orders?
Tu-204/214 how many orders?
Il-96 how many orders?
An-38 how many orders?

Compare that to the interest generated by the SSJ and MS-21. Enough said.

Sales is one thing, but technically may be different. Boeing has had plenty of issues yet Russian companies still use them. Good marketing works too, and lets be honest, that is non-existent in Russia. There of course things in need to be fixed in domestic industry, but even Tu-204 had some foreign components in it as well, and it failed. SSJ was supposed to be an international success for Russian civil aviation, and it really isn't. Time will tell of its international success, but even Armenia wasn't happy with theirs, neither was Aeroflot.

Armenia returned them because they are broke.

They had some issues, and so did Aeroflot, but that is not at all unexpected for a new bird.

As far as international sales goes, be patient. The superjet is ALREADY a far bigger success than any previous Russian bird. Serial production has only ramped up, so there will be the potential to fulfill new orders within a fast time frame. They have work for years as is, so there is plenty of time to get new orders. Just 3 years ago the yearly production was 2 birds, 2012 was already 12 birds, and this year is going to be close to 20.

Modest? Yes.
Visible success compared to previous Russian civilian efforts? Absolutely.
Long live Pogosyan!

TR1 wrote:Armenia returned them because they are broke.

They had some issues, and so did Aeroflot, but that is not at all unexpected for a new bird.

As far as international sales goes, be patient. The superjet is ALREADY a far bigger success than any previous Russian bird. Serial production has only ramped up, so there will be the potential to fulfill new orders within a fast time frame. They have work for years as is, so there is plenty of time to get new orders. Just 3 years ago the yearly production was 2 birds, 2012 was already 12 birds, and this year is going to be close to 20.

Modest? Yes.
Visible success compared to previous Russian civilian efforts? Absolutely.
Long live Pogosyan!

Well, I hope it is true. And I hope for the sake of the Russian civil aviation industry, they find ways to move some of the production to local, cause face it, it is barely a Russian bird. Actually, with the amount of foreign components, it is probably about 20 - 30% Russian.

I also hope for the sake of the aircraft and its industry, that no blacklisting happens to them and that they don't end up with a tail between the legs cause they cannot purchase the 70 - 80% of the components they need. I really do not hope it happens. Because history shows that this stuff happens and the company is gonna get itself into trouble. But make as much money as you can now I suppose.

No, it is over 50% Russian.

The explicitly foreign sourced components are over 50% of the bird, but some of those components use Russian made parts. So if we look at it in terms of "what comes out of Russia" it is over 50% at least.

This is one of the biggest arguments against the SSJ, and it has been addressed by Russian aviation enthusiast pretty extensively.

Mind you that is more workload for Russia and income than from any previous civilian airliner, where supply lines were stretched out for years while they complete 2 airframes in 4 years.

An-148 is more "Russian" arguably than the Superjet, but between the numbers sold/built, from which plane is Russia benefiting most? Superjet of course. An-148 is needing MOD orders to stay alive. Some success.

Some (kinda) good news:

The government has planned the development of the aviation industry

The Russian government has prepared a plan for the development of the aviation industry until 2015. For its implementation will require more than 250 billion rubles: 180 000 000 000 incorporated in the federal budget, even 70 billion is expected to attract extra-budgetary sources. In addition to direct production and subsequent certification of aircraft, aircraft engines and equipment, the plan provides for financial assistance to the industry. Most of the funds be redistributed between the large integrated structures, "United Aircraft Corporation" (UAC) and controlled by GK "Rostekhnadzor" corporations.

I understand why they selected the P&W engines in the beginning, but the time table of release of test MS-21's, they will be ready after the PD-14 engines.  WHY use P&W then, when the whole purpose of the PD-14 was for this and other aircraft?

TR1 wrote:No, it is over 50% Russian.

The explicitly foreign sourced components are over 50% of the bird, but some of those components use Russian made parts. So if we look at it in terms of "what comes out of Russia" it is over 50% at least.

This is one of the biggest arguments against the SSJ, and it has been addressed by Russian aviation enthusiast pretty extensively.

Mind you that is more workload for Russia and income than from any previous civilian airliner, where supply lines were stretched out for years while they complete 2 airframes in 4 years.

An-148 is more "Russian" arguably than the Superjet, but between the numbers sold/built, from which plane is Russia benefiting most? Superjet of course. An-148 is needing MOD orders to stay alive. Some success.

If they were able to source some of those foreign components to domestic industry, then that is really good! I hope that is true regarding the SSJ-100 being 50% or more domestic. Cause last I checked, it was pretty much airframes and engines that were (semi) domestic.

The problem is not good marketing... an Australian airline would never consider a Russian aircraft... just like their government never considered Su-35s even though such an aircraft would have been ideal for them.

In lots of markets it is nothing to do with the product but the name on the side of the product that matters, but also the country behind the name as well. If you have good relations with the US like many countries do then you are most likely to select Boeing even if it is more expensive, look at C-17 sales... if the Il-476 had a cockpit made of solid gold it would still be cheaper than a C-17 and the five or six Il-476s you could buy for the price of one C-17 would be far more productive and useful than one C-17... yet C-17s are still purchased because it is really nothing to do with the aircraft at all and that is something Russia can't change.

What it has to do is accept it has lost its traditional market of the Warsaw Pact countries and focus on the non aligned countries first and pursuade them that their product will be better than an Airbus or Boeing in terms of support and relations that such purchases buy. It shouldn't be hard considering western diplomacy seems to consist of bombing those who dont do as they are told.

At the end of the day it will be Russian military purchases that subsidise the Russian civilian aircraft market just like the US and her allies military subsidise Boeing and French and Euro forces subsidise Airbus.

Once they build a base to grow from then they should be OK.

GarryB wrote:The problem is not good marketing... an Australian airline would never consider a Russian aircraft... just like their government never considered Su-35s even though such an aircraft would have been ideal for them.

In lots of markets it is nothing to do with the product but the name on the side of the product that matters, but also the country behind the name as well. If you have good relations with the US like many countries do then you are most likely to select Boeing even if it is more expensive, look at C-17 sales... if the Il-476 had a cockpit made of solid gold it would still be cheaper than a C-17 and the five or six Il-476s you could buy for the price of one C-17 would be far more productive and useful than one C-17... yet C-17s are still purchased because it is really nothing to do with the aircraft at all and that is something Russia can't change.

What it has to do is accept it has lost its traditional market of the Warsaw Pact countries and focus on the non aligned countries first and pursuade them that their product will be better than an Airbus or Boeing in terms of support and relations that such purchases buy. It shouldn't be hard considering western diplomacy seems to consist of bombing those who dont do as they are told.

At the end of the day it will be Russian military purchases that subsidise the Russian civilian aircraft market just like the US and her allies military subsidise Boeing and French and Euro forces subsidise Airbus.

Once they build a base to grow from then they should be OK.

X2, very good post.

I would wager that if they came up with a more consistent set of aircrafts for multipurpose, like Il-96 but with much more efficiency, build them for multipurposes - tanker, awacs, etc, then propose it to domestic airliners. It is just sad when domestic airliners fall for the scheme that "west is always better at everything" and purchase such aircrafts. I mean look, most domestic airliners use boeing in Russia. I think marketing has a lot to do with it, as they gain foothold in Russian market too.

The reason they bought Boeing and Airbus, is because the Russian industry had nothing as competative- end of story.

Look at the situation in the 90s. What did the Russian industry provide? It was behind seriously in interior comforts, modern digital avionics, turbofan civilian engines. Even a decent design like Tu-204 took years to get working and it was consistently behind the latest Airbus and Boeing offerings. Il-96 is a 4 engined bird at a time when 4 engines were moving out of style due to fuel burn and increasing reliance on twin-engine birds. Tu-334? lol, not even gonna adress that.
Why did nobody buy these guys? Even if they technically met or were close to what airlines wanted (Tu-204 could somewhat be described as such, Il-96 no way), there was the production issue. Timelines all slipped, there was utter lack of clarity on production status--- what airlines would be the ones to take the plunge and risk orders on unproven airframes when they could just buy (for likely cheaper) a well oiled Boeing or Airbus machine? There was no international support network, and hell due to so few orders the plants did not even want to make the birds quickly due to the way the subcontractor timelines were laid out.

So we gave either lagging or utterly-inadequate performance in a tight-fought market, a totally unreliable delivery and support scheme, and you guys expect a Russian airline company to go for that instead of ordering Boeing or Airbus? Please.

Superjet was exactly the right way to go size wise because it prevented competition with the big boys, a completion it would have lost. And no, no military orders to save a plane like the An-148 would have saved the capture.
Russia needs to develop a modern civilian aircraft industry as it is slowly doing today, and from that industry create actually competence and realistic offerings to domestic airlines and abroad. Then we can talk about challenging Boeing and Airbus-it wont come from piggybacking on military orders that much is assured.

Trying to mix military and civilian design is a terrible idea. The reason a modernized An-124 is being demanded by the civilian companies is they understand a 747-8 is more efficient for the vast majority of cargo runs. And the resurrection of the An-124 won't go foreward without civilian orders - the military doesn't care about efficiency and cost as much, and they can always modernize the current birds.

In how many decades do you think that the Russian civil aircraft industry will be able to produce passenger jet engines competitive to the ones made by General Electric  and Pratt and Whitney?

KomissarBojanchev wrote:In how many decades do you think that the Russian civil aircraft industry will be able to produce passenger jet engines competitive to the ones made by General Electric  and Pratt and Whitney?

Well, PD-14 is supposed to be same quality and performance of the latest P&W engines, so I would say by next year when it is ready.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:In how many decades do you think that the Russian civil aircraft industry will be able to produce passenger jet engines competitive to the ones made by General Electric  and Pratt and Whitney?

Quite soon I'd imagine if they keep working at it. I think the engines are competitive already in their latest iterations, or at least very soon to be. But Russia still lacks behind in providing a support & spare parts network.

Il-112 is a better light transport plane than the An-140, as has been mentioned before.

Is project goes ahead. Where would production take place?

Interview with Mikhail Pogosyn on Sukhoi Superjet Development  

http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/38863/

Two IL-96 of Presidential Squadron , Command Aircraft IL-96PU with the President is the one that lands second. Watch it with HD enabled

https://youtu.be/9JZIVPGb64A

Good update on MS-21 program with pros and cons discussed

http://www.ato.ru/content/kakuyu-nishu-na-rynke-mogut-zanyat-samolety-ms-21


For civil aviation in Russia to scale manufacture of composite structures

Status Update and Good Interview on MS-21 Program

http://www.aviaport.ru/digest/2013/08/23/262267.html

 

On the first day of MAKS sold 129 Russian civilian aircraft at $ 7 billion