Going from 4 engines to two require a massive wing redesign and a recertification (not just an update of the certification).
They designed the Il-106 in the 1990s for four engines so completing it now with four PS90 engines of 18 tons thrust should be easy and four engines is good enough for now for an aircraft in the 80 ton payload capacity whose current international competition would be the C-17 which is eye wateringly expensive to buy and to operate.
The advantage of using the PD-35s revolves around being cheaper and simpler but doesn't really apply till they are ready so designing a new set of wings for the PD-35s when they are ready is no big deal... the existing wings should be fine for the PS90s.
If you are in the design phase everything can be changed, of course taking into account of the impact on other parts and systems. Once the design is over, the development is finished and the aircraft is in production, the impact and cost of a change in design is much higher.
So in the design phase adapt the current wing and layout to PS90s in 18 ton thrust performance and look at developing a new twin engine wing design for PD-35s for when they are ready.
You are mixing a lot of things:
In the first place, the USSR aeronautical industry was devastated in the 90s, when it began to recover, the coup in Ukraine came, which broke ties with the Ukrainian aeronautical industry, which was closely intertwined with the Russian one, therefore the ability to do more of what they are already doing, that is, rescuing Soviet-designed planes, and that is not going to change in the short term.
I think you sound too keen to keep existing Soviets types in operation... the theme across the board for Russia is two pronged... upgrade existing stuff as far as it can be upgraded while in the background develop new from scratch designs with the fundamental faults removed, so we have T-72 upgrades and new model T-90s, but we also have the next generation systems Armata, Kurganets, Boomerang, Typhoon that separate crew from ammo and fuel and put them under the heaviest armour to best protect them.
In the case of transport planes they are near the end of their lives, and building brand new old ones is probably more problematic than designing and building other types.
Even if they could make An-12s and similar types it would be a mistake because Zelensky could end up in the UK as Kiev in exile and be a ratbag for the next 10 to 20 years demanding that third countries seize any Russian aircraft of Ukraine design (despite most were Soviet design)... look at the BS the US pulls getting Chinese CEOs arrested in Canada for breaking American laws... ridiculous.
Do you think they are going to get better or get worse?
There is a large potential market for new planes to replace old planes... even countries that use western planes are finding A400Ms and the new C-130s and especially the C-17s to be horrendously expensive to buy and to operate... some cheap C-17 equivalent which would essentially be an Il-106 would be very popular not just for the Russian military... if the smoke clear even HATO liked using Il-76s and An-124s when ever they could because they are good rugged aircraft that can operate from austere and rough places around the world.
Second, if you want to rebuild the aircraft industry, as happens in shipbuilding, you have to start small and simple.
Not simple... there is nothing simple about the new Russian corvettes... they are more multirole than Soviet cold war cruisers... their new corvettes can hit subs and ships and also land targets and aircraft.
The new light planes they are developing really only have gaps in the L-410 and L-610 area, with the Il-112 and Il-114 filling important gaps, the only real space is the 20 ton payload spot currently held by the An-12.
The return of the Tu-204/214 suggests the Tu-330 makes sense, and the idea of a shrunk down Il-476 meaning you could build factories to swap between production of the two types as needed sounds flexible and useful, and the numbers needed for both the 476 and 276 are only going to get bigger when they are opened up for export too.
The smaller the plane the larger the numbers needed is a general rule of thumb so I really don't understand this talk of putting the An-124 into production because there are no engines for them right now and they are at the wrong end of the equation really.
An An-22/C-17 is vastly more desirable as it will be cheaper to run and should be bought in greater numbers than the An-124 or Slon would be needed... so it makes economic sense to start making them first... the factories that were going to make more An-124s make sense because the Il-106 is very similar in layout and shape and design.
.. however it maintains the great Soviet ships like Udaloy, Kirov and Kuznestov, all those fabulous imperial destroyer designs nuclear aircraft carriers are just commercial propaganda or justification for the salary of engineers in design offices, in addition to much sensationalism in the specialized defense press. Replacements will arrive after 2040
It maintains those destroyer and cruiser sized cold war ships because it is not in any position to make brand new designs or even start them till the smaller ships are in serial production.
The core difference is that corvettes and frigates are coastal home defence, so starting with them makes sense, but the air transport is in a different place... the big heavy transports are good for distribution but only from main centre to main centre... the detailed distribution to unit level is done by much smaller aircraft and they need lots of them.
The Russian AF has large numbers of obsolete old transport planes and special function aircraft that all need to be replaced with something newer.
Many roles they don't need to be state of the art super planes... Tu-214s will actually make rather good spy planes and communications planes and inflight refuelling planes for that matter (not carrier based obviously), and would probably do a good job replacing Tu-154Ms and Il-38s as well as Il-20 and Il-22 types too., but their transport fleet is very much an aging fleet that also needs replacing too.
A lot of things are waiting for engines, so gaps are going to have to be accepted, but making new old planes does not make sense IMHO.
For large aircraft they should keep the Soviet heritage going, while starting with the simple, like the Il-112 (which in my opinion is a flop before it starts).
Getting this up and running will take years of testing and tweaking and only then will the level be raised.
They are not going to be fighting in Africa or Central or South America any time soon... they need the smaller aircraft vastly more than they need a few more big aircraft that don't have obvious engine options ready to go.
On the other hand, if you manufacture the Il-76MD-90A in the next 15-20 years and the useful life is 30-40 years, they will be in service until 2070 or more, so no more planes are needed.
About the Il-276 is simply closed, Ru MoD dont have money or dont want it
Interesting that one can be amazing and the other totally useless... sounds like a mistake.
The Il-112 is a pure shit, has a bad It is badly planned from the root, nobody wants a plane with only 5 tons of cargo in the best of cases, the best is cancel or start with a diferent way
You seem very fixated on payload weight... having 5 ton capacity does not make it worse than a plane that can carry 9 if they don't want 9 ton capacity because it can only fit two pallets which are limited to 2.5 tons each.
Also flight range and field performance are important too... the specs for the C-17 on paper are amazing, long airframe hours and short rough field operations capacity... but as the Aussies found out... you can't have both. The long airframe life guarantee is null and void if you operate it from rough short airstrips.
All of a sudden not so amazing, but still expensive.
Cancelling just means starting from scratch which is the longest slowest option.
Even in the case of try something like il-276 this will be after the Il-112 and this will take one more decade or more,
They have been pissing around with this design with India for decades... the MTA needs someone to put a bomb under it and fund it properly to get results.... or if they have made a decision to go for the Tu-330 then go with that but do something... the An-12s are going to start crashing or being put out to pasture because their hours are up.
Designing a new plane is not cheap, but using an An-124 to transport 2 tons of post 500km to the next airport down will make that designing cost look cheap.
and An-12 replacement cannot wait for more time
As I said, Russia must decide to purchase An-12 replacement to a foreing country or well try an Antonov replacement if can get the Antonov property after the war
That comment alone tells me of your bias... Russian designers don't have time to get designs right and have to start from scratch but really the best solution in your opinion is to wait till the conflict in the Ukraine is over and sift through the ashes of what was Antonov and Motor Sich and then presumably build them up from near scratch and then start a design for a replacement... how the heck could that possibly be faster or easier or cheaper?
It is just plain stupid.
That plane from Brazil with two jet engines looks ideal but then selling them to the Russian military might kill any western sales they might get so I don't think they would be interested.
BTW I looked up the Il-276 on wiki and it didn't say it was cancelled... it said it was approved and included a link to a news report:
Begin flight testing in 2023 and first units delivered 2026...
is replacing An-26 (5 ton payload) with C-295 (9,5 ton payload)
is replacing An-12 (21 ton payload) with A-400M (37 ton pauload)
Uzbekistan is also replacing An-26 with C-295
Well it is not like they are choosing these planes over Russian planes because there are currently no Russian planes in serial production to choose from.
India that has An-32 has signed a huge contract for 56 C-295 and also is replacin Il-76 with C-17. And does not have An-12
India will find those C-17s to be an enormous drain on their budget and when Russian alternatives become available they might change to them, but right now the C-17 is really the only game in town and it is terribly expensive.
The only reason to start a light military cargo plane as Il-112 from zero is that the Russian government needs more than 200 such planes for various departments, not only the VKS and the Navy, but also the interior ministry, the border guard or the ministry of emergencies, in addition to small private companies that provide service on a regional scale in siberia or the arctic, the domestic market can exceed 300 units
This amount justifies the project even if it does not export an
The Russian experience with foreign designs suggests buying foreign planes is never a good idea unless you own copyrights to the design.
the only person that wanted Il-276 is Shoigu, and now is very busy trying to win a war, the program was cancelles last year when the preparations for war began
This information is not repeated anywhere else that I can find...
Both the il112v and the il-276 are (in paper) subpar if compared with Aircrafts with similar size (both old and new aircrafts) and the il-112v prototype revealed itself to be overweight and with a wrong weight balance (so needing actually ballast on the front in order to be able to fly safely). It is true that some of this could be corrected. But again the question is: is it needed?
If you were paying attention those problems were with the first prototype that were fixed on the next prototype... the only remaining problem seemed to be with the auto feathering system which failed and caused the crash, but that is an engine issue rather than a plane issue.
Basically it loses in specs against the old An-26.
Maybe if its characteristics were similar to the C-295 (which actually has less powerful engines it could be more appealing).
They can improve it over time if that is necessary. Its design specs would be set by military requirements.
Foreign aircraft, like Ukrainian aircraft are no longer an option.
Furthermore Russia has already in development a nice aircraft of similar size to the il-112v, it is the TVRS-44 Ladoga. A cargo version of it could be interesting also for the military (even if probably it would be to narrow to fit some payloads).
That is the Let-410 or 610 isn't it?
But yes, I believe someone in Russia is already thinking about modernised An32 and An72 as a good fit for the need of VTA (and slightly derated PD8 would be a good fit for the An72 as well).
Yes, always people looking backwards... but in the end they will need replacement anyway.
As far as the il276, the only advantage is its commonality with the il(4)76. And I still believe that the il76 is a stopgap for Russia.
The enormous advantage of the Il-276 is that it is a shorter narrower Il-476 with half the number of engines, which should be quick and easy to build and put into service and factories making it could switch between the two types as needed,
An export market for aircraft with full engine and avionics commonality like that should be relatively good too.
Personally I would prefer a comeback of Tu330 (and possibly of the yak-44).
Agree with the Tu-330 with the airliner versions going into serial production for airlines because they could expand that to military replacements for the old airliners still in use and also work on the transport aircraft too, which with a 35 ton payload capacity should be more useful.
When the Americans staged a coup d'état in 2014, they cut off this collaboration, of course, Ukraine finished producing aircraft forever, but it will take Russia more than a decade to recover and establish a closed cycle for the manufacture of components and aircraft in addition to forming a new generation of technicians and engineers
The orcs were being pricks well before 2014, making themselves as annoying as they could.
Russia is well shot of those pricks.
For example, the replacement of the An-26/32 should be the An-132, the An-72 the new versions of An-74 produced in Kharkov, for the An-12 the An-178 and the An-70 would be manufactured it depends on the needs, given that the An-70 is the size and performance of the A-400M, which is the one ordered by Kazakhstan
Most of the new Antonovs are slightly warmed over old Antonovs, I think you are overstating the talent that was there to be honest.
The IL-112 is a project taken on the fly that was wanted to be done in a hurry, but it is terrible, the plane weighs too much and cannot increase the payload, there are even versions of the An-74TK that can reach 10t of load of payment according to the specifications of the Ukrainians, I think that Iran has planes of these
You are comparing a turboprop with a jet.... and it is going to replace the An-26, Yak-40, and in interestingly also to replace the L-410... according to Wiki so that might be a mistake. Perhaps the L-610?
If Russia wins the war and annexes half of Ukraine, Kharkov could produce a new generation An-72/74 with new materials, there is even a version with engines under the wings instead of above
The version with under wing podded engines is because having the engines on top makes them a pain in the arse to work on because most stands and equipment are designed for underwing pods.
Maybe the easiest solution is really to produce improved An-32 as a stopgap and then start a new clean sheet design after combining proper good brain Power (including the russian Boeing engineers)
It is simply not going to be the case that Zelensky signs a surrender and all of a sudden Antonov pops up from the ground fully tooled up and with full staff all trained and ready to make planes, and Motor Sich et al also pop out of the wood work ready to make shit.
Not going to happen.
See the laughable joke that's A400M rough field landing trails.
The C-17 is terrible in that regard too... the Aussies were forced to sign an agreement they would not operate theirs from short rough airstrips...
My plan and considerations
Antonov are dead... forget about them.
Il-112 already fulfils the 5 ton capacity so no need for a foreign plane.
15 ton requirement does not exist AFAIK.
Your 30 ton suggestion makes sense.
The 45 ton suggestion AFAIK does not exist and I think most are going to airlines rather than military for the next few years...
60 tons is already in production... the Il-476... and a scaled down Il-276 should be made... shortening the fuselage and wings and halving the number of engines it should be the quickest and easiest new plane in your list.
I also think four PS90 engines of 18 tons thrust on an An-124 airframe would be perfect to get an 80 payload capacity transport plane to take stress off the bigger model with the more powerful engines.
Once the PD-35s are ready then I would be putting the Slon into service with four PD-33s and a half Slon with two for the 100 ton and 180 ton payload capacity ranges... it might be worth keeping the An-124s for a bit with the PS90 engines in the An-22 category... the less powerful engines should make them rather cheaper to operate but also provide a useful aircraft size... the large size of the aircraft should allow a higher fuel fraction to be carried for better flight range especially if inflight refuelling probes are added so it can take off light with the lower level of thrust and then take on more fuel once airborne to get excess range.
You are also in error... an An-124 with four PD-35s would have almost as much engine thrust as the An-225 with six engines and would probably be a 180 ton capacity plane assuming the structure could carry that.
The original An-225 with 6 engines of 24 tons thrust each had a total of 144 tons thrust, an An-225 replacement with 6 x PD-35 would have 210 tons thrust... to put that in perspective you could fit that to the 60 ton payload Il-476 with its MTOW of 210 and it could take off vertically.
It is imperative to strive for cooperation with Iran and China
I think cooperation with these two countries is also very important but let Antonovs lie... no raising zombies...