

modern Kiev theses about the "Ukrainian origin" of the An-124 do not stand up to criticism. The An-124 aircraft was created in the Soviet Union, in cooperation with the aviation enterprises of Voronezh, Ulyanovsk, Kiev. It was adopted by the Soviet Army in 1991. It was originally intended for airlifting mobile launchers of intercontinental ballistic missiles, which independent Ukraine does not have. In Ulyanovsk, 36 out of 56 Ruslans were produced, and it is no coincidence that An-124 is missing from the list of four products of the Ukrainian company ANTONOV today.
By the way, the world famous Soviet aircraft designer Oleg Antonov - a native of the Moscow province, studied in Saratov and Leningrad, began design work in Moscow. Since 1946, he headed the Siberian Research Institute of Aviation, which was transferred to Kiev in 1952.
PapaDragon wrote:
Same as the Ukraine and Antonov who now build wood stoves instead of airplanes
So if Russia wants to build An-124 and they have the required components they can go for it no problem
PapaDragon wrote:
These things don't get built over night and same goes for restarting production and logistics cycle
If they start now at reasonable pace they should be receiving first new builds by the time old ones start hitting expiration date
Also, current numbers of An-124s are too close for comfort
Big_Gazza and slasher like this post
mnztr wrote:I don't agree, Russia does not need the same number of transports as the US because it does not have as many foreign bases and adventures. They can also use commercial air lifters for most needs. They also have another 12 at VD they can access in an emergency. The ones they have will last until at least 2040..maybe longer then you or me.
GarryB wrote:I think this is an opportunity to start a replacement design for the An-124... which in my opinion should be the much heavier Slon transport in 180 ton capacity, and the Il-106 at 90-100 ton capacity with fewer Slons and rather more Il-106s which I think would be popular and sell rather well.
GarryB wrote:I think this is an opportunity to start a replacement design for the An-124... which in my opinion should be the much heavier Slon transport in 180 ton capacity, and the Il-106 at 90-100 ton capacity with fewer Slons and rather more Il-106s which I think would be popular and sell rather well.
Why put an aircraft from the 1970s back into production.... that isn't an F-15.
actually the an124 is not obsolete. The airframe techonology used there is not outdated.GarryB wrote:I think this is an opportunity to start a replacement design for the An-124... which in my opinion should be the much heavier Slon transport in 180 ton capacity, and the Il-106 at 90-100 ton capacity with fewer Slons and rather more Il-106s which I think would be popular and sell rather well.
Why put an aircraft from the 1970s back into production.... that isn't an F-15.
LMFS and owais.usmani like this post
Since the basic airframe has no issues and is incredibly robust, I see no reason they cannot re-engine the plane. If they were building it in Russia then they have very deep knowledge of the plane and can do deep modernisations with new avionics they develop for CR929 for example. Its a question of where you invest. Even the Syria adventure was supported by the current transport assets. Of course if they project further they will be more stretched, which is why they are building more heavy ships I guess. But if they modernize and return to service all their AN-124s and IL-76 they will have a massive airlifter fleet. They can even turn the IL-76 into a pretty good bomber I suspect.LMFS wrote:
While you are right, the power projection needs of Russia are going to be seriously challenged this decade, the demands placed on the VTA will be much higher and the numbers and remaining resource of the An-124 fleet that are quite ok for today's requirements are on the one hand too reduced and in the other non replaceable for comfort. And then it comes the issue of the unreliable ukie engines. They need a plan forward for the -124 fleet
The issue is that their industry is badly struggling to put a less demanding project like the production of the Il-76 back in its feet again, until they are not able produce a good amount of those airframes per year with ease, it makes no sense to start more challenging programs. Ilyushin has their hands more than full with their currently assigned tasks, their lag behind other bureaus that managed to keep their specialists in place like Sukhoi is very noticeable.
For what I know such high tempo assembly lines are being contemplated also for both the MiG-35 than for the second production batch of the Felon.
actually the an124 is not obsolete. The airframe techonology used there is not outdated.
It does not need stealth or other strange things. It would just need an "upgrade" similar to that of the il76 into il-76 MD-90A.
I do not know how extensive are the modernisations being done for the existing an124, but in case of restart of production I would try to fit new modern internal systems (hydraulics, pneumatics, avionics, navigations systems, etc) into the airframe (which probably does not need substantial changes).
Anyway the main show stopper for the restart of production is lack of engines. If they have solved it and they have the PD24 (or PD26 or PD28) or the engine derived from the NK32 ready, well then please go ahead with the Il-124 (it is not a typo)
But if they modernize and return to service all their AN-124s and IL-76 they will have a massive airlifter fleet. They can even turn the IL-76 into a pretty good bomber I suspect.
GarryB wrote:
Well they could just focus on the Il-106 project because the vast majority of the time the AN-124 does not fly around with a full payload so having Il-106 aircraft would be cheaper and far more efficient than using a bigger aircraft.
Extra programmes require extra funding and new production facilities or upgraded existing factories, they have improved production facilities for the Il-476 and those facilities could also produce the Il-276 which is another much more urgent programme.
Maybe production of the Tu-330 might be a good shorter term solution so that An-12s can start to be retired before they start falling out of the skies, but I think the smaller lighter Il-276 would also be cheaper to buy and operate once it is ready.
mnztr wrote:I don't understand the il-96-400m project to be honest. Why?
mnztr wrote:I don't understand the il-96-400m project to be honest. Why?
Backman likes this post
miketheterrible likes this post
Isos wrote:CR929 has already failed. Chinese want russian to transfert all the technologies.
If Russia agrees chinese will restart a new program and copy it to make it alone after leaving the program with russians.
Il-96 has a brighter future IMO. With the 100% russian ssj-100 and MS-21 they will have 3 classes of russian made aircraft. 4 if we count the cargo and the passenger il-96.
LMFS wrote:...
That is what I mean, look at the amount of programs Ilyushin/UAC Transport is involved in:
> Il-112V
> Il-114-300
> Il-96-400M
> Il-76MD-90A
> Il-276
> Il-106
> Slon
> Overhaul of An-124
...
PapaDragon wrote:LMFS wrote:...
That is what I mean, look at the amount of programs Ilyushin/UAC Transport is involved in:
> Il-112V
> Il-114-300
> Il-96-400M
> Il-76MD-90A
> Il-276
> Il-106
> Slon
> Overhaul of An-124
...
Il-114 and Il-76-90A are complete
Il-96-400 is modification of existing aircraft so it's doable without too much strain
Il-276 is priority clean sheet project which has to be completed at all costs
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
Because they already built 36 An-124s & 0 IL-106s that is still a paper plane.Why bother with restarting the ancient AN-124 when the ecosystem for the IL-76 as been built and is running.
Tsavo Lion wrote:
Because they already built 36 An-124s & 0 IL-106s that is still a paper plane.