Il-112V/Il-212 light military transport

It is terrible when journalists use such tragedies to promote their "investigations"...
It is commendable that the employees of PJSC Il stood up for the former director

TMA1 wrote:

Daniel_Admassu wrote:Before some notable forum members get spooked, we are talking about a different Rogozin here, right?

Dont let papadragon find out!

Well, what do you know.....father and son messing up the space and aviation industries of Russia...PD may have a point.

But seriously, the source credits this Rogozin with accelerating the Il-112 program.

Daniel_Admassu wrote:

TMA1 wrote:

Daniel_Admassu wrote:Before some notable forum members get spooked, we are talking about a different Rogozin here, right?

Dont let papadragon find out!

Well, what do you know.....father and son messing up the space and aviation industries of Russia...PD may have a point.

But seriously, the source credits this Rogozin with starting the Il-112 program.

Quite the opposite. But only a moron would not figure this out.

Space industry, ask yourself, how long Rogozin was in power of it?

Some people shouldn't share their opinions.

Rogozin Jr came into the program as a "fixer-upper", much like his father into Roscosmos back into 2018.

These "fixers" are necessary due to power politics within both the MIC and various other industries(often the same company), they unfuck whatever pissing match started between the parties, which can be the military not wanting to pay on time for research, or a factory wanting to push its own homegrown product, etc etc.

And in any case, the person who wrote the article blaming Rogozin Jr, Andrei Karaulov, is quite a piece of work when you do some research into his previous writings and "opinions".

You may read from his own website his own writings and get a measure on what sort of content he pushes as well as those on his platform.

https://karaulovlife.ru/

TMA1 wrote:

Daniel_Admassu wrote:Before some notable forum members get spooked, we are talking about a different Rogozin here, right?

Dont let papadragon find out!

PapaDragon knows

PapaDragon knows all

PapaDragon cares not for Junior

Alexey Rogozin:

Please tell the interested people.
Last week, an open letter from "Ilyushins" appeared on the Internet criticizing the blogger Karaulov, who accused me of the crash of the Il-112V plane. Since then, the authors of this letter have received calls from the UK and Georgia. Presenting
themselves as employees of the Karaulov Platform, the Anti-Corruption Fund and the Citizens Rights Protection Fund of Alexey Navalny (organizations banned in Russia), unknown persons are trying to find out the details of the history of the creation of the Il-112V since 2003, my role and the motives
of the designers and pilots who supported me.
I am also aware of several cases when these same people (including those with the status of journalists) call my former colleagues, posing as other people and trying to find at least something for a new video. This is also a violation of the law on mass media. 

Libel is a criminal offense. Aspecially created interdepartmental commission and an Investigative Committee are investigating the Il-112V crash. The preliminary
results should be published in September, after which I will decide on measures against people who spread false information about me.

Source: 

The cockpit of the Il-112B military transport aircraft

The plane itself give up, not the people. 

As it became known to Kommersant, experts have established the causes of the crash of the experimental Il-112V that happened in Kubinka near Moscow five days before the start of the Army-2021 forum. A critical situation on board was provoked by an engine fire, but the plane went into an uncontrolled side roll, which turned into a rollover, due to the breakage of the right aileron thrust destroyed by fire. The pilots in this situation could do absolutely nothing; they also had nothing to say to each other, so the crew died in silence.

Experts of the Ministry of Industry and Trade and the Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) found that the development of the disaster began with the loss of gas-dynamic stability of the right engine of the Il-112V. The subsequent surge, accompanied by pops and flame emissions, probably led to the partial destruction of the turbine, and its fragments, in turn, could kill the fuel lines located nearby. To determine the exact cause of the fire of the transport vehicle, specialists will have to wait for the results of the examinations that have already been appointed, but, anyway, a few minutes after takeoff, a powerful "kerosene" fire appeared in the internal cavities of the gondola and the right wing of the Il-112V.

It is interesting that the first fire was noticed not by the pilots, but by the dispatchers of the Kubinka airfield, from which the board that caught fire soon took off. The crew was immediately informed about the problem by radio, but this, as it turned out, was not necessary. The danger warning board has already lit up in the cockpit and the so — called first stage of the fire extinguishing system has worked automatically-a fire extinguishing foam composition was released into the gondola from a high-pressure fire extinguisher cylinder located next to it.

The crew reacted to the alarm promptly: realizing that the foam attack was idle, the pilots had already manually activated the second stage of the fire extinguishing system, which also did not reach the target.

As sources close to the investigation explained to Kommersant, both Il-112V fire extinguishing systems were focused primarily on engines, so the foam formed from carbon dioxide and inert gases filled mainly the nacelle of one of them, while the fire had already spread to the inner cavity of the wing. Meanwhile, there was nothing else to fill the fire with. According to the interlocutor of Kommersant, the manufacturer has provided only two fire extinguishers for each engine of the transport vehicle, while, for example, in civil aircraft of PJSC Il, fire extinguishing is provided in six queues.

The pilots, therefore, had no choice but to return to the departure airfield and make an emergency landing, which they requested. The experienced crew, as experts say, acted smoothly and quickly. The commander, without the slightest signs of panic, ordered the co-pilot: "Turn off", then - "Fly", and he just calmly reported on the execution, saying that the burning engine was safely stopped, and the blades of his propeller were installed "downstream" and did not interfere with the movement of the aircraft. The crew managed to position the rudders of the aircraft and select the mode of the only working engine in such a way that, despite the raging fire and asymmetric thrust, the car went towards the airfield on an almost perfect straight course. Describing the video recording of the last seconds of the Il-112V flight, made by a random eyewitness of the tragedy, experts even called it a "slip". In their opinion, in this mode, the pilots would probably have landed a burning transport in Kubinka, which was only one and a half to two kilometers away.

However, the desperate struggle of people for survival, according to experts, was in vain, because the plane itself "gave up".

At the 45th second of the flight after the fire started, the temperature in the right wing cavity reached 600 degrees, after which, as the investigators found, the duralumin aileron thrust going inside collapsed. The temperature of 650 degrees is critical for duralumin D16, from which the thrust and most other parts of the aircraft were made, but already at 600 degrees the duralumin tube on hinges holding the right aileron in the lowered position, as experts say, lost elasticity and "flowed".

Due to the destruction of the thrust, the aileron, which helped the pilots to ensure the straight flight of the Il-112V, got into a neutral position, located along the plane of the wing, and the car began to roll to the right and lower the nose. The roll increased slowly at first, but the pilots, as investigators believe, already at the moment of the thrust breakage realized that the process that had begun was irreversible. The pilots could not somehow influence the behavior of the aircraft; they apparently did not consider it necessary to comment on the situation either, so they simply remained silent. The last turn of the transport lasted only three seconds — the increasing right bank ended in a coup and a fall.

Experts who have dealt with this tragedy say that no pilot in the world could have taken the plane out of the roll in such conditions, noting that by coincidence the accident occurred in the forest, and not in the Patriot Park, over which the Il-112V demonstration flight was planned.

Most experts believe that the reason for the tragedy is the unpreparedness for the flights of the first experimental model of a military transport vehicle and the possible haste with its commissioning.

Flight No.0001, issued by the Voronezh Joint-Stock Aircraft Construction Company (VASO), was the first and only "flying" aircraft of this type in the world (another copy of the Il-112B has so far been tested only on the ground). During its short history, the first number managed to take to the air 23 times, making 22 landings at the same time. Experts note that almost all flights of the crashed aircraft were short, five-minute, and from March 2019 to March 2021, it did not fly at all due to identified technical flaws that aircraft designers had to eliminate. The specialists made the most claims to the TV7-117ST engines produced by JSC "UEC-Klimov".

However, despite all the problems that have arisen, they decided to show the experimental copy first at the International Aerospace Salon (MAKS), held in July, and then to coincide the show with the International Military Technical Forum "Army-2021", held on August 22-28. The rush, experts believe, created the conditions for a catastrophe, but it is not yet clear whether this opinion will become the official conclusion of the commission of the Ministry of Industry and Trade. In any case, as an informed source of Kommersant explained, the investigators have already been tasked to find out in detail whether the crew made mistakes when performing the approach.

Source: 

The Ministry of Industry and Trade commented on the reasons for the crash of the Il-112V put forward by the media, 01/09/2021.

The Ministry of Industry and Trade commented on the reasons for the crash of the Il-112V plane near Kubinka put forward by the media.

MOSCOW, September 1 - RIA Novosti. The information published by the media about the reasons for the crash of the Il-112V plane near Kubinka - assumptions of sources, no final conclusions yet, said the chairman of the commission to investigate the incident, Deputy Minister of Industry and Trade Oleg Bocharov.

The first prototype of the Il-112V aircraft crashed near Kubinka near Moscow on August 17. The entire crew on board was killed - chief pilot, 1st class test pilot Hero of Russia Nikolai Kuimov, 1st class test pilot Dmitry Komarov and 1st class test flight engineer Nikolai Khludeev. The preliminary cause of the catastrophe is considered to be a fire followed by a failure of the right engine when the plane was at low altitude and speed, noted a RIA Novosti source in the industry.

"The information given in the article of the Kommersant newspaper is only the assumptions of the sources, but not official conclusions. It is still premature to talk about the causes of the tragedy," the press service quoted Bocharov as saying.

The newspaper "Kommersant" on September 1, citing sources, reported that the catastrophe began with the loss of gas-dynamic stability of the right engine. The surging that followed, accompanied by popping and bursts of flame, probably led to the partial destruction of the turbine, and its debris, in turn, could interrupt the nearby fuel lines.

The article notes that in order to establish the exact reason, it is necessary to wait for the results of the examinations, but "one way or another, a few minutes after takeoff, a powerful" kerosene "fire arose in the internal cavities of the nacelle and the right wing of the Il-112V. As the sources close to the investigation explained to the newspaper, both Il-112V fire extinguishing systems were focused primarily on engines, so the foam formed from carbon dioxide and inert gases filled mainly the gondola of one of them, while the fire had already spread into the inner cavity wing.

According to the interlocutor of the publication, the manufacturer has provided two fire extinguishers for each engine, although, for example, in civil aircraft of PJSC "Il" fire extinguishing is provided in six bursts. The pilots had no choice but to return to the departure airfield and make an emergency landing, which they requested.

https://ria.ru/20210901/samolet-1748167643.html

Borisov told about solving the problems of the Il-112V aircraft. 

The problems with the insufficient carrying capacity of the Il-112V military transport aircraft due to the too heavy design have been solved, Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov told reporters at the Tyumen Oil and Gas Forum.

"You are probably aware that the first developments of the aircraft did not meet the requirements of the technical task for carrying capacity. It was supposed to carry at least five tons, but it could not, because it was overloaded. UAC launched additional work, thanks to which they achieved the customer's requirements" – he said.

Earlier, Borisov said that it took three years to fight the preponderance and the preponderance should be eliminated on the third prototype of the aircraft.

Source: 

TASS; The crash of IL-112V in the suburbs
May 26, 02:01 (Updated 02:28)

The commission completed the investigation into the crash of the Il-112V military aircraft

According to a source in the aircraft industry, the causes of the crash will not be published.




MOSCOW, May 26. /TASS/. The commission has completed work on investigating the causes of the crash of the new Il-112V military transport aircraft in Kubinka in August 2021, the causes of the crash will not be published. This was reported to TASS by a source in the aircraft industry.

"The commission has completed the investigation into the causes of the Il-112V crash, the conclusion has been signed, but the results of the investigation will not be published," the source said.

Another TASS interlocutor noted that the conclusion of the commission does not directly name the cause of the tragedy and does not place direct responsibility for it on the manufacturers of engines, aircraft components or the crew.

TASS has no official information on this matter.

Il-112V is a Russian light turboprop military transport aircraft. Designed for transportation and airborne landing of up to five tons of light weapons and military equipment, cargo and personnel. It is also possible to transport a wide range of goods in commercial operation.

Before the disaster, it was assumed that already within the framework of the state armament program until 2025, it would be planned to purchase about 22 Il-112V aircraft. In the future, the aircraft was supposed to replace the fleet of obsolete An-26s.

https://tass.ru/proisshestviya/14731593

https://xn--b1aga5aadd.xn--p1ai/2022/%D0%9E%D0%B0%D0%BA8/

Военное.рф

The investigation into the crash of the first Il-112V continues, work on the project is frozen
October 18, 2022 at 13:29 
Theme: Aviation , military- industrial complex

The construction of new flight prototypes of the Il-112V military transport aircraft is not being carried out due to the ongoing investigation into the causes of the first sample plane crash in 2021. This was announced on Tuesday, October 18, by Nikolay Talikov, Deputy Chairman of the Scientific and Technical Council, former Chief Designer of Ilyushin PJSC , to RIA Novosti .

Answering a question about how the third and fourth samples of the Il-112V, which should continue flying, are being created, Talikov noted: “Practically nothing.


At the same time, the interlocutor of the agency clarified that there was no question of the refusal of the Russian Aerospace Forces from this project, but in order to continue it, it is necessary to establish the exact reasons for the crash of the prototype.

"They are waiting for a solution to the issues of the disaster, the investigation continues," he explained.

The first sample of the Il-112V light military transport aircraft crashed on August 17, 2021 during a training flight before participating in the Army-2021 international military-technical forum. The entire crew died: Hero of Russia Nikolai Kuimov and Dmitry Komarov, as well as flight test engineer Nikolai Khludeev. Russian President Vladimir Putin awarded them the Order of Courage posthumously.

The plane crash was preceded by the ignition of the right engine. According to media reports, the crew triedto extinguish it, but it was not possible to do this, since the aircraft manufacturer focused the fire extinguishing systems on the engines, and by that time the fire had spread to the wing. The crew stopped the burning engine and sent the plane to the airfield in Kubinka, but after the aileron thrust was destroyed, it stood in a neutral position, and the pilots could no longer influence the situation.

Il-112V is a light aircraft designed to transport personnel, military equipment, various types of weapons and cargo. The board will replace the retiring fleet of An-26 and An-24 aircraft.

The first flight of the Il-112V took place in March 2019, after which the aircraft required various improvements. The second flight took place only at the end of March 2021.

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:
Answering a question about how the third and fourth samples of the Il-112V, which should continue flying, are being created, Talikov noted: “Practically nothing.

At the same time, the interlocutor of the agency clarified that there was no questions of the refusal of the Russian Aerospace Forces from this project, but in order to continue it, it is necessary to establish the exact reasons for the crash of the prototype.

I really hope that the IL-112 is rejected by Shoigu, it is a shitty plane that would never have been made, if it weren't for the coup in Ukraine in 2014
I don't think even Ilyushin wanted to undertake this plane project at this point.

Actually the VKS wanted the An-74, the production of which went to shit in 2014
There were even several contracts for 12 An-74s for Kazakhstan and as many for Iran and the contracts were canceled in 2016 or 2017 since the Ukrainian industry could not work without the Russian parts that were 3/4 parts of the plane.

Thus, Victoria Nuland managed to destroy the Ukrainian aeronautical industry as a competitor and also screw up the plans of the Russian industry for at least a decade

I hope that Russia will recover all of Novorossia and can resume production of new modernized versions of AN-72/74 in Kharkov

Those are wholly different aircraft with much different performance characteristics. The Antonov aircraft which competed closest with this one was the An-132. Which is an unmitigated disaster. The Il-112 slots in between the An-140T and An-132.

lancelot wrote:Those are wholly different aircraft with much different performance characteristics. The Antonov aircraft which competed closest with this one was the An-132. Which is an unmitigated disaster. The Il-112 slots in between the An-140T and An-132.

The IL-112V is an even worse aircraft than the An-26 it is supposed to replace, and this assuming that the minimum specifications of the project are achieved, which today is clearly in question

On the other hand the An-140T and the An-132 do not exist outside of the paper or the imagination of the Ukrainian commercial propagandists, at least the An-132D (demonstrator) was presented,it's not even a prototype, in reality it is nothing more than an An-32 with some modifications, I don't remember if at least some work on a new engine was really done

Today there are only two aircraft for sale in the light military transport aircraft sector, the C-295 and the C-27.

The C-295 made its first flight in 1997 and the Spanish Air Force received its first copy in 2000
Since then, some 35 countries have bought C-295s, including the latest contracts signed by countries usually in Russia's orbit, such as India, Serbia, Uzbekistan or Angola.
The C-295 is a thinner and lighter aircraft but with a higher cargo capacity than previous aircraft.
In addition to the C-295 there are several very successful modifications such as Maritime Surveillance Patrol, ASW, EW, there is even a prototype of a small AWACS

The C-27 is fatter and heavier can carry a little more weight, the most in this category, that have about a dozen countries
It is also from the last century (first flight 1999) as well as being a modification of an earlier plane from the 1970s

The original An-72 is of this same category (MTOW: 30t), although with better performance for extreme conditions and for STOL conditions.

If we go back a decade before the coup in Ukraine, at least the An-74 was manufactured in small quantities for Kazakhstan, Iran, etc... but the coup d'état canceled the production and contracts for at least two dozen devices for these countries

and An-72/74 it is a clearly differentiated product and superior to the other aircraft of the same category in some aspects, in addition to be more convenient for the characteristics of Russia, that is precisely why the effort has been made to restore the An-72 and put them back into operation in Russia, about 40 An-72 currently in operation including the 6 modified for arctic conditions for the Russian Navy

Il-112 is a bad project for the Russian Air Force and has nothing to do in competition with the C-295 and the C-27

After the defeat of Ukraine, the An-74 would be a big production for Russia and many related countries such as Iran, Kazahstan and many other countries in Africa, Asia or South America.
In any case, with or without Il-112, the Russian MoD is not going to give up the An-72, the Il-112 is unable to replace it and will remain in operation for a long time.

Does someone know of the TVRS-44 Ladoga (Let L-610 derivative with some parts from the An-140) could be made in a cargo version fitted with rear cargo door?

While it is a bit narrower, it is also a high wing aircraft with 5 tons payload and rough airstrip capabilities.

It would save a lot of money to have the passenger version and the military cargo with a lot of commonalities.

If so it could solve a part of the problem, and Russia could then concentrate more on a larger aircraft with similar payload and cargo hold width as the C-27. 

An engine with the desired power (4000-5000 hp, same as the engine of the C27J) is anyway currently in development in Russia.

Edit I also like the An72/74. While it is a different type of aircraft, "Cheburaska" is quite convenient in some special role. Furthermore, while creating more issue for the accessibility for maintenance, the engine over the wings could also be advantageous in some terrains and decrease the amount of gravel and dust ingested by the engines when taking of or landing from desertic areas.

Anyway the PD-8 will also be realised with a nacelle for over the wing installation for the Be-200 aircraft. A derated version of that engine could be perfect for a modetnosed An72

Guys... the Il-112 is replacing the An-26... it does not need to fly further or faster or carry more... it just needs to be in production and made up of Russian parts.

The An-72/74 is a dead end Antonov design... let it go.

The An-26 could carry 5.5 tons, but only 40 passengers, while the Il-112 can carry 44 passengers... which actually sounds better.

Extra range doesn't fall from the sky... it has to be designed in either with more fuel or better engines or lower profile wings and fuselage.

The Il-112 will have all new Avionics including a self defence suite also carried by the Ka-52 and Mi-28 and Mi-26 helicopters.

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:Does someone know of the TVRS-44 Ladoga (Let L-610 derivative with some parts from the An-140) could be made in a cargo version fitted with rear cargo door?

While it is a bit narrower, it is also a high wing aircraft with 5 tons payload and rough airstrip capabilities.

It would save a lot of money to have the passenger version and the military cargo with a lot of commonalities 

Also for the An-140 was planned a military airlifter modification with a rear ramp based on the civilian passenger. The same thing can be done for the TVRS-44 Ladoga, which in that case will become the real An-26 replacement.

An-140T (Tactical airlifter): the An-140T is a light military transport aircraf developed on the basis of the An-140-100 turboprop airliner. The An-140T features a rear ramp for loading/unloading of cargo and personnel. The An-140S is the same military transport aircraft equipped with a larger loading/unloading hatch.

Then the various Russian design bureau can concentrate on developing a larger aircraft powered by two 4500/ 5000 hp turboprop engines (An-8 successor/ Better alternative to the C27J) in order to cover the gap between the 5 tons payload TVRS-44 and am eventual An-12 replacement (possibly the 35 tons payload Tu330)

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:Anyway the PD-8 will also be realised with a nacelle for over the wing installation for the Be-200 aircraft. A derated version of that engine could be perfect for a modetnosed An72

New engine, PD-8, would go perfectly in hand with probably best Antonov's post Soviet design An-178. Originally, more than a third of the parts and systems for the plane was supposed to be delivered from Russia. It could be a very interesting post-war revival project.

caveat emptor wrote:

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:Anyway the PD-8 will also be realised with a nacelle for over the wing installation for the Be-200 aircraft. A derated version of that engine could be perfect for a modetnosed An72

New engine, PD-8, would go perfectly in hand with probably best Antonov's post Soviet design An-178. Originally, more than a third of the parts and systems for the plane was supposed to be delivered from Russia. It could be a very interesting post-war revival project.

I fear the An178 design suffers at least as much issues as the Il-112. Furthermore An148/158 is not anymore in production and is only in service in Nord Korea (4 years ago the 6 An-158 of Cubana were grounded indefinitely for technical problems).

The only good post soviet program of Antonov has been the Chinese Y20...which is basically an enlarged An-70 with jet engines and with some parts "inspired" from the American C17.

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:

caveat emptor wrote:

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:Anyway the PD-8 will also be realised with a nacelle for over the wing installation for the Be-200 aircraft. A derated version of that engine could be perfect for a modetnosed An72

New engine, PD-8, would go perfectly in hand with probably best Antonov's post Soviet design An-178. Originally, more than a third of the parts and systems for the plane was supposed to be delivered from Russia. It could be a very interesting post-war revival project.

I fear the An178 design suffers at least as much issues as the Il-112. Furthermore An148/158 is not anymore in production and is only in service in Nord Korea (4 years ago the 6 An-158 of Cubana were grounded indefinitely for technical problems).

The only good post soviet program of Antonov has been the Chinese Y20...which is basically an enlarged An-70 with jet engines and with some parts "inspired" from the American C17.

The An-148 has been manufactured in Voronezh until 2018 when the last one was delivered to the VKS
In fact, VASO delivered up to 38 devices to different clients, however Ukraine only delivered 2 to North Korea in addition to several test devices operated by Antonov itself.
It is also not true that the components are mostly manufactured in Ukraine, in fact they are a minority, so much so that the planes operated by the Russian state are still active.

In An-178 it is too big to be a light transport, and it is too small to be included in the category of C-130, C-390, An-70 or A-400M.
He stays in no man's land and that's why no one showed interest in him
In addition, it has a wingspan and wing area that are too small for a military transport plane, low fuel capacity, etc... it is a bad design for this role, it is clear that it is a civil plane that has been wanted to be converted into a military one, and this does not work, at least not with this plane

The Chinese Y-20 aircraft is of the exact dimensions of the Il-76, same MTOW, payload, range..., in fact it is clearly seen that it is a more modern derivative, the only thing that perhaps resembles an Antonov is in the shape of the nose

Also for the An-140 was planned a military airlifter modification with a rear ramp based on the civilian passenger. The same thing can be done for the TVRS-44 Ladoga, which in that case will become the real An-26 replacement.

A cargo An-140 does not exist and no attempt was even made to present a demonstrator because no one was interested in it.
This plane only exists on wikipedia and perhaps in the Power Point of some Antonov designer, but it is impossible to make that plane a military transport, it is too small, flimsy and without strength to be more than a short-range passenger plane
In the same way there is no version of the An-70 no matter what the wikipedia says, there is simply only one prototype with the basic configuration

I also like the An72/74. While it is a different type of aircraft, "Cheburaska" is quite convenient in some special role. Furthermore, while creating more issue for the accessibility for maintenance, the engine over the wings could also be advantageous in some terrains and decrease the amount of gravel and dust ingested by the engines when taking of or landing from desertic areas.

It is not only used for special tasks like in the Frontier Guard or the Arctic Navy, in fact several squadrons have been put into operation for general cargo tasks at the same time that the An-12 is gradually being phased out, and I mean that in the bases that the An-72 has appeared are those in which the An-12 is disappearing due to exhaustion

GarryB wrote:Guys... the Il-112 is replacing the An-26... it does not need to fly further or faster or carry more... it just needs to be in production and made up of Russian parts.

The Il-112V does not exist today, the only copy that had crashed, and it crashed because it is a bad plane, poorly planned from the beginning.
In addition, it does not meet the specifications that it should have according to the documentation.
At first it could only take flight without a load, since it is too heavy. After weight was removed and even so it can not carry the minimum weight required, not only is it too heavy but the configuration of the tail forces to put a counterweight on the nose losing more payload than it should in addition to the fact that the materials are too heavy , should carry a greater amount of more modern lightweight composite materials

Besides what the parts are made in Russia or not, how many parts of the Antonov planes do you think were made in the Ukraine.?
That is the reason why Ukraine will not manufacture any aircraft again and Russia could easily resume the manufacture of any Antonov,
In fact Russia continues to operate the Antonov´s because it can do the maintenance and have spare parts



Even if several years from now the fiasco could be fixed by losing time, money, not to mention the lives of several irreplaceable designers, the plane has characteristics that are far inferior to the two competitors that exist on the market, which on the other hand are modernized versions of earlier aircraft

The C-295 is a more modern version of the CN-235 of the 1980s, which improved the characteristics and the max. payload from 6 to 9.5 t.
The C-27 is a more modern version of the Alenia C-222 from the 1970s and its pàyoad also increased significantly to 11 t.
The big difference is that the C-295 is more designed for paratroopers with a cargo bay that is very low (1.90m) but longer and can accommodate Humvees, while the C-27 is much taller (2.70m) , wide and short and can accommodate higher loads such as a light truck


these are the supposed characteristics that wikipedia says about the Il-112 and similar planes, but of course the prototype did not meet them even after being refurbished for two years, and it is difficult for it to meet them in the short or medium term
An aircraft like the Il-112 makes no sense nowadays and even less to do it from scratch, to make a plane useless today
Not even the USA spent time and money developing a light cargo aircraft, they just bought the C-27 and C-235/295.

The An-72/74 is a dead end Antonov design... let it go.

The truth is that just the aircraft that Russia needs, and only the end of the USSR and the corrupt Ukrainian leaders prevented Russia from replacing the An-26 with An-72 as planned.

And the truth is that if it were not for the 2014 coup in Ukraine, the plane would still be being manufactured even today, Kazakhstan had 12 contracted and a contract was broken in 2017 due to delays because Ukraine cannot manufacture anything by itself. Kazjastan received an An-74 in 2014 and it was the last one manufactured
In addition, there were more pending contracts and more countries interested in the latest versions of the An-74

In fact, what has happened in recent years is that almost all the russian available An-72s have been taken out of the reserve at the same time that the An-12 is gradually being returned
Today there are squadrons of An-72 in:

33 OTSAP Leningrad - Levashovo
8 ADON Moscow - Chakalovsky
929 GLITS Akhtubinsk
Moscow Ostalfyevo (Navy)
There are some units in other air bases such as Omsk, Bagay Baranovka, Kasputin Yar... up to 40 An-72´s put into service until last year, perhaps there are some more to be repaired but in 2022 there is no information due to the war


https://www.airrecognition.com/index.php/archive-world-worldwide-news-air-force-aviation-aerospace-air-military-defence-industry/global-defense-security-news/global-news-2018/june/4326-russia-upgrading-an-72-airlifters-for-artic-operations.html
Russia upgrading An-72 airlifters for Artic operations
June 2018
The Russian Defense Ministry contracted the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) to upgrade An-72 airlifters for Arctic operations.
The aircraft has the engines above the wing which allows it to take off and land with a cargo of several tons.
The ministry wants to have the takeoff weight, the range and payload increased, the Izvestia daily writes.

The Defense Ministry told the newspaper it issued to the UAC the tactical and technical requirements for An-72 upgrade for the use in Arctic conditions.
The main aim is to increase the takeoff weight from 32 to 34.8 tons to carry more fuel and payload.
The upgrade will cover six An-72 of the Russian Navy. They are all deployed at Ostafyevo airfield near Moscow.

An-72 modernization potential has not been exhausted, representative of the expert council of the defense and security committee of the Federation Council Yuri Zakharchenko believes. "The necessary upgrade can make the aircraft of the Defense Ministry very efficient. For example, they can use a shorter runway. Prospective concepts have to be designed and tested, but modernization of available aircraft is a reasonable and efficient path," he said.

The An-26 could carry 5.5 tons, but only 40 passengers, while the Il-112 can carry 44 passengers... which actually sounds better.

Extra range doesn't fall from the sky... it has to be designed in either with more fuel or better engines or lower profile wings and fuselage.

The Il-112 will have all new Avionics including a self defence suite also carried by the Ka-52 and Mi-28 and Mi-26 helicopters.

I doubt very much that the crashed Il-112 could lift even 3 tons of cargo in the conditions that the project was in, it's pure shit, if you have to wait for a new decent engine you will run out of planes before
Also, I don't think it can have the requested range either, due to lack of fuel and the scant surface of the wing that gives the plane less glide


The task of the An-72 and An-26 is not to transport passengers (soldiers) for that the MoD has Tu-134, An-140 and AN-148 L-410 etc...
Nor for airborne or parachute operations, since that is what the Il-76 does.
Light cargo planes are to move certain types of cargo and supplies between air force bases, which cannot be transported by rail (priority transport for the Russian Army as opposed to western ones) or cargo, equipment or supplies that are more urgent or that have to be taken to places farther from the ordinary transport routes

this is the airplame Russia and so many countries need
With a little modernization and improving the weight with more modern materials, a successful aircraft can be achieved, better than the two competitors in most aspects.


https://www.skopjesos.com.mk/mk/proizvodi/AN-74T-200A.html
AN-74T-200A

Description:
It is intended for airlifting of 10 tones of cargo in containers, stacked on pallets, as well as self-propelled and non self-propelled vehicles.

Together with the aircraft equipment the additional equipment is delivered for the following missions fulfillment: transportation of serviceman (67 persons); paratroopers landing (42 persons); cargoes paradropping (up to 7.5 t, three airdrop cargo pallets, each of 2.5 t); cargoes paradropping (up to 3.5 t, seven airdrop cargo pallets, each of 0.5 t); ambulance version (transportation of 40 patients on stretchers); ambulance version (transportation of 24 patients on stretchers and 12 patients on side seats).

FUNCTIONAL FEATURES The aircraft is an all-metal cantilever high-wing monoplane with single-finned T-tailed empennage. The aircraft is intended for operation in all-weather conditions. Arrangement of engines over the wing provides the air flow passing along the upper wing surface which results in additional lifting force formation.
Availability of high lift wing and engine thrust reverse allows to operate the aircraft on short runways, and the aircraft landing gear and high engines location allows to operate the aircraft on runways with artificial, soil, sandy, pebbled and icy coatings.
In fuselage tail section the cargo door is located which is used for cargo loading/unloading and paratroops/cargo dropping.
Cargo hatch opening is closed with the ramp that can be used as a stairs or moved under the fuselage to facilitate aircraft loading directly from the truck.

Technical details:
Maximum payload weight, t 10
Engines: type D-36 ser. ЗА double-flow turbojet engine
number x thrust, tf 2x6.5
Maximum cruissng flight speed, km/h 650
Maximum flight altitude, m 10100
Fuselage length, m 25.735
Maximum diameter, m 3.10
Flight range, km, at 9 000 m -10100 m pressure altitude and 560-580 km/h airspeed with engine thrust not exceeding maximum cruise power condition thrust, for take off weight 36 500 kg and 1-hour fuel reserve:
with maximum payload 10 000 kg and fuel reserve 6 070 kg before taking-off 1300
with maximum payload 3 210 kg and fuel reserve 12 860 kg before taking-off 4150
Crew, persons* 3

AMCXXL, this is one of the best posst I've seen on this forum. Very analytical and precise.
I'm not any kind of expert on the subject, but i agree that Il-112V looks like dead end program. That plane doesn't even pass eye test. Its body looks out of proportions with size of the wing surface .
I do have a question, though. Which engine does Russia have that could accommodate An-72? Maybe they could derate PD-8?

caveat emptor wrote:AMCXXL, this is one of the best posst I've  seen on this forum. Very analytical and precise.
I'm not any kind of expert on the subject, but i agree that Il-112V looks like dead end program. That plane doesn't even pass eye test. Its body looks out of proportions with size of the wing surface .
I do have a question, though. Which engine does Russia have that could accommodate An-72? Maybe they could derate PD-8?

The Sam-146 is rated between 68–80 kN (15,000–18,000 lbf (6.9 - 8.15 tons) and the PD-8 should be equivalent.

The D-36 of the An72 was rated 63.9 kN (14,330 lbf, 6.5 tons). 

Either a derate or a  version /variant with a smaller LP compressor (booster) and LP turbine. 
A variant could be more efficient and possibly also useful for an eventual shortened version of the SSJ100.

Of course it will need a new nacelle for installation above the wings (and a different one from the Be-200) as the positioning on the wing is totally different
An-72


Be-200