Il-112V light military transport

Some news about il-112v,

Garry will be happy :p

From what I understand they want to do some modifications to the wings. However it says that they need some changes to the engines but that at the moment there are no alternatives to the TV7-117 (in theory there is the more powerful PDV4000 in development, but probably it is still at least a few years away (and its development has likely faced additional delays as well).


https://aviation21.ru/po-programme-il-112v-planiruetsya-dorabotat-dvigatel-i-krylo/

According to the Il-112V program, it is planned to finalize the engine and wing
06/20/2023

Four years after the first flight and almost two years after the crash of the Il-112V light military transport aircraft, the first positive news on this project appeared. Telegram channel AviaCommentsinformedthat work on the IL-112V program will continue, the changes will affect the engine and wing.

In 2017-2019, Alexei Rogozin worked as Vice President of the United Aircraft Corporation for Transport Aviation and General Director of PJSC Il. He left this post almost immediately after the first flight of the Il-112V - in early April 2019.

By 2017, the development of the Il-112V had been going on for more than 15 years, but was repeatedly stopped due to the lack of engines of the required power. The first flight of the Il-112V prototype was planned to be carried out in 2016-2017. However, for the first time this aircraft took off in Voronezh on March 30, 2019. The resulting plane turned out to be heavier than the calculated one, and Rogozin was tasked with reducing the weight of the car and lifting it into the sky.

“For starters, the General Director ordered to install his desktop directly in the final assembly shop of VASO. No, the general director of Ilyushin did not stand over the soul of the assemblers of the "one hundred and twelfth". But he preferred to personally fix and remove problems in the process of how the prototype was saturated with components.

The new general director created a kind of anti-crisis headquarters, capable of solving issues related to finalizing the design of the first prototype, as well as cooperation between the competencies of the plant, design bureau, financial management, and so on, as quickly as possible. In fact, this headquarters became the prototype of a new management model that manually unites “on a living thread” in a situation where there is no time for buildup, design bureaus, factories and pickers,”reportedin February 2023 RIA FAN.

Aleksey Rogozin himself news about the continuation of work on the aircraftcommentedlike this: “Under the program, in accordance with the requirements of the Ministry of Defense, not only an aircraft was created (not without flaws, but the first copies always have them). For the first time in recent Russian history, a transport aircraft with the maximum level of import substitution was created from scratch. Dozens of enterprises that created the most modern domestic aviation systems and electronics participated in the cooperation.”

According to him, many technical solutions have been worked out, a significant part of which is in demand today when creating the MS-21 and SSJ-New aircraft, as well as to maintain the airworthiness of foreign equipment included in the fleet of Russian airlines.

“The work of the creators of the Il-112 was not wasted, but, of course, if we talk about transport aviation, a lot of time has been lost. One way or another, there was no alternative to this project and still is not. An aircraft to replace the An-26, An-32 and even An-12 should appear.

I hope that in the near future work on the Il-112, taking into account the overdue design changes, will resume. Russia needs a domestic light transporter,” Alexei Rogozin emphasized.

This is instead a translation of the telegram post quoted by the article above

Manturov spoke about the fate of the IL-112

"This project will be modified, technological changes will affect the design of the wing and engines," said Deputy Prime Minister - Head of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation Denis Manturov on the sidelines of SPIEF-2023, answering a question about the Il-112V project.

Recall that the first prototype Il-112V crashed in August 2021 in the Moscow region. The preliminary cause was called an engine fire, which was visible on the video footage of the tragedy.

The final causes of the disaster, based on the results of the work of the commission of inquiry, were not officially reported, but information leaked to the media that the engine fire led to unacceptable damage to the control system in the wing and loss of controllability.

The construction of new aircraft models was suspended, there were suggestions about the termination of the program - problems with being overweight, a disaster, difficulties with fine-tuning the engine ...

Manturov's comment shows that the decision on the fate of the Il-112 aircraft has been made and we are ready to announce that the program will continue.

The main reason that the IL-112 cannot be abandoned at the moment is that it must urgently replace the retiring An-26 fleet.

We do not have another development that is at the stage of building prototypes. And we also don’t have an alternative to the TV7-117ST engine, which is needed for an aircraft of this class, which they are trying to bring to the Il-112/114.

Certainty with the future of the program allows you to move from reasoning to the allocation of funds and intensification of work.

Follow @AviaComments

“The work of the creators of the Il-112 was not wasted, but, of course, if we talk about transport aviation, a lot of time has been lost. One way or another, there was no alternative to this project and still is not. An aircraft to replace the An-26, An-32 and even An-12 should appear.

And that is the core of the issue, this does not need to be a super plane that breaks all records in speed and payload and range and altitude, it just needs to do the job the An-26 and An-32 did and for some jobs the An-12 did.

Transport jobs don't wait till the aircraft is full before flying, the An-12s they have didn't fly with 20 ton payloads everywhere they went... sometimes they would have used an An-12 because it was all that was available. Sometimes they might have sent an An-12 with a 1 ton payload because the return flight was going to be 12 tons and their other lighter aircraft couldn't manage such a payload for the return flight, so instead of sending one An-26 with one ton of payload to a location and having 4 or five An-26s bringing back 4 or 5 tons of payload each, they send an An-12 there and use the An-12 to fly the 20 tons back...

All of this stuff is about logistics and if the Il-112 is slightly faster or slightly shorter ranged than the An-26 it doesn't change a lot as long as they work out that it can still reach the airfields and operate from the airfields they have.

The priority is getting rid of the old worn out Antonovs and getting new Russian planes into service.

In 5 years time they might introduce new engines that transform their performance and make them amazing, but the real point is that they need to get the Antonovs out of service before their old state starts resulting in crashes.

I hope that in the near future work on the Il-112, taking into account the overdue design changes, will resume. Russia needs a domestic light transporter,” Alexei Rogozin emphasized.

Bold part emphasized by me...

We do not have another development that is at the stage of building prototypes. And we also don’t have an alternative to the TV7-117ST engine, which is needed for an aircraft of this class, which they are trying to bring to the Il-112/114.

On the positive side when they do find a solution to the engine that solution can be applied to both aircraft to improve the performance of both platforms... whether it is an engine booster or upgraded engine.

There has been a lot of time wasted on transport planes in Russia and they really need to pull finger and get new planes into use and old planes out of use before people start to die in crashes.

Much of the delays has been lack of a suitable engine, but now new engines are coming online so hopefully there will be progress... in a range of areas.

The Russian Il-112V light military transport aircraft will be redesigned for PD-8 jet engines, RIA Novosti reports, citing an informed source. " The #IL112V design is planned to be reworked for #PD8 jet engines . In particular, a number of changes will be made to the aircraft wing design, fuel system, and other onboard systems ," the agency's interlocutor said. Earlier, Deputy Prime Minister - Head of the Ministry of Industry and Trade Denis Manturov told reporters during #SPIEF2023 that the project of the Il-112V military transport aircraft would be modified, technological changes would affect the design of the wing and engines. MAX aviation

https://ria.ru/20230719/samolet-1884971819.html

gc3762 wrote:The Russian Il-112V light military transport aircraft will be redesigned for PD-8 jet engines, RIA Novosti reports, citing an informed source. " The #IL112V design is planned to be reworked for #PD8 jet engines . In particular, a number of changes will be made to the aircraft wing design, fuel system, and other onboard systems ," the agency's interlocutor said. Earlier, Deputy Prime Minister - Head of the Ministry of Industry and Trade Denis Manturov told reporters during #SPIEF2023 that the project of the Il-112V military transport aircraft would be modified, technological changes would affect the design of the wing and engines. MAX aviation

https://ria.ru/20230719/samolet-1884971819.html

It is logical the Il-112V as it was raised was shit
If they redesign it and put much more powerful engines to carry much more load, the logical thing is that they change the name, something like Il-126 or Il-176

lancelot wrote:What a typical management decision.

The Il-112 was supposed to be an An-26 replacement. If they use the PD-8 then it will become more like an An-72 replacement. i.e. it is not the same thing. They will have to redesign the aircraft and make the whole thing even larger. None of the molds and tools developed specifically for the Il-112 will be usable on it either. In fact it might end up even larger than the An-72, since that uses two 64 kN engines, the PD-8 is a 78kN engine.

Well, the An-72 was the plane that the Soviets designed to replace the An-26. That is why the new plane should replace both. The Il-112V as it was raised was insufficient if not to say a botch

It was only the collapse of the USSR that prevented the An-26 from being replaced by the An-72, in fact between the idiot Yeltsin and the Ukrainian Nazis killed the company, the An-72 would have been manufactured in Omsk from from the mid 90's. I already wrote a post about this.
The MoD of Russia is more interested in an aircraft with the capacity of the An-74 (up to 10t.) That was sold to Kazakhstan or Iran just before the coup in Ukraine, in fact several An-72 have been modified, increasing their power so that it reaches an MTOW of around 36 tons like the An-74, 20% more than the original An-72, which effectively had 6500 kg thrust engines

The segment of 5 or 6 tons of payload is dead, the C-295 certainly reaches 9t. but it is an airplane designed for paratroopers that has a low and not very wide hold, it is its small empty weight that allows it to carry more weight
But the Russian MoD seems to want a plane with a hold about 2.5 meters high, rather than the An-72 which is about 2.2
It is not so much a problem of the amount of charge but of the form. It must also be adapted to load using standard pallets, I don't know the measurements that will be used in Russia but in NATO they are quite wide.
The best thing would be to remanufacture the Il-112 with those powerful engines and bring it to a segment of 10-12 tons, which would remove most of the work from the AN-12s that are in fact used little and not with all their load given their old age, but smile especially for bulky loads, wider or taller than normal.
If An-12 has a replacement it should have a capacity of about 30-32 t.

Well, basically they are just keeping the naming and the lessons learned from the experience.

The change will be something comparable to the first 2 Ivan gren landing ships and the new serie.

It would be interesting to know if it will have engines below or above the wing (like the An-72).

And this means again that there could be an empty niche for a smaller turboprop with 5 tons payload, which in this case it could be covered by either a renamed An-140 with a rear ramp (similar mod as what Iran did) or by a Ladoga with a rear ramp.

As far as the engine, maybe it is perfectly ok in the power rating needed for the il-114 (it just need some minor mod to prevent some unseen failure modes) or in the derated version for the Ladoga, but the il-112V needed it to be more powerful to be effective and that power could not be reached without basically making a brand new engine.

By the way, has it been confirmed that this new cargo aircraft named il-112 will have two PD-8 turbofan or will it be powered by two turboprop derivative of the PD-8? A turboshaft (helicopter engine) version of it (with a takeoff power of about 12000hp) is in the making for the Mi-26 and a turboprop will be an obvious further development.

Wow... lots of tantrums.... there were complaints that the Il-112 was under powered and its engines were unreliable, but now they have decided on making this a jet there are more complaints and moaning... almost like no solution will please some.

The Il-112 was given a larger body to hold bulky loads so rather more powerful engines are going to improve the flight performance to what it would have been with a slimmer engine... but it can still carry the bulkier payloads... I would think that would be a good thing... the extra power means heavier loads or more fuel for better range or both, which again is a good thing.

They might locate the engines above the wing like they did on the An-72, but the An-74 shifted them to a more conventional underwing pylon location because while the upper surface location was good for Upper surface blowing effect giving vectored thrust effectively... the cost was difficulty in maintenance and support at airfields in the sticks... so conventional underwing mounts is most likely in my opinion.

I doubt this improvement is to greatly increase flight speeds, but more for increasing weights and payload performance and extending range... which means brand new wings would likely not be needed.

The most reasonable thing to do is to proceed with the Il-276as replacement for the An-12.
The model can use the PS-90 engines and in a few years the PD-14. After that you can go
back to the Il-112V and either use the PD-8 engines or the derivative of it for propellers.

AMCXXL wrote:The best thing would be to remanufacture the Il-112 with those powerful engines and bring it to a segment of 10-12 tons, which would remove most of the work from the AN-12s that are in fact used little and not with all their load given their old age, but smile especially for bulky loads, wider or taller than normal.

I agree with both considerations, and it is at least a couple of years that I wrote something similar... I still think, however, that a narrower 5 tons payload aircraft could still be useful (e.g. upgraded an-140 under another name or military transport version of Ladoga).

AMCXXL wrote:If An-12 has a replacement it should have a capacity of about 30-32 t.

There was already an aircraft proposed with the desired characteristics, the Tu-330.

The commonalities with the Tu-204/214 makes it even more interesting now.

GarryB wrote: They might locate the engines above the wing like they did on the An-72, but the An-74 shifted them to a more conventional underwing pylon location because while the upper surface location was good for Upper surface blowing effect giving vectored thrust effectively... the cost was difficulty in maintenance and support at airfields in the sticks... so conventional underwing mounts is most likely in my opinion.

Actually the An-74 has the same overwing engines of the An-72.

GarryB wrote:I doubt this improvement is to greatly increase flight speeds, but more for increasing weights and payload performance and extending range... which means brand new wings would likely not be needed.

I fear the changes will be much bigger than what you believe, however they need to cover a bit what they are going to do so that they can more or less justify all the time and money spent on this project in the past.

The An-74TK-300 has underwing engines.

Hole wrote:The An-74TK-300 has underwing engines.

isn't that the preliminary designation of the An-148? (Which is a Airliner derivative of the An-74 with underwing engines).

Most of the An-74 are the artic versions of the An-72 and they have over the wing engines.

yeah I noticed that too. A "redesigned Il-112" .... with 2x underwing jet engines
almost the exact spec as the An-148 .... that just happened to be assembled at VASO .... where the Il-112 was to be assembled
and surprise surprise the PD-8 has roughly the same power as the engines that the An-148 uses ....

all the jigs etc would be stored somewhere ... too easy

commonsense anyway for such a big country - jets are much faster
same problem here in AU - it takes a Hercules about 3 months to cross the country .... C-17s do endless work
whilst the Hercules just sit around gathering dust

The most reasonable thing to do is to proceed with the Il-276as replacement for the An-12.
The model can use the PS-90 engines and in a few years the PD-14. After that you can go
back to the Il-112V and either use the PD-8 engines or the derivative of it for propellers.

I agree the Il-276 should be going forward much faster than it appears to be at the moment, but those PS-90 engines will be going to Il-476 and civilian aircraft as a much greater priority.

The Il-112 is to replace the light antonovs like the An-26 and with new jet engines it could also replace the An-72 too.

Over time they might improve the propeller engines with more power so they can do the job, but jet engine powered Il-112s would be useful replacing a range of different aircraft currently used and rapidly running out of time.

There was that 5,000 hp engine they were talking about which would be just fine but clearly it wont be ready soon enough which suggests the matter is becoming urgent enough for big decisions to be made... like making it a jet.

I agree with both considerations, and it is at least a couple of years that I wrote something similar... I still think, however, that a narrower 5 tons payload aircraft could still be useful (e.g. upgraded an-140 under another name or military transport version of Ladoga).

I would think something in the 10-12 ton weight range would take a lot of the load off the An-12s and the Mi-26s, and it could certainly replace the An-26 and An-72 and its bulky shape means it can carry outsized payloads that the smaller aircraft could carry even if they could manage their weight but not their dimensions.

There was already an aircraft proposed with the desired characteristics, the Tu-330.

The commonalities with the Tu-204/214 makes it even more interesting now.

Both the Il-276 and the Tu-330 are based on existing types that are now in serial mass production so it makes sense to make either or both aircraft as they are different enough to warrant their development and production. Some export customers might not want Il-476s and so the Il-276 might not have so many advantages for them so the Tu-330 with its commonality with the Tu-214 family could allow them to buy a bigger heavier transport that shares commonality with aircraft they might base on the Tupolev like inflight refuelling aircraft or AEW aircraft or civilian airliners or VIP transport.

The point is that the two types are different enough to be both useful, and of course the commonality of the Il-276 with the 476 should make it relatively quick and easy and safe to develop and get flying and get into production.

With the Tu-330 they can take some time to develop it while they are making as many airliners as they can. This would help with getting enough engines too.

however they need to cover a bit what they are going to do so that they can more or less justify all the time and money spent on this project in the past.

Cynical bloody westerner....  they are making the changes to get a good product that works and can be produced in sufficient numbers to be useful...

isn't that the preliminary designation of the An-148? (Which is a Airliner derivative of the An-74 with underwing engines).

Yes. The amazing brand new Antonov is an old Antonov with the engines in a more convenient location... tells you everything you need to know about the 21st C potential of Antonov...

yeah I noticed that too. A "redesigned Il-112" .... with 2x underwing jet engines
almost the exact spec as the An-148 .... that just happened to be assembled at VASO .... where the Il-112 was to be assembled

There was no need for ground breaking amazing exotic new generation design here... they were going to use an engine used widely by helicopters for commonality and low cost, but now it appears they are using a new jet engine which has rather more power.

same problem here in AU - it takes a Hercules about 3 months to cross the country .... C-17s do endless work
whilst the Hercules just sit around gathering dust

The Hercs were sold as strategic light transports but actually they are theatre light transports... any trip for New Zealand C-130s to the Islands means hopping from island to island picking up fuel on the way. No point in sending them to Antarctica their payload would be mostly fuel for the return trip.

We would have been much better off with Il-76s but that would not be acceptable given out place at the bottom of the western world (geographically and politically).

GarryB wrote:
I agree the Il-276 should be going forward much faster than it appears to be at the moment, but those PS-90 engines will be going to Il-476 and civilian aircraft as a much greater priority.

The Il-112 is to replace the light antonovs like the An-26 and with new jet engines it could also replace the An-72 too.

Over time they might improve the propeller engines with more power so they can do the job, but jet engine powered Il-112s would be useful replacing a range of different aircraft currently used and rapidly running out of time.

There was that 5,000 hp engine they were talking about which would be just fine but clearly it wont be ready soon enough which suggests the matter is becoming urgent enough for big decisions to be made... like making it a jet.

Yeah, since they did not speak much recently about the PDV-4000 it is highly possible that it will be delayed a few years, given that they need to concentrate on all other projects.

Klimov on the VK-650, VK-1600 and on the fine tuning of the TV7-117 for both the il-114 and the Ladoga,

Perm engine and Saturn on the PD-8 (plus all the PD-14 variants) and in parallel on the PD-35.

And I am not sure if them or Kutznetov is managing the conversion of the PD-8 into a turboshaft (helicopter engine).

Unfortunately all of these separate projects had to be done almost at the same time.( And luckily perm did not subcontract the combustion chamber of the PD-14 to ivchenko-motor sich, otherwise there would have been additional issues...)


As I wrote elsewhere I am not that much of a fan of the il-276 project.
An-12 tasks could be probably be splitted between the new jet version of the il-112 and the Tu-330 (one of my favourite canceled projects from the russian aviation industry).
I am not sure that the work on the il-276 was brought to a higher state of progression that  what was previously done one by Tupulev on the Tu-330 and I would prefer if Ilyushin would concentrate first on the "new" il-112 and , if the have spare resources, on the "new" il-106 (the 80 tons payload version, not the An-124 copy).

GarryB wrote:

however they need to cover a bit what they are going to do so that they can more or less justify all the time and money spent on this project in the past.

Cynical bloody westerner....  they are making the changes to get a good product that works and can be produced in sufficient numbers to be useful...

Well soviet union did something similar as well with the Tu-22 vs the Tu-22M, two completely different aircrafts

GarryB wrote:

isn't that the preliminary designation of the An-148? (Which is a Airliner derivative of the An-74 with underwing engines).

Yes. The amazing brand new Antonov is an old Antonov with the engines in a more convenient location... tells you everything you need to know about the 21st C potential of Antonov...

Actually the under the wing engine location for the An-74 derivative is convenient only for maintenance and cost issue for an airliner. For the an-72 and the artic an-74 it was a great advantage to have the "cheburaska" configuration.

Possibly Russia will use some concepts from those in the new il-112 (or even propose 2 versions, one classical and one with over the wing engines)

The last successful Antonov aircrafts were the An-72 and the An-124. Since the An-124 is an extremely expensive project impossible to be done without Russia.They tried to reuse the An72 and an-26/an32 concepts as much as possible (where Russia was only used as components supplier).

An-70 was on paper also a very promising project. Too bad it suffered of scope and size creep (going from being a possiilble An-12 replacement to a not needed Il-76 alternative) and was killed by the Ukrainian-Russian issues.

A lot of concept from it have been however taken into the chinese y-20 (a sort of illegitimate child between the An-70 and the C-17)

If I am not mistaken the only new aircraft (which was not a modification of previous projects)
developed by Antonov after 1992 was the An-140, which has not been particularly successful. Maybe it will have a better future in its highly modified Iranian derivative

As I wrote elsewhere I am not that much of a fan of the il-276 project.
An-12 tasks could be probably be splitted between the new jet version of the il-112 and the Tu-330 (one of my favourite canceled projects from the russian aviation industry).
I am not sure that the work on the il-276 was brought to a higher state of progression that what was previously done one by Tupulev on the Tu-330 and I would prefer if Ilyushin would concentrate first on the "new" il-112 and , if the have spare resources, on the "new" il-106 (the 80 tons payload version, not the An-124 copy).

Well a jet powered Il-112 might be in the 12-15 ton payload range which might make replacements for the An-12 much less urgent while also replacing the An-72 and An-26 family of aircraft.

The Il-276 should be fairly straight forward and relatively quick to get into serial production... it should be possible to make them in the same factories making Il-476s and vice versa... so set up a couple of extra factories to make Il-276s so you are making both and then depending on the numbers of each aircraft you need you can change production factories to which ever is more urgently needed... remember the A-100 and Il-478 will also be needed too.

I honestly think that now the Tu-214 is being built that aircraft of the Tu-204/214 family should be produced for teh Russian military to replace all the obsolete aircraft like the Il-20 and Il-22 as well as the Tu-154M and Tu-134 and Yak-40 and the Il-38... and if that is the case then it makes sense to have the Tu-330 transport modification made too so the spares and support and equipment are standardised.

I think there would be a good export market for both types as replacements for C-130/An-12 aircraft that is more affordable than the A-400M and the C-17, and the Il-276 would be a useful plane if you also needed a plane for heavier payloads in the 50 ton range like the Il-476 as they are almost the same.

The jet engines for the Il-112 might take pressure off the An-12 replacement and later on when the more powerful prop engines are ready a Il-112 version could be built too.

Well soviet union did something similar as well with the Tu-22 vs the Tu-22M, two completely different aircrafts

The Tu-22M is a vastly better aircraft and well worth the money spent... especially the M3 models, but if they had admitted they were different aircraft they never would have gotten the funding which would have been a shame.

Actually the under the wing engine location for the An-74 derivative is convenient only for maintenance and cost issue for an airliner. For the an-72 and the artic an-74 it was a great advantage to have the "cheburaska" configuration.

Well they use the same engine location for their jet powered amphibians and a roof hatch and the engine cowlings opening into frames to stand on while working on the engines means you really don't need special equipment to work on them... you just need some way of getting your tools and parts up there...

Regarding Antonov, remember what they managed to make and not what they became... the An-2 is still an excellent aircraft and if they were brand new they would keep working for decades to come... and I liked the An-22 too... an awesome beast.

GarryB wrote:Well a jet powered Il-112 might be in the 12-15 ton payload range which might make replacements for the An-12 much less urgent while also replacing the An-72 and An-26 family of aircraft.

The Il-276 should be fairly straight forward and relatively quick to get into serial production... it should be possible to make them in the same factories making Il-476s and vice versa... so set up a couple of extra factories to make Il-276s so you are making both and then depending on the numbers of each aircraft you need you can change production factories to which ever is more urgently needed... remember the A-100 and Il-478 will also be needed too.

They would still need to spend a lot of time and money and do a lot of testing. Actually they would need to do a similar testing campaign in cost and length for either the il-276 and the Tu-330.

So Russia would have to see if it is really worth, especially if there will be at the same time also the 12-15 tons payload il-112 new and the 30-35 tons payload Tu-330 (also considering that the testing campaign for the Il-112 new will have to start again from almost the beginning).

Furthermore there is still the need to produce il76 for several years, so Ulyanovsk is quite busy.

If necessary to set up new factories, I would prefer them to concentrate on the il-112new or on the Tu-330 (not to speak about the il-106 or the An-124 replacement).

And for the smaller end of the military transport aircrafts (5 tons payload) Aviastar in Samara could be tasked to produce either an upgraded An-140 (under a different name) or a variant of Ladoga with rear ramp.

Such Ladoga variant could be in service by 2026/ 2027 and if Russia is really desperate for a small aircraft in the meanwhile they could read across the Iranian modification to the An-140 to expedite the process (Aviastar is fully capable to produce it).

GarryB wrote:I honestly think that now the Tu-214 is being built that aircraft of the Tu-204/214 family should be produced for teh Russian military to replace all the obsolete aircraft like the Il-20 and Il-22 as well as the Tu-154M and Tu-134 and Yak-40 and the Il-38... and if that is the case then it makes sense to have the Tu-330 transport modification made too so the spares and support and equipment are standardised

I agree, the Tu-204/214 would be perfect also for all the special versions like radar aircraft or naval patrol (possibly to be paired with a smaller turboprop which should be already in development) (and maybe also  as a tanker aircraft.

Well soviet union did something similar as well with the Tu-22 vs the Tu-22M, two completely different aircrafts

GarryB wrote:
The Tu-22M is a vastly better aircraft and well worth the money spent... especially the M3 models, but if they had admitted they were different aircraft they never would have gotten the funding which would have been a shame.

Exactly, so I hope that the same will happen with this il-112 "new".

GarryB wrote:
Regarding Antonov, remember what they managed to make and not what they became... the An-2 is still an excellent aircraft and if they were brand new they would keep working for decades to come... and I liked the An-22 too... an awesome beast.

Exactly, and the An-2 will still be produced and continue to fly in the SibNIA TVS-2MS, SibNIA TVS-2-DT and /or
SibNIA TVS-2-DTS variants (especially since soon the (derated) 1200 hp turboprop version of the VK-1600 will be available).

Who knows, after the SMO is finished Russia can grab back the Antonov name (and create a brand new design Bureau in Novosibirsk, Moscow or another Russian city) and restart using the Antonov designation for those aircrafts.

They would still need to spend a lot of time and money and do a lot of testing.

Of course they will, safety is important.

But anything they introduce will need time and money to make sure it is right for the jobs they intend to use it for.

Actually they would need to do a similar testing campaign in cost and length for either the il-276 and the Tu-330.

Not sure how you can claim that... just putting new jet engines on a design that was at the prototype stage that had just lost weight and was approaching serial production stage can't be compared with a mature in service design like the Il-76 with a shorter fuselage and smaller wing with weight reductions and capacity reduction and two instead of four engines... it is essentially the opposite of what Antonov did with the An-124 to create the An-225... but going the other way which is easier because you don't need to worry about the increased weights of fuel and payload and takeoff weight..

Equally the Tu-330 was well worked out with everything except a full sized mockup... there are factories currently making as many Tu-214s as they can, but eventually production of the newer types will catch up with demand which means eventually there are going to be Tu-214 factories that are sitting idle, so developing one or two full sized prototypes at one of the factories on the sidelines that can be tested and checked out means that when they stop making Tu-214s for domestic airlines some of the factories can shift to Tu-330 transports for domestic use and the others can produce any Tu-214s that might be exported to other countries bullied by the west and wanting an alternative... and they might want Tu-330s for themselves eventually too.

A factory making Il-476s could do the same... on a single line they could make two or three full sized Il-276 prototypes for testing and then revert back to making Il-476s while the Il-276s are tested and evaluated. They might decide that 20 tons payload is not enough and that instead of the Il-276 using the same engines as the Il-476 they might install slightly more powerful engines in the smaller aircraft to boost payload to say 25 or 30 tons.

(also considering that the testing campaign for the Il-112 new will have to start again from almost the beginning).

If the Il-112 design had to start from scratch then it would not make sense to use jet engines... just use existing engines which are going to be used on the Il-114 anyway and just accept that it will be under powered and reduce the manual loads allowed and the range performance data for mission planning.

If the Jet idea was not faster and easier and cheaper I doubt it would be even considered.

Furthermore there is still the need to produce il76 for several years, so Ulyanovsk is quite busy.

The point is that an Il-276 factory can be designed to make Il-276s or Il-476s or other aircraft based on their design.

Remember there are lots of different aircraft based on the Il-76 including inflight refuelling aircraft Il-78s, AWACS A-100s, even laser blasters A-60s, and there are jammer models and fire fighting models etc etc etc, and how many different models of An-12 are there.... so this is not just about making new transport planes, there are lots of other types that need to be made and having a factory that can make Il-76 replacements and An-12 replacements without much of a change is useful because you can change easily if you need for new domestic and export orders... the rest of the world is screaming out for Il-76 replacements because the alternative right now is the C-17 which is not available to a lot of countries and even those allowed to buy it know it is eye wateringly expensive.

If necessary to set up new factories, I would prefer them to concentrate on the il-112new or on the Tu-330 (not to speak about the il-106 or the An-124 replacement).

Factories should be allocated to produce the Il-112 already... there was mention that the factory that made the prototypes is converted to making Il-96s but that suggests it was only ever intended to make prototypes if it can make Il-96s then it would not be suitable for Il-112 serial production unless it had a huge number of production lines.

The Tu-330s will be likely produced in the factories currently making Tu-214s as fast as they can, because as production of superjet and MS-21 get ramped up these factories might start converting Tu-214s to military use to replace the Tu-154Ms and Tu-134s and Yaks and older Il-20/22 and Il-38 types in service, but equally producing Tu-330 transports on the same tooling that made the Tu-214 makes sense as well.

I would say the Il-106 that was designed to replace the An-22 will be first because the An-22 was widely used and filled a niche just below the An-124 and with them gone the more expensive An-124 would need to be used so getting the lighter cheaper aircraft operational and in service should save some money...

Plus the PD-35 engine it needs will take time and the Slon four engined aircraft needs those engines too so both are going to be delayed.

And for the smaller end of the military transport aircrafts (5 tons payload) Aviastar in Samara could be tasked to produce either an upgraded An-140 (under a different name) or a variant of Ladoga with rear ramp.

I hope not, those are civilian aircraft not intended for the military and would need to be seriously looked at from top to bottom.

Funny you think new engines for the Il-112 needs a complete restart of the design and testing programme but Ladoga just needs a rear ramp fitted and it is ready to go.

As a structure an aircraft is a tube... the energy of the airflow moving around it in flight is easily enough to rip it to pieces if it is not designed carefully.

Such Ladoga variant could be in service by 2026/ 2027 and if Russia is really desperate for a small aircraft in the meanwhile they could read across the Iranian modification to the An-140 to expedite the process (Aviastar is fully capable to produce it).

Civilian demand will mean little spare capacity to meet the needs of the military.

Exactly, so I hope that the same will happen with this il-112 "new".

I disagree... the situation is totally different. The Tu-22 design was not good enough and didn't have the growth potential to get better to the point where it would be good enough.

The Il-112 just needs slightly more powerful prop engines. Such engines are not available so they are cheating and using jet engines instead.

This is not a complete redesign to create a completely different aircraft with nothing in common even the ejector seats...

They are just putting jet engines on the Il-112.

Anything else really would take too long.

Who knows, after the SMO is finished Russia can grab back the Antonov name (and create a brand new design Bureau in Novosibirsk, Moscow or another Russian city) and restart using the Antonov designation for those aircrafts.

That would just be an insult to the designers that redesigned the An-2 and made it modern.

It would also be giving credit to a designer that didn't work on the new design.

The Fins don't call their rifles Kalashnikovs and neither did the Israelis or South Africans... even though that is exactly what they were with a few tweaks.

lancelot wrote:What a typical management decision.

The Il-112 was supposed to be an An-26 replacement. If they use the PD-8 then it will become more like an An-72 replacement. i.e. it is not the same thing. They will have to redesign the aircraft and make the whole thing even larger. None of the molds and tools developed specifically for the Il-112 will be usable on it either. In fact it might end up even larger than the An-72, since that uses two 64 kN engines, the PD-8 is a 78kN engine.

This is basically a new aircraft. It is not that I am necessarily against making something like that. But the An-72 did not sell all that well in the first place. It was produced in much smaller numbers than the An-26. NATO basically has no aircraft in that segment that I can think of. Which makes me think the use cases for it are limited in the first place.

The turbofan aircraft will have like twice the cruise speed than a turboprop, so the wing will have to be totally different and optimized for a different flight regime, plus it makes no sense to use the same fuselage when you have a vastly more powerful engine. The PD-8 turbofan is like three or four times more powerful than the TV7 turboprop. So you can carry much more payload which means you will want a much larger fuselage.

I would just develop the Il-276 which is an An-12 replacement and skip this thing. If they develop it I doubt it will sell all that well.

I kind of get why they want to do this, in the sense that they have had problems with the engine, and the whole aircraft is overweight for the engine in the first place. I would just fix whichever issues the engine has and redesign the fuselage. If the TV7 turboprop has issues, it is going to be used on the Mi-38 and Il-114 projects as well, so it is not like they can just brush off any issues it has. They need to fix them.

If you compare the Russian Il-112 with other projects which compete with it like the Spanish C-295 you will see that the fuselage design is totally different. For whatever reason they decided to basically make a short and fat aircraft with the Il-112. I think because of a Russian Military requirement to be able to put certain vehicles inside the aircraft. There are other (much smaller) aircraft with similar airframe like the C-212 but those are not meant to fly long distances.

Better a bird in the hand than two in the bush

The original Il-112 concept didn't work well but if this mutant works out and ends up fulfilling another niche while still being able to fulfill the original role, so then roll with it.
It's a better idea than scrapping it and ending up with nothing ready to put into service either for this or that.

In the future when more new-gen engines are available the same airframe can be reused, sized down or sized up as appropriate, and used with different engines to make a transport aircraft optimal for a different weight class and dimensions.

They have decided to put a jet engine in the Il-112.

The other engines it was designed with was chosen because they are widely used helicopter engines and engine availability and parts will be readily available and cheap, but it was a little under powered.

If they couldn't get the engines then they likely wouldn't consider using the jets so we have to assume the fact that they are going with jet engines that they think they can do it relatively quickly and that the new engines will be available to get the aircraft into service.

They were talking about new more powerful propeller engines but they seem to be delayed so the options would be to go ahead with an underpowered engine which likely would reduce performance, use an uprated version of that engine with higher maintenance and lower fuel economy and possibly reliability issues, or go for this jet engine... a third option is delay it till a more powerful engine is available and they seem to be going with the jet engine.

This engine should rather significantly improve performance which is not a bad thing because it was clearly designed to have a bigger body for outsized internal payloads which means the engines need to be more powerful to enable the same flight performance to be achieved compared with a slimmer aircraft, but obviously they needed the additional internal volume for whatever payloads they intend to use this aircraft for.

The extra power will mean it can replace the An-25/6 types and probably also An-32s which are not widely used in Russia because it was a high powered hot and high type, but that should just increase the appeal of the aircraft for users operating in hot and high places like India and Afghanistan etc etc.

The extra power and jet flight speed should also make the An-72 less necessary... and remember the core purpose of the new transports is to replace obsolete Antonovs from Russian Armed Forces fleets so replacing the An-24/25/26/32 and An-72 is an extra bonus.

Some time in the future when that more powerful prop engine is ready they can make an Il-112 version with that engine too, but replacing the obsolete Antonovs sooner rather than later is the priority.

The An-12 also needs replacement but a lot of An-12 jobs will be less than 20 tons payload over large distances so an Il-112 with jet engines might replace the An-12 in a lot of roles too if they increase its fuel capacity and increase its MTOW because of the extra engine power.

The Il-276 and Tu-330 now make good sense in my opinion as both aircraft would be useful and they could be a bit flexible about things, the Il-276 is supposed to be a reduced length and wingspan Il-476 with two engines instead of four, but there is no reason why the Il-276 has to have the same engines the Il-476 uses.

The original Il-76 engines were 12 ton thrust engines and the Il-476 will use PD-14s with 14-15 tons of thrust, or PS=90A engines with about 14.5 tons thrust each at the moment, but the new Il-276 could eventually use PD-16s to boost flight performance and payload capacity and fuel weight and MTOW to 25 to 30 tons perhaps.

The Tu-330 might have PD-18 engines and its 35 ton capacity could allow it to carry the various Boomerang class vehicles... though those vehicles are quite tall and might not fit well without taking off the turrets.

I rather think the Tu-330 would be a better idea than trying to make a transport version of the Sukhoi Superjet or the MS-21 even though they are newer aircraft.