Military Review

PD-14: the most powerful engine for civil aviation in Russia

29
Perm engineers are testing a new aviation the engine, which will be the first Russian development in 30 years. It will be put on short- and medium-range aircraft. Including the new MS-21 airliner. Tests have shown that the engine will be able to compete on equal terms with American and European motors.

29 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. vviller
    vviller 31 August 2017 18: 49
    0
    the first Russian development in 30 years
    and they in general, Perm engineers, engines, when was the last time they did?
    1. Sorokin
      Sorokin 3 August 2018 15: 38
      0
      PS_90 in 86 and on its base all the gas pumps in the 90s the presidential board on them. The ring itself on the CNC in the ICD was pumped.
  2. svp67
    svp67 31 August 2017 19: 01
    +4
    How much is the PD-14, even outwardly unlike the previously made engines we can see "by eye"
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 31 August 2017 19: 34
      +3
      Quote: svp67
      How much is the PD-14, even outwardly unlike the previously made engines we can see "by eye"

      Already at all do PD-15 and even talk about the beginning of work on PD-18 ...
      A family of aircraft engines with take-off thrust from 8 to 18 tons is planned to be created on the basis of the PD-14 gas generator, Alexander Inozemtsev, general designer of Aviadvigatel (Perm), told Interfax-AVN.
      “The most powerful engine in the PD-14 family will be the PD-18R modification. This engine is designed for heavy passenger and transport aircraft of the IL-96-300 / 400T type, ”the general designer said.
      According to him, for the PD-18R engine, the highest take-off thrust in the PD-14 family will be 20 tons. “This is the biggest craving in this family,” A. Inozemtsev noted.
      However, he did not rule out that in the future it is possible to increase traction. “So far, according to our calculations, this gas generator is capable of providing traction up to 20 tons. To get takeoff thrust of more than 20 tons, another gas generator of a greater dimension is needed, ”A. Inozemtsev said.
      It was previously reported that PD-18R (P-reducer). can be used on Tu-214, Il-96-300 and Il-96-400T aircraft. According to experts, the efficiency of the PD-18R will be about three to five percent higher than that of the PD-14.

      hi
      1. DiKoff
        DiKoff 1 September 2017 13: 30
        0
        Where do PD-15 do ??? just returned from Rybinsk and Perm - it’s very interesting to find out, but for some reason the engineers on the Aviadvigatel and Perm Motors and Saturn did not hear about this miracle, and they tried to establish serial PD-14s only from 2018, maybe you meant PD-14M with traction 15600?
    2. prosto_rgb
      prosto_rgb 31 August 2017 21: 38
      +1
      Quote: svp67
      How much is the PD-14, even outwardly unlike the previously made engines we can see "by eye"

      Is it exactly PD-14?
    3. Skifotavr
      Skifotavr 31 August 2017 21: 44
      +2
      Quote: svp67
      How much is the PD-14, even outwardly unlike the previously made engines we can see "by eye"

      Are you kidding me? In the photo you provided, the breakthrough NK-93 ruined by agents of influence!
      1. svp67
        svp67 31 August 2017 23: 21
        +3
        Quote: prosto_rgb
        Is it exactly PD-14?

        Quote: Skifotavr
        Are you kidding me? In the photo you provided, the breakthrough NK-93 ruined by agents of influence!

        Litter, did not understand ... the error came out. But still, the PD-14 is clearly different ...

      2. 32363
        32363 1 September 2017 11: 23
        +1
        Quote: Skifotavr
        Quote: svp67
        How much is the PD-14, even outwardly unlike the previously made engines we can see "by eye"

        Are you kidding me? In the photo you provided, the breakthrough NK-93 ruined by agents of influence!

        when jumping, will paratroopers suck in such an engine?
    4. boris sorokin
      boris sorokin 1 September 2017 19: 07
      0
      In the photo is not PD-17 but NK-93
  3. senima56
    senima56 31 August 2017 20: 45
    +2
    This "buttock" with PD-14 has been going on for several years! Everything is “tested” and “tested” ... I understand that it’s impossible without this, but why it was a few years ago to shout to the whole world that “A new engine was CREATED” not inferior, but in many ways superior .... "A it turns out in fact, nothing has been created! Here all the "tests and trials" will pass then let's shout and rejoice!
    1. ADmA_RUS
      ADmA_RUS 1 September 2017 08: 41
      +2
      There is such a thing. If you do not understand, then these are your problems.
      1. senima56
        senima56 1 September 2017 11: 57
        0
        I congratulate you if everything is clear and understandable to you!
    2. Nikolai Grek
      Nikolai Grek 1 September 2017 16: 51
      +5
      Engine progress
      Developed on the basis of PS-12 (1999), officially since 2008.

      In early April 2012, the assembly of the demonstrator engine began. On April 16, 2012, there were also four gas generators and several installations of the fan model module, a full-size compressor, a combustion chamber, two turbines, one of which had already been tested at CIAM (the second was tested on April 16, 2012). The first launch on the ground test bench of the first model of the PD-14 demonstrator engine took place on June 9, 2012.

      In September 2013, it was planned to complete bench tests.

      On October 30, 2015, tests began on the wing of the IL-76LL flying laboratory.

      Serial production has been planned since 2016, with annual output of at least 20-30 engines. Currently, the start date of its mass production has been shifted to 2018. According to UAC estimates, approximately in 2019–2020, up to two hundred engines a year will be required. The cost of the entire program is estimated at 70 billion rubles, of which 35 billion rubles. will be allocated from the budget.

      so no one yelled at anything !!! tongue tongue tongue bully bully bully
  4. Music
    Music 1 September 2017 03: 27
    +3
    That's when the MS will fly with these engines, then we can say - we did!
    1. senima56
      senima56 1 September 2017 12: 04
      +1
      So I'm talking about the same thing! If the engine is in the process of "testing, testing and debugging", then it is not there! At one time, the notorious Mr. S. Ivanov said that the T-50 will go into production in 2013! But now, it turns out, in 2017 the first stage of testing this aircraft should (!!!) end! And next year they will start the second stage ... So, talking about a 5th generation airplane is still so early! This is obviously why Mr. S. Ivanov is now “excommunicated” from the technical part and tackled the tigers in the taiga? I hope he can do it better.
  5. Engineer
    Engineer 1 September 2017 10: 12
    0
    PD-14: the most powerful engine for civil aviation in Russia

    Is this a joke? Nk-93 - 18000kgs, PS-90A2 up to 18000kgs, on the same IL-76-90 there is PS-90-76 with a thrust of 16000kgs, and PD-14, which should be clear even to the author from the name 14000kgs.
    1. ADmA_RUS
      ADmA_RUS 1 September 2017 13: 30
      +1
      And if you do not pull out of context?
      1. Engineer
        Engineer 1 September 2017 14: 32
        +1
        and if you do not write headlines as in the yellow press?
        1. ADmA_RUS
          ADmA_RUS 1 September 2017 14: 57
          +1
          And if you read not only the headlines.
  6. Kolin
    Kolin 1 September 2017 14: 04
    0
    Quote: Skifotavr
    breakthrough NK-93!

    Bggg. With a resource of 80 hours, horse-drawn mass and not fit under more than one wing of a passenger plane, this supposedly "breakthrough" is not needed by anyone.
    1. Skifotavr
      Skifotavr 1 September 2017 18: 20
      0
      Quote: Kolin
      Quote: Skifotavr
      breakthrough NK-93!

      Bggg. With a resource of 80 hours, horse mass and not fit under more than one wing of a passenger aircraft.
      Lying is bad.
    2. Ehanatone
      Ehanatone 4 October 2017 20: 49
      -1
      And you k.oz.E.l - gY ring! ...
  7. HEATHER
    HEATHER 1 September 2017 14: 31
    +2
    He is not the most powerful. He is at the beginning of the engine line. They will be tested at 25 and 35 tf.
  8. Skifotavr
    Skifotavr 1 September 2017 18: 11
    0
    Quote: 32363
    when jumping, will paratroopers suck in such an engine?

    This is a laboratory plane for testing new engines, and so they were not going to put them on the IL-76. In general, the landing with IL-76 is made from the ramp.
  9. Bronevick
    Bronevick 1 September 2017 19: 32
    0
    PD-14 will be more expensive than Pratt Whitney
    1. ADmA_RUS
      ADmA_RUS 2 September 2017 08: 09
      +2
      1. Where are the proofs?
      2. What is more expensive?
      3. More expensive for whom?
  10. Kolin
    Kolin 2 September 2017 10: 50
    0
    Quote: Skifotavr
    Lying is bad.

    Of course it’s not good. The specific fuel consumption in the tests is 0,54 kg / kgf ∙ h. at Mach 0,72, i.e. fuel consumption during the flight from point A to point B will be like that of the PS-90 ... theoretically. Almost NK -93 will gobble up more.
    Under the wing of civilian aircraft, the NK-93 does not climb geometrically, its dry weight per tonne is more than that of a substation, and a resource cannot be made for more than a thousand hours. So what is its advantage compared to the PS-90?
    The video was amusing.
    1. Skifotavr
      Skifotavr 2 September 2017 16: 32
      +1
      Quote: Kolin
      Quote: Skifotavr
      Lying is bad.

      Of course it’s not good. The specific fuel consumption in the tests is 0,54 kg / kgf ∙ h. at Mach 0,72, i.e. fuel consumption during the flight from point A to point B will be like that of the PS-90 ... theoretically. Almost NK -93 will gobble up more.
      Under the wing of civilian aircraft, the NK-93 does not climb geometrically, its dry weight per tonne is more than that of a substation, and a resource cannot be made for more than a thousand hours. So what is its advantage compared to the PS-90?
      The video was amusing.

      Again, in a blatant lie. And about fuel consumption, and even about the fact that he does not allegedly crawl under the wing of civilian aircraft. Suppose that the An-124 Ruslan is not civilian for you, but what about the size of the engines of the passenger Airbus A-380, Boeing-787? But in the Boeing 777 they are generally cyclopean. Some completely illiterate troll hackers have recently been sent to us from synagogues.