Military Review

The President proposed to think about the creation of a supersonic passenger aircraft

125
The Russian President watched the demonstration flight of a new Tu-160M “Pyotr Deynekin” strategic bomber (missile carrier), named after the former commander-in-chief of the Russian Air Force. During a visit to the Kazan aircraft factory them. Gorbunova, Vladimir Putin noted that for Russian airspace (the air transport market) would be the creation of a modern supersonic passenger aircraft.




RIA News cites the statement of the President of Russia:
Tu-144 why he quit production - the ticket had to correspond to some average salary in the country. And now the situation is different. Now large companies have appeared that could use this aircraft. Civilian model based on the Tu-160 was relevant. We fly faster to New York than from Kaliningrad to Vladivostok.


Recall that the supersonic Soviet passenger aircraft Tu-144 was developed in the Tupolev Design Bureau in the 1960s. The first flight made 31 December 1968 of the year. At the same time, operation began only in 1975. In June, 1978 was retired for the carriage of passengers for a variety of reasons, including economic ones.

The head of UAC, Yury Slusar, answered the president’s statement. According to him, the corporation has a project of a supersonic long-range airliner.

For reference on the Tu-160M, on the basis of which a passenger version of a supersonic airliner could be created:
Tu-160M - the largest aircraft with a variable sweep wing, one of the most powerful in the world fighting machines. A modernized information management system will be installed on the upgraded aircraft, the advantage of which is the possibility of collecting, processing and displaying flight information in a single system; flight navigation equipment, an on-board communication complex, an automatic on-board control system, an onboard radar station, an electronic countermeasure complex will be updated; the complex for fuel management and control and centering, engine management system will be improved.
Photos used:
www.kremlin.ru
125 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Topotun
    Topotun 25 January 2018 16: 09
    40
    But is it necessary? TU-144 with his gluttony is not enough? Maybe on the contrary, try to develop subsonic but truly economical engines? For a plane ticket to cost reasonable money ....
    1. 210ox
      210ox 25 January 2018 16: 11
      +4
      Yes, for its operation there was no infrastructure and of course gluttony.
      Quote: Topotun
      But is it necessary? TU-144 with his gluttony is not enough? Maybe on the contrary, try to develop subsonic but truly economical engines? For a plane ticket to cost reasonable money ....
      1. antivirus
        antivirus 25 January 2018 20: 01
        +6
        payback military "gluttonous" to share with the civilian-CORRECT
        with universal addition
        antivirus 7 January 9, 2018 21:16 | Russia won an “entry ticket” to an elite civil aviation club
        the result will be much later:
        when airlines say "here my profit flies, it grows on every flight"

        and MAIN (received a warning 6 and 7) !!!!!!!!!!!!!
        per flood for the banker
        There is no single owner - there will be no aviation.
        only individual airline and plants.
        without a single cycle of project and production + escort throughout life - fog in the newspapers
        UNIVERSAL RESPONSE FOR ALL AIRCRAFT AND PLANTS WITH SMALL R&D
        antivirus Yesterday, 7:11 | MS-33 status: how are things with the main airliner of Russia?
        the fault of all new growing planes-- NO OWNER WITH MONEY.
        the separation of aviation "corporations" and banks gives a gap between R&D and operation.
        there is no money (plant) and do not want to give (bank). In the USSR there was 1 owner.
        just pump loot, even carry bananas, even aviation.
        "conditional Gref" is to blame for the fact that they give a present to every year to their wives .. and they don’t.
        10 years without Courchevel and MC21 flies.
        They shake it from the beginning 00 = x
        NO SINGLE "FIN-PROM GROUP". with market launch and service.
        GUILTY STRUCTURE OF BANKING BUSINESS.
        WESTERN GAME RULES HAVE BEEN ADOPTED AND DO NOT REACH THE GIANT INVEST BANKS, which finance all stages of the life-work of industrial corporations.
        each in his corner gnaws a grain of "his"
        A complaint

        -DO NOT THROW THE PROJECT HIS LIFE, KEEP ALREADY SPENDED MONEY AND HUMAN WORK-- AGAINST "ALREADY SUFFICIENTLY HAPPENED AND PUMPED" "YOU CAN POST A PROBLE TO DR. PROJECT, AND THIS WAY WITH IT"
        modest responsibility for the project is not the switchman, but at the highest level - 30-40 years before its replacement by the next generation (ms21-350-2050?)
        A complaint
        1. Dr. David Livesey
          Dr. David Livesey 25 January 2018 20: 22
          10
          You, Comrade Anti-Virus, would have tied up with a loaf in the middle of the week, you yourself tomorrow morning read what you wrote today, you will be ashamed to look at yourself in the mirror, you won’t be able to shave. Blue is not always useful on weekdays ...
          1. antivirus
            antivirus 25 January 2018 20: 28
            0
            your credit is always

            and there’s only one principle of building an air prom - I repeat many times, and there’s no other option yet in the country (not only in the “blue” head (
            without it there will be no new engines, only pumping dough through bananas or granulated sugar, or PD90, or another “promising” engine, glider
            knowingly (laugh) at specialists) if you are special aviation) to awaken from hibernation: "they gave money, they mastered it and others are to blame, it’s not us that there is no result, it doesn’t fly and did not take its place in the world and in the Russian sky
    2. Azazelo
      Azazelo 25 January 2018 16: 16
      +3
      Rather, an airplane like Mriya needs to be done. Ukrainians still ruined the project, and what was left of the documentation was sold to the Chinese.
      1. 210ox
        210ox 25 January 2018 16: 47
        25
        The giants will not work with us. We need as many aircraft as possible with a passenger load of 100-200 passengers. And restore the airfield infrastructure throughout the country.
        Quote: Azazelo
        Rather, an airplane like Mriya needs to be done. Ukrainians still ruined the project, and what was left of the documentation was sold to the Chinese.
      2. ZVO
        ZVO 25 January 2018 20: 15
        0
        Quote: Azazelo
        Rather, an airplane like Mriya needs to be done. Ukrainians still ruined the project, and what was left of the documentation was sold to the Chinese.


        What for?
        What would ruin the country again?
        Airbus, with its enormous resources and the right analysts, and then got into a puddle with its A-380 ... The project did not pay off and will not pay off, because such huge aircraft did not become needed.
        1. alexmach
          alexmach 26 January 2018 00: 13
          +2
          Mriyu is not a fact that it’s necessary, Buranovs are no longer being built, but Ruslan wouldn’t hurt to establish production. He has a niche both in the war and in the civilian sector.
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 26 January 2018 06: 41
            +1
            Quote: alexmach
            Mriyu is not a fact that it’s necessary, Buranovs are no longer being built, but Ruslan wouldn’t hurt to establish production. He has a niche both in the war and in the civilian sector.

            Actually, Mriya and the USSR Armed Forces would have come in handy ... In the Soviet Army there would have been especially bulky cargoes ... And now the only An-225 is not idle. “Mriya” could be restored (production) provided that An-124 production was resumed in Russia ... but they still cannot decide whether this “sheepskin” is worth making or not ... And then they started talking about PAK TA ...
            1. alexmach
              alexmach 26 January 2018 09: 07
              0
              As I understand it, now there is a problem not even with the production of new An-124 but also with the maintenance of existing ones ....
              1. Nikolaevich I
                Nikolaevich I 26 January 2018 09: 28
                +1
                Actually, yes ... but there was also a “moment” when the "plan" to resume the production of Ruslan was discussed in vain ...
      3. HEATHER
        HEATHER 25 January 2018 22: 38
        0
        and what was left of the documentation was sold to the Chinese. Really? The Chinese refused this pepelats. They cook their own. Only with the engines they have problems. Therefore, they sucked in to us with the PD-35.
    3. Megatron
      Megatron 25 January 2018 16: 16
      +8
      Strange, but why not remove the excise tax from jet fuel? Then our airlines will become more than competitive.
      1. dSK
        dSK 25 January 2018 16: 39
        +2
        Will do, re-equipment in the "passenger" is inexpensive. A couple of pieces, but overtake the west in this segment. hi
        1. BVS
          BVS 25 January 2018 16: 46
          +6
          And what will you do with his gluttony? It is the military that does not consider money for fuel and lubricants, and the civilians will not buy it because of the excessive appetite.
          1. IL-18
            IL-18 25 January 2018 16: 53
            +8
            We’ll do it on the basis of the Su-57, it flies in super sound without afterburner laughing
            1. BVS
              BVS 25 January 2018 17: 44
              0
              It does not fly yet - there is no necessary engine.
            2. just exp
              just exp 25 January 2018 18: 45
              0
              afterburning supersonic does not mean fuel economy, cruising speed is constant speed and it is not equal to economical speed. and the economical speed of the PAK FA is also subsonic.
        2. Simargl
          Simargl 25 January 2018 18: 02
          +4
          Quote: dsk
          Will do, re-equipment in the "passenger" is inexpensive.
          What is it like? I loaded the chairs into the drum and that’s it?
          Well, for example, let’s let him in, but he won’t fly in Europe: he won’t pass through the noise.
          Least
      2. Kasym
        Kasym 25 January 2018 16: 43
        +5
        My question is. PAK YES, as I understand it, they are going to make subsonic, but civilian distant supersonic - somehow does not fit with the history of aviation in the USSR and the Russian Federation. It seems to me that PAK YES will still be supersonic. bully
        Only for the oligarchs and the rich is such a supersonic aircraft. It can create its own niche in the market. Offers from others are not visible. But here only the size needs to be made smaller, in my opinion, than the Concord or Tu-144. Airlines serving the rich, large companies and corporations, etc. become the main customers for such an aircraft - it may have some commercial success. hi
        1. zyzx
          zyzx 25 January 2018 17: 00
          0
          PAK YES a battlefield fighter, he’ll fly around the corner, and there’s enough for a sound.
          1. Simargl
            Simargl 25 January 2018 18: 04
            +6
            Quote: zyzx
            PAK YES battlefield fighter
            What! belay
            1. zyzx
              zyzx 25 January 2018 19: 01
              0
              WHAT? You PAK YES with PAK FA do not confuse? Here is the PAK FA supersonic, the demon of afterburner is laid.
          2. just exp
            just exp 25 January 2018 18: 46
            +2
            Decipher the abbreviation PAK YES and find the word Fighter there.
            1. zyzx
              zyzx 25 January 2018 19: 02
              +1
              Well described. That does not change the essence.
        2. ZVO
          ZVO 25 January 2018 20: 18
          +1
          Quote: Kasym
          My question is. PACK YES, as I understand it, they are going to make subsonic:


          After the information has passed about the placement of the contract for 50 Tu-160M2 - about PAK-DA - you can forget for the next 20 years ...
        3. alexmach
          alexmach 26 January 2018 00: 26
          +1
          My question is. PAK YES, as I understand it, they are going to make subsonic, but civilian distant supersonic

          The answer to your question is simple. So much money was poured into the restoration of production that if you produce only 10 boards, then they turn out to be just gold. Looking for what else you can use existing production capabilities. Maybe the idea is not the most economical, but logical in its own way. Of course, it is more reasonable for the Russian economy to build subsonic passenger airplanes and saturate at least the domestic market with them, while at the same time lowering ticket prices to make air travel affordable.
      3. The comment was deleted.
    4. RASKAT
      RASKAT 25 January 2018 16: 34
      +6
      But is it necessary? TU-144 with his gluttony is not enough?
      I agree, here at least a couple of hundred pieces to rivet subsonic aircraft to begin with. IL-96, IL-112, IL-114, IL-276, Super Jet-100, MS-21. And it would not be bad to think about replacing Ruslanov with something modern.
    5. Zoldat_A
      Zoldat_A 25 January 2018 16: 43
      23
      Quote: Topotun
      Maybe on the contrary, try to develop subsonic but truly economical engines? For a plane ticket to cost reasonable money ....

      At the beginning of the 80's, a plane ticket from Tashkent to Moscow cost about three of us to sit in a middle-sized restaurant. A little more student scholarship and a little less than the cleaning salary at school. Now the cleaner at school gets about 8 sput. And where on the 8 ty can I fly? I don’t even speak about restaurants at all ....
      And large companies have long acquired different Jets and their directors fly wherever they need without the Tu-160. You need to start with a complete shake-up of the entire air transportation system. And then we have it - GDP was indignant that a ticket from Vladivostok to Moscow costs more than 50 tyr - they immediately dropped the price. As usual, "just yesterday." On 4 sp ... laughing laughing And in Kamchatka, for half this price, you can fly kilometers at all on the 300 “corn box”. Are there too many people who want to eat?
      By the way, today I bought flour - 50 rubles. 2 kilograms. And last week it cost 45. Weekly price increase 11.11 ...%. Where is our inflation in 4%, about which the beloved Government of the Gaidar-Kudrintsy broadcasts so joyfully and cheerfully to us ???? Why am I talking about inflation in relation to airplanes - and to the fact that all carriers, including Aeroflot, tear up ticket prices and justify their greed by IMANOUS inflation. As the owner of that stall where I buy flour ....
      1. UVB
        UVB 25 January 2018 17: 46
        11
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        At the beginning of the 80's, a plane ticket from Tashkent to Moscow cost about three of us to sit in a middle-sized restaurant.
        Prices for flights from Lugansk Airport to 70's. In the right column, the prices to the regional centers of the region (!) Are the same as on the bus.
        1. Zoldat_A
          Zoldat_A 25 January 2018 17: 55
          +5
          Quote: UVB
          Quote: Zoldat_A
          At the beginning of the 80's, a plane ticket from Tashkent to Moscow cost about three of us to sit in a middle-sized restaurant.
          Prices for flights from Lugansk Airport to 70's. In the right column, the prices to the regional centers of the region (!) Are the same as on the bus.

          Here I am about the same. I am from business trips to Tashkent and to Blagoveshchensk. And then - on military demand. Only by train to travel long and tedious. There will be a passing transporter - good. No - that’s Aeroflot. Tashkent-Moscow, if I don’t confuse, at the beginning of 80's (about 82-83) something cost about 50 rubles ... On the train, the same thing was something about 23-25 rubles. Although, I could be wrong - years, you know ... request
          1. 406ppm2gv
            406ppm2gv 25 January 2018 21: 28
            +3
            Aeroflot and Russian Railways incl. in our country, there should only be state-owned companies with state regulation in pricing policies. Otherwise, we’ve picked up profitable destinations, and there’s not enough money for local transportation
          2. TRex
            TRex 26 January 2018 08: 24
            0
            From Tyumen to Simferopol (direct or landing in Ulyanovsk / Kharkov) - 56 rubles year-round. Now - in the season up to 25 thousand or more, in winter a little less.
            And about the supersonic passenger plane, I want to answer based on the film "Gentlemen of Fortune": "Associate Professor, you are certainly an authoritative thief, but ..."
            What, cherher, is “supersonic” when the Boeing and Airbus are all on the country's airlines? Start with the domestic aviation industry in the normal format.
        2. Sling cutter
          Sling cutter 25 January 2018 17: 58
          +4
          Quote: UVB
          Prices for flights from Lugansk Airport to 70's. In the right column, the prices to the regional centers of the region (!) Are the same as on the bus.

          Yes, it is very interesting to recall that in our country there was small aircraft. I remember from the city to the collective farm as a student for 3rub flew.
          Thanks for the picture, I visited my homeland. hi
          1. Zoldat_A
            Zoldat_A 25 January 2018 18: 04
            16
            hi
            Quote: Stroporez
            Yes, it is very interesting to recall that in our country there was small aircraft. I remember from the city to the collective farm as a student for 3rub flew.

            Interestingly, but for money comparable with those three rubles, where can I fly now? .
            The salary of the cleaning lady is then 60 rubles, 3 rubles - one twentieth. Now the cleaner is paid, on average, 8 thousand. One twentieth - 400 rubles .... For such money only as Munchausen - on a cannonball to the moon ... crying
            1. Sling cutter
              Sling cutter 25 January 2018 18: 07
              +3
              Quote: Zoldat_A
              One twentieth - 400 rubles .... For such money only as Munchausen - on a cannonball to the moon ...

              At 400 rubles, you can’t even buy normal vodka, but if you have a little “stick”, you can use Duc on a broom.
        3. Igor V
          Igor V 25 January 2018 21: 09
          0
          Why Lugansk airport? Was Voroshilovgrad like? Explain someone. what
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. UVB
            UVB 25 January 2018 22: 01
            +2
            Quote: Igor V
            Why Lugansk airport? Was Voroshilovgrad like?

            Lugansk Voroshilovgrad was 2 times, 1935-1958 and 1970-1990, so the picture of the late 60s, I apologize for the inaccuracy. But prices did not change until the early 80s.
      2. 1vlad19
        1vlad19 25 January 2018 17: 57
        0
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        that a ticket from Vladivostok to Moscow costs more than 50 tyr

        Go to the Aeroflot website, see how much it costs.
        1. Zoldat_A
          Zoldat_A 25 January 2018 20: 19
          +4
          Quote: 1vlad19
          Quote: Zoldat_A
          that a ticket from Vladivostok to Moscow costs more than 50 tyr

          Go to the Aeroflot website, see how much it costs.

          Itself did not fly on this route for 30 years. The information was heard on television in the first person - Putin personally spoke. About a year and a half or two ago. The Aeroflot website has a huge spread - from 15 tyr (economy) to 100 tyr (business). So, in general, somewhere I have not gone so far from the truth - for 15 tyr 9 hours with my knees to prop up my own chin is an amateur ... My first car was a Zaporozhets - the pleasure is about the same for a person under 190 height and about 90 weight. lol
          1. 1vlad19
            1vlad19 25 January 2018 23: 42
            +1
            Quote: Zoldat_A
            for 15 sput 9 hours with your knees to support your own chin

            You haven’t flown for a long time, it’s not IL-96 there, B-777 or A-330 fly there, it’s quite comfortable in economy.
      3. Simargl
        Simargl 25 January 2018 18: 10
        0
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        In the early 80s, a ticket from Tashkent to Moscow for an airplane cost about three to sit in a middle-hand restaurant. A little more student scholarship and a little less than the salary of a cleaning lady at school. Now the cleaning lady at school receives about 8 sput. And where on 8 sput can you fly?
        You will not believe! Wife to Moscow and back for 8 + ty took tickets. True, only hand luggage. 2100 km one way.
        1. Zoldat_A
          Zoldat_A 25 January 2018 20: 25
          +5
          Quote: Simargl
          You will not believe! Wife to Moscow and back for 8 + ty took tickets. True, only hand luggage. 2100 km one way.

          My wife flew 1000 rubles for 1500 miles back and forth 5 years ago — shares, discounts, tickets two hours before departure, economical economy plus dumping from Abramovich’s company (I don’t remember what it was called there. I remember that under the pressure of Aeroflot it was closed). She said that during the holidays there was absolutely something like a lottery - for 10 rubles (!) It was possible to fly from Moscow, say, to Saratov.
        2. INTER
          INTER 25 January 2018 21: 15
          0
          Quote: Simargl
          You will not believe! Wife to Moscow and back for 8 + ty took tickets. True, only hand luggage. 2100 km one way.

          To be honest, now in the economy class the prices are normal, the victory of the aero 2200 km on January 2 there after 4 days cost about 7800 rubles. Relatives of the students are flying from Moscow by plane, not at the price standards.
      4. Igor V
        Igor V 25 January 2018 21: 05
        +1
        In the early 80's, Kaliningrad - Tashkent 65 p. was worth it. Expensive! counted. smile
    6. NEXUS
      NEXUS 25 January 2018 16: 50
      +7
      Quote: Topotun
      But is it necessary? TU-144 with his gluttony is not enough?

      It's not about TU-144, but about the civilian version of TU-160! And in this regard, the modernization of the NK-32 engines looks very different in order to reduce their gluttony ...
      And according to TU-144, it’s easy to use operating time.
      1. xtur
        xtur 25 January 2018 22: 16
        0
        > It's not about the TU-144, but about the civilian version of the TU-160! And in this regard, the modernization of the NK-32 engines looks completely different in order to reduce their voracity.

        according to the wiki, at a supersonic speed, the Tu-160 burns all its 170 tons of fuel already for 3000 km. No modernization of the NK-32 or any other engine will not allow to raise this figure, at least a couple of times. One hell, from end to end of the Russian Federation on supersound, without refueling in the air, you will not reach
        1. xtur
          xtur 26 January 2018 14: 11
          0
          by the way, about the project from a supersonic aircraft and its estimated fuel efficiency:
          http://k-politika.ru/budem-pervymi-putin-ne-zrya-
          zayavil-o-passazhirskom-tu-160 /? utm_source = finobz
          or.ru
    7. Piramidon
      Piramidon 25 January 2018 20: 57
      0
      Quote: Topotun
      But is it necessary? TU-144 with his gluttony is not enough? Maybe on the contrary, try to develop subsonic but truly economical engines? For a plane ticket to cost reasonable money ....

      Well, maybe it’s not necessary like a Tu-144 (obviously, people won’t rush into it), but for any rich Pinocchio you could make a liner for 20-30 seats. Let grandmas pay and fly. good
    8. Esoteric
      Esoteric 25 January 2018 21: 45
      +4
      Quote: Topotun
      Maybe on the contrary, try to develop subsonic but truly economical engines? For a plane ticket to cost reasonable money ....

      You can try as you like. Do you have any examples when, due to some circumstances, one well-known airline stopped serving passengers, is not enough? A ticket can cost less under socialism. In a capitalist country, profits (even more than before) fall into the pocket of the capitalist.
    9. vladimirZ
      vladimirZ 26 January 2018 06: 10
      +1
      In Russia there are no normal subsonic civilian aircraft, civilian aircraft manufacturing is in a fierce long-term crisis, including due to the mismanagement of the economy of V. Putin, but what about “supersonic passenger aircraft” ?! Well what is it?
      Even the West does not set such tasks for its aircraft manufacturers. Not justified and not necessary.
      Or will we build Manila projects in Russia?
    10. Alexkorzun
      Alexkorzun 26 January 2018 09: 49
      0
      The cost of tickets with us is robbery.
      How do others carry passengers and expand?
      Example - Before the new year, I flew from Krasnodar to Frankfurt on the Main with a transfer in Istanbul. The ticket was bought through, hand luggage - 8 kg, luggage - 20 kg. And all this for 84 euros. The course was a little less than 70. Total - even 7000 rubles did not pay. The airline is Turkish, I will not advertise, the planes are all A-320, new, clean, comfortable.
  2. _Ugene_
    _Ugene_ 25 January 2018 16: 10
    +5
    No more money to invest in?
    1. kepmor
      kepmor 25 January 2018 16: 30
      15
      and no one is going to invest in "supersonic" ... so the election bone is starving to raise patriotism ... by analogy with the May decrees ...
      over the middle-range “on the wing” they cannot deliver which year in any way ...
      1. Antidote
        Antidote 26 January 2018 05: 23
        +2
        Jab already licked
        https://ria.ru/economy/20180125/1513330200.html
  3. Grits
    Grits 25 January 2018 16: 11
    +1
    But isn’t it easier to pull the Tu-144 from the shelf? Make adjustments to it - new avionics, new materials, new engines. The plane is already ready, it even flew.
    1. Topotun
      Topotun 25 January 2018 16: 13
      +8
      Who will fly on it? Exit to the supersonic of such a colossus - leads to huge fuel consumption. The price of tickets will be .... For whom are we building an airplane? Carry the oligarchs?
      1. Orionvit
        Orionvit 25 January 2018 18: 30
        +3
        Quote: Topotun
        Ticket price will be

        It’s cheaper to feed the passenger once again in flight than to spend a lot of money on developing something fast and supersonic, which in general didn’t matter to anyone. It is clear that in the 60s, two world systems were measured, who has more and faster. Moreover, the same Concord was more exotic for the rich than a workhorse for airlines. And the last disaster, "Concord", served as a good reason to decommission them.
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 25 January 2018 16: 53
      +4
      Quote: Gritsa
      But isn’t it easier to pull the Tu-144 from the shelf? Make adjustments to it - new avionics, new materials, new engines. The plane is already ready, it even flew.

      At all times, our aircraft designers developed a military version of the aircraft and its civilian version. The Tu-144 was really painfully voracious. But making a civilian version of Cygnus is a very interesting idea, given that the production seems ready to be released.
      1. Igor V
        Igor V 25 January 2018 21: 20
        +1
        Tu-144 is not only gluttonous. There were many unsuccessful decisions. Milling of titanium plates, welds and more. Now we can do castings, at least for Boeing. But there is also overload. Who wants to give a ton of money and experience the delights of a supersonic flight?
      2. Servisinzhener
        Servisinzhener 26 January 2018 14: 05
        0
        Direct alteration, if possible, will be very doubtful in the operation of airlines. If you make a supersonic airliner, then you need to do it exactly as a passenger one and we have the basis for this. With all the comments on the operation of the Tu-144, flight range, fuel consumption, a crew of test pilots. But most importantly, the price of its purchase, operation and tickets should not greatly exceed those for a subsonic aircraft.
    3. Piramidon
      Piramidon 25 January 2018 21: 06
      +1
      Quote: Gritsa
      But isn’t it easier to pull the Tu-144 from the shelf? Make adjustments to it - new avionics, new materials, new engines. The plane is already ready, it even flew.

      And in a 200-seater liner will fly 10 people capable of paying for a flight on it.
  4. Kot_Kuzya
    Kot_Kuzya 25 January 2018 16: 12
    +7
    Again the same rake to attack, which we attacked with the Tu-144 and the French with Concord? 99,9% of passengers will prefer to fly from Moscow to Vladik in 9 hours for 15 thousand rubles, than in 5 hours for 100 thousand rubles. In conventional airplanes, 200 economy-class seats usually have 8 business-class seats, and even then they are not completely full. Here you have an indicator of future demand for tickets for supersonic planes, especially since business travelers and those who fly for the money of the employer will still be required to take tickets for subsonic planes, as they now require to take tickets to economy class seats. Even if they begin to subsidize these flights from the budget, as we and the French did, what is the point of starting this whole black hole for money?
    1. Alexy
      Alexy 25 January 2018 17: 08
      +4
      I think from Moscow to Vladivostok will be able to fly for two and a half hours, a maximum of three.
      Wealthy people who cherish the time now.
      In the end, maybe Putin himself wants to fly it.
      In any case, first you need to do all the calculations, and then draw some conclusions.
      1. Orionvit
        Orionvit 25 January 2018 18: 35
        +1
        Quote: Alexy
        In any case, first you need to do all the calculations, and then draw some conclusions

        Calculations have long been made and not in favor of supersonic “romance”.
        Wealthy people who cherish the time now.
        There are only a few such people, and investing state billions in a deliberately unprofitable project is a crime against the people. To whom time is expensive and there is money, let it be invested.
        1. Kot_Kuzya
          Kot_Kuzya 26 January 2018 01: 04
          0
          Quote: Orionvit
          To whom time is expensive and there is money, let it be invested.

          Those have long been flying on their private Gulf Stream.
    2. Orionvit
      Orionvit 25 January 2018 18: 37
      +1
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      99,9% of passengers will prefer to fly from Moscow to Vladik in 9 hours for 15 thousand rubles

      So I say that it’s easier to feed a passenger once again in flight than to invent a supersonic “bicycle” for oligarchs.
    3. Servisinzhener
      Servisinzhener 26 January 2018 14: 09
      0
      Partly agree. To build such airplanes makes sense only if the final price of tickets is commensurate with the subsonic option. And do not exceed it by an order.
  5. tchoni
    tchoni 25 January 2018 16: 13
    +7
    Exactly))) And from Armata make a limousine of increased security))) There are clients)))
  6. rruvim
    rruvim 25 January 2018 16: 15
    18
    The team leader blurted out something without thinking, the boyars and lackeys stirred: "this is where there is a theme to cut the dough for the next presidential term ...".
    1. dauria
      dauria 25 January 2018 16: 33
      17
      The foreman blurted out something without thinking, the boyars and lackeys stirred


      Interestingly, at least one of the engineers found to ask Putin, "Uncle, are you stupid?"
      1. zhekazs
        zhekazs 25 January 2018 17: 01
        +4
        C'mon, but the oligarchy ... sorry, the electorate is pleased to hear about new projects in the economy in the wake of the election campaign ... Someone is already rubbing his hands.
  7. dauria
    dauria 25 January 2018 16: 18
    12
    Vladimir Putin noted that the creation of a modern supersonic passenger aircraft would be relevant for Russian airspace


    It must be reminded to Putin that the entire life of the Concord was subsidized. So paid for the "prestige". Better invest in developing a normal workhorse. And then shame, the IL-18 still flies just because it is a really great passenger car.
    1. IL-18
      IL-18 25 January 2018 17: 03
      +7
      IL-18 is the best! I know who I am writing about wink
      1. Igor V
        Igor V 25 January 2018 21: 12
        +1
        Quote: IL-18
        IL-18 is the best! I know who I am writing about wink

        About myself? laughing
        1. IL-18
          IL-18 25 January 2018 23: 45
          +2
          Quote: Igor V
          Quote: IL-18
          IL-18 is the best! I know who I am writing about wink

          About myself? laughing

          Aha yes
    2. Esoteric
      Esoteric 25 January 2018 21: 49
      +2
      Quote: dauria
      And then shame, the IL-18 still flies just because it is a really great passenger car.

      Even the modernized An-2 has good prospects ...
  8. Fregate
    Fregate 25 January 2018 16: 30
    14
    Yes, nothing needs to be redone. There are two bomb bays. In one passenger, in the other baggage. If you don’t need to pick up anyone at the destination or if you don’t have the opportunity to sit down, you can drop everyone with luggage by opening the bomb compartments. And in case of war it’s the same “strategist”. How do you like it?
    1. Sling cutter
      Sling cutter 25 January 2018 17: 02
      +3
      Quote: Fregate
      If you don’t need to pick up anyone at the destination or if you don’t have the opportunity to sit down, you can drop everyone with luggage by opening the bomb compartments. And in case of war it’s the same “strategist”. How do you like it?

      This is genius wassat
    2. IL-18
      IL-18 25 January 2018 17: 05
      +6
      So it’s possible to fly to America to the Poplars.
  9. Masya masya
    Masya masya 25 January 2018 16: 31
    +9
    Tu-144 why it went out of production - the ticket had to correspond to some average earnings in the country

    An interesting question ... and how much will the ticket price be? as I understand it, neither me nor you will have to fly in this quick miracle ... wink
    1. newcomer
      newcomer 25 January 2018 16: 43
      +5
      maybe yes. Marina, good day. at one time, the late USSR_ early EBNism, managed to fly on almost all of our Aeroflot planes. later it got to fly on Airbus and Boeing_ I still don’t understand why they are better than our TU154? and on expensive supersounds, probably they will fly, or their wives. in order to shield them from the righteous anger of ordinary people.
      1. Masya masya
        Masya masya 25 January 2018 16: 48
        +6
        Garik, howdy there! love
        Quote: newbie
        probably expensive mozhory or their wives will fly on expensive supersounds. in order to shield them from the righteous anger of ordinary people.

        can they also build a separate airport? to fence off, so to fence off ... wassat
        1. newcomer
          newcomer 25 January 2018 16: 58
          +2
          Marina, I’d build an airport_ for them already. I would have fenced them with moats with water, anti-tank hedgehogs, and, let them fly from port to port, without the right of access to people.
      2. san4es
        san4es 25 January 2018 16: 55
        +6
        what ... Ah, don’t we fling ourselves at whether William, ours, Shakespeare fellow
        1. newcomer
          newcomer 25 January 2018 17: 04
          +2
          that yes, Sanya, there is such a thing. but in any situation a passenger supersonic is needed. I just read that we (I don’t remember whose KB, in my UC) developed a plane from 10 to 30 people, a kind of supersonic mini-jet. Tokmo, the eternal question is not specified: whose engines?
          1. san4es
            san4es 25 January 2018 17: 18
            +3
            Quote: newbie
            ... whose engines?

            ... II stage Su-57 - supersonic without afterburner wink
            PS .. Somehow in 2003, the Concorde landed - it almost blew off the deck (from the sound) ... One of the last flights crying
        2. Masya masya
          Masya masya 25 January 2018 17: 05
          +6
          want to say catch up and overtake? wink
          1. newcomer
            newcomer 25 January 2018 17: 12
            +2
            somewhere yes, more precisely for the possession and conservation of technology. look, we have TU160, but the technology was lost, two and a half years were restored and money was spent for it. we have already lost VTOL technology (vertical take-off aircraft), but we have to recreate it if we are going to build helicopter carriers and light aircraft carriers.
        3. Vadim237
          Vadim237 26 January 2018 00: 00
          +1
          The fastest here joint development of Australia by the EU and Russia - 6M speed.
      3. Servisinzhener
        Servisinzhener 26 January 2018 14: 11
        0
        There is no difference in passenger plan. The difference is only for the airline due to the smaller crew and fuel consumption.
  10. kaschey
    kaschey 25 January 2018 16: 36
    +2
    "for the Russian airspace ......................."
    And then Ostap suffered.
    The stump for space is clear.
  11. dvvv
    dvvv 25 January 2018 16: 39
    13
    I can imagine how, with such knowledge in the economy, this leader in 6 years will raise a country that he has been defending for 18 years. Even Bush, who confused Austria with Australia, did not try to push such ideas! And in general, the sun-man begins to bother. He began to get involved in monasteries and prayers, now business ideas are pushing extravagant ones. Is everything normal in the Danish kingdom?
    1. Volodin
      Volodin 25 January 2018 16: 42
      +1
      Quote: dvvv
      And in general, the sunshine begins to bother.

      Whom? Moldova? So there you have long been concerned about them ...
  12. NEOZ
    NEOZ 25 January 2018 16: 41
    +3
    gentlemen! calm, only calm !!!!
    this is GDP GDP! aircraft will be dual-use !!!! with the ability to carry KR !!! most likely, without the possibility of transporting passengers ...... laughing
  13. dvvv
    dvvv 25 January 2018 16: 42
    +6
    Tu-160 in our time is a complete anachronism with its supersonic and ideas of the 70s of the last century, and here is another option to build a civilian. Go to the KLA already choked with saliva from the prospect of sawing 6 years of kettlebell for a good salary.
  14. kaschey
    kaschey 25 January 2018 16: 43
    +5
    "The president suggested thinking."
    Thinking not sandbags tossing and turning, here you need to think.
  15. akudr48
    akudr48 25 January 2018 16: 47
    +8
    It is wise, it is perspicacious!
    The USSR with its poverty did not pull the Tu-144, what to take from a backward, totalitarian country, and modern, free and rich Russia will pull the Tu-160 for businessmen half a century later, especially when such a VIP super-sonic scorer is put on the state’s flight President’s squad to fly to Washington for a report more quickly.
    In which case - a bomb from the stratosphere, not directly flying away far from the Washington Regional Committee.
  16. weksha50
    weksha50 25 January 2018 17: 09
    +8
    "Vladimir Putin noted that for the Russian airspace (air transportation market) it would be relevant to create a modern supersonic passenger aircraft"...

    Um ... Something I'm surprised by the statement ... All the time I considered the GDP to be smart and serious ... Or is it the rules of the election game like that - put forward some unwise ideas ??? We have in civil aviation urgent, demanded work and problems - a lot of land, and here - some talk about the "popular" Tu-144-2 ...
    Is there little money stealing? Another project for squandering money ??? When will our rulers even stop the brain from greatness from greatness ??? fool
    Let the dodgers dare to tell him what infrastructure this "monster" will need, what maintenance costs ...
    Let the watermelons and Boeings be expelled, small aircraft and airfields need to be developed ... Yes, a lot of things ...
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 January 2018 23: 58
      0
      We have already worked out a model of a supersonic aircraft for about 7 years, the engines will be made using additive technologies.
  17. dedBoroded
    dedBoroded 25 January 2018 17: 12
    +3
    It would be nice to return small aircraft. If for 3 rubles it was possible to fly to the regional center (here in the BSSR). And today everything is ruined, there are no lanes, the park is written off 90%. Bourgeois in Honolulu and so fly, about ordinary people would have thought that they live without business jets and without free tickets to any end of immense Russia.
  18. midshipman
    midshipman 25 January 2018 17: 29
    15
    There was such a case with me on our Tu-144. I worked as the head of the laboratory at NII-33 and tested my equipment on a combat aircraft in Zhukovsky. Tu-144 stood nearby, there Tolya Bravo (also the head of the NII-33 laboratory) checked the operation of the computer in the VNPK-144 equipment. I went to him, took off my boots and went to the cockpit (as expected). Anatoly and I are working, setting tests. Suddenly we hear from behind the question: "What are you doing here?" We turned around, worth Tupolev. He recognized me and I began to explain with Tolya. What is this new equipment and the pilot will now during the flight will display a dot of information on the map where the plane flies. Tupolev became interested, sat down to us. We demonstrated this information to him on tests. He congratulated us, and then quietly said: "Well .......... you are with her." Then he smiled and said: "Just kidding." Anatoly Bravo received a big prize for this equipment. And we lived with him in the same house on the street. Shipbuilders. I have the honor.
  19. sapporo1959
    sapporo1959 25 January 2018 17: 41
    +4
    Yes! The closer the elections, the grander and plans ..
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 25 January 2018 17: 57
      0
      And the Germans have long been looking ahead SpaceLiner suborbital hypersonic passenger spacecraft. The first flight is planned in the 2035th
  20. faiver
    faiver 25 January 2018 18: 11
    10
    To this statement of GDP, the expression “sometimes better to be silent than to speak” is ideal laughing
  21. Sergeant71
    Sergeant71 25 January 2018 18: 17
    +5
    Is there no other concern in the country? Ships for the Navy would be better off learning to build for 10 years each. That's what you need to think about.
  22. Moscow landing
    Moscow landing 25 January 2018 18: 46
    +3
    Quote: dvvv
    I can imagine how, with such knowledge in the economy, this leader in 6 years will raise a country that he has been defending for 18 years. Even Bush, who confused Austria with Australia, did not try to push such ideas! And in general, the sun-man begins to bother. He began to get involved in monasteries and prayers, now business ideas are pushing extravagant ones. Is everything normal in the Danish kingdom?

    High mink! It’s after his ice-hole, they warmed up the water, and swept it through the air, and that’s what it bears.
  23. DPN
    DPN 25 January 2018 18: 54
    +8
    No need to roll LIPS; in the USSR, almost the entire population of the country flew airplanes; even a pensioner could afford it now crumbs compared to the USSR. Civil TU-160 is a little thing for the elite, and not for the PEOPLE.
  24. APASUS
    APASUS 25 January 2018 19: 30
    +3
    It would be better to restore local airlines and the aerodrome network. It’s too early to think about international lines, we can reach some villages only by water or ice
  25. planetauuu.com
    planetauuu.com 25 January 2018 20: 16
    +1
    A lot of research has been done on this subject, including cost / effectiveness assessment and human adaptation to flight in a supersonic passenger aircraft. The standard distance between seats in an airplane is 32 inches. If you double this distance, then such a chair can be laid out in an almost horizontal position. You can sleep in such a chair. And people often want to sleep, and the duration of sleep somewhere coincides with the average duration of a flight in an ordinary long-haul airplane. The price of a flight in 64 inches doubles, essno. But it's still a lot cheaper than supersonic flight. Plus you do not have, well, very high costs for research and development, testing and so on. But in general, people are already pretty good at carrying long flights over long distances.
    1. rruvim
      rruvim 25 January 2018 20: 30
      +2
      Researchers gathered and investigate:
      -If there will be aerophobia, how many "bubbles" will he buy in Duty Free?
      -If you take off and land quickly, you won’t buy anything ...
      -Dilemma...
      -And if you extend the flight? That aerophobia should prove itself early too late!
      - Then you can take a restaurant in flight. Russians, for example, would not come out of it ...
      “You are all about the airship, but I think how to make customers drink on a supersonic plane!”
      Beeping from behind the crowd of top managers voice:
      -[b] remind them of Concord ...
    2. Kot_Kuzya
      Kot_Kuzya 26 January 2018 01: 09
      +2
      In the hinterland, people shake for 20-25 hours on buses to get from their town to Moscow or the regional center. And they go for days only to pay for travel not 15 thousand for a plane ticket, but 5 thousand.
  26. HEATHER
    HEATHER 25 January 2018 22: 33
    +2
    The civilian model based on the Tu-160 was relevant. Not relevant. The size of the fuselage will allow it to be transported for a sufficiently small number of passengers. What is not payable. Moreover, it is unrealistic to equip a passenger in a military vehicle nowadays. Crazy acceleration, as a result of which is overload. The swan is not suitable for processing into a passenger. First of all, this is a combat vehicle. We need to do something else. We have some progress. They will give the go-ahead. It will probably be the go-ahead. But, I repeat, the 160th is not in the subject.
  27. Romin
    Romin 25 January 2018 23: 22
    +5
    It would be better if our President thought about the development of the infrastructure of the Russian Federation and proposed building instead of a single-lane road of federal significance a two-lane on both sides, equipped with dividing bumpers and lighting along the entire route, and even more so the development of high-speed rail transport that would connect the cities of the Russian Federation and make it possible Citizens of the Russian Federation move and work without reference to their permanent place of residence ...
    oops yes what am I talking about ... infrastructure ... citizens of Russia. We do not have a president, but a foreign-political president, we have only foreign policy in the first place!
    We have ... floodlights;))!
    Confirmed - not the profitability of the Concord project, because This is for a limited circle of businessmen and top managers.
    We need massive fast transportation, not hyper-speed airplanes.
    Yes, age takes its toll ...
    1. Golovan Jack
      Golovan Jack 25 January 2018 23: 30
      +3
      Quote: Romin
      ... oops ...

      In-in ...
      Quote: Romin
      ... build instead single cavity federal roads two-sheeted.

      Twice the same mistake is a sure sign of a misunderstanding of what you are writing about.
      Single lane road, damn it ... fast jack negative
      Quote: Romin
      We have ... floodlights

      I would say that you really have, but it’s already too much laughing
  28. iouris
    iouris 26 January 2018 00: 50
    0
    Two supersonic passenger aircraft are known: Su-27 and Tu-160.
  29. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 26 January 2018 01: 35
    +1
    And the funniest thing is to start designing.
    Once such a wish from the very top ...
    1. Romulus
      Romulus 26 January 2018 03: 43
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      And the funniest thing is to start designing.

      The money will go down, they will definitely start. And life was a success)
  30. Sergeant71
    Sergeant71 26 January 2018 02: 26
    +1
    Quote: dvvv
    Tu-160 in our time is a complete anachronism with its supersonic and ideas of the 70s of the last century, and here is another option to build a civilian. Go to the KLA already choked with saliva from the prospect of sawing 6 years of kettlebell for a good salary.

    Two moldovas with a two-handed saw (specially blunted) will take up the process of cutting weights directly. To their legitimate question, “but for sho?”, They will be explained to them, saying that their fellow tribesman at the VO was already worried about the Russian woman!
    1. dvvv
      dvvv 26 January 2018 03: 26
      +2
      judging by your subtle humor, you were a sergeant in the warehouse where the weights are
  31. Anatoly Dobry
    Anatoly Dobry 26 January 2018 04: 24
    +2
    Tu-144 why he quit production - the ticket had to correspond to some average salary in the country. And now the situation is different. Now large companies have appeared that could use this aircraft. Civilian model based on the Tu-160 was relevant. We fly faster to New York than from Kaliningrad to Vladivostok.


    Now, of course, a person with an average salary is not ready to fly, he wouldn’t die of hunger.
    Give the price of tickets an adequate and restore the airfield network.
  32. Runoway
    Runoway 26 January 2018 07: 46
    +1
    Well, purely theoretically:
    - One hour of flight of the TU-160 missile carrier (without combat use) costs, according to official data for 2008, 580 thousand rubles (about $ 23,3 thousand).
    distance “London-New York” Concord overcame in ~ 3h
    Total: 580 * 000h = 3um 1 thousand rubles
    Let's say a maximum of 100 places, total 17 400 rubles per ticket ....... even a little, considering that now the price is ~ 30-40 thousand rubles
    Correct if not right
    1. iouris
      iouris 26 January 2018 13: 08
      0
      Quote: Runoway
      One hour of flight of the TU-160 missile carrier (without combat use) costs, according to official figures for 2008, 580 thousand rubles (about $ 23,3 thousand).

      One hour of flight of the MiG-23M fighter (according to unofficial data) cost 10000 rubles of the USSR, Su-24 - 20000 rubles. (The dollar was worth 0,60-0,90 rubles.).
      The relationship between cost and ticket price is most likely stochastic.
  33. engineer74
    engineer74 26 January 2018 16: 59
    +1
    I did not understand the subject of the dispute! sad The Tu-160 is not a supersonic airplane; it travels far and short for supersonic! Only in the air defense breakthrough mode. So, if the collective "passenger" is a collective farm, then only from scratch! fellow
  34. Lone gunman
    Lone gunman 26 January 2018 20: 47
    +2
    Great combinator-culinary specialist V.V. from th ... on a candy offered to sculpt how pigs sculpt their wedges:

    ... what should be carried by bombs and missiles, even if it bears ... and there is nothing to invent before the elections, and there are enough people who will vote as they should ... V.V. because they don’t carry it on the “poplars” ... It is necessary to produce a fundamentally new one, we cannot ... then laugh it off, at V.V. it turns out well ... and people will have fun since the elections are on the nose ...