Antonov Design Bureau and the US aviation industry: who strangles anyone in sweet arms?

106
This agreement between the Ukrainian and North American aircraft building companies on the start of deliveries of scarce components from the United States and on the creation of joint production was the result of rather long negotiations, which were most active last July.

According to international news agencies, Aleksandr Donets, the next (already the fourth in the last three years) head of the Design Bureau named. Antonova, said that the beginning of cooperation with the American side will allow the company to withdraw from the deep crisis in which the corporation was due to the rupture of economic ties between Ukraine and Russia.




Ukrainian An-178 is preparing to land during the international aerospace show in Le Bourget


According to A. Donets, the basic joint production will be located on the territory of Ukraine, in Gostomel, and this will solve the problem of those components, scarce materials, etc., which in the current period the Ukrainian company turned out to be impossible to obtain from Russian suppliers.

Known in the Soviet period, KB them. Antonova developed several dozen models of various transport aircraft, including the famous super-heavy Ruslan and Mriya. However, after 2005, the corporation abandoned the development of new models, and in 2015, production also stopped.


Ukrainian transport aircraft An-178 and its accompanying An-158


Thanks to the North American assistance, the Ukrainian aviation industry plans to launch the production of such aircraft as An-158, An-178 and others, which will be supplied (of course, in case of successful development of this joint venture) to markets mainly in Central Asia.

The Antonov enterprise is not only hoping for broad participation in the joint project of American aircraft manufacturers, but plans to enter the international and even North American aircraft market with its developments. In particular, the Ukrainians are planning that their An-77 (created on the basis of the Ukrainian-Russian An-70 that did not go into the series) will be able to occupy an intermediate niche between such models as the Hercules Lockheed C-130 (load capacity 21) and Boeing C-17 "Globemaster III" (loadable 78 t).

Ukrainian aircraft manufacturers also pin some hopes on the An-178 (which passed the 2015 flight tests in May) and the An-134D (presented by Ukroboronprom in June 2017 at the Le Bourget air show) created without Russian components.


Inside view of cockpit in An-178


However, in reality, according to a number of Russian military experts, Ukrainian aircraft are not needed by either European or North American aircraft building corporations, since, by and large, they are their direct competitors.

Recently, such countries as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Azerbaijan and even the Iraqi Air Force (probably all of these countries are allies of the USA), as well as ... China, have indicated their interest in acquiring An-178. However, the author is not yet aware of the export of these planes from Ukraine to any other countries, the main reason for which is the lack of components required for the resumption of their release.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

106 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +5
    28 July 2018 10: 49
    There is one more important aspect in such cooperation. Antonov’s enterprises are already in a deplorable state, but cooperation with American manufacturers is likely to fail for Ukrainians. It’s just not tricky to replace avionics on an airplane, and then you need to undergo a full course of testing, certification within the country and obtaining international registration. this is primarily money and time, and it can take 2-3-5 years. And if Antonov has it?
    1. +22
      28 July 2018 11: 04
      Ukraine is a torn chunk from Russia. ALL!
      Fuck you do not need anyone. Your mission was completed at the time of separation from Russia. Next is a slow death. Enjoy it.
      1. +4
        28 July 2018 11: 16
        Quote: For example
        Fuck you do not need anyone. Your mission was completed at the time of separation from Russia. Next is a slow death. Enjoy it.

        Very true words.
        1. +1
          28 July 2018 17: 50
          The question is why the US needs it.
          The sole purpose of the contract from the USA is to make a profit. How can I make a profit by signing a contract with Ukraine? Getting their techno hi-tech? Not even funny.
          Conclusion - Antonov is going to finally strangle.
          1. +2
            29 July 2018 02: 48
            Quote: Shurik70
            The question is why the US needs it.

            I honestly put on amers - they will stifle even thoughts about their production. 404th will not pull to fight with amers: they just like that they use them: this way and that and differently ...
            1. +1
              29 July 2018 10: 03
              Quote: Pete Mitchell
              Quote: Shurik70
              The question is why the US needs it.

              I honestly put on amers - they will stifle even thoughts about their production. 404th will not pull to fight with amers: they just like that they use them: this way and that and differently ...

              Yes, no one at ANTK seriously expects to produce something serious. If there are cooperation plans, then the ultimate dream is to produce individual units and / or blanks. As, for example, “Irkut” for “Airbus” made beams for the floors of the passenger compartment.
              1. +1
                30 July 2018 00: 46
                Quote: Avis-bis
                Yes, no one at ANTK seriously expects to produce something serious

                To do this, you don’t even need to be in the ANTC, you just need to look a little at the modern aviation business
                1. 0
                  31 July 2018 17: 13
                  Quote: Pete Mitchell

                  You don’t even have to be at ANTK for this

                  And I'm not in it.
    2. +7
      28 July 2018 11: 07
      Quote: APASUS
      .It is just that replacing avionics on an airplane is not a tricky business, and then you need to undergo a full course of testing, certification within the country and obtaining international registration. And this is primarily money and time, and it can take 2-3-5 years. And if they have Antonova?

      If there is real cooperation with the USA, then they will receive certification quickly.
      1. +5
        28 July 2018 11: 15
        Quote: saturn.mmm
        If there is real cooperation with the USA, then they will receive certification quickly

        Are you sure that the USA directly needs real cooperation with Antonov Design Bureau, and not the absorption of a competitor in the world market?
        1. +6
          28 July 2018 11: 43
          If Boeing bought Antonov, this would be an ideal option for Ukrainians.
          Warranty for many years to come. But for now, apparently, they are only eyeing: how Anas will be sold on international markets.
          1. +7
            28 July 2018 12: 23
            Quote: voyaka uh
            If Boeing bought Antonov, it would be for Ukrainians

            ... the same as for MDD. "Bobing" only crushes the purchased competitors. Learn the story, malcheg.
            1. 0
              28 July 2018 17: 45
              If Boeing bought Antonov, this would be an ideal option for Ukrainians

              And why do they need a competitor and Trump didn’t talk about this recently that production should be returned to the USA They have one rule - friendship is friendship, and wallets apart. All this is blah blah, and nothing more.
          2. +3
            28 July 2018 13: 23
            Quote: voyaka uh
            If Boeing bought Antonov, this would be an ideal option for Ukrainians.

            Why is Boeing able to answer such a question?
            1. +3
              28 July 2018 13: 46
              Boeing controls a significant part of the transport aircraft market. Antonov has his own niche: landing on unpaved airfields, on runways, covered with sand, etc.
              It is in demand in Africa, in the Middle East. Boeing will be able to get its share of the profits.
              1. +2
                28 July 2018 13: 58
                Quote: voyaka uh
                Boeing controls a significant part of the transport aircraft market. Antonov has his own niche: landing on unpaved airfields, on runways, covered with sand, etc.
                It is in demand in Africa, in the Middle East. Boeing will be able to get its share of the profits.

                Have you seen a lot of companies that have invested in countries where there is a war? As a rule, a real investor follows the silence and rules of the game.
                1. +2
                  28 July 2018 20: 12
                  I have seen hundreds of companies that have invested their money - huge billions - in a country where there are constant wars - in Israel. Actually, there is not a single large high-tech company that has not invested in Israeli industry.
                  A real investor goes for high profits, despite the risks.
                  1. +1
                    28 July 2018 21: 35
                    Quote: voyaka uh
                    I saw hundreds of companies investing their money - huge billions - in a country where there are constant wars - in Israel

                    My dear, you confuse Ukraine with Israel, they put the president at your place, but for Ukraine it is nonsense. To steal there is a national craft
          3. +3
            28 July 2018 13: 51
            Ho ho Boeing has production in Ukraine. wink
            To get the right to produce components, suppliers go through the hell with how many audits. And until they eliminate all the inconsistencies with the requirements of the same Boeing, a damn two that they get. And to buy Antonov to organize production there is business madness.
            They are worried about the development, they will pick up specialists, who most likely are no longer there, and dosvidos.
            1. 0
              29 July 2018 06: 38
              Quote: mmaxx

              They are worried about the development, they will pick up specialists, who most likely are no longer there, and dosvidos.

              “Absolutely in the hole,” as one of my instructors said. Anya has been doing this since the 1980s.
          4. +1
            28 July 2018 17: 04
            Do you believe what you say or just kidding
            1. 0
              29 July 2018 06: 39
              Quote: bmv04636
              or just kidding me

              No, I just don’t understand the question, but I want to blurt out something.
          5. 0
            30 July 2018 11: 36
            If Boeing bought Antonov, this would be an ideal option for Ukrainians.


            I agree. It remains now to convince the Boeing that he needs it. In an asset, Antonov does not have a single aircraft ready for production in any kind of cooperation other than Russian. ANY plane of Antonov Design Bureau requires redesign, re-testing and certification when replacing Russian components with Euro-American.
            By the way, Anas are not mass-produced, it is simply impossible to sell them on the international markets, let alone look at this process. :)

            Boeing controls a significant part of the transport aircraft market. Antonov has his own niche: landing on unpaved airfields, on runways, covered with sand, etc.
            It is in demand in Africa, in the Middle East.


            I repeat, first you need to invest a lot of money just to start serial production of Antonov’s aircraft outside of Russian cooperation. And only then start to sell at least somewhere. And if, in the Middle East, they can still be delivered for "real money" or guaranteed by local banks and governments, then the delivery of aircraft to Africa is at least financially risky business requiring not just leasing, but risk capital. I'm not talking about the fact that no one will create a service structure in Africa for Antonov’s planes.

            I have seen hundreds of companies that have invested their money - huge billions - in a country where there are constant wars - in Israel. Actually, there is not a single large high-tech company that has not invested in Israeli industry.


            Call a spade a spade. Israel is not just a country, it is a US avatar in the Middle East. If Ukraine becomes the US avatar in Eastern Europe, they will also invest in it, even if it fights. But so far nothing of the kind has been observed. :)

            And how Boeing works with aircraft manufacturers I had the opportunity to observe in the 90s. It creates a sort of "personnel vacuum cleaner" which in a short time spills up everything that lives and thinks independently, after which it turns off as unnecessary.
            1. 0
              31 July 2018 17: 16
              Quote: abc_alex
              It remains now to convince the Boeing that he needs it. In an asset, Antonov does not have a single aircraft ready for production in some kind of cooperation other than Russian. ANY plane of Antonov Design Bureau requires redesign, re-testing and certification when replacing Russian components with Euro-American.

              I repeat, first you need to invest a lot of money just to start mass production of aircraft

              "Absolutely in the hole."
              how Boeing works with aircraft manufacturers I had the opportunity to observe in the 90s. It creates a sort of "personnel vacuum cleaner" which in a short time spuds everything that lives and thinks independently, and then turns off as unnecessary.

              Even more correct.
        2. 0
          28 July 2018 17: 42
          all that the Westerners can offer them real is to produce spare parts for Boeing at Ukrainian capacities ....
        3. 0
          29 July 2018 00: 24
          Quote: Mikhail Matyugin
          Are you sure that the USA directly needs real cooperation with Antonov Design Bureau,

          Yazh wrote, if. And why worry so much about Antonov if you better worry about Gazprom
          BoNY is understandable here sideways - he wears clothes under the issuer of American depositary receipts issued for shares of GAZPROM. In order not to puzzle in vain, I’ll explain - this is a veiled form of transferring state property from the colony of the metropolis. Those. 27% were transferred directly to “our American partners,” as they like to joke around fun in GDP. Why 27? And because with 25 percent comes the "announcement" of shares, i.e. the owner of these 27% can hack decisions made by the Company.
      2. +1
        28 July 2018 11: 22
        Quote: saturn.mmm

        If there is real cooperation with the USA, then they will receive certification quickly.

        ... but he will not be. The US has a Spartan, for example. And the C-130.
      3. avt
        +2
        28 July 2018 11: 35
        Quote: saturn.mmm
        If there is real cooperation with the USA, then they will receive certification quickly.

        bully Our Super Budget from the GSS with Boeing’s “intellectual” contribution also quickly received certificates and what? Captured the market segment "as promised by the great Poe? Well, we at least have a lot to shove the manufactured airplanes into Russian airlines. And these ... Sumerikra to whom and where will they play the same 178th if, with the help of us, the Brazilians, yes-and-so, have an analog in the series already?
        Quote: Not Liberoid Russian
        regular mriies ...

        As previously with the Saudis.
      4. +1
        28 July 2018 13: 22
        Quote: saturn.mmm
        If there is real cooperation with the USA, then they will receive certification quickly.

        Ha ha ha Fast is how much?
    3. MPN
      0
      28 July 2018 11: 53
      It is as if honestly sorry for Antonov, but the task of rebuilding him with anyone (with the existing management of an independent one) seems impossible to me, this is a very risky sector (Ukraine), investment ... And the point here is not certification and lack of materials and components ...
      which in the current period of the Ukrainian company was impossible get from Russian suppliers.
      No one refused to sell, they themselves imposed sanctions on this, with the goal of "strangling Russia" ... smile There’s just nothing to buy them, I don’t think that the USA will give everything for free ...
      1. +2
        28 July 2018 13: 55
        Why feel sorry for him? Who are they to us? For more than 10 years, there has been trepidation about joining NATO. For the sake of their flying troughs, we are ruining our projects. We deprive designers of experience, workers' salaries. It is better to send this money rain into our country. Because she is ours.
        The essence of any idea of ​​the non-fallow lands of Ukraine is treason. These Ukrainians whom only in their history have not betrayed. Even they betrayed themselves.
        Guys!!! There is nothing on Antonov that was worth the money that we swelled there.
        1. MPN
          0
          28 July 2018 14: 05
          Quote: mmaxx
          It is better to send this money rain into our country.

          Not even a question. To regret, it’s kind of nostalgic.
          Quote: mmaxx
          There is nothing on Antonov that was worth the money that we swelled there.

          Now, no, there used to be a whole school of aircraft building, just as there was tank building ..., now you can raise production capacities (which, given the power of (thieves), is commensurate with the construction of several new aircraft plants in Russia) But you won’t revive the design school, that's all she is no longer ... sad drinks
    4. +1
      28 July 2018 13: 32
      For how much time we promise "the collapse of the Ukrainian economy" ...., but she still survives. Maybe enough to "prophesy", and step aside and watch? And then somehow it turns out badly: we promise one thing, but in reality another comes out!
      1. 0
        28 July 2018 18: 05
        Quote: senima56
        For how much time we promise "the collapse of the Ukrainian economy" ...., but she still survives. Maybe enough to "prophesy", and step aside and watch? And then somehow it turns out badly: we promise one thing, but in reality another comes out!

        recourse Somalia, too, of the type still formally exists !!! wink Yes laughing laughing laughing
    5. +1
      28 July 2018 16: 01
      And where are they in a hurry? No aircraft have been assembled in the last two years. Therefore, you can certify as much as you like. But I am more than sure that the mattress covers of competitors will be destroyed in the shortest possible time. About An - 178 - the most obscene reviews. Motor Sich pilots communicated with pilots who flew on the 178th - a very dangerous airplane.
    6. 0
      28 July 2018 17: 49
      Quote: APASUS
      There is one more important aspect in such cooperation. Antonov’s enterprises are already in a deplorable state, but cooperation with American manufacturers is likely to fail for Ukrainians. It’s just not tricky to replace avionics on an airplane, and then you need to undergo a full course of testing, certification within the country and obtaining international registration. this is primarily money and time, and it can take 2-3-5 years. And if Antonov has it?

      You forgot one more important nuance - the rise in price of the final product due to the use of more expensive Euro-American "substitutes" !!! wink Yes wassat wassat wassat
    7. 0
      29 July 2018 09: 55
      Don’t worry, the Americans will help.
    8. mvg
      -1
      29 July 2018 10: 17
      And then they had a sea of ​​options? And now the company will be able to get up off its knees. But Russia is ahead of the rest! And the IL-114 is lifted to the wing and the MS-21 flies, and 80% of SuperJet, consisting of imports, has a bunch of solid orders ... You don’t even remember right away what successes we have in the citizen. aviation !!! If only the first Russian PS-14 engine, and then, on tests ...
      PS: Everything is fine with us!
  2. +2
    28 July 2018 10: 52
    next mriies ... nobody needs Antonov
    1. +2
      28 July 2018 10: 59
      Quote: Not Liberoid Russian
      nobody needs Antonov

      Why, of course, we need it. There are countries that are afraid of complications in relations with the United States (Azerbaijan, C Korea) and don’t buy aircraft of this type. Or countries that themselves start production and they need help (like China for example), but such aircraft do not buy planes hundreds, 2-3 and no more, well 10 maximum. And such a quantity simply prolongs the stagnation of the manufacturer. Ukraine needs a firm order for at least 30-40 boards. Then it makes sense to get involved in updating the design and certification
      1. +1
        28 July 2018 11: 11
        they just want technology from Antonov, planes are like that, a curtain
        1. +3
          28 July 2018 13: 00
          Quote: Not Liberoid Russian
          they just want technology from Antonov, planes are like that, a curtain

          What technology?
          Antonov is so outdated that they don’t even have a standard assembly-free assembly.
          1. +1
            28 July 2018 13: 59
            Bravo!! I know one more thing. About 6-7 years ago, and they did not even have a 3D-design management system. This kindergarten Russia passed immediately as we had CAD / CAMs appeared in the 90s. This is the basis, damn it.
        2. +2
          28 July 2018 13: 37
          Sorry, but according to the latest, albeit versatile, news, Shumeria no longer has technology.
          Let's start with the memorable 178, which was so "improved" that we had to store 400 kilos in the form of "cast iron" behind the cockpit, so we flew to Lyaburzha laughing . Then they were notorious. According to different people - Russian factories and design bureaus "vacuumed" from "Antonov" EVERYTHING that made even the slightest sense. And this is taking into account the runaway and "grabbed" before that - the Chinese, Americans, S. Koreans. tongue
          So most likely - the Boeing decided to guarantee to finish off the remnants of the competition, so that it wouldn’t work out like with Russia, "she thought that’s FSE, and she’s a bastard - Resurrected."
          1. 0
            28 July 2018 14: 01
            Well, to hell with them with their 400 kg stove. In the USSR, over, the Mig-23 was made with a piece of cast iron of 200 kg. They are just followers of traditions. An-178 - this is to carry goods. So let him carry.
          2. 0
            29 July 2018 06: 42
            Quote: Mih1974
            178, which was so "improved" that it was necessary to store 400 kilos in the form of "cast iron" behind the cockpit, so they arrived in Lyaburge

            The words "Antonova" about the not yet mounted blocks of military avionics are very believable. This is not the first case in aviation history.
            1. 0
              29 July 2018 12: 18
              Of course, I am a complete amateur, but what would a LOAD plane have to be "balanced" with cast-iron "plates" instead of unidentified avionics "- this is some wildest nonsense fool
              What is it that they "counted" of it in the wrong way, that the vital need to "balance" appeared? This is not a micron scale, but if in the future they decide to upgrade with replacing “400 kg” with some kind of “light” semiconductors, what is it to weld “cast iron” again? negative
              1. 0
                29 July 2018 14: 54
                Quote: Mih1974
                avionics "- this is some kind of wildest nonsense

                Yes, "avionics" is really nonsense.
                What is it that they "counted" of it in the wrong way, that the vital need to "balance" appeared?

                I do not know. A radio station, for example. Or r / st with a friend or foe block. Or something else, whatnots are usually roomy, there’s a lot to fit into.
                This is not a micron scale, but if in the future they decide to upgrade with replacing “400 kg” with some kind of “light” semiconductors, what is it to weld “cast iron” again? negative

                Ask them. If at the time of the start of flights this block is not yet there, but its mass is known, but why not. Temporarily put the ballast, and then replace it with a real unit. Not the first time.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                2. 0
                  30 July 2018 12: 10
                  Oh mine bastard, I found an article
                  An-178 developers made a mistake with centering the aircraft
                  The very first flight tests of the new Ukrainian military transport aircraft An-178 revealed a serious design error, a military blog writes with reference to insider information of Antonov State Enterprise.
                  Due to the misalignment of the airliner, the An-178 can only perform any flights with a ballast weighing 1,32 tons in the form of 15 steel plates laid behind the cockpit. It was with such a load that the An-178 traveled to air shows in Le Bourget and Dubai. Immediately after landing, the ballast was quickly unloaded and hid.
                  Presumably, the reason for the misalignment of the machine was the decision made in 2012 to increase the wing span by two meters, as well as the wing area from 88,5 to 98,6 square meters, while keeping the already designed fuselage unchanged. The wings were lengthened not from a good life, but because of the mismatch of the takeoff and landing characteristics with the declared ones.
                  The defect is “organic” and structurally difficult to remove, experts say. A possible way to solve the problem is to lengthen the front of the fuselage, however, this will require serious redesign, the construction of a new prototype and the development of anew test program. And the identified miscalculation will worsen the already unimportant flight performance of the An-178.

                  The short-range military transport aircraft An-178 was designed and built by Antonov Antonov Aviation Complex based on the passenger An-148. Work on the machine began in 2010, the first flight of the An-178 took place in May 2015. The aircraft is planned as a replacement for the An-12: it will be able to transport 18 tons of cargo and use unpaved airfields. At the same time, the An-178 surpasses its predecessor in a number of declared characteristics: a more spacious airtight cargo compartment allows transporting containers of international standards, cruising speed and flight range are increased, and the practical ceiling.

                  where there are up to 400 kg, there are almost one and a half tons.
                  1. +1
                    31 July 2018 17: 23
                    [quote = Mih1974] Oh mine reptile, I found an article
                    [quote] An-178 developers made a mistake with the alignment of the aircraft [/ quote]
                    No, well, if the article got it so, then “yes”, this is the ultimate truth ... :) And “some kind” of the CCAMLR was wrong, and “Mih1974” is right. :)
                    For militant amateurs, for reference: when the sweep of the swept wing increases, the dive moment from it also increases. At the same time, ballast is laid not behind the cabin, but behind the wing.
                    Learn the materiel before saying something about aviation. Limit the spread of manure in the garden.
  3. +3
    28 July 2018 11: 06
    Antonov’s enterprise hopes not only for wide participation in the joint project of American aircraft manufacturers, but plans to enter the international and even North American aircraft market with its developments. In particular, Ukrainians plan that their An-77 (created on the basis of the Ukrainian-Russian An-70 that has never gone into production) will be able to occupy an intermediate niche between models such as the Lockheed C-130 Hercules (21 t payload) and Boeing C-17 Globemaster III (78 t)
    Sweet dope of dreams while falling in love with death. If Americans need Antonov, then to extend the resource of the existing Ruslanov fleet and use them in NATO logistics. There may be a resumption of production of new ones, but hardly. I am interested to ask, where will the Americans get a replacement for Russian components? It is evident that they will buy from us and resell margin-free to Ukrainians ...
    1. 0
      28 July 2018 11: 45
      If Americans need Antonov, then to extend the resource of the existing Ruslanov fleet and use them in NATO logistics

      To update the Ruslan fleet, where? Are they used by any of the NATO countries? Which one?
      1. 0
        28 July 2018 11: 55
        Quote: alexmach
        Are they used by any of the NATO countries? Which one?

        They are used in the interests of NATO. There are no ready links, but just hammer something like "using Ruslan NATO" or something like that in Yandex - you will find everything that interests you ... hi
        1. 0
          28 July 2018 13: 44
          They are used in the interests of NATO.

          Yeah, but whoever exploits them is in the interests of NATO? Do you seriously believe that the United States will modernize aircraft belonging to the same Volga-Dnepr mentioned above?
          Again. They have no problem updating Ruslanov because they have no Ruslanov ... Only Russia has this problem.
      2. +1
        28 July 2018 12: 25
        Quote: alexmach

        To update the Ruslan fleet, where? Are they used by any of the NATO countries? Which one?

        In general, An-124 (and even An-225) carry out / -li transportation in the interests of coalitions in which NATO participates. Even "ours" Volga-Dnepr drove.
        1. 0
          28 July 2018 13: 42
          What does even mean? His Russian companies and carried in the interests of NATO. There is no Ruslanov in any NATO country. All that transported for them was the Russian companies. What seriously believe that the Americans will upgrade the aircraft that are owned by Russian companies?
          1. +1
            28 July 2018 17: 00
            Quote: alexmach
            What does even mean? His Russian companies and carried in the interests of NATO. There is no Ruslanov in any NATO country. All that transported for them was the Russian companies. What seriously believe that the Americans will upgrade the aircraft that are owned by Russian companies?

            Did you understand that you got it?
            1. 0
              28 July 2018 17: 05
              Do you have problems understanding the trivial fact that the USA does not have Ruslans and none of their allies have them and accordingly they do not need to be modernized? I sincerely sympathize. Develop, read books. Maybe it will pass.
              1. +1
                28 July 2018 19: 18
                Quote: alexmach
                Do you have problems understanding the trivial fact that the USA does not have Ruslans and none of their allies have them and accordingly they do not need to be modernized? I sincerely sympathize. Develop, read books. Maybe it will pass.

                Clearly, they themselves did not understand. I'm so sorry. Learn Russian, this is one of the official languages ​​of ICAO.
                1. 0
                  28 July 2018 19: 44
                  I’m sitting here and I think your rudeness is that hereditary or from education? Or is pushing letters on the Internet creating an unhealthy feeling of impunity?
                  1. 0
                    29 July 2018 06: 04
                    Quote: alexmach
                    I'm sitting here and thinking

                    Useful activity, I approve. Continue in the same spirit. And, until you think about it, do not write anything.
    2. 0
      29 July 2018 02: 58
      As far as I understand, Superjet is a set of Western components. Russian there is like a glider. That is, in Russia, cooperation with the West is closer than that of Ukraine. Ukrainians seemingly sold the last planes to the DPRK and to Cuba. If the company management has competent people and patriots for their production, unfortunately hostile to Russia, Ukraine, there will be aircraft manufacturing in Ukraine. What is the strength of Western civilization, it uses other countries in peaceful production and allows these countries to develop. The USSR, having an alliance with China, Vietnam, India, the DPRK was unable to establish profitable cooperation and division of labor. Ukrainian aircraft manufacturers are more likely to earn bread and butter while maintaining and developing the existing production, than trying to squeeze the producers of the PRC and Korea from the market with completely different products ..
      1. 0
        29 July 2018 06: 06
        Quote: gsev
        As far as I understand, Superjet is a set of Western components. Russian there is like a glider.

        As well as the "cold part" of the engine and, most importantly, design. Brain.
        The USSR, having an alliance with China, Vietnam, and India, the DPRK was unable to establish profitable cooperation and division of labor.

        CMEA.
        1. 0
          3 August 2018 15: 18
          I meant that until 2013 Antonov used Russian components more often than in the Superjet. When interacting with the CMEA, the USSR still retained production. For example, the production of AN-2 was sold to Poland under the condition that Russia would buy these aircraft for $ 10000. The Poles were outraged that they were forced to sell the aircraft so cheaply. And when the Ministry needed AN 2, it considered that they were cheaper to make in the USSR, which was done. They slightly changed the design, lengthened the wing, and even the shallow series with design changes turned out to be cheaper than the Polish one. Also, when it was necessary in the 60s to help Algeria cope with the invasion of locusts, and NATO banned non-stop flights of agricultural aircraft. AN2 was modified for a long-haul flight and flew to Algeria without an intermediate landing. At that time, there was a noise in NATO at the USSR; long-range small-sized bombers appeared. The USSR did not seriously help the grain of the PRC, Vietnam and the DPRK. Khrushchev bought grain from the United States when the PRC had a good harvest and Mao offered to sell it. And the blame for poor cooperation was too high the ambitions of the leadership of the USSR ...
          1. 0
            3 August 2018 18: 08
            Quote: gsev
            I meant that until 2013 Antonov used Russian components more often than in the Superjet.

            What are you talking about?
            When interacting with the CMEA, the USSR still retained production.
            when the ministry needed AN 2, it considered that they were cheaper to make in the USSR, which was done.

            Faq What such An-2s were built in the USSR after the 1960s?
            What world do you live in? In parallel?
  4. +2
    28 July 2018 11: 09
    "Antonov Design Bureau and the US aviation industry: who will strangle whom in a sweet embrace?"
    Here, the Americans don’t even go to the grandmother with their anti-Russian and Russophobic colonial (by no means “sweet”!) Policies on the post-maid “Ukraine”, in fact, they finally strangled Antonov Design Bureau, “blocked it with oxygen”, and these “flutters” with American components, only the agony of a dying organization! IMHO
  5. +2
    28 July 2018 11: 18
    The Americans will once again get acquainted and gain free access to the development ... and they will be thrown, as they always do.
    1. 0
      28 July 2018 13: 01
      Quote: Strashila
      Americans will once again get acquainted and get free access to development

      Yes, they won’t get it ... It was already about this in another discussion, I repeat again
      In Pucheng County (Weinan, Shaanxi Province) on an area of ​​124 square kilometers, the construction of the Luyanghu Modern Open Industrial Area is nearing completion, where two thousand employees of the Ukrainian Antonov Design Bureau will live and work with family members.

      Read more here http://gosnovosti.com/2017/07/Ukrainian- concern-
      Antonov-moving /
    2. 0
      28 July 2018 14: 03
      Guys! Understand! The level of technology at Boeing is such that he has nothing to take on Antonov at all. It's like a white colonizer arrived on the island with cannibals. All you can get is a barbecue and banana pig.
      1. 0
        28 July 2018 15: 48
        Ulyudoedov always have something to learn ... how to survive in such conditions of their life. For example ... the United States has been purchasing rocket engines in Russia for a long time ... but they cannot reproduce them in their hands ... even North Korea has surpassed them in this matter ... but they get full access to the entire chain of missile production and airplanes ... from how the idea is generated and the ways of its implementation in the final product, all the design and technological chains. This is a series of why the MIG25 was attended by lamps in electronics.
        1. +1
          28 July 2018 21: 27
          I do not know why the Americans do not want to make their rocket engine. But aviation technology is pushing them forward. And since the 30s.
          But the time of war, how did the Americans survive in the jungle? They drove engineering troops with bulldozers, cleared all the jungle, built barracks and poison mosquitoes. And they changed people. Own methods. It’s not naked running through the woods.
          1. 0
            29 July 2018 06: 49
            Quote: mmaxx
            aviation technology moves them forward. And since the 30s.

            “Aviation technology” in the 1930s “advanced” the Hans and some other Europeans. Including the USSR. For example, the first aviation serial diesel engines appeared in Germany and the USSR. The first jet is Germany. The first practically applicable UAV is the USSR. The engine (half of the aircraft) for one of the best US fighter aircraft in the United States - UK. Well, and so on.
            1. 0
              30 July 2018 14: 31
              I understand. that dislike for Americans dominates in the head. But ... If the Germans still had something, then the USSR ... Sorry. Actually, aviation technology was moved by the Americans. Take a look at aerodynamic profile albums only. Probably 90% American.
              Assembly of aircraft. The use of all kinds of gizmos in production. One Tu-4 gave a giant boost to our aircraft. Also not ashamed to copy. The first plane on which we mastered the plazo-template method in the 30s is an American one. Bought and not ashamed. American aircraft of the 40s still fly.
              Yes and now ... You just need to open your eyes. The use of electronic linking and assembly technology without carriers of shape and size. Only this one raised the quality of aircraft to unprecedented heights.
              And the engine ... So what? Only now, the Americans of the Merlin PP were assembled on the assembly line, in contrast to the selective assembly in England.
              Do not underestimate the enemies. The USA is a very technically developed country with a high technical culture. To begin with, the tolerance and landing system appeared in the United States.
              1. 0
                30 July 2018 14: 33
                All that we have achieved is earned by tremendous work and talent. We have been cut off from progress for many years. But something could. It must be multiplied by any means. And if you need to tear something from your rivals, then this must be done. Without any complexes, but also without hatred.
              2. 0
                31 July 2018 17: 28
                [quote = mmaxx] I understand. that dislike for Americans dominates in the head. / quote]
                You don’t understand a damn ... I don’t have this "dislike", stop attributing your alcoholic fantasies to others.
                The aviation profiles in the 1930s were not only from NACA and Clark, but also from TsAGI. But this is too early for you to know, not mature enough.
                The rest is your nonsense - no comment; Hans and other Europeans were vehicles of aviation technology. I have listed them (technology). Now someone has something left to understand. Good luck. She will be needed.
                1. 0
                  1 August 2018 14: 29
                  Yeah. It’s too early for me to know. Mal ischo. Only now, if you open an album-second-third then ...., there are more American profiles there than all the rest combined. And this is puzzling. And now I know the aviation industry a little. Only now I have cited some facts, but you are not. What is there in technology who has done? Germans for example. Regarding how to build airplanes?
                  Or an indirect question: where do we buy equipment all the time? If we don’t have it, then apply it first, we can’t start at all.
                  1. 0
                    1 August 2018 14: 38
                    An example of our success. Licensed release of Li-2. An advanced aircraft in all respects for its time. But in terms of quality, Douglas and Lee-2 did not stand nearby. And the old man who served as an aircraft technician during the war spoke to me about this. He praised American bombers too. It’s like excellent aircraft in all respects - build quality, engines, avionics, etc.
                    But the Germans could not rip off Douglas. Apparently, they went so far forward that they did not turn around. I will not laugh at them, there were many reasons.
                    Let me remind you, we are talking about technology. And not about individual successful aircraft.
                    And now, separation from us is simply indecent. Although we are trying.
                    And talking about Antonov is simply ridiculous. The plane is built primarily on paper. And the paper is spent on him more than he weighs. And all this is the normative base, technical and reporting documentation should be modern. Even we western standards (ISO, DINs) we simply translate and accept, according to the sensations, no longer reading. And if you didn’t compose it, then it means that even the move did not reach you in development. Well, at least the thought came to rip off.
                    About Ukraine is better not to remember.
                  2. 0
                    1 August 2018 14: 50
                    Quote: mmaxx
                    Yeah. It’s too early for me to know. Mal ischo.

                    Finally, reasonable speech. :)
  6. +2
    28 July 2018 11: 21
    Not for that the USSR was killed and its aircraft industry, then to "revive" something. For development, any investments are needed, and simply a huge amount of working capital, which Antonov KB is unlikely to have. You can of course take a targeted loan, but for sure all Wishlist will end in failure. We need to produce series like Embraer and Bombardier, and not piece copies.
    PS And what kind of aircraft in general? On the territory of Ukraine there should be a population of stupid consumers as elsewhere.
  7. +3
    28 July 2018 11: 27
    What expression ... no one will strangle, they will marry and leave. Or maybe they won’t sail ...
    1. +2
      28 July 2018 11: 50
      eat and do not choke ...
  8. +3
    28 July 2018 11: 33
    "Antonov", the final amen, rest in peace .... you yourself have chosen, i.e. come on!
  9. +2
    28 July 2018 11: 45
    Cooperation with the USA in any field a priori implies the highest standards of activity.
    At one time, TAPOiCh contracted for Boeing to make some simple assemblies, something in the cockpit. The customer was satisfied, the question arose of further, more complicated work. And Boeing put forward the requirement that they in Seattle could monitor the technological process online via the Internet, Particular heat treatment of parts. This is the end of the collaboration!
    1. +2
      28 July 2018 13: 56
      Sure. Now there is a tendency to diagnose online, through computers, the entire process technology, all stages.
      Everywhere sensors, timers, everywhere video cameras. It is impossible to quietly “speed up” any heat treatment or “hammer” a bolt into a thread, hoping that they will not notice.
  10. +2
    28 July 2018 11: 48
    Antonov enterprises are no longer in Ukraine !!
    It remains only this ..

    But the memory remained, with tears in his eyes ..
    1. +3
      28 July 2018 13: 08
      It remains only this ..

      And this does not belong to Ukraine. These are the achievements of the Soviet Union.
      1. +1
        28 July 2018 13: 18
        Quote: Dimy4
        It remains only this ..

        And this does not belong to Ukraine. These are the achievements of the Soviet Union.

        Ukraine is now Donbass from distant guns bombing! Here is their main gain (under the whip of the USA and Israel ...) For loans and so on.

        They live so constantly (just do not need to say that it’s drunk to be saved, after a fire, etc.)
      2. 0
        28 July 2018 19: 11
        Without its Ukrainian concern, fate would be sad like Buran.
        And so it works. It continues to set records.
        The Ukrainian giant aircraft An-225 Mriya completed the largest project in terms of the number of consecutive flights in its history on the commercial market, transporting 12 large-sized generators in South America with 12 flights.
        According to the Antonov State Enterprise, within the framework of the energy project, the world's largest aircraft, commissioned by Hansa Meyer Global Transport GmbH & Co, delivered equipment from Chile to Bolivia for a new thermal power plant.
        During each flight, Mriya delivered a cargo weighing 160 tons
        1. 0
          28 July 2018 19: 29
          Quote: Antares

          Ukrainian giant aircraft An-225 "Mriya"

          Especially for tupar: An-225 - a Soviet aircraft. Enlighten yourself, malcheg. You can’t thank, I allow.
    2. 0
      28 July 2018 15: 02
      THIS remains only as property. And memory .... you will not return to the past.
  11. tap
    0
    28 July 2018 12: 07
    Who writes these articles? Doesn’t the ear hurt: “Antonov Design Bureau, known during the Soviet period, developed several dozen models of various transport aircraft, including the famous superheavy Ruslan and Mriya. However, after 2005 the corporation refused to develop new models, and in 2015 it stopped and production." What is a model? There is a TYPE of aircraft.
    1. +1
      28 July 2018 12: 29
      Quote: zapfen
      after 2005 year
      What is a model? There is a TYPE of aircraft.

      Hehe ... What is wrong? The "model" in English is synonymous with "modification." Since then, Antonov has not created new types of aircraft, unless. not this way? And "models" - too. An-158 / -178 and An-132 do not count.
    2. +1
      28 July 2018 12: 58
      Quote: zapfen
      What is a model? There is a TYPE of aircraft.

      TYPE is An. And the model is various modifications, if that ... wassat
      1. 0
        29 July 2018 06: 53
        Quote: helmi8
        Quote: zapfen
        What is a model? There is a TYPE of aircraft.

        TYPE is An.

        Not really, namesake. "Type" is, for example, An-24. An is, in modern terms, a brand. But the An-24RV is a modification or, in Western terms, a “model”.
  12. +1
    28 July 2018 12: 30
    China is only interested in obtaining technology and will not finance the development of the Ukrainian aviation industry ...

    Moreover, the USA never helped anyone for free, the probability that they will help the development of a competitor to Boeing is close to zero ...

    And everyone else had already seen enough of how Ukraine repaired planes for Croatia, made armored personnel carriers for Iraq and tanks for Thailand ...

    The aviation industry of Ukraine has no future without Russia ...
  13. 0
    28 July 2018 13: 01
    Ukrainian transport aircraft An-178 and its accompanying An-158

    That yellow one looks like Pinocchio.
    1. 0
      29 July 2018 10: 09
      Quote: Dimy4

      That yellow one looks like Pinocchio.

      If you are talking about the An-178, then this bar is temporary - there are reference airspeed sensors. After testing, it is removed. With this "nose" flew all Antonov cars, including the An-225.

  14. +2
    28 July 2018 13: 21
    as I understand it, the load for balancing the Boeing will deliver laughing
  15. +1
    28 July 2018 13: 53
    Inside view of cockpit in An-178

    Honestly, in our century, the "joysticks" of management could be more compact. It reminds the helm of the 30s of the last century.
  16. BAI
    0
    28 July 2018 14: 24
    Scrap the remains of Soviet technology. And that’s all over.
  17. 0
    28 July 2018 14: 44
    I myself work in the aircraft industry. As soon as some project was planned and shit boiling over in the factories, some "pro-Russian" president immediately won the trouble in Ukraine. And it all ended up pumping money into the next An-148, An-178 and other things:% *:?% *: But. In the best case, nothing was done, in the worst we got trash. But their projects stopped. And the development paid for with Russian money was pumped everywhere. And all thanks to the politicians who appeased the "brothers." Even in Antonov, friendly through Ukraine, are pieces of bread taken from the mouth of our children. Finish off, not to take away that everything is possible. Let Boeing help if our bosses lack conscience. White people have a lot of experience with Papuans.
  18. 0
    28 July 2018 17: 14
    The article is a complete contradiction. the author then indicates that for more than a decade new models have not been developed, then lists ready-made aircraft, then indicates complete devastation, then possible orders from Africa and Asia. The author, decide whether you are handsome or smart?
  19. +1
    28 July 2018 17: 24
    Pootyumeut people "" by weight, by the very tomatoes "Valtsmanoidy, wash off ZABUGOR how to give a drink.
  20. 0
    28 July 2018 17: 45
    I don’t even doubt the victory of UkrAntonov over the Boeing ... And he will be releasing An
    Boeing by the hands of American earners in the United States
  21. 0
    28 July 2018 19: 07
    Collaboration should lead to the emergence of new Antoing or Boeionov models, lol
    1. +2
      29 July 2018 10: 23
      Quote: afrikanez
      Collaboration should lead to the emergence of new Antoing or Boeionov models, lol

      A joke went to zero: "Sukhoi and Boeing began a joint project of the aircraft. It is called Bukhoy-878."

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"