SSJ100 aircraft with saber endings completed flight tests

131
In Zhukovsky near Moscow, flight tests of the Sukhoi Superjet 100 aircraft with wingtips, which received the common name “sabers,” were completed.





Tests of two SSJ100 jets with horizontal wingtips successfully completed. Cars completed over 140 flights

- says the KLA message.

SSJ100 was tested for take-off and landing performance, stability and controllability, flight control systems were tested, equipment responsible for external lighting and vertical navigation was tested. At the same time, the planes were subjected to heavy loads, developing high speeds and reaching critical angles.

At the same time, fuel consumption was monitored throughout the flight. However, its consumption is just an indicator of the effectiveness of the use of “saber”: as the developers (JSC “Sukhoi” and TsAGI) indicated, the endings significantly increase the economy of the flight along with an increase in aerodynamic characteristics and carrying capacity. As expected, kerosene consumption will decrease by no less than 4%.

As a result, each machine will bring 10 million rubles to operators. annual savings. At the request of the customer, it is possible to equip the tip of the old type of machine.

As planned, after the certification procedure is completed, the first SSJ100 with the sabers attached to it will be transferred to operation, which is expected before the end of this year.
    Our news channels

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

    131 comment
    Information
    Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
    1. +14
      18 October 2019 15: 47
      If only they would have localized it, at least 90 percent, but they would have installed their own engine.
      1. +5
        18 October 2019 15: 51
        Quote: FenH
        Yes, they installed their engine.

        Something all muddy with this plane.
        1. +11
          18 October 2019 20: 47
          Are you up there so dumbe that did not immediately understand that it had to be done initially with endings ?! fool belay
        2. +2
          18 October 2019 20: 56
          Colleague, this technology is 35 years old! The winglet has long been used on Tu-204, Il-96, An-158. On SSG-100, apparently, the "partners" did not allow it. Probably for the same reason it is still not on the imported "black wing" of the MS-21.
      2. +17
        18 October 2019 15: 52
        Here is a list of just a few of the suppliers of major Sukhoi SuperJet 100 systems:
        Avionics —THALES (France)
        Management and life support system - LIEBHERR (Germany)
        Chassis —MESSIERDOWTY (France)
        Fuel System — INTERTECHNIQUE (ZODIAC) (France)
        Hydraulics - PARKER (USA)
        Interior and oxygen system - B / EAEROSPACE (USA)
        Fire system - AUTRONICS (CURTISSWRIGHT) (USA)
        Crew seats - IPECO (UK)
        Power Supply System - HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND (USA)
        Engine vibration sensors - VIBRO-METER (Switzerland)
        Wheels, brakes - GOODRICH (USA)
        Doors - THE BOEING COMPANY (USA)

        And what about the Russian Superjet?
        Russian in SSJ is, in fact, the aircraft itself: 100% designed, tested, certified, manufactured in Russia.
        All design and a full cycle of tests, both resource and static, were carried out in Russia.
        The fuselage and wings are fully Russian-made.
        Composites for SSJ are made at VASO, in Russia.
        Metal for Superjet is completely Russian.
        The design of the SSJ cockpit was developed in Russia.
        1. +15
          18 October 2019 15: 57
          Quote: Svarog
          Here is a list of just a few of the suppliers of major Sukhoi SuperJet 100 systems:
          Avionics —THALES (France)
          Management and life support system - LIEBHERR (Germany)
          Chassis —MESSIERDOWTY (France)
          Fuel System — INTERTECHNIQUE (ZODIAC) (France)
          Hydraulics - PARKER (USA)
          Interior and oxygen system - B / EAEROSPACE (USA)
          Fire system - AUTRONICS (CURTISSWRIGHT) (USA)
          Crew seats - IPECO (UK)
          Power Supply System - HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND (USA)
          Engine vibration sensors - VIBRO-METER (Switzerland)
          Wheels, brakes - GOODRICH (USA)
          Doors - THE BOEING COMPANY (USA)

          And what about the Russian Superjet?
          Russian in SSJ is, in fact, the aircraft itself: 100% designed, tested, certified, manufactured in Russia.
          All design and a full cycle of tests, both resource and static, were carried out in Russia.
          The fuselage and wings are fully Russian-made.
          Composites for SSJ are made at VASO, in Russia.
          Metal for Superjet is completely Russian.
          The design of the SSJ cockpit was developed in Russia.

          I agree-SHILDIK Russian. Take away everything else and what remains and whether it can take off
          1. +4
            18 October 2019 17: 23
            The most international plane in the world turns out to be a friendship of peoples however!
            1. SSR
              +7
              18 October 2019 19: 36
              Quote: BARKAS
              The most international plane in the world turns out to be a friendship of peoples however!

              Only now the "druzhban" American, blocked the sale of SSJ100 to Iran and so really, international.
              1. +3
                18 October 2019 20: 50
                Quote from S.S.R.
                Only now the "friend" is an American,

                Friendship is friendship, and tobacco is apart.
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. +2
            18 October 2019 19: 44
            Quote: FenH
            I agree-SHILDIK Russian. Take away everything else and what remains and whether it can take off

            Take away everything Russian and there will be a bunch of high-tech expensive scrap metal and can it take off?
            1. 0
              19 October 2019 06: 12
              Quote: sir.jonn
              Quote: FenH
              I agree-SHILDIK Russian. Take away everything else and what remains and whether it can take off

              Take away everything Russian and there will be a bunch of high-tech expensive scrap metal and can it take off?

              spare parts for embaers, watermelons and Boeing. Or do you think they only produce products for Russia
        2. +8
          18 October 2019 16: 10
          Engines still forgot ...
        3. +5
          18 October 2019 16: 23
          Well, if not fools, then all foreign technologies should be studied with the possibility of reproduction on our basis. And if not, then sadness. :-(
          1. SSR
            0
            19 October 2019 07: 47
            Quote: Ural-4320
            Well, if not fools, then all foreign technologies should be studied with the possibility of reproduction on our basis. And if not, then sadness. :-(

            Studied, but as I said earlier, and what do not understand the idler. For instance.
            Power Supply System - HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND (USA)

            We can make this system, the equipment allows, it remains to receive semi-finished products such as cores and compounds, asks from ours and ours cannot make from ours but can make from them raw materials (such as dispersed fractions) purchased in England and Germany, and here the carousel begins.
            In general, there is no single production chain, relations with the collapse of the USSR are broken, restoration is underway, but demand is needed and if the state does not pour in the same defense, then these chains cannot be restored.
            There is already a lot of whining about social services and health care, but here there are causal relationships, "either put on your cowards, or take off the cross." Another thing is that they pour into infrastructure and the military-industrial complex, and in the field, some steal and squander, but this is a separate topic.)))
            1. +2
              19 October 2019 08: 57
              Pure offtopic, but you can make a projection on another production.
              Yesterday my child assembled our Stels Pilot 310 bicycle. Well painted, well packaged, high-quality passport, warranty, parts without burrs. In general, the first impression is delight. And then began the hinge of the wings, trunk, front wheel and steering wheel. And in the passport there is not a word about the assembly, but much has been written about the gear shift and hand brake, which is not on the bike itself. The trunk is made as usual from a bar, but it was necessary to pull it into place, because the rods have the right direction, but no one bends from the factory so that they sit on the fastening points. With wings the same trouble. In addition, the threaded holes for the wings are drilled at random: of the 4 holes, only one has a 90 ° angle between the axis of the bolt and the plane of the part. The front fork became the apotheosis - the wheel hub did not get into it - the pharynx is small on one side. I had to bore a file.
              "How so? !!! How so? !!!"
              1. 0
                19 October 2019 11: 42
                Designer bike - finished me myself.
                1. 0
                  19 October 2019 13: 56
                  And in addition there are no keys - collect as you want. I didn’t get hemorrhoid with the greats as a child, although all Soviet hayut.
                  1. -1
                    19 October 2019 14: 33
                    Well, what do you want - judging by the design, the most budget model.
                    1. +1
                      19 October 2019 15: 31
                      Well, design and spare parts are two different things. Previously, there was a tool for assembly, it was possible to assemble directly in the store (which they did), and now this is the buyer’s problem. And if I do not have keys in principle? I am a single mother, but great for a little daughter?
                      And then: the presence of crooked drilled holes is not an indicator of budget, but an indicator of the responsibility of the contractor to his work.
                      1. -2
                        19 October 2019 19: 19
                        Well, for the most part, what is the price - such is the performance.
                        1. 0
                          19 October 2019 19: 38
                          Well, somehow the garbage turns out: the sensor is upside down on the rocket, the hole does not understand where it got out of the module in orbit. Quite non-budget things, and the jambs are not weak. And the plastic in the SSJ-100, which burns with terrible discharge (published results on the May SSJ)? After the fires in cinemas, the composition of the film was changed to avoid fires, but what is this nonsense?
                        2. 0
                          20 October 2019 15: 44
                          But plastic shouldn’t burn on the plane - nothing should burn on the plane in fact, under normal working conditions, but this can be replaced by rubbish, but human factors, because of which all accidents, fires, alas, can’t be removed
              2. SSR
                0
                19 October 2019 23: 52
                Quote: Ural-4320
                I had to bore a file.
                "How so? !!! How so? !!!"

                Comrade, and estimate when they work on the highest level. (((
        4. -2
          18 October 2019 16: 25
          So the kid will sit under sanctions, they won’t let him out anywhere. Such designers on Magadan need to bring benefits.
        5. -7
          18 October 2019 16: 26
          Quote: Svarog
          And what about the Russian Superjet?


          The name "vinaigrette" would be better for him, that is - "Vinaigrette" ...
          So who thought of a sort of designer Lego in terms of sanctions to create?
          1. +10
            18 October 2019 16: 51
            Quote: yuratanja1950
            under the conditions of sanctions to create?
            The plane was created a decade ago. First flight May 19, 2008
          2. +6
            18 October 2019 18: 27
            So who thought of a sort of designer Lego in terms of sanctions to create?


            When it was sculpted, the GDP itself said - they say, this and that, great, they say, foreign partners will push the plane around the world, since their components are on this plane. That was the "idea" at the very top.
            1. +3
              18 October 2019 19: 11
              Quote: dauria
              That was the "idea" at the very top.

              As usual, the idea was naive .. or stupid .. In general, for a plane to be bought, it should be cheaper, better, more economical .. that is, competitive .. But how can a plane be competitive, 70% of the parts we buy, while that in terms of quality, economy, it does not differ significantly .. Hence the conclusion .. there are either not at all reasonable people (which is unlikely), or just sawing ..
        6. 0
          18 October 2019 16: 32
          Want to be honest?
          Then write that this aircraft is only 30% Russian, moreover, in operations and devices of the LOWEST redistribution and is no different from computers assembled on the knee in garages.
          In addition, you can add that there is no demand for this aircraft, but there is a return of the aircraft due to disgusting operational maintenance and supply of spare parts, a collapse of service and delivery contracts is expected
        7. +1
          18 October 2019 17: 17
          Svarog, Vladimir, you would know with what pleasure I put you a plus. It was an objective comment.
        8. -1
          19 October 2019 16: 57
          And what about the Russian Superjet?
          Russian in SSJ is, in fact, the plane itself: 100%

          And why then a 100% Russian plane to Iran does not sell?
      3. +6
        18 October 2019 15: 54
        Quote: FenH
        And so the patient is comatose

        Exactly. But managers with UAC SO MANY the dough was pulled out and continues to be pulled from the state for this project, which for a long time it was possible to build a fully domestic short-haul aircraft. And now it's too late to give the back. But the worst thing is not this, but the condition with the reliability of the aircraft. The network has a lot of videos, as stewardesses and pilots are the mother of this brainchild of Poghosyan.
        1. +3
          18 October 2019 15: 59
          Quote: kjhg
          that for a long time it was possible to build a fully domestic short-haul aircraft.

          This is not in the interests of managers .. In general, a superjet is a shameful fact in the history of aircraft manufacturing in Russia .. How much pomposity was ... how much money they sawed, but created an unremarkable aircraft from western parts ..
          1. +5
            18 October 2019 16: 13
            SSJ is the first competitive domestic passenger aircraft in the last half century.
            1. +3
              18 October 2019 16: 17
              Quote: AU Ivanov.
              SSJ is the first competitive domestic passenger aircraft in the last half century.

              So I brought you the above certificate that there is little domesticity .. well, there’s very little .. and it cannot be competitive (in price) given that all components have to be bought for euros and dollars ..
              1. -2
                18 October 2019 17: 04
                it cannot be competitive (in price) given that all components have to be bought for euros and dollars
                For some reason, bombardier and embraer didn’t stop creating competitive aircraft.
                Maybe it’s all the same for different purposes and motives for creating an airplane? Some created a plane with an initial targeting of the market, while others would only “master” the state budget + amuse the ego and raise the ratings you know who, but the difference turned out to be the same as that of the whole domestic patronage.
            2. The comment was deleted.
              1. +2
                18 October 2019 17: 09
                Our glider. Our assembly. We have neither competitive engines, nor avionics. Of course - without import, they would not have done anything and Pogosyan has nothing to do with it.
                1. -1
                  18 October 2019 17: 30
                  Quote: AU Ivanov.
                  Our glider. Our assembly. We have neither competitive engines, nor avionics. Of course - without import, they would not have done anything and Pogosyan has nothing to do with it.

                  They put me a minus, but they themselves confirmed what I wrote. Any glider who is a little versed in aviation can create a glider now. But you yourself admitted that the filling is imported. And Poghosyan oversaw all this and claimed
                  1. -2
                    18 October 2019 18: 24
                    "Anyone who is a little bit versed in aviation can create a glider now." - Go do it.
                2. +2
                  18 October 2019 17: 56
                  Quote: AS Ivanov.
                  Of course - without import, they would not have done anything and Pogosyan has nothing to do with it.

                  And no one blames Poghosyan or anyone else. There is no one to blame for the fact that the aircraft was originally designed as a design kit. Only one question, more precisely two:
                  1. Does Russia need high-tech products if their production can be stopped by simple sanctions of an external state?
                  2. Is there too much currency in Russia to spend on the purchase of components that can be produced at home for rubles?
                  The aircraft has been produced for more than 10 years, it is considered the best in its class, and the directors of airlines are buying "not the first freshness" Boeings.
            3. +3
              18 October 2019 19: 44
              Quote: AS Ivanov.
              SSJ is the first competitive domestic passenger aircraft in the last half century.

              Only 30% of the domestic volume and everything related to the fuselage and wings, and everything else is imported. After all, the USSR occupied at that time 30% of the world aircraft market, we all knew how to produce
          2. +8
            18 October 2019 16: 16
            So we did not know how to make cost-effective aircraft, and we do not have piles of plants around the world. Domestic aircraft will always be more expensive than Airbus and Boeing, in which, by the way, there are also few details. We can build an airplane, and then after the 90s with great difficulty, but there is no commercial product, and SSS is the first attempt, it should work better with the second MS.
            1. -3
              18 October 2019 16: 18
              Quote: K-612-O
              So we didn’t know how to make cost-effective aircraft,

              Who are you? The USSR made beautiful planes, for that time ...
              1. +4
                18 October 2019 16: 20
                This is true for the 60s. Then we lagged behind the global aviation industry.
                1. 0
                  18 October 2019 18: 00
                  Quote: AS Ivanov.
                  This is true for the 60s. Then we lagged behind the global aviation industry.

                  If the USSR lagged, then only in avionics. You still say that the IL-86, Tu-144 overwhelming model. Everything was done only because there was integration in the USSR:
                  I make nuts, and you
                  you make screws for nuts ...

                  True, when a mall is being erected instead of an enterprise in the city, there can be a "tension" with the production of components ...
              2. +7
                18 October 2019 16: 26
                So they did not generate income, if the state did not subsidize Aeroflot, then tickets would only cost 2-3 times more expensive. The first one comparable to its competitors was only the IL-86, and then the 96th, but we won the "new thinking" and then the drunk-democrat. And the aviation industry, especially the civilian, died and was solemnly buried.
            2. +2
              18 October 2019 17: 47
              We ceased to be competitive after joining the WTO, where we have been striving for more than one year for the sake of capital. After raising energy prices and equalizing domestic prices with global prices. And it turned out that we simply cannot compete with others.
        2. +3
          18 October 2019 16: 08
          Just about ... There was already a flying (!!!) sample of Tu-334. Question: what is cheaper - to bring "to mind" an already flying model of an aircraft? Or give a task to the design bureau, which has never (!!!!) designed civil aircraft, to develop a new model? The answer seems obvious? But if someone nevertheless chose the "second" - how to name this figure ?! "Enemy of the People" and "Pest"! Only in our country, for some reason, there are always no guilty ones! In the meantime, there is no "personal responsibility" for the assigned direction, there will be no sense! Money will be plundered, excuse me, "master", and return - zero!
          1. +11
            18 October 2019 16: 25
            Quote: senima56
            Just about ... There was already a flying (!!!) sample of Tu-334. Question: what is cheaper - to bring "to mind" an already flying model of an aircraft? Or give a task to the design bureau, which has never (!!!!) designed civil aircraft, to develop a new model?

            To bring to mind - this is to ensure weight return, fuel efficiency, in short, profitability at the level of foreign analogues. Otherwise, this aircraft will be bought only at gunpoint or under the guarantee of state subsidies. And all-crawlers were the first to howl that a Russian plane was devouring budget money that flew into private hands.
            And in order to make a plane at the level of foreign analogues, you will have to use the best of the available on the market. And we will get SSJ. Otherwise, we will get either a voracious monster, or a white elephant, or a paper airplane, the development of domestic components for which will be carried out for years.
            1. +5
              18 October 2019 16: 32
              If we were a country WITHOUT an aviation past, we could agree with you. But we also have KB Tupolev, Ilyushin, Yakovlev! It's just that "modern menagers" from aviation did not give TTZ to these design bureaus. Because by concluding contracts for aircraft equipment with foreign suppliers, you can "get a kickback" in a certain percentage of the transaction! Those. own enrichment is what is put at the forefront, but not the needs of the country!
              1. +5
                18 October 2019 17: 00
                Quote: senima56
                If we were a country WITHOUT an aviation past, we could agree with you. But we still have KB Tupolev, Ilyushin, Yakovlev!

                The aviation past remained in the USSR. Together with the Soviet aircraft industry and its allies.
                And KB is just "paper". From which to "iron" is often an insurmountable abyss.
                Quote: senima56
                It's just that the "modern menagers" from aviation did not give TTZ to these design bureaus.

                Well, in 1995 they would give TTZ to a modern airliner. You know what would start right there? That's right: this plant is in Belarus, this one is in Ukraine, this one is in Latvia, this one is generally somewhere in the CMEA, and these (hereinafter several-sheet list) have long been gone. How will we replace their products? And how much will the domestic replacement cost, taking into account the costs of R&D and the construction of its plant?
              2. +4
                18 October 2019 18: 07
                Oh yo! In 2000, about 500 people worked in the Tupolev Design Bureau, instead of several thousand, during the 90s we lost the radio industry, aircraft factories, Yakovlev Design Bureau died in general, the rest flowed away to Irkut, the cat also cried, Ile somehow managed to build a new 76, and then with what difficulty and in what timeframe, entire sectors almost had to be rebuilt + modernization of production, which is the most costly thing for everyone, and it’s not at the click of a finger to learn and recruit personnel. Until 2006, there was no question of any technical requirements for a civilian aircraft. Yes, and there were no engines for these aircraft, the same PD with what difficulty they could do. You can fuck everything quickly, but they can go to restoration at the modern level.
              3. 0
                18 October 2019 20: 47
                Dear, perhaps you are right, but these design bureaus, as it were, have not been de facto for a long time.
            2. 0
              18 October 2019 17: 10
              Quote: Alexey RA
              use the best available on the market

              You can temporarily and involuntarily focus on this, but self-sufficiency should be an end in itself, otherwise dependence and loss of sovereignty. It would be better to keep their “gluttonous” TUs, and the uncomfortable Lada, ZILs, IZhs, cast-iron machines, etc. .. Nobody interferes with improving and developing.
              1. +2
                18 October 2019 17: 20
                Quote: Alexander Ra
                You can temporarily and involuntarily focus on this, but self-sufficiency should be an end in itself, otherwise dependence and loss of sovereignty.

                The problem is that import substitution leads to non-competitiveness. It is practically impossible for one country to compete with a global transnational corporation with transnational allies. Boeing assembles parts for its aircraft all over the world - and with a choice and a portfolio of large orders, it can choose the best in terms of price-efficiency ratio. And here the New-Vasyukovsky plant mastered the production of a component thirty years ago - and drives it further, because it is a monopolist and there will be no other. It's like with Kolomna diesels for the fleet - take what they give, you still won't find others.
                1. +1
                  18 October 2019 18: 33
                  "...A to make the plane at the level of foreign analogues will have to use the best available on the market. And we will get SSJ"- to use the best, but have you got the best? Do you deny the" old "experience, instead of just embedding-copying someone else's experience?
              2. -2
                18 October 2019 18: 32
                Not a single country in the world has had and does not have any self-sufficiency, and developing rubbish is already a shiz.
                1. +3
                  18 October 2019 18: 53
                  How did humanity live for millions of years without self-sufficiency in forests, tundra, deserts? To call rubbish what happened 10, 30, 100 years ago is somehow infantile and cynical. Without creating their own and be proud of being admitted to other people's “devices”, in the otzoviks, subtly sorting out the pros and cons of imported wheelbarrows, gadgets in sophistication looks like ape. It happens that you have to work on Sovnarkhoz machines, I look at them with respect.
                  1. 0
                    18 October 2019 20: 06
                    If someone else has done the best, why not apply this best and, using study, create your own at the level, and then move forward with an eye on your competitors.
                    1. 0
                      19 October 2019 07: 00
                      It's right. The only problem is that we allowed the destruction of our industry, it had to be developed and updated. How much did Chubais and Ko destroy and how much did he build? And compare - how much Russia has distributed technologies, and how much has received.
                      1. -1
                        19 October 2019 11: 47
                        Most of our industry was technological development at the mid-60s. All the best developments were sent to the shelves - and even the defense industry ate specialists, engineers and the necessary materials, in such conditions it is almost impossible to create something promising and competitive.
                        1. 0
                          19 October 2019 13: 28
                          As for the impossible - the potential was huge, another question is how they disposed of it. Whatever the disadvantages in the USSR, this does not justify the deliberate devastation of the 90s, it was a diversion. More beyond the horizon is the time when the pluses of the new will outweigh the minuses of the USSR. There is no task to return to the USSR, but today's cap in Russia is a suicidal path. A healthy path has not yet been indicated.
                        2. -1
                          19 October 2019 14: 58
                          Beginning in the 60s, the policy of the CPSU itself led the country to this devastation - there was no need to hang 123 world rogues on our neck, we gave them products, engineers, equipment, materials - they gave us coconuts bananas and loyalty and this was for decades, only 22 countries with The USSR paid in volatility, the USSR received at the peak 74 billion rubles from exports, and was supposed to receive more than 800 billion with 3 trillion annual GDP of the country - 20% of this amount went to the defense industry, and having only 74 billion from export, the USSR imported foreign food technology and 68 billion rubles, which is all that led the country to run out of money in the 80s and a crisis began - you think that Gorbachev ran for foreign loans from the beginning to the banks, and then to the heads of state. In this regard, Russia has moved away from any universal and gratuitous assistance to everyone, having a nominal GDP for this year of about $ 1800 billion and PPP GDP of $ 4300 billion - we have export under $ 500 billion in which the fuel and energy sector takes 34%. Our national debt 13% of GDP is one of the lowest in the world with 540 billion gold reserves - now we live within our means and produce as much as we buy and are ready to buy.
                        3. 0
                          19 October 2019 17: 21
                          "Gratuitous assistance to everyone" - changed the awl for soap - why not take into account offshore, corruption, shadow turnover? In my "... Khakassia, revenues of 250 billion rubles are mined. In the budget of own incomes - 21 billion "is a robbery. The USSR share in world GDP is 20%, today it is 3-4%. “We live within our means and produce as much as they buy from us and are ready to buy” - 20 million do not live, but survive, many earn in three years as much as some have on one day. There is no reason for “the right way to go ...”, we are going to a systemic crisis.
                        4. -1
                          19 October 2019 19: 48
                          Offshores - they are also needed for business to bypass sanctions in transactions with other countries for export and import, shadow turnover - so 30% of the population supports most of the money, one horseradish in the country remains and revolves wherever possible, corruption - show the country where it does not exist, it is necessary to fight with it, but it will not be possible to completely remove it. In Khakassia, it is mined, but not processed or sold. "The share of the USSR in world GDP - 20%" - Thanks to 123 world parasites and, accordingly, 15 states that were part of the USSR. Russia has 3-4%, but 500 billion in foreign currency every year, and this is not counting the cost of services for other countries, a minimum of debt, food independence, freedom of speech and the absence of a shortage of all goods and services. "20 million do not live, but survive" - ​​there is no need to talk about everyone in reality, you do not know how they live and how much statistics they get, they take only the office's earnings, in the early 2000s there were more than 50 million poor and this poverty was immediately evident on every corner, now this is no longer observed. And all over the world, the majority earn little, the minority a lot, this will be the case everywhere and always.
            3. -1
              18 October 2019 17: 28
              Alexey Why make fogs? Poghosyan and Co. drank dough, blinded from the shit and branches of miracle judo with a localization of 30%! This is chewed-chewed. Both Ancient and Sergey Ivanovich spoke out!
          2. 0
            18 October 2019 16: 33
            Quote: senima56
            There was already a flying (!!!) sample of the Tu-334

            In fairness, the Tu-334 had three crew members. It was no good. It was necessary to entrust the Tupolev company with the development of a promising short-haul aircraft. For the first time, before developing your own, you could put foreign engines on it, with the subsequent transition to your own. Then, today, this plane would have the prospect of sales abroad. For example, in Iran, which wanted to buy SSJ, but the Americans put a ban.
          3. -1
            18 October 2019 16: 42
            Quote: senima56
            That's it ... There was already a flying (!!!) sample of the Tu-334.

            That's right - a sample. An example of how not to make airplanes.
          4. +4
            18 October 2019 17: 10
            That Tu 334 is a bad example, outdated and not profitable already at the project stage. 3 crew members, Ukrainian engines, but the saddest thing is that they tried to push the wing from the medium-range aircraft into the short-range ones. Hence, high fuel consumption compared with foreign classmates.
        3. -2
          18 October 2019 18: 20
          With the reliability of the Superjet everything is in order 191 aircraft have already been manufactured since 2008, only two accidents - the reason is the human factor.
      4. -3
        18 October 2019 17: 12
        FenH (Finn) And how much the idiots shouted about him, they say our plane, an awesome breakthrough and jerk. But in fact zilch in the eyes and cut.
      5. -2
        18 October 2019 17: 16
        Localization, of course, is a good thing, but if it is cheaper and better to purchase any part from a subcontractor over a hill, then why not? Their production culture is higher than ours, plus transportation costs definitely fall to us
      6. 0
        18 October 2019 17: 18
        Quote: FenH
        And so the patient is comatose

        Right It’s too late to drink Borjomi .... All the foreign operators have already refused it, and even the Russian Ministry of Defense.
      7. 0
        19 October 2019 09: 00
        Quote: FenH
        And so the patient is comatose

        "You argue apolitically, I swear, on my word" (c). They want to rename the Superjet. And how they will rename - so everything will be different at once. Well, like with the police / police. Captain Vrungel's case is alive and well ...
      8. AAK
        0
        19 October 2019 11: 27
        I agree that don’t attach to a penguin - it won’t become an eagle
    2. Kaw
      +6
      18 October 2019 16: 05
      I wonder why these tips (winglets) did not immediately put? Not one modern aircraft can not be produced without them, and has not been produced for a long time, they were already initially on the Tu-204. And on the MS-21, in my opinion, they are not there either .... Or they wait until this aircraft also proves itself to be completely ineffective, and then they begin to modernize it when it loses all customers like Superjet.
      1. +1
        18 October 2019 16: 14
        Quote: Kaw
        I wonder why these tips (winglets) did not immediately put? Not one modern aircraft can not be produced without them, and has not been produced for a long time, they were already initially on the Tu-204. And on the MS-21, in my opinion, they are not there either .... Or they wait until this aircraft also proves itself to be completely ineffective, and then they begin to modernize it when it loses all customers like Superjet.

        Carbon fiber is a much tougher material, therefore, even without the use of winglets, the MS-21 composite wing of large elongation, formed by thin supercritical profiles (almost flat upper and convex lower surfaces), allows obtaining aerodynamic quality at cruising flight speeds 5-6% better than the latest foreign counterparts.

        Type, because request
        1. +3
          18 October 2019 16: 26
          Yes, it seems like saber-like not so long ago began to be used in aviation, even among the bourgeoisie.
        2. +5
          18 October 2019 16: 42
          Quote: FenH
          Type, because

          There is one more thing: the wing length of the MC 21 is so long that if you put saber tips or "winglets", then it does not pass according to ICAO standards for wingspan for aircraft of this class.

          And so, that's right. Due to its simply gigantic wingspan, the MC 21 should outperform its cousins.
        3. Kaw
          0
          18 October 2019 16: 47
          So, I started looking for the lack of winglets on the MC-21 and found an article.
          https://aviation21.ru/mc-21-winglets/
          This is from there:
          According to the Deputy Director General of TsAGI, the head of the complex of aerodynamics and flight dynamics of aircraft Sergey Lyapunov, winglets are a reserve that can be used on subsequent modifications. But at the present time, the characteristics and fuel efficiency in cruising flight, which gives the supercritical composite wing, are sufficient to ensure the required level of competitiveness.

          They are afraid, "what if we make an airplane that will be more effective than all foreign ones!" Russian is more effective than foreign ones, it's a mess, so they didn't do it smile
          1. +3
            18 October 2019 18: 55
            Russian and more effective than foreign ones, this is a mess, so they didn’t do it


            They just took the maximum permissible range, correctly calculated the wing for strength. With normal lengthening and the shape of the endings (and their profile) and winglets are not needed - although they will reduce the inductive, they will add a profile one. And the most foul - it means there was a margin of safety for torsion, and this is weight. That is, the wing was initially heavily weighted. Winglet - this is when the file is finalized with what an ax could not immediately do.
            They can be set if you enter the wing into the permissible class range. And just like that - to nothing.
      2. -1
        18 October 2019 17: 14
        And they have both pros and cons. On the one hand, they reduce the aircraft’s clutter, and on the other, they increase fuel consumption
        1. +1
          18 October 2019 17: 31
          And they have both pros and cons. On the one hand, they reduce the aircraft’s clutter, and on the other, they increase fuel consumption

          I mean, on the contrary, increase the chatter and reduce fuel consumption)))
        2. +1
          18 October 2019 17: 50
          Quote: loki565
          On the one hand, they reduce the aircraft’s clutter, and on the other, they increase fuel consumption

          How it all starts ...
          Winglets reduce the vortices at the ends of the wings, and since these vortices are attached to the wing, inductance decreases with their decrease, which reduces fuel consumption.
          And the chatter is not treated with winglets, and even vice versa, with insufficient rigidity of the wing they can be provoked.
          1. 0
            18 October 2019 18: 10
            Yes, the patch has come out))) corrected below, but you did not notice the campaign
          2. -3
            18 October 2019 18: 57
            Saber-shaped winglets reduce toplore but increase the noise level, apparently with export to Europe they finally said goodbye, they are unlikely to receive a certificate ...
      3. -1
        18 October 2019 17: 39
        Quote: Kaw
        and why these endings (winglets) did not immediately put

        Winglets are beneficial only for long-haul aircraft. The first couple of hours of flight, the winglet compensates for its weight and only then makes a profit. In the regional, flight times are short and the benefits are not obvious.
    3. +2
      18 October 2019 16: 17
      muddy airplane .. negativity is much connected with it.
      1. -2
        18 October 2019 18: 37
        And all this negativity in the bulk flows from all kinds of icteric media, which it is vital to inflate the mammoth from any crap.
        1. -1
          19 October 2019 07: 45
          Quote: Vadim237
          And all this negativity in the bulk flows from all kinds of icteric media, which it is vital to inflate the mammoth from any crap.

          relatives are at a joke, they’re also returning from the enemy’s foreign countries, there are no spare parts, yeah, just a sea of ​​positive. belay
          1. -1
            19 October 2019 11: 50
            As parts were delivered and delivered, at least half flies - with new planes, the service will be adjusted and everyone will fly.
    4. -3
      18 October 2019 16: 19
      As a result, each machine will bring 10 million rubles to operators. annual savings. At the request of the customer, it is possible to equip the tip of the old type of machine.
      The guys are not sure of anything.
    5. The comment was deleted.
    6. -10
      18 October 2019 16: 40
      "Wings bent" in a newfangled way, you need to rejoice .... And with the same fuel tanks above the wheel cleaning shelves, that is, any hard landing and scribe - the destruction of tanks with leakage and fuel ignition .... The main drawback that threatens safety , the lives of passengers are constructively unavoidable ... The plane is in the furnace ... Yes
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. +5
        18 October 2019 17: 01
        Well, do others have astral tanks drifting for sure?

        In Narita, the MD-80 was killed on a lane on a goat and his chassis broke and he began to tumble through a torn wing, much faster than the SGS.


        On the belly, he sits as well as other aircraft. Moreover, it is subject to certification.

        Now, if you drive it into a strip, then the plane will fall apart. Like any other way. And not just passenger.
        There was another reason - but the same pattern of impact (hit the strip)
        1. -2
          18 October 2019 19: 47
          Quote: donavi49
          In Narita MD-80

          Actually there was an MD-11F.
          And what, chassis racks pierced tanks?
          1. +1
            18 October 2019 20: 52
            The stand developed - followed by the wing and somersaults.
            Tu-22 broke in half in the video. AND? Prohibit all Tu22?

            This is a question of the force of impact, how the SSJ planted it — it would kill any plane in the world. If it is planted on the belly / 2 racks - as part of the requirements for piloting the type, then everything will be fine.
            1. -3
              18 October 2019 20: 58
              Quote: donavi49
              as they planted the SSJ - would kill any plane in the world

              Are you aware of cases with other airplanes when a rough landing led to the penetration of tanks by landing gear?
              Quote: donavi49
              Forbid all Tu22?

              In fact, it would have to be. The Tu-22 broke in half due to an overload of 5 G. While even not the best civilian aircraft (SSJ) did not break at the same overload
            2. -3
              18 October 2019 21: 06
              By the way, about the MD-11 in Narut. "The tendency of the MD-11 to" goat "was revealed back in 96, it seems. There was a similar problem, but there were no casualties. This was a consequence of the unfortunate design features of the aircraft - too" long "fuselage. Because of this, the pilots they could not even understand that the plane "jumped" after touching and lowered the nose down as in a normal landing, which intensified the "goat", instead of raising the nose and giving thrust on the contrary.
              So to "justify" the SSZ by the example of MD-11 is nothing good. It means that both have constructive problems.
              1. +5
                18 October 2019 22: 16
                It seems to me that it’s too early to talk about the structural problems of the SSS, based on only one AP. The video clearly shows that the plane approached the runway at too high a vertical speed, and the progressing one was later. It’s just a crew error in piloting.
                Nobody speaks, for example, about the Tu-154 there were design flaws that manifested itself during landing: in Krasnovodsk, the carcass broke during landing not because of design features, but because of errors of the second pilot (he pulled the plane below the glide path) and the FAC, which I didn’t warn about the specifics of the runway and forbade leaving for the 2nd round.
                1. -2
                  18 October 2019 22: 22
                  There are pilot errors caused by the design flaws of the aircraft themselves. For example, failure on a modern aircraft electronics due to a lightning strike)
                  Vertical speed too high - what caused it?
                  1. +3
                    18 October 2019 23: 02
                    How what? Crew errors in piloting as a result of panic. What didn’t work on board, which made it difficult to enter? Connection?
                    Management, ILS (course-glide path system), ARC (or what they have now), altimeters (PB and baro)? What? Everything was in order, just the crew was used to working in conditions when everything was in order and the automation was working. And here is a denial! I once went into the cabin of 737 a / c Yakutia about five years ago, flew from Moscow. The crew is pretty young. I ask: did the circuit on the machine, and then on hand? PIC said that the machine was up to 30 meters, and then he let the second one land. Up to 30 meters, Karl! Consider that the AP has almost wiped you. They didn’t go on their hands below the minimum with fog and icing, oh they didn’t go ...
                    Although the envy of modern technology is also a little bit: a lot of nerve cells could be saved in the work
                    1. -2
                      19 October 2019 00: 00
                      Quote: dmmyak40
                      How what? Crew errors in piloting as a result of panic

                      Do you have any IAC findings?
                      Quote: dmmyak40
                      I once went into the cabin of 737 a / c Yakutia about five years ago, flew from Moscow. The crew is pretty young. I ask: did the circuit on the machine, and then on hand? PIC said that the machine was up to 30 meters, and then he let the second one land.

                      Is it customary for Russian airlines to enter the cockpit during flights with such inquiries?)
                      1. +3
                        19 October 2019 00: 21
                        1. The Romans said: Sapienti sat, which meant: "The clever is enough." After watching the full video with the boarding, everything immediately became clear: if there were no technical problems, then this was an error in piloting. Experience allows us to assert.
                        2. There were the following failures at the CCJ: radio communication failure (later established), automatic control failure (switched to Direct Mode).
                        At the request of the dispatcher: "... will any help be needed?" - the crew replied: "No, so far everything is normal, regular." To the dispatcher’s clarification request, the crew replied that there are communication problems and lost automatic control of the aircraft.
                        3. Violations:
                        - The pre-landing briefing and the “ON APPROACH” section of the control checklist were not performed by the crew.
                        - landing with a mass exceeding the maximum landing (who prevented us from going into the waiting area and twisting orbits to produce kerosene?)
                        - At 15:27:20, a decrease in the glide path began. The crew clearance was not set for the second circle
                        - The reduction was carried out at an instrument speed of 155 - 160 kt (287 - 296 km / h) in parallel (below) installed glide path.
                        - By the time of the runway end passage, the deviation from the equal-signal zone of the glide path beacon was minus 0.9 points (that is, below the glide path).
                        - An increase in engine operation led to an increase in instrumentation
                        speeds: by the time of runway end passage at an altitude of 40 ft (12 m) - up to 164 kt (304 km / h), and at an altitude of 16 ft (5 m) - up to 170 kt (315 km / h). According to the RLE, the approach speed for existing conditions was 155 kt (287 km / h).
                        - “three points”, with a vertical overload of at least 2.55 g.
                        (very rough - with a vertical overload of more than 2.25 g.)
                        - the crew did not produce manual release of interceptors.
                        - The fixed maximum angular pitch velocity was ≈ 25  / s, and the vertical overload was not less than 5.85 g.

                        I won’t do it anymore - read a lot of material. https://mak-iac.org/upload/iblock/4e4/report_ra-89098_pr.pdf

                        2. We talked already in the parking lot, alas now is not the Soviet era, when children were constantly put at the helm.
                        Not to mention Mezhdurechensk - it’s a completely different matter.
                        1. -1
                          19 October 2019 00: 46
                          Quote: dmmyak40
                          if there were no technical problems,

                          And they weren’t there? Has the plane returned with a good life to the take-off airport?
                          Quote: dmmyak40
                          landing with a mass exceeding the maximum landing (who prevented us from going into the waiting area and twisting orbits to produce kerosene?)

                          How did the pilots know how long the plane would last in the air with the electronics cut down?
                          What kind of systems did the aircraft work and do not have? How does the airplane behave with such damage to the systems? And another 100500 questions
                          As for the rest of the "errors" ... Did you study the An-148 disaster near Moscow a couple of years ago?
                        2. +3
                          19 October 2019 01: 18
                          1. You see, technical problems are different, for example. On your car, on a clear and sunny day, the rain sensor failed. Or the wipers do not work. Is this a technical problem? Of course. Is it critical to safety in these conditions? No.
                          For an airplane, in principle, everything is the same. The RLE has a list of malfunctions and failures with which completion of the flight is permitted. You can read: Yak-40 RLE by Stradomsky O.Yu. p. 46.
                          Where is the criticality of the lack of (temporary, mind you) communication with the RP and the failure of automatic control? In the event of an IPP communication failure, for each airport there is a special zone where the board should go and be there - this is the signal for the RP.
                          2. ALL control systems worked normally. I repeat - EVERYTHING.
                          3. The catastrophe with the An-148 studied. After it was said about freezing the PPD, everything became very clear: loss of speed and a breakdown in a corkscrew or going into a dive with exit from it and destruction or absenteeism.
                          The problem with the current flight crew is that when they get used to the reliable operation of the electronics, they are lost in case of failure.
                          In the case of the An-148, simply blatant disorder! Yes, issuing PPD of incorrect data is very unpleasant, especially in instrument flight. But in addition to the horizon and the speed indicator, there are many devices that can be used to stabilize flight parameters and begin to solve the problem, namely:
                          - variometer: the vertical component of speed, you know, you fly down and up and with which vertical
                          - RV (radio altimeter): set it to the required height and you will know the line of decline
                          - barometric altimeter: I know about the relief of the area, you can hold the required height.
                          Damn, even a meteorological locator could be used.
                        3. 0
                          19 October 2019 13: 33
                          Quote: dmmyak40
                          Studied the catastrophe with An-148.

                          Not really studied as seen.
                          The cause of the disaster is the failure of pilots to heat the PPD
                          And on this basis, all the dogs were hung on the pilots. Moreover, they are dead and will not object anymore. And the reasons why it became possible, so that the pilots forgot to turn on the PPD heating and why they did not notice it even when the PPD were icy and peddled, it is hushed up. Otherwise, under the court should go a lot of people, from the developers of the aircraft to the managers of the airline and officials of the Ministry of Transport and the Federal Air Transport Agency and flight schools. Moreover, the problem with the RPM on the An-148 is chronic and before that there were several more cases. But no one did anything
                        4. +1
                          19 October 2019 22: 58
                          1. The Town Hall, before declaring something so categorically and categorically, familiarize yourself with the materials and the conclusion of the IAC Commission. Behind
                          such an approach is a minus.
                          2. Especially for you. https://mak-iac.org/upload/iblock/560/report_ra-61704.pdf. Not too lazy to print a little.
                          CONCLUSION:
                          The crash of the An-148-100V RA-61704 aircraft occurred due to erroneous crew actions[i] [/ i] at the stage of climb in instrumental weather conditions with unreliable instrument speed readings caused by icing (blockage with ice) of all three RPMs, which led to the loss of control over the flight parameters of the aircraft, transferring it to a dive and collision with the ground.
                          3. Tell me, can you name the reasons why the crew did not turn on the RPM heating? Although the point of the control chart "RPM heating? - On" is one of the control points at the executive launch after receiving clearance for takeoff.
                          You see, you are reasoning from the point of view of an outsider, for whom, as I have the impression, the pilots are never mistaken, and a catastrophe is the result of a conspiracy by the KB and the authorities.
                          And the motives ... I can call a bunch: lack of sleep / headache / flight commander gave a thrashing / quarreled with his wife yesterday (as an option - refused in bed) / in a hurry / went through a bit yesterday with the men. And there are a lot of these motives / reasons.
                          Answer me the question: for what reason in the 70s, the crew of the Il-18 of Yerevan OJSC, when taking off in Leningrad, did not do the following: did not open the steering wheels, did not release the mechanization (in general), did not turn on the heating of the RPM. NONE OF THE CHECKS OF CHECKS HAS BEEN PERFORMED !!! NOT ONE!
                          As a result, during take-off he could not tear off the front support and rolled out. Is it also the fault of KB Ilyushin?
                        5. -1
                          19 October 2019 23: 35
                          I can name the motives. For IAC read the conclusion completely from the first to the last page. But I am stopping the discussion with you because I can not stand the trivialities of the minuscule minuscule people. To talk with the person and minus his opinion is the top of the net meanness)
                        6. +2
                          19 October 2019 23: 43
                          1. What are the motives, do not go away from the answer.
                          2. I am not a minor minus signer. In previous posts, I did not even put a minus. And now he said openly, where is the meanness? There is something to put a minus. Or are you afraid on the rails not to get on the site?
                          3. If you want and you can continue the discussion at a professional level (without falling to the level of personal complaints), then let’s. But if there is nothing to say on the topic besides the usual accusations, we’ll round off.
                          PS Once you read the IAC report completely, you have something to say in response. I wait, sir.
                        7. +2
                          19 October 2019 01: 21
                          http://superjet.wikidot.com/news:2607
                          Briefly.
      3. 0
        19 October 2019 02: 02
        Now, it would be interesting to know if you are a designer of at least some equipment, or a specialist in the wide side of a sofa? Kohl carry such nonsense, while not having the slightest knowledge in the design of aircraft.
    7. -7
      18 October 2019 16: 40
      Even with sabers, even without sabers, this plane remains the same "Superjet." There are Russian details, - the cat wept. Even the name is foreign. And after everything that happened to him, flying on it is stupid.
      1. +2
        18 October 2019 17: 13
        Quote: Jovanni
        And after all that was with him, flying on him was a bit annoying.

        Fly on Boeings, who doesn't give you? The same 737 had only 8 flight accidents over the past year. wink
      2. -1
        18 October 2019 18: 16
        Even the name is foreign. And after all that was with him, flying on him was a bit annoying.

        What happened to him? For the entire period of operation, two accidents and those due to the fault of the crew, the plane has nothing to do with it
      3. -7
        18 October 2019 18: 39
        As the saying goes, "Pussies - they do it."
    8. -6
      18 October 2019 17: 08
      Here recently, a domestic subsidy of 30 billion was allocated from the treasury to domestic airlines, so it’s quite clear to whom this “super budget” is being promoted.
    9. -2
      18 October 2019 17: 12
      Good news. The SSD-100 short-range aircraft project in Russia is developing and becoming more economical.

      Each purchased SSD-100 is $ 35-50 million left in the Russian economy, which otherwise would have had to be given to either Boeing or Airbus for their planes.

      But it’s not worth whining about foreign units on this plane, this is our first airliner and it’s correct that in order to accelerate its construction and commissioning, cooperation with foreign manufacturers was established. Over time, most of the units will become Russian.
      1. 0
        18 October 2019 17: 26
        Well, then by the end of the year I think the 200th car will be put on the wing! Each month 1-2 sides .. So the machine is not at all rare in our sky!
        1. -2
          18 October 2019 19: 22
          Super is an excellent aircraft, better than Bombardier and is not inferior to Embraer. I recently flew to Izhevsk as a business class, only when I went out to the airport on the ramp I realized that I was flying on a super.
          1. 0
            19 October 2019 01: 32
            You. It turns out bourgeois! So the minuses slapped you. .. well, that would not boast.
            In general, the SSJ-100 is a normal car.
            Most foreign aircraft are assembled "from the world on a string" and nothing. The main thing is to provide service to the machine, in which SSJ lags behind
            1. 0
              19 October 2019 07: 49
              I’m far from bourgeois, I’m an ordinary engineer, it’s just a very large flight due to the specifics of the work, so I have a golden Aeroflot card, and very often the airline puts frequent flyers into business, if we allow economy seats to be sold in excess and there is a place in business
              1. 0
                20 October 2019 06: 10
                Well, I actually tried to joke so much with a hint ... do not be offended.
                I’m as ordinary as you and I fly twenty times a year. In business class the truth is only once lucky to get on a freebie. The plane was really small, the shower was 80, but it was very pleasant to barge. Here I look closely at everything, as it were, for me on a New York - Moscow flight to get into the business class and relax for 12 hours. but it’s incredibly expensive. A couple of years ago the economy class flew to Moscow, the fifth point then departed for about three days.
                1. 0
                  20 October 2019 09: 12
                  If you accumulate flight miles, you can raise the class to business with these miles.
                  1. 0
                    20 October 2019 09: 33
                    So far, only on United and on Delta have accumulated,
                    Delta seems to be Aeroflot's Sky Team partner. Thank you for reminding me
                    1. +1
                      20 October 2019 09: 36
                      Yes, on Delta radishes, you can pay with Aeroflot miles I did in 2015. United is domestic airlines in my opinion.
    10. -3
      18 October 2019 17: 39
      Quote: AU Ivanov.
      This is true for the 60s. Then we lagged behind the global aviation industry.

      write correctly. Were ahead of the rest. This is when there were big problems with the Comets and Khrushchev flew to London on Tu-104 as much as 3 pieces
    11. -4
      18 October 2019 17: 41
      Quote: Jovanni
      Even with sabers, even without sabers, this plane remains the same "Superjet." There are Russian details, - the cat wept. Even the name is foreign. And after everything that happened to him, flying on it is stupid.

      they just recently flew from Moscow to Stavropol and back. Some kind of bad feeling arises. And the stupid layout of 2/3 inside, and it seems that his alignment will be violated from this. Moreover, after Aeroflot introduced the Luggageless Tariff, all passengers pack their bags (cabin baggage, I mean) into the Salon. Now there are not enough places on the luggage racks
    12. 0
      19 October 2019 11: 24
      I read and watched a lot of materials about this plane. I've seen him virtually hundreds of times. However, "Superjet" had to be seen live only once. When in September we were returning from Anapa in the good old Airbus, when taxiing for takeoff, a standing Super with Gazprom's logos was visible in the window. The nacelles are covered with covers, and it was noticeable that the engines were missing. It is successfully anchored for an unknown amount of time. It's nice to read again about the successful completion of the next modification, but I would like to see live successful flights at our airports.
    13. AML
      +1
      20 October 2019 08: 06
      Quote: FenH

      I agree-SHILDIK Russian. Take away everything else and what remains and whether it can take off


      An interesting approach. What, then, in American Boeing? But watermelons are generally no man's. Even the nameplate is stolen from a non-existent country - EC.
    14. AML
      +1
      20 October 2019 08: 31
      Quote: APASUS
      the ability to play on our base. And if not, then sadness. :-(

      The number of population of the USSR and Russia compare.
      Quote: Corn
      Here recently, a domestic subsidy of 30 billion was allocated from the treasury to domestic airlines, so it’s quite clear to whom this “super budget” is being promoted.

      And then we don’t subsidize the type of Boeing? And like they do not have official kickbacks, which they do not hide?
    15. -2
      20 October 2019 14: 56
      Does the Sukhoi Superjet 100 with wingtips - have analogues in the world?

    "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"