Military Review

The press service of "Ilyushin" called the timing of the second test flight of IL-112В

83

It became known about the next planned flight of a prototype IL-112V transport aircraft. Recall that a few days ago, “VO” in one of the news materials reported about the changes made to the design of this aircraft. As a result of the changes, the Il-112B became lighter by about a ton. Reducing the mass of the aircraft was one of the main requirements of the Russian Ministry of Defense, which initially noted that the new transport vehicle does not meet the stated requirements and needs a number of improvements.


The TASS news agency, citing the press service of the Ilyushin group of companies, reports that for the second time the IL-112B will fly in the air in 2020. And until the end of this year, the transporter will continue to undergo tests at the airport. In particular, it is stated that he will continue to practice such actions as “taxiing and jogging”.

The machine made its first flight (as early as in the previous version) in March of this year - in Voronezh. This is the first transport aircraft that is being developed in the Russian Federation (in the post-Soviet era) virtually from scratch. The Ministry of Defense is going to use IL-112V with the goal of transporting personnel and cargo. The terms of reference, voiced by the main defense department of the country, state that the Il-112В should carry up to 5 tons of cargo.

Recall how the first test flight of the Il-112B took place:

83 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 11 November 2019 06: 15 New
    +13
    The IL-112 is of course the "first swallow", a purely Russian-developed transport aircraft that should arrive in our airborne forces very soon and would like it to have a long and happy fate.
    1. jonht
      jonht 11 November 2019 06: 20 New
      +7
      Yes, this workhorse has long been needed to replace the old An. So I think everything will be fixed and finalized. hi
      1. mikle1999
        mikle1999 11 November 2019 12: 10 New
        0
        Or fix it or throw it in the trash. On what outcome would you put your personal bottle of skate, with all the love for domestic aviation?
    2. Greg Miller
      Greg Miller 11 November 2019 09: 58 New
      -19
      IL-112 is not a swallow, it is a poorly flying parrot. Craft Rogozin Jr., aimed exclusively at cutting budget funds in Russia. This aircraft is a hybrid of the Soviet An-74 and Ukrainian An-140 and An-148 and inferior in its characteristics to the veteran An-26. Russian Defense Ministry is extremely dissatisfied with this machine and most likely will not accept it.
      1. Sky strike fighter
        Sky strike fighter 11 November 2019 10: 09 New
        +11
        Quote: Greg Miller
        IL-112 is not a swallow, it is a poorly flying parrot. Craft Rogozin Jr., aimed exclusively at cutting budget funds in Russia. This aircraft is a hybrid of the Soviet An-74 and Ukrainian An-140 and An-148 and inferior in its characteristics to the veteran An-26. Russian Defense Ministry is extremely dissatisfied with this machine and most likely will not accept it.

        Let's get by on this site without cheap kindergarten-level propaganda with a mouth painted on a video of an airplane. You're not a clown in the end. So don't go down to the clown level then. It’s not serious to carry such a childish balcony.
        On 3 and 4 Il-112V machines that are currently under construction, all performance characteristics of the Russian Ministry of Defense will be sustained. The Il-112V mass is reduced by 2,5 tons and there are no An aircraft at all.
        1. Vlad.by
          Vlad.by 11 November 2019 11: 14 New
          +8
          He is not a clown. He is exactly the same parrot, repeating, perhaps for money, the ridiculous mantra about the inability of our manufacturers to make a normal plane.
          The plane is already flying and will fly even better.
          And the clown-parrot will remain so in its wretched vocabulary.
        2. okko077
          okko077 11 November 2019 11: 30 New
          -7
          Maxim, you have to be a complete idiot or Rogozin Jr. to make such a plane. Look at this under plane carefully and evaluate visually ratio of wing area to fuselage.
          What IT will carry 5 tons to a distance of 6000 km. The fact that the designers did this one thing, but what "genius" built this squalor and snapped at the first opportunity?
          THIS will not fly. It is necessary to construct a new aircraft, and sell four unsuccessful mock-ups to Rogozin, by installments ....
          1. John22
            John22 11 November 2019 12: 51 New
            +4
            I completely agree. The width of the wing is surprising at first sight. There used to be a rule of areas - wings and fuselage sections. But in this instance, the opposite is true. Constructors (unknowns) must have certain experience and consideration. It was at one time that Burt Rutan made revolutionary designs - they flew and surprised. And in this case, doubts arise in the common sense of designers. Thank God soared and landed!
          2. Sky strike fighter
            Sky strike fighter 11 November 2019 14: 00 New
            +4
            Look at this under-plane carefully and visually evaluate the ratio of the wing area to the fuselage.

            Look at Spartan. Flies. There is about the same ratio.
            THIS will not fly.

            IL-112V has already successfully completed the first test flight.
            We need to build a new plane,

            The 3 and 4 copies of the Il-112V will be essentially new aircraft with a mass of 2,5 tons reduced each compared to the first Il-112V, which made the first test flight. And the 3 and 4 copies will correspond to the TTZ from the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation. So the new plane no need to construct.
            1. mikle1999
              mikle1999 11 November 2019 14: 31 New
              -1
              You already decide, either the 3rd and 4th instance will be completely new aircraft, or a new aircraft does not need to be developed. Or are you talking about the fact that the new name will not be used?
            2. Vlad.by
              Vlad.by 12 November 2019 00: 55 New
              +1
              Spartan has a wing area of ​​5 m less.
              And, well, it flies in full growth ...
              And ours, then the wing of the wrong system
              Connoisseurs ...
          3. KTA
            KTA 11 November 2019 19: 39 New
            +1
            The area rule is for near critical numbers M.
        3. Piramidon
          Piramidon 11 November 2019 11: 38 New
          +3
          Quote: Sky Strike fighter
          Crafts Rogozinyounger

          What kind of aircraft is this?
        4. carstorm 11
          carstorm 11 11 November 2019 13: 41 New
          +2
          exactly. taking into account the fact that Rogozin was a crisis manager from 17 to 19 and is related to the development of this aircraft the same as I do to the development of Mars.
        5. Looking for
          Looking for 11 November 2019 22: 42 New
          -1
          to reduce the mass by 2.5 tons, he needs to trim the wings.
        6. Vika cnek
          Vika cnek 12 November 2019 09: 56 New
          +3
          Come on in more detail about the 3rd and 4th machines being built. Who and where are they building? I go twice a day, five times a week, past the slipways for IL -112, located in one of the VASO workshops. There is not a single panel, not a single node in them! Ever since the first two cars were rolled out of these stockpiles, they were moved to a heap in the corner of the workshop. They stand and collect dust. Where did you get this information from the TV?
      2. Servisinzhener
        Servisinzhener 11 November 2019 11: 12 New
        +7
        One should be a little critical of such videos. And at the time when Rogozin Jr. took office, the assembly of the first flight instance was already underway. So it’s not correct to name the plane “Rogozin Jr. Craft”.
        1. okko077
          okko077 11 November 2019 11: 43 New
          0
          And what kind of ears did someone drag him to the post? Does he have an aviation education? Dad put in committees and he suddenly became an aviation specialist? He will answer in full ...
          1. Servisinzhener
            Servisinzhener 11 November 2019 13: 46 New
            +2
            He will answer, but not for designing a heavy aircraft, as it was before him.
            1. okko077
              okko077 11 November 2019 14: 14 New
              -1
              He will be responsible for building useless trash ...
          2. carstorm 11
            carstorm 11 12 November 2019 00: 08 New
            0
            he is a crisis manager! Well, learn at least what this means !. its tasks have little in common with airplanes. it is a piece goods of the highest qualification. Its task is to conduct a business analysis and make the company overcome the crisis with minimal losses. there a bunch of not the most popular measures to be taken and a bunch of work. and he will never be left without her. getting such an education is a very expensive pleasure, but there will always be a lot of work.
            1. okko077
              okko077 12 November 2019 10: 56 New
              0
              Yeah, we studied for a long time: the movement is everything, the goal is nothing ... Buy a cock, ... in short ...
      3. AU Ivanov.
        AU Ivanov. 11 November 2019 11: 15 New
        +4
        Oh, another cut expert has been spotted. With fundamental knowledge in the field of aircraft construction.
        1. mikle1999
          mikle1999 11 November 2019 11: 25 New
          -4
          Do I need to be a great specialist to predict that the IL-112 will not be released in a series of more than 50, but most likely 20 vehicles.
          An-24/26 was released 2800.
      4. loki565
        loki565 11 November 2019 11: 28 New
        +2
        Remind me when the Il112 project started and when Rogozin Jr. took office ??? banal comment banal bot)))
        1. okko077
          okko077 11 November 2019 14: 21 New
          0
          Who painted is responsible for the damaged paper and pencils, and who built for the money spent and the cost of the work .. Quite different costs ... By your logic, are the Wright brothers to blame? I wonder who blew this shit and evaluated for stability and alignment? Very interesting ! Something is wrong here. It doesn’t happen!
      5. svp67
        svp67 11 November 2019 12: 32 New
        +3
        Quote: Greg Miller
        This aircraft is a hybrid of the Soviet An-74 and Ukrainian An-140 and An-148

        In what places is this "hybrid" then?
        This is An-74

        This is An-140

        An-148

        And with nothing Belarusian they were not "crossed"?
        Maybe you should compare at least the diameter of the fuselage and the dimensions of the cargo compartments of these aircraft with the Il-112?
        Quote: Greg Miller
        Craft Rogozin Jr.

        This "effective manager" went to school when IL-112 began to be designed.
        1. okko077
          okko077 11 November 2019 13: 00 New
          -2
          And who did it? While the plane on paper is not scary ... But when, it is not clear whose work, embodied in "metal" is a completely different matter ... That answers
          who did is his responsibility and decision ... But the fact that someone does not have the brains and determination to stop the production of a useless aircraft does not absolve him of responsibility! What would he do at another time? No need to go anywhere! Used a springboard, climbed higher already ..
          1. svp67
            svp67 11 November 2019 13: 11 New
            0
            Quote: okko077
            And who did it?

            Here the situation is akin to this ...
            Quote: okko077
            But when, it’s not clear whose work they embodied in “metal”, this is a completely different matter ...

            Well, what do you want to lose entire departments from the best specialists, who went to Sukhoi due to lack of money, and then they recruited students ... then what else to wait. Moreover, the level of education has fallen sharply.
            Quote: okko077
            And the fact that someone lacks the brains and determination to stop the production of a useless aircraft,

            Stop. What kind of production are you talking about, is it already in the series? How many have already been released? And why is this plane useless?
            1. okko077
              okko077 11 November 2019 13: 16 New
              -2
              It is useless because it will not be accepted, it will never correspond to the technical requirements ... And they planned to make 4 boards for testing and they are all under construction, and one even took off, but it is not clear why ... Everyone who came across this board live in shock ... Maybe this "genius" was framed, so why was this scarecrow flaunted in victorious reports?
              And the departments were dispersed and lured by pseudo-reformers when superjet shit was sucked in instead of the TU-334, also from the geyropey details ...
              1. svp67
                svp67 11 November 2019 13: 39 New
                +1
                Quote: okko077
                It is useless because it will not be accepted, it will never correspond to the terms of reference ...

                In modification “B” it may not, but I’m sure that new modifications and years will appear soon, in two or three he will go into service, even if it will already be IL-112Я
                Quote: okko077
                .Maybe this "genius" was framed, so why was this scarecrow adorned in victorious reports?

                Studied with dad, he only thanks to such "reports" and got out ...
                Quote: okko077
                Everyone who came across this board live in shock ...

                But is there also the fault of the “Klimovites”, with their very “raw” engine?
                1. Dikson
                  Dikson 11 November 2019 19: 29 New
                  +1
                  It turns out a little strange, don’t you? There is no serial machine yet, but modifications are already there ... are implied .. and not even one .. according to your words .. Shouldn't the machine first get on the stream, be approved, and get equipment options already in the process of mass production? And then right away, like in a Lada - “why would a simple Soviet man have a automatic gearbox, air conditioning and window lifters in a car ?!” he will be so happy by buying a VAZ! Why should the navigator get the instruments? Give him a protractor and a map .. If the engines don’t pull - make the car easier ..
                  1. svp67
                    svp67 11 November 2019 22: 59 New
                    +2
                    Quote: Dikson
                    Shouldn't the machine first get on the flow, be approved, and in the process of mass production get equipment options?

                    Sorry, I brought this to a word, apparently not a very good example. One thing I’ll say is that in the history of aviation, there probably wasn’t any chance that the first prototype aircraft would go into production without any changes afterwards. They all went a long way alterations and fine-tuning and somehow went into series.
      6. Andrey VOV
        Andrey VOV 11 November 2019 21: 00 New
        +2
        And I reported to you about this Shoigu personally, we will not accept ...)) well ..
  2. rMN
    rMN 11 November 2019 06: 35 New
    -7
    It seems to me alone that the wings somehow look ugly?
    1. askort154
      askort154 11 November 2019 08: 34 New
      +3
      Rmn ....It seems to me alone that the wings somehow look ugly?

      Not "ugly", but completely direct. It also puzzled me. Such
      the “flat” wing was on the An-8. At the beginning of operation, two accidents occurred during the failure of one engine on take-off. In both cases, the plane immediately turned over to the "shoulder blades". As a result of long investigations, it was established that the reason was in the wing profile. It was completely "direct." And at the time of failure of one engine,
      a turning moment occurs due to the difference in traction. On the half-wing of a failed engine, the lifting force drops sharply, dropping stealthily,
      reduces the angle of attack of the incoming flow, thereby further reducing the lift A on the half-wing with the engine running, the opposite is true - the lift increases, which creates a turning moment and the aircraft flips to the "back".
      Why didn’t this happen on the An-24 and An-12? There, the wingtip has a "down" refraction (negative "V" - figurativeness) from the common surface of the wing. This reduces the points described above. The steering wheel was "grabbed" to hold the aircraft from a coup at the time of engine failure. An-8 production was discontinued, and the previously released small batch was not operated for a long time, and then it was allowed to fly with great restrictions and was used only in the MAP.
      That’s what surprises me, the identity of the An-8 Wing and the Il-112. Maybe on
      IL-112, increased ailerons to provide lateral controllability in a similar situation? (minus did not set). hi
      1. Avis-bis
        Avis-bis 11 November 2019 09: 05 New
        +12
        Quote: askort154
        two catastrophes in case of failure of one engine on take-off. In both cases, the plane immediately turned over to the "shoulder blades". As a result of long investigations, it was determined that the reason

        ... lack of auto-feathering.
        wing profile

        A “wing profile” is a cross-sectional shape of a wing, not a plan.
        wingtip has a "down" refraction (negative "V" - figurativeness) from the common surface of the wing. This reduces the points described above.

        This reduces excess lateral stability and increases directional stability, rather than what you mentioned.
        A lot of non-broken wings fly safely around the world. The same C-130.
        1. askort154
          askort154 11 November 2019 09: 22 New
          0
          Avis-bis ....This reduces excessive lateral stability and increases directional stability, rather than what you mentioned.

          Bravo! Noticeable knowledge in aerodynamics. good
          I answered “in a nutshell" to a person, in the most accessible language (everyday), without going into the true theory of aerodynamics. And you flashed your knowledge! Let's then move on to graphs and formulas in aerodynamics. Let us prove to each other why the plane is iron and flies? But this is not an air forum. Not everyone will understand us.
          And “why the plane flies,” I found out back in 1963. And where you were at that time, I can only guess. hi
          1. Avis-bis
            Avis-bis 11 November 2019 09: 41 New
            +10
            Quote: askort154

            And you flashed your knowledge! Let's then move on to graphs and formulas in aerodynamics. Let us prove to each other why the plane is iron and flies? But this is not an air forum. Not everyone will understand us.
            And “why the plane flies,” I found out back in 1963. And where you were at that time, I can only guess. hi

            "What was it?..".
            1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Sergey Valov
        Sergey Valov 11 November 2019 09: 12 New
        +6
        Almost everything is wrong, starting with terminology. The wing profile is not the angle relative to the fuselage, but the geometry in the cross section of the wing. Second, when one engine fails, a longitudinal turn occurs, that is, roughly speaking, the plane begins to try to fly in a circle in a plane, "pancake", and this is very dangerous. This effect is eliminated by the rudder, ailerons. The lifting force cannot fall by definition, because the speed of the whole plane is the same as that of the left plane, which for the right one and does not depend on the position of the plane relative to the horizon. As for the crash with engine failure on takeoff, then I'm sorry, here almost any plane will crash.
        1. Avis-bis
          Avis-bis 11 November 2019 09: 44 New
          +4
          Quote: Sergey Valov
          The lifting force cannot fall by definition, because the speed of the whole plane is the same as that of the left plane, which for the right one and does not depend on the position of the plane relative to the horizon.

          It depends on blowing a screw. On OKA planes, airflow added on take-off> 10% of the lift.
          As for the crash with engine failure on takeoff, then I'm sorry, here almost any plane will crash.

          A critical engine failure on take-off is a calculated case. Not a single aircraft is certified if it cannot take off if one engine fails.
          1. Sergey Valov
            Sergey Valov 11 November 2019 10: 36 New
            +6
            “The failure of a critical engine on takeoff is a calculated case. Not a single aircraft is certified if it cannot take off if one engine fails ”
            1. When was the An-10 created? What were the requirements then?
            2. Even if you are right, how long will the take-off run increase if the engine fails? What will be the failure in height at take-off in case of engine failure? Will a regular crew manage to react to a miserable altitude to failure?
            3. The recent somersault near Zhukovsky is not an example for you?
            4. You have common words. Failure to start the take-off, at the time of separation, at a height of 20 meters, at a height of 100 meters - these are all completely different situations, and it is impossible to make them all safe by definition.
            You are right about blowing the screw, but firstly, the stop of the screw does not come instantly, and there is a reaction time, and secondly, for each machine the indicators are different (you have given the maximum).
            1. Avis-bis
              Avis-bis 11 November 2019 11: 00 New
              0
              Quote: Sergey Valov
              When was the An-10 created?

              What's the difference?
              What were the requirements then?

              The same. Since the 1930s.
              Even if you are right

              What does even mean?
              how long will the take-off run increase if the engine fails?

              It does not matter. Before the speed of decision-making in the event of engine failure, the run-up stops. After - continues. These are the conditions of certification. The term "runway required" is not entered from scratch.

              What will be the failure in height at take-off in case of engine failure?

              Did you understand that you got it?
              Will a regular crew manage to react to a miserable altitude to failure?

              They are taught this.
              The recent somersault near Zhukovsky is not an example for you?

              The same question - "Do you understand that? ..".
              You have common words.

              You don’t have them at all.
              Failure to start the take-off, at the time of separation, at an altitude of 20 meters, at an altitude of 100 meters - these are all completely different situations, and it is impossible to make them all safe by definition.

              ... and this set of words is proof of that. Learn the materiel. If there is anything.
              1. Sergey Valov
                Sergey Valov 11 November 2019 12: 17 New
                +4
                "It does not matter. Before the speed of decision-making in the event of engine failure, the run-up stops. After - continues. These are the conditions of certification. The term “runway required” was not introduced from scratch. ” - in case of engine failure during take-off, the aircraft can easily fly over the runway with unpredictable consequences.
                "Did you understand that you got it?" - a drop in 50% of thrust immediately after separation will definitely lead to an aircraft subsidence (Look at take-off with a catapult from aircraft carriers).
                "They are taught this" - it would be nice, but can they? Who believed? The introduction of autopilots led to a sharp drop in the skills of pilots. And do not say that the flight is carried out manually, I myself know.
                The same question - "Do you understand that? ..". - You forgot how the take-off ended when a bird hit the engine on take-off?
                “Learn the materiel” - late, already retired, although at one time MATI graduated and by profession he plowed his whole life.
                “If there is anything” - but you don’t have to be rude, it does you honor.
                1. Avis-bis
                  Avis-bis 11 November 2019 12: 46 New
                  -3
                  Quote: Sergey Valov
                  "It does not matter. Before the speed of decision-making in the event of engine failure, the run-up stops. After - continues. These are the conditions of certification. The term “runway required” was not introduced from scratch. ” - in case of engine failure during take-off, the aircraft can easily fly over the runway with unpredictable consequences.
                  "Did you understand that you got it?" - a drop in 50% of thrust immediately after separation will definitely lead to an aircraft subsidence (Look at take-off with a catapult from aircraft carriers).
                  "They are taught this" - it would be nice, but can they? Who believed? The introduction of autopilots led to a sharp drop in the skills of pilots. And do not say that the flight is carried out manually, I myself know.
                  The same question - "Do you understand that? ..". - You forgot how the take-off ended when a bird hit the engine on take-off?
                  “Learn the materiel” - late, already retired, although at one time MATI graduated and by profession he plowed his whole life.
                  “If there is anything” - but you don’t have to be rude, it does you honor.

                  Malcheg ... You do not distinguish an airplane from a girl, so it’s not for you to pick something here.
                  1. Sergey Valov
                    Sergey Valov 11 November 2019 14: 20 New
                    +6
                    Q.E.D! In the absence of arguments, rudeness comes into play. Don’t bother with the answer.
                    1. Avis-bis
                      Avis-bis 11 November 2019 15: 03 New
                      -6
                      Quote: Sergey Valov
                      Q.E.D! In the absence of arguments, rudeness comes into play. Don’t bother with the answer.

                      Malcheg ... You do not see the difference between an airplane and a scooter.
        2. Town Hall
          Town Hall 11 November 2019 09: 45 New
          +1
          Quote: Sergey Valov
          a crash with engine failure on takeoff, then I'm sorry, here almost any plane will crash.

          One of the requirements for certification of the aircraft does not include take-off with engine failure?
        3. AlexTss
          AlexTss 11 November 2019 10: 23 New
          +3
          The lifting force cannot fall by definition, because the speed of the whole plane is the same as that of the left plane, which for the right one and does not depend on the position of the plane relative to the horizon.

          Not quite right.
          The lifting force depends not only on the speed of the aircraft and the propeller blowing of the planes, as noted above, but also on the sweep of the wing.
          If the engine fails, a yaw moment occurs on one half-wing, leading to a change in the sweep angle of the wings relative to the incoming flow. On the "lagging" half wing, the lift is reduced. That, coupled with the cessation of propeller blowing, leads to a significant drop in lift on this wing. hi
          1. Dikson
            Dikson 11 November 2019 12: 51 New
            +2
            .. Lift depends not only on the speed of the aircraft and the propeller blowing the planes, as noted above, but also on the sweep of the wing .. "It depends on the speed of the air flow enveloping the wing .. and on the wing profile .. And there are screws on the machine or not - this is already an addition of characteristics .. Gliders have no engines at all - but they fly after all .. Even the headwind or tailwind affects the lifting force ..
        4. AU Ivanov.
          AU Ivanov. 11 November 2019 11: 18 New
          +4
          Why would he crash - this is a standard situation and it is practiced on simulators. Twice during his flying career he continued to take off on one engine and, as you see, alive.
      3. KTA
        KTA 11 November 2019 19: 42 New
        0
        A mixture of near-aviation terms with the addition of pseudo-aerodynamics.
        1. Dikson
          Dikson 12 November 2019 05: 15 New
          0
          Oh yes .. About the "speed of the plane" is good here .. I once saw in the Arctic how a plane parked (speed, respectively, 0 km / h) - for some reason it took off with idle engines and without any "blowing screws" ..))) - the wind was 35 meters per second right in his forehead ..)) here's all the lifting force ..))
      4. mmaxx
        mmaxx 21 November 2019 14: 55 New
        0
        In fact, negative V is done on high planes just for instability. Otherwise, with a positive V or a direct wing, the aircraft becomes very stable. It is difficult to heel with ailerons. That is, he turns badly. Just at negative V, the lifting force drops sharply on the lowered wing. And the plane goes even easier to roll.
        On a cow like IL-76, the consoles are generally very lowered. Draw a diagram on the front and use the arrows to draw lift.
      5. mmaxx
        mmaxx 22 November 2019 06: 58 New
        0
        So, there’s still an addition to my answer. I walked myself an hour ago. And then the An-12 enters the landing. And clearly on me, respectively, then it goes further from me. From me to the beginning of the strip of 500 meters. In flight, the transverse V wing of the An-12 is positive, that is, the wings are up. And the end third of the console is bent down. The plot is just with ailerons. That is, negative V. So, taking into account the above story, most likely the wings during the alteration bent exactly up, leaving the negative V at the ends. Again. On the high-wing CMs below the wing, they are very reluctant to heel. Own weight does not. Therefore, the wing consoles are given a downward inclination in the transverse projection - negative V. Due to this, the lifting force of the console, which goes down, drops sharply, on the opposite side it rises - the plane heels more easily.
    2. okko077
      okko077 11 November 2019 11: 38 New
      +2
      No buddy! Not for you alone! It is very narrow ... and of great elongation ...
      1. Vlad.by
        Vlad.by 11 November 2019 15: 49 New
        +1
        the wing area of ​​Il112 is almost 5 m2 more than that of the same S-295.
        Yes, he carries less cargo and there are no windows in it.
        This may indicate that:
        and. the purpose of the machines is a dirt roadman carrying equipment
        b. military truck with built-in protection systems that will not be talked about out loud.
        Yes, most likely the fuselage is heavy. Till. Exactly 2 tons compared to the same S-295.
        But the tasks of the car are different. And overweight will lose weight ...
        https://www.shortoftheweek.com/2011/07/29/ormie/
  3. rocket757
    rocket757 11 November 2019 07: 26 New
    +1
    There is a manufacturer, there is a customer ..... this is not a competition, this is a common, necessary business should be.
  4. aszzz888
    aszzz888 11 November 2019 07: 43 New
    0
    I hope on 112 a little shake TTX
    Flight performance of the Il-112 aircraft:

    Aircraft Projections:
    profile - screw monoplane with upright straight wing
    crew - 2 pilot
    passenger capacity - 44 (cargo-passenger version)
    load capacity - 6 t (maximum load)
    length - 23,5 m
    wing span - 25,7 m
    height - 8,9 m
    curb weight - 15 t
    normal take-off weight - 20,4 t
    Max. take-off weight - 21 t
    fuel tank capacity - 7900 l
    The main characteristics of the power plant:
    number of engines - 2
    engine type - turboprop
    engine - TV7-117ST
    power - 2 × 2800 hp
    propeller - single row six-blade AB-112
    screw diameter - 3,9 m
    thrust - 3 645 kgf
    afterburner - 4 145 kgf
    Fuel consumption - 500 l / h
    maximum speed - 550 km / h
    cruising speed - 480 km / h
    practical range - 1 000 km at maximum load, 3 400 km - 3,5 t
    ferry range - 5 200 km
    practical ceiling - 7 600 m
    take-off run - 870 m
    path length - 600 m
    1. Avis-bis
      Avis-bis 11 November 2019 11: 36 New
      0
      Quote: aszzz888

      curb weight - 15 t
      normal take-off weight - 20,4 t
      Max. take-off weight - 21 t

      If this is true, then this is tryndets ...
  5. Jurkovs
    Jurkovs 11 November 2019 08: 53 New
    +1
    What gives weight loss per ton?
    Range-???
    Payload _ ???
    1. Avis-bis
      Avis-bis 11 November 2019 09: 47 New
      +4
      Quote: Jurkovs
      What gives weight loss per ton?
      Range-???
      Payload _ ???

      Both.
    2. Dikson
      Dikson 11 November 2019 09: 49 New
      -2
      It gives bonuses to the developers .. and an attempt to "shove" what happened into the initially declared performance characteristics and requirements of the RF Ministry of Defense ..
      1. Dikson
        Dikson 11 November 2019 10: 45 New
        -1
        What did I write wrong this time? Isn't that about the second day of the article here? And .. I understand .. here you only need to praise ... Well, so the bonuses - is that good?
    3. donavi49
      donavi49 11 November 2019 12: 45 New
      +2
      Nothing new. Rather - an attempt to save the plane and design bureau. Talikov (general designer IL-112B) has already been kicked out.
      "Yes, we weighed the plane. There are objective reasons - in the aviation industry, a generational change of designers has taken place. Replenishment was weak, technical universities have lost popularity. And a young specialist came to us, looked around, learned a bit and went to the place where they pay more, ”the chief designer said.

      According to Talikov, the developers "in many ways have missed the weight problem." “This issue was considered with military, and at the level of profile vice-premier of the Russian government. Approved a comprehensive plan to reduce aircraft weight", Said the specialist.

      Briefly - now the actual carrying capacity is about 3t.
      The key requirement of the Ministry of Defense is to maintain the range for partial load (in 3t) = 3400km. Really a bit more 1000km now. For it is actually its full loading in this configuration.
      1. Tcheluskin
        Tcheluskin 11 November 2019 15: 01 New
        0
        I wonder how you can “overweight” the car at half the load capacity. She would have been a little more mistaken, and she would have been unable to take off altogether.

        Does the Ministry of Defense plan for the Tiger to transport the plane? At least in some version of "ё" 20XX year?
  6. Brturin
    Brturin 11 November 2019 11: 59 New
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    IL-112 is of course the "first swallow", a transport aircraft of purely Russian development

    let's hope that the errors of the “first” will be taken into account and the following models will avoid them. And so, here it’s not only a glider, here they work out the engines, and the engine is the next step of IL 114-300.
  7. Genry
    Genry 11 November 2019 12: 06 New
    +2
    It is strange that no one said that the first IL-112 is not flying now, just because after the first flight the runway for reconstruction for a year was closed. Therefore, only ground tests are possible.
    1. Town Hall
      Town Hall 11 November 2019 12: 07 New
      +1
      Quote: Genry
      It is strange that no one said that the first IL-112 is not flying now, just because after the first flight the runway for reconstruction for a year was closed. Therefore, only ground tests are possible.

      What a coincidence and timely coincidence.
      1. Genry
        Genry 11 November 2019 12: 08 New
        0
        Quote: Town Hall
        What a coincidence and timely coincidence.

        Coincidence of what?
    2. KTA
      KTA 11 November 2019 19: 44 New
      +2
      Waited for this comment.
      So it is, the addition to the reconstruction. There is a feeling that they were waiting for the first flight to begin the reconstruction.
      By the way, they are leading it very vigorously and visually, the case is moving towards an end.
  8. Waskasan
    Waskasan 11 November 2019 13: 55 New
    +2
    Quote: Avis-bis
    Quote: Sergey Valov
    The lifting force cannot fall by definition, because the speed of the whole plane is the same as that of the left plane, which for the right one and does not depend on the position of the plane relative to the horizon.

    It depends on blowing a screw. On OKA planes, airflow added on take-off> 10% of the lift.
    As for the crash with engine failure on takeoff, then I'm sorry, here almost any plane will crash.

    A critical engine failure on take-off is a calculated case. Not a single aircraft is certified if it cannot take off if one engine fails.

    Pancake! And why the hell did they come up with helicopters. Make more screw, increase power and the plane takes off vertically, because the lifting force will increase by a factor! WHAT TO SAY. Movies and toys make experts in any field of knowledge!
    1. Avis-bis
      Avis-bis 11 November 2019 15: 04 New
      -1
      Quote: Waskasan
      Quote: Avis-bis
      Quote: Sergey Valov
      The lifting force cannot fall by definition, because the speed of the whole plane is the same as that of the left plane, which for the right one and does not depend on the position of the plane relative to the horizon.

      It depends on blowing a screw. On OKA planes, airflow added on take-off> 10% of the lift.
      As for the crash with engine failure on takeoff, then I'm sorry, here almost any plane will crash.

      A critical engine failure on take-off is a calculated case. Not a single aircraft is certified if it cannot take off if one engine fails.

      Pancake! And why the hell did they come up with helicopters. Make more screw, increase power and the plane takes off vertically, because the lifting force will increase by a factor! WHAT TO SAY. Movies and toys make experts in any field of knowledge!

      Did she understand what got it?
  9. Waskasan
    Waskasan 11 November 2019 13: 58 New
    0
    Quote: Dikson
    It gives bonuses to the developers .. and an attempt to "shove" what happened into the initially declared performance characteristics and requirements of the RF Ministry of Defense ..

    So go, learn, at least become just a constructor and there will be prizes for you, maybe someday they will give a state prize! They won’t give it here! Do not worry!
    1. Dikson
      Dikson 12 November 2019 05: 37 New
      0
      Thank you, I’m more on other things ... Although it’s never too late to learn ..)))
  10. Kaw
    Kaw 11 November 2019 19: 24 New
    0
    Interesting. An-72 planned to replace the An-24/26. Why was its production discontinued?
    1. Looking for
      Looking for 11 November 2019 22: 51 New
      0
      and the AN-72 was handsome. He is doing this inadequate IL "at a time"
  11. Looking for
    Looking for 11 November 2019 22: 36 New
    0
    this plane was 30 years late.
  12. Looking for
    Looking for 11 November 2019 22: 49 New
    0
    Quote: Sergey Valov
    Not a single aircraft is certified if it cannot take off if one engine fails ”

    not a single twin-engine aircraft will take off on one engine !!!!
    1. Town Hall
      Town Hall 11 November 2019 22: 52 New
      0
      Quote: Seeker
      Quote: Sergey Valov
      Not a single aircraft is certified if it cannot take off if one engine fails ”

      not a single twin-engine aircraft will take off on one engine !!!!

      You cheated. Will take off
      https://youtu.be/aZ5W-eBY8uI
  13. Gorbunov Artem
    Gorbunov Artem 7 December 2019 14: 46 New
    0
    I'm certainly not an expert. But five tons per 6 thousand kilometers. This is for local deliveries. And it seems to me that five tons aren’t enough to feed the army. And about what flies, does not fly. The engine is more powerful stuck and they say, "what a handsome man."
    1. Rzzz
      Rzzz 28 January 2020 00: 27 New
      0
      Engine power is not a question. But kerosene on board is not infinite. More powerful motor - faster kerosene flies into the exhaust pipe.

      All kinds of deliveries are needed too. For example, bring a new engine for the Su-27 from Rybinsk. One and a half tons + packaging. To carry IL-76? Get up a little expensive!
  14. YakimovSS
    YakimovSS 10 December 2019 10: 22 New
    0
    Quote: John22
    The width of the wing is surprising at first sight.

    Do you know the term “elongation” and its effect on aerodynamic quality?
    So to listen to you, “Beluga” and should not come off the runway.

    Forum for children on another site.