Where are the new Russian aircraft for the military transport aviation?
To the great regret of all fans of our aviation, and even those who often look up to the sky, were saddened by yet another tragedy. An An-22, a heavy transport aircraft, crashed in the Ivanovo region, killing the entire crew.
This incident is notable because in June 2024, Lieutenant General Vladimir Benediktov, commander of the Aerospace Forces' Military Transport Aviation, announced that the MTA would retire the An-22 by the end of the year. Now, 18 months after this announcement and a year after the An-22 was supposed to be retired, the aircraft is not only flying, but "conducting a scheduled test flight after repairs," as several Russian media outlets reported.
This makes us think about the overall state of the transport component of the Russian Aerospace Forces, and they are doing this abroad with all their might and analyzing what is happening.
Eyewitnesses reported seeing the An-22 disintegrate in mid-air, with parts of the fuselage falling into a reservoir near the village.
The vessel's commander was 52-year-old Major Sergei Shmakov. Also on board were:
- assistant to the crew commander - 35-year-old captain Dmitry Yatsenko,
- navigator - 36-year-old captain Kirill Vakulenko
- radio operator - 58-year-old senior warrant officer Igor Ishkhanov,
- the ship's engineer is 40-year-old Senior Lieutenant Alexey Dorofeev,
- aviation equipment engineer - 49-year-old captain Igor Belikov,
- landing equipment engineers - 43-year-old Alexey Tyksheev and 38-year-old captain Roman Korotkov.
Russian state media cited a statement from the Russian Ministry of Defense that the An-22 was on a test flight "post-repair" when the crash occurred. This suggests the aircraft was in the process of being returned to service. After repairs…
However, last August, reports emerged that Russia had finally phased out its An-22 fleet. At the time, it was believed that the last example, registration number RF-09309, built in 1974, had departed its base in Migalovo, Tver Oblast, for Yekaterinburg on August 16, 2024. It was expected to be on permanent display at the militaryhistorical Museum in Verkhnyaya Pyshma. However, the latest satellite images do not show the An-22 collection, suggesting that plans may have changed.
The crashed aircraft is said to be one of four An-22s that were reportedly still in service with the 196th Military Transport Aviation Regiment of the Russian Aerospace Forces as of June 2024.
The fact that the An-22 has served for so long, not to mention that one of its examples is still in service, is remarkable in itself. After all, it all started quite a long time ago.
The prototype took to the air on February 27, 1965, and at the time, it was the heaviest aircraft in the world. Like the Tu-95 "Bear," the An-22 was powered by four Kuznetsov NK-12MA turboprop engines, each producing over 14,805 horsepower, which drove eight-bladed contra-rotating propellers.
A total of 68 An-22s were built between 1966 and 1976, including two prototypes.
It entered service with the Soviet military in January 1969, and the aircraft was particularly prized for its ability to carry large cargo, with a capacity of up to 60 tons. Furthermore, the An-22's cargo hold could accommodate 151 paratroopers or 292 standard-issue troops across two decks. However, the main cargo hold was not pressurized, with the exception of the forward cabin, which could accommodate 29 people.
Among the cargoes transported were complete sets missile systems, as well as large and heavy military equipment, which was loaded through a large loading ramp at the rear. If necessary, the aircraft could take off from and land on unprepared airfields, which was very useful during supply operations in Africa.
Landing in Mali
By the early 2000s, it seemed the An-22's career was coming to an end: only nine flying examples remained at Migalovo. It was now outnumbered by the much more powerful An-124 Ruslan jet, which entered service in the 1980s as the world's heaviest production transport aircraft, capable of carrying up to 150 tons.
However, the military decided to retain the An-22, albeit in limited numbers, since it was cheaper to operate than the An-124 but had a much larger cargo hold than the Il-76. It's also possible that the shortage of transport aircraft was already beginning to make itself felt.
However, plans to modernize the surviving An-22s fell through, reducing the number of active aircraft in the Russian Aerospace Forces to five.
Western media outlets were quick to point out that, with at least one An-22 apparently being prepared for return to service with the Russian Aerospace Forces, this paints a rather bleak picture of the state of transport aviation.
Despite the fact that a significant number of Il-76s remain in service in Russia, the An-124 has also failed to resume production in the cargo sector. The main problem is the shortage of suitable engines—the original D-18T turbofan engine was manufactured by Motor Sich at its Zaporizhzhia plant, which is experiencing certain issues. Furthermore, Motor Sich is the only company capable of overhauling these engines, reducing the operational availability of Russia's An-124 fleet. This factor could also have impacted the planned return of the An-22 to service.
Plans to develop a completely new, all-Russian successor to the Ukrainian An-124 have not yet been realized.
Overall, Russia's fleet of transport aircraft is rapidly becoming obsolete, and this may have been the cause of other recent accidents involving Antonov aircraft, which have claimed dozens of lives.
But let's now take a general look at what our Aerospace Forces operate with in terms of transport and special aviation.
Il-76. Produced since 1973. Currently in production.
An-26. Produced from 1969 to 1986. Production has ceased, making the youngest aircraft 40 years old.
An-72. Produced from 1982 to 1993. Production is now discontinued; the youngest aircraft is 32 years old.
An-124. Produced from 1984 to 2004. Production is now discontinued; the youngest aircraft is 21 years old.
An-22. Which is no longer in service, but... It was produced from 1966 to 1976. At least 50 years of service.
An-30. Produced from 1971 to 1980. Production discontinued after 45 years of service.
Il-20. Produced from 1968 to 1976. Production ceased after 50 years in service.
We can also recall the fifty Tu-134s, whose age is also gradually approaching their half-century anniversary, and the newest ones are quietly approaching forty years.
The biggest problem is that all aircraft produced under the Antonov brand can be written off. In the Russian context, it's simply impossible to provide these aircraft with adequate care and maintenance: the production base remains in Ukraine, there are no spare parts, no engines. The crashed An-22 was a clear indication of this.
Aviastar, of course, does everything possible to maintain the operability of Antonov aircraft, but the capabilities of this enterprise, unfortunately, are not unlimited.
The main thing is that there are no engines for An aircraft. Starting with the An-124, which became the subject of a myth about Ruslans being assembled in Ulyanovsk from Russian components. That would have been great, of course, but the D-18T couldn't be copied, and the Russian PD-35 engine, which could have lifted an aircraft of this class, is, alas... lost somewhere in the future.
In general, all projects to resume production of any Antonov aircraft are just pipe dreams. They're not too much to ask; after all, the Antonovs were Soviet creations, and their components were assembled at hundreds of factories, while the basic documentation remained in Kyiv and Zaporizhzhia.
Therefore, all rumors about the possible start of production of the Russian An-124 remain just that: rumors. In fact, there are certain doubts that the Russian aviation industry is capable of undertaking projects like reviving An-124 production. It's just too... far-fetched.
And besides, what's the point? Yes, NK-12MP engines are produced, no problem. But there are no An-22 airframes for them, and there never will be. I don't even want to talk about the An-124, because there's nothing.
It's good that we have the Il-76, which has everything it needs. And it continues to carry all the needs of the Aerospace Forces' military transport aviation, but here's the problem: the needs far exceed the capabilities.
Of course, replacing the ten An-124s remaining in service with Ilyushins is easy. But replacing the Ruslans will require replacing 150 An-26s and An-72s. These aircraft are of a slightly different size and intended use. And there's no immediate replacement for them; after the An-148 and Il-112V disasters, we don't even have any candidates for that role.
And this is very alarming. The service life of aircraft with Ukrainian roots is limited, and, as the An-22 has already shown, the aircraft tend to fail to understand that they "need to serve longer." And they fail, taking their crews with them.
Unfortunately, transport aircraft don't have fighter jet ejection seats and are crewed by more than one person. Therefore, every military transport aircraft crash results in 6-8 fatalities.
In our time, this is an unforgivable waste of human lives. It's clear that these people will climb into the cockpit and take off even without a strict order; that's their nature. And those who send them on such a hugely risky flight will regret only the personal problems that another disaster will cause them. Usually, those who give the order to "fly at any cost" never get behind the controls.
This is Russia's second problem.
Will the Il-76 be able to replace all the Antonov aircraft currently in service with the Aerospace Forces? It's doubtful. It lacks the payload capacity and range of the An-22 and An-124, or the mobility of the An-72 and An-26. Of course, we can work around this; in fact, any scenario where we don't lose pilots through stupidity would be a good one. And trying to return a 50-year-old aircraft to service because it's "really needed" isn't stupidity; it's a crime. Those who allowed it to happen should be held accountable.
We laugh at the Americans, who are trying with all their might to keep their B-52s afloat, the youngest of which is already over 60 years old, but those are Americans, they're famous... And us? Are we much better?
And the last question into the void: Rostec, will we have aircraft for the military transport aviation?
Information