When will the domestic MS-21 aircraft start carrying passengers?

The medium-range domestically produced MS-21-300 aircraft truly possesses high technical specifications. According to its designers, it was intended to be the most advanced aircraft in the world in its class. However, its serial production, which would then enable mass passenger transport, has been repeatedly delayed.

The MS-21's main advantage over its classmates is its aerodynamic properties, which, among other things, should allow for a significant reduction in fuel consumption with comparable engine power, payload, and speed.

It seemed the engineers had thought of everything. But a lot went wrong. Initially, serial production of the MC-21 was planned for 2016, and the first aircraft were supposed to be delivered to Russian carriers just two years later. However, in 2018, foreign companies refused to supply composite materials for the Russian airliner. As a result, the start of serial production was postponed until 2020.

The problem was resolved domestically. In 2021, the MS-21 took to the skies with a wing made entirely of domestic composites. However, the Russian "black wing" proved heavier than originally planned. Furthermore, the following year, it suddenly became clear that more than 80 systems, previously planned to be purchased abroad, needed to be replaced. The main problem was replacing the American PW1400G engine with the Russian PD-14.

It was crucial that the domestic engine and other key components not affect the aircraft's technical characteristics. It turned out that achieving this within the design specifications, including aerodynamics, interior space for passenger comfort, external dimensions, weight, and so on, was unrealistic.

These challenges are being addressed through engineering solutions, including compromises. Some of the airliner's original design characteristics have had to be sacrificed, but overall, the work, albeit with significant delays, is proceeding successfully.

On April 29, 2025, Rostec announced the first test flight of the MS-21 with new Russian systems. The tests included domestically produced avionics, electrical power supply systems, air conditioning, and other components. This flight marked the start of factory development testing.

On October 28, 2025, the Russian Ministry of Industry and Trade announced the first test flight of an import-substituting aircraft equipped with PD-14 engines. In November of this year, the second import-substituting MS-21-310 with domestically developed systems completed a nonstop flight from Irkutsk to Zhukovsky (Moscow Region) for certification testing. Production of serial aircraft is already underway at the Irkutsk plant. aviation The aircraft is being developed at the Rostec United Aircraft Corporation plant. Certification of the aircraft is expected to be completed next year, allowing for its delivery to airlines.

Experts note that, despite the reduction in some of the aircraft's technical characteristics (primarily, range and weight) and delays in serial production, the MS-21 will be the world's first aircraft built almost entirely from components produced within a single country.

According to the Russian government's comprehensive civil aviation development program, airlines will receive 270 MC-21-310 aircraft by the end of 2030. Aeroflot Group will receive 108 aircraft by this date. An additional 92 aircraft will be delivered to the airline by 2032. Other customers include Smartavia (45 aircraft), Aurora (15), and IrAero (7). Rostec stated that the MC-21 is primarily intended for the domestic market, but the state corporation is also counting on interest from foreign buyers.

Comments

[acetophenone]

will first in the world an aircraft that is built almost entirely from components produced within a single country.

Idiocy is an incurable disease, yes...

[Proxima]

***will become the first airplane in the world that is built almost entirely from components produced within one country ****** - from the text**** Well, at least throw up your caps after such an "immortal" quote! The author didn't even specify whether it was the first civilian aircraft or the first combat aircraft. Could the author perhaps clarify how many imported components were in, say, the IL-76 or the Yak-42?

[your vsr 66-67]

the world's first airplane,

The most important thing for the author first in the world!
I read this phrase twice in the article.

[bayard]

Quote: your vsr 66-67

For the author, the most important thing is to be first in the world!
I read this phrase twice in the article.

But in fact, I wanted to repeat the words of UAC and Rostec representatives that this is currently the "only passenger aircraft in the world built entirely by a single country." This has been repeated everywhere. Well, this guy decided to "reinterpret" it... and it turned out to be complete nonsense. Well, bloggers are like that, even cooler than modern journalists.
Degradation.

[gray]

Hello. You're all just nitpicking the words "first in the world," but it's clear the author is referring to modern market realities. The Soviet Union was a separate civilization where its entire line of aircraft was manufactured from its own components, while Russia, unfortunately, has leaped into a market economy.

[Andrei Nikolaevich]

On the part of foreign suppliers, this is called sabotage. You have to rely on your own resources.

[multi-category]

And from the officials' side, it's called treason, and there's an article in the criminal code to that effect. 12-20 years.
Has anyone been jailed for disrupting work on the implementation of the MS-21?

[by land]

Airbus uses British wings, German and French fuselages, and American engines. There's nothing wrong with buying components from allies. The problem is that Russia has virtually no allies, with the exception of Belarus and North Korea.

[multi-category]

Quote: overland

In purchasing components from allies

It's the supply chain that needs to be carefully considered. For example, the Superjet was initially a risky project because 70% of supplies depended on countries that are far from being amenable to peaceful trade, and even if they did sell, there would be quotas, inconsistent purchasing power parity pricing, and other pitfalls.

[sgrabik]

We don't need "allies" who, in the event of any disagreements, immediately and unilaterally break any agreements and refuse to supply the necessary equipment and components, as if to say, "Behave as we ask, otherwise you'll be left without aircraft and much else." You probably like that kind of alliance?

[by land]

Well, Russia was buying aircraft components not from its allies, but from its enemies, and everything ended predictably. Unfortunately, our allies don't have any significant industrial output we could use, with the exception of North Korean artillery shell factories.

[Bersaglieri]

When? "Not in this life," most likely.

[a vacuum cleaner]

We'll get everything sorted out. Everything will be fine.

[Gavrilo Princip]

Yes, just like Baikal.

[Amateur]

The MC-21 will be the world's first aircraft built almost entirely from components produced within a single country.

An outstanding example of artificial intelligence generating text in the absence of natural intelligence. Because only an American AI or a Russian graduate with a passing exam could be unaware that, for example, the Tu-104 didn't contain a single imported component.

[AA17]

This is how HISTORY is rewritten.

...The MS-21 will be the world's first aircraft to be built almost entirely from components produced within a single country.

...So, when the same Ifop asked the French in 2015 which country "contributed most to Germany's defeat," 54% of respondents named the United States... And only 23% named the Soviet Union, slightly more than England (18%), which remains underrated. Importantly, among young people, the preference for the United States is more pronounced—60% of French people aged 18 to 35 believe that the Americans were the main architects of the victory (19% name the Russians and 17% the British). Among those over 65, the gap is less pronounced: 45% choose the United States, 26% the USSR.
It's worth clarifying that this phenomenon of distorted historical memory is characteristic not only of the French, but of the entire Western world: when, in 2015, the British ICM Institute asked a similar question of citizens of EU countries, the results were virtually identical (with the exception of England itself, where 46% cited their country's contribution as decisive). ... https://inosmi.ru/20250508/voyna-272917540.html

...Some Japanese youth believe that the Soviet Union bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and a significant portion of the population is willing to justify the use of the atomic bomb by the United States. Deputy Chairman of the Parliamentary Committee on International Affairs Farit Mukhametshin stated this during a meeting of the Federation Council. https://ruposters.ru/news/15-08-2022/bolshe-molodih-yapontsev-schitayut-hirosimu-nagasaki-bombili-russkie

[Sergey39]

Of course, the TU-104 didn't have any imported components - it's our Tu-16, only with seats!)

[traveler 63]

But when the Tu-104 landed in America with Nikita Khrushchev, after a nonstop, unrefueled flight, that's when the Americans started to get worked up! So, the USSR had an aircraft capable of delivering nuclear weapons to America! Regarding the return, I recommend checking out the "Mitchell Plan"!

[Evgeny_4]

Not Tu-104, but Tu-114.
You have it wrong.

[Maks1995]

Ah, it's all PR...
You start listening - "the most", "the most", "the most", "the most"... As if the others don't want the same, and someone will deliberately produce "worse, worse, worse...".
and then everyone stopped supplying... well, everyone just started getting in the way...

We just need to remember: who signed the permits for the purchase of Boeings and the allocation of funds, instead of investing money in the development of domestic aviation, and where his son lived at the time...

[Uncle lee]

It was supposed to be the most advanced aircraft in the world in its class.

despite the reduction in some of the aircraft's technical characteristics (primarily, flight range and weight)

These aircraft are built without imported parts;

[multi-category]

The problem was resolved domestically. In 2021, the MS-21 took to the skies with a wing made entirely of domestic composites. However, the Russian "black wing" proved heavier than originally planned. Furthermore, the following year, it suddenly became clear that more than 80 systems, previously planned to be purchased abroad, needed to be replaced. The main problem was replacing the American PW1400G engine with the Russian PD-14.

That's not entirely true. The MS-21 was originally designed for our PD-14 engine program,
and the PS-90 engine line, which had been developed for many years since the Soviet era, was put aside
Well, we're rich, so we're not going to throw away good engines, which, by the way, have their advantages over the PW1400G and the watermelon engine. So the engine issue didn't just suddenly become apparent; we'd planned to install it from the start. But the problem is that the promised performance for which the aircraft was designed wasn't achieved. Then the wing became heavier, along with a number of other systems. Basically, the issue doubled back to the PD-14's power output, and it took a painfully long time to bring it down to some vaguely acceptable figure (12.5 instead of 14), which took 2025-2008 = 17 years. The problem is that Western competitors complete similar developments in 4-7 years.
The second issue is Manturov's complicity, which allowed a large share of foreign suppliers to be involved in areas where we were clearly capable. For example, passenger seats. We may not have had ready-made solutions for business class, but we certainly had seats for economy class, where 90% of passengers will travel. Then there's the French fuel system. Why couldn't we have used the existing one from the Tu-204?
Officials say those damned foreigners are to blame, but I personally see that at least half of the delays are our officials' fault. And the worst part is the absolute lack of planning for the aircraft's introduction into actual mass service, until the foreigners started banning leased aircraft and impeding spare parts supplies.
Furthermore, the production rate of the PD-14 is a critical bottleneck. Only eight were manufactured last year, and some will be used for certification, meaning even fewer will be available for serial production.
Why hasn't anyone thought about launching mass production? The first small batch of production aircraft will be flying, hopefully, in 2026. It took almost 20 years! And don't lie about foreigners being to blame for everything. And if production continues at this rate, it will take another 25-30 years to even produce any significant number.
Who needs an airplane that was conceived half a century ago? Why is no one talking about this nonsense?
Even without exports, there's currently a pressing need for more than 400 aircraft on domestic routes alone. Another half of the leased aircraft would also benefit from being replaced. That brings the total to roughly 800. Even in our wildest dreams, production in the coming years is projected to reach 8-12 aircraft. 800/12 = 66 years.
Please explain this.
And for such projects to pay for themselves, and for the next machines to be built without our budgetary funds, we also need to export them—at least a couple of hundred, and preferably 400-500. That seems completely unrealistic.
And I have a question: do our ministers really occupy their positions by right, if this is how work is planned?

[cmax]

Thankfully, things are at least moving forward, and the plane is flying and undergoing certification. In this day and age of promises, that's good enough. They'll finish it, IMHO.

[multi-category]

Quote: cmax

Thank you that things have at least moved forward and the plane is flying and undergoing certification.

There's no point in this until actual shipping at least recoups the enormous investment. And that point is being pushed back to an unrealistic timeframe, even in theory. In practice, it's a huge loss, not even zero. Thanks for wasting money???

[Alexey Lantukh]

Thanks for wasting money???

If they'd taken on improving the 204/214, they'd likely have achieved results at a lower cost. The engines would have been improved, and there would have been two people in the new cockpit. About 15 years ago, I was arguing with a former KhAI graduate about how Russia absolutely mustn't stop producing passenger aircraft, since it's also linked to military aviation, the production of similar aircraft systems and components, and the advancement of technologies and materials.

[multi-category]

Quote: Alexey Lantukh

Under no circumstances should the production of passenger aircraft be stopped, as this is, among other things, connected with military aviation

Well, first and foremost, we need to stop the degradation of the production base. Production can be done under license, but if the production capacity and personnel are lacking, that's it, you're screwed.
I don’t agree that you put the military and the military-industrial complex in first place.
Look at Stalin's industrialization. The USSR produced tanks because it was producing 100.000 tractors a year, and they were actively exported, not because tanks came first.
Such patently flawed decisions began to be made under Khrushchev, when the quality of their development and planning sharply declined. And I wouldn't advise you to blindly copy this style. The army depends on industry, not the other way around. And the strength of the military depends directly on the strength of SALES and production, of civilian industry. These are the real priorities.

[Gavrilo Princip]

Of course they'll finish it. Just a couple more budgets.

[bk316]

and our ministers certainly occupy their positions by right, if this is how work is planned

Yes, you can fire the Minister of Transport, but there have been 7 of them since 2004.

[Gavrilo Princip]

Some even shot themselves. And the number of top managers who fell out of windows is countless.

[Peter1First]

Absolutely right! From the PS-90 to the sluggish import substitution program! Yes, the PS-90A2, with imported parts, achieved the efficiency of Western engines, meaning it could have been gradually improved upon ourselves! The engine is well-tuned, simple, reliable, easy to repair, and powerful! Of course, the twin-shaft PD-8...14...35 engines promise incredible performance, but fine-tuning them in the current climate and dire time constraints is an unforgivable luxury!

[multi-category]

It didn't need to be refined; it needed to be further developed. It was already good, just a different engine type with a different efficiency distribution at altitude. A line of faster (higher power at altitude with the same fuel consumption) and longer-range aircraft was needed, where they could extract the maximum benefit from such an engine. In this capacity, the Tu-204 was already a very serious machine in 1985, and instead of duplicating the engine, they should have invested in other components of the aircraft. For example, in system automation; for the same reason, the Tu-204 was considered less profitable than Boeings. And after the generation change and profits from producing 1500 aircraft, they could have considered a different engine line.
And not like ours - chip in the budget, and we'll see what we come up with.

[multi-category]

For Europe, the high-bypass ratio lineup makes more sense, as distances there are short and the aircraft rarely flies in cruise mode. For us, the PS-90 is more cost-effective on long highways (from 700-800 km+ to 4-5 km).

[AA17]

Why hasn't anyone thought about launching mass production???

To develop mass production of aircraft, industrial enterprises are needed. And there are not enough of them in modern Russia.
"We have the means, we lack the mind."

There was enough intelligence in the USSR.

...An order was received to complete construction and repurpose eight more civilian factories in the southern USSR for aircraft production. At the same time, numerous enterprises from other industries were transferred to the People's Commissariat of the Aviation Industry: textile mills, school equipment factories, Aeroflot aircraft repair shops. In 1940, the People's Commissariat of the Aviation Industry received 60 factories, bringing its total to 100. By 1941, this number had increased to 135!

[multi-category]

This is not much, it's mobilization
but there were other examples
The Il-18 was produced at a single plant for 20 years, 850 aircraft, an average of 45 aircraft per year, not 2-3, like the MS-21, but 45
Furthermore, the Tu-154 was produced at a rate of five per month at the single Kuibyshev plant! This aircraft was already quite comparable in complexity to the MS-21.
Next, the Il-62 is more modest, but nonetheless, 289 aircraft were produced over 25 years, with a production rate of 10 aircraft per year after a pilot run and a number of modifications. But it's important to keep in mind that it wasn't produced as a single-purpose long-haul aircraft, but rather as an additional long-range option to complement the existing fleet.
Tu-114. A huge plane. They built 10 of them a year.
The problem is that we haven't built our own aircraft in series for many years, and the demand for them is much higher, and even a rate of 30 units per year is completely insufficient.
But in any case, there is an objective need to launch production of 7-10 aircraft per year at both plants and provide them with everything they need, even with a reserve. However, in reality, suppliers are currently only capable of supplying a maximum of 7 aircraft per year. And we could have been working on expanding production capacity for three years since the start of the SVO, but nothing has been done.
I won't even mention the personnel - not only are they not being trained anymore, but they continue to squander what they already have.

[AA17]

Dear Serge.
You did not understand me.
To produce a large number of aircraft, multiple Russian manufacturers of various components for aircraft are needed.
I've come across reports that aircraft assembly plants are dissatisfied with the quality of components, so they're forced to develop in-house production of some components. They have no choice. And that increases costs.

[multi-category]

Quote: AA17

I came across information that aircraft assembly companies are not satisfied with the quality of components.

I'm a bit familiar with the topic: suppliers often simply don't find it profitable to invest in production, or they see no prospects for doing so. Therefore, issues of quality and adjusting production volumes are very pressing. The reasons lie in government regulation of the economy. There are too many risks and problems with very low profitability.
And assembly plants are relying on government contracts, with time guarantees—they don't care how much additional production costs and can do whatever they want.

[sgrabik]

We used to have ministries for each separate industry, but then, after idiotic reforms and restructurings, there were no professionals left who could thoroughly understand the real needs of each industry. All sorts of lawyers, economists, and bankers occupied the leadership, but not aviation industry specialists, not engineering and design personnel who understand the essence of the problems. So let's turn to past experience. They could and did before, but now a market economy has arrived and it has become unprofitable to produce airplanes. Isn't that a paradox, isn't that stupid?

[multi-category]

the goal is to profit from the collapse, not to do anything

[crambol]

Give us Mozhaisky's plane!

[andrey martov]

The majority of passengers on all airlines are tourists, those who were called "vagrants" under the Tsars and who were imprisoned for vagrancy. Remove the vagrants from airplane cabins, and the need for 1000 airplanes will disappear. A few dozen passenger planes will be enough for the entire country.

[multi-category]

And are those who ride the bus also homeless?
Nowadays, aviation is becoming similar to a bus, only it travels further and faster.
I think you're very confused.

[Genius Yo]

It's easier not to "reinvent the wheel" but to modernize the Tu-134 and Kukuruznik aircraft! China still uses them, even though they're already flying into space!

[easy]

The lack of domestic aircraft production isn't the fault of foreigners, but of our worthless elite, who are always trying to get by on a freebie, maybe even make a quick buck or snatch it up for themselves. What prevented them from implementing their existing aircraft? The answer is simple: they weren't given fat kickbacks. That's all! That's the spinelessness and thieving of individuals!

[Sgt.]

Does the number in the plane's name hint at its quality?

[Ross xnumx]

I know how to speed up the development of passenger aircraft: we need to ban private jet flights over Russian territory for the particularly wealthy until a civilian aircraft for general use is launched into production...

[Gavrilo Princip]

How many of them scattered during Prigozhin's mutiny, and where? The State Duma Speaker proposed an investigation into which officials fled with suitcases and underwear at that time, and that's where the investigation ended.

[faiver]

It would be very funny if it weren't so sad.......

[snow mountain]

Quote: multicaat

Has anyone been jailed for disrupting work on the implementation of the MS-21?

Rather, they received options for this

[Glagol1]

As originally conceived, a 50/50 deal with leading global suppliers, it would have been the best medium-range aircraft in the world. When the West caught wind of this, they quickly imposed sanctions on finished composite wing materials. Thanks to Rosatom, they replaced them, and quickly. But there's a problem: previously, they were talking about a weight gain of 1.5 tons, which was moderate, but in reality, it turned out to be 5. And that's quite significant. But we have to produce something like this. Eventually, modernization will occur, some improvements will be made, and the weight will be reduced. Deliveries will begin in 2026. Coming soon!

[Alexander]

How come so quickly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Yuri L]

This plane would be fine, but when replacing imported composite with pure Russian cast iron, it gained some weight and can no longer take off. However, it's perfectly roadworthy. I propose renaming this plane "the world's first bus with wings," like the LuAZ "Lugansk" brand. We need to restore the brand in new territories!

[sgrabik]

You Bandera idiot, go to the doctor and get your sick cuckoo treated, a person in their right mind would never write such ridiculous crap!!!

[Mikhail3]

According to the designers, it was supposed to become the most advanced aircraft in the world in its class.

As is often the case here, there are no questions about the engineers (unless they've been replaced by child workers and other money-grubbers). But as for management and business...
Seriously?! Was this some kind of conceived attack on the global aviation market?! Excuse me, but how do these "business leaders" get paid? Are they completely out of their minds, and have their minds been stuck in waste? Who couldn't understand that Western aviation corporations will do anything to block a competitor?!
What were they expecting there? International "cooperation"?! What nonsense! The market was divided up many, many years ago. Who told our "businessmen" that they'd be sold these 80 systems, that they'd be sold engines, carbon fiber, and so on? HSE has poisoned their heads beyond repair. People handling hundreds of billions of dollars believe in "fair competition." There's nowhere else to go!!
In a country where everyone who made decisions in favor of this "cooperation" should be jailed and have their property confiscated! And who in the government supported them? They're outright traitors! It's impossible to be SO stupid without self-interest! The situation is simply monstrous...

[Artyom Yarovikov]

Most likely, the aircraft will be used in the first few years only on Russian routes, as well as in Kazakhstan and Belarus. Due to the acute shortage of civilian aircraft in our country, it will not be sold to anyone at all.

[sgrabik]

Modernization can continue during operation, the main thing is to finally begin mass production.

[AdAstra]

"Somewhere somewhere in the middle of summer" (c) but what year it will be, who knows.

[Evgeny_Sviridenko]

Yeah, it's still hard for one person to appreciate the scale of that "Mamai" that swept across the USSR, breaking and destroying industries, institutions, established connections, teams, and their traditions. Yes, many things that functioned as a single, well-coordinated mechanism and were perceived as natural. And an airplane is tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of "cogs" that need to be connected. Okay, that was a rough outline, but weren't there always people for it? Of course there were. For restoration, revival, and all that. But there were and are those against it. All those "plants," "sleepers," simply useful idiots who have put and continue to put spokes in the wheels. Now, they say, "there's no money" to produce their own chips. What if China kicks up a fuss tomorrow? I think the money will be found right away, but it will be too late...

[AC130 Gunship]

The question in the title should be asked to the mob that has been feeding the population with promises for years, when, after steaming in a sauna with women, they throw their legs up to climb on them.
It is at this moment that we will (perhaps) learn the truth. Or perhaps we won't.

[FoBoss_VM]

As a resident of Vladivostok, I'm very interested in when a long-haul aircraft will take to the skies to replace the Il-62, capable of flying the Vladivostok-Moscow route nonstop. All these MC-21s and SuperJets are of little interest.

[AC130 Gunship]

Quiet, . You were told "tomorrow," so it means tomorrow.

[anclevalico]

"a reduction in some of the aircraft's technical characteristics (primarily, range and weight)" This, one might say, put an end to the import of the car.

[Neutral Neutral]

It seemed like the engineers had thought of everything.

This quote looks especially charming against the backdrop of a wing made of foreign polymer materials. Miscalculated, but where?
But now, the same wing (without redesign) has completely different characteristics, and as a result, the aircraft's range has been reduced. Redesigning the wing is probably possible, but the aircraft was needed yesterday. What prevented the aluminum wing from being the primary option and the polymer one an option is a great mystery.