Military Review

Aerobatics in lies and the sky

149
Brilliant pilots with their skill cover up crooks - such a conclusion suggests itself after the completion of the International Aviation and Space Salon MAKS-2013.
Chinese circus did not take place

The general impression from MAKS-2013 suggests that this event is for internal use with the involvement of rare friends. And the double-deck giant Airbus A-380, capable of carrying up to 850 passengers, rather confirms this theory. He flew to Russia to demonstrate the "flag" and participate in the "show program" on a par with the French fighter "Rafale" and the Chinese aerobatic team. There were still Swiss on the F-18, but almost no one saw them - the American technology failed, the plane simply broke down.
We waited a lot from the Chinese on light fighters Chengdu J-10 with the Russian engines AL-31FN, but their performance seemed like a breeze to the brilliant and complicated aerobatics "Swifts" and "Vityaz". They hoped to see the exotic, a kind of unique Chinese circus, only in the sky, but against the background of the masters of their craft, they looked like diligent students. It would be better if 28 million rubles were given away not to Chinese pilots, and a third of this amount was allocated to the Russian national aerobatics team, which did not have the money to deliver their planes to the United States for the world championship. But the spectators of MAKS were lucky - an enchanting aerobatics was shown by a seven-time absolute world champion among women in aerobatics Svetlana Kapanina. She flew on import EXTRA ‑ 300. Favorite aircraft champions, pilots and just beautiful - Su-26 and Su-31 - no longer produce. And they are still the best in the world, most of the cars are sold abroad.
Trotter - hope for military appeal
Light twin-engine turboprop aircraft "Trotter" lives in hope.
Aerobatics in lies and the sky

Trotter
It was developed at the Tekhnoavia Design Bureau; they decided to build it in Samara at the missile production base at TsSKB Progress. The reinforced chassis and large-diameter pneumatics give it the ability to land on the ground, withstand "hard" landings and "goats" under the control of cadets of flight schools. But it is the Ulyanovsk Civil School aviation Framed the plane with a bandwagon - refused to pay and accept the built cars. They explained that Austrian Diamond DA42 Twin Star aircraft were purchased for training. Beautiful, expensive and, for our conditions, rather flimsy, with small chassis wheels.
Manufacturers and creators of "Rysachka", it seems, have agreed with the Ministry of Defense, and the plane has already gone to GLITZ them. V.P. Chkalov in the Astrakhan region, where he began testing. The Ministry of Defense plans to use it in patrol, search and rescue and training options. Now it’s an 10-seat machine, the output already has options on 16 and 19 seats. What is not a replacement for An ‑ 2? Cruising speed 250 – 400 km / h, range to 2 thousand km, take-off run - 370 meters, mileage - 350. The main thing is that the lobbyists of the Western aircraft technicians do not hurry up and do not slip something more beautiful and expensive to the military. At the air show, one Rysachok participated in the flight program, while the other demonstrated a brutal essence in the coloring of the Russian Air Force, with blocks of missiles suspended under the fuselage - just an attack aircraft for the poor.
New is well forgotten old
Ukrainian presence, in addition to successful regionals An-148 and An-158, provided two more interesting flying cars - modernized by the company "Motor Sich" Mi-8MSB helicopter and An-2-100 biplane. It would be an exaggeration to say that the helicopter and the corncob made a splash, but the experts appreciated that the old Mi-8T with new engines and gearbox gained unprecedented agility and ability to set world records, climbing to 9 150 meters. An-2, replacing the piston gasoline engine of the Great Patriotic War with the MC-14 turboprop, also became dashing, without a strain, to take off - the engine power increased by one and a half times. The native ASH-62IR engine was developed in 1938 and managed to do some fighting on the X-NUMX fighter “Chaika” and the famous “donkey” I-153. Moreover, today special aviation gasoline in the country is not produced, but imported from Finland, and its price exceeds 16 rubles. per liter. And the use of motor gasoline has repeatedly led to engine failures and accidents.

With new hearts, old cars have gained competitiveness in all respects — from fuel economy to improving flight performance: the range, speed, flight altitude, reliability, and overhaul life have increased. It is clear that the manufacturers of the Mi-8 / Mi-17 family and local air lines look at it without affection - such a modernization is a much more budgetary way to update the fleet of airlines than buying new equipment for many times more money. But the trick is that helicopter builders are already overwhelmed with orders, and airplanes capable of flying, like the An-2, on rural airfields and landing sites, are not being mass-produced.
True, at the air show, the An-2 fellow showed himself beautifully in flying from one bear corner to another in the twin-engine DHC ‑ 6 Twin Otter-400 Canadian production. It takes off from the “patch”, landing almost without run. It is easy to “change shoes” from a wheeled chassis to skis or floats. The legendary car is built with 1966, flies everywhere - in Antarctica and the deserts of Australia. In 1988, the aircraft was removed from production, but it turned out that it does not have a full-fledged replacement and is not expected. And after nearly twenty years, the upgraded Twin Otter re-enters the market. Isn’t it true that it’s not at all similar to the actions of the Russian leaders We manage to declare obsolete aircraft development began 90-s. It was possible to look and feel this car in a static parking lot. In the cabin 19 compact but comfortable seats. I checked it personally, for me it is better than in the economy class of the liner - even if it is too narrow, but my knees do not rest on the back of the front seat. The cabin is the most modern, no archaic.
We have Twin Otter promoting the Vityaz air corporation, a screwdriver assembly from Canadian car kits in the special economic zone of the Ulyanovsk region is expected. They promised that this will happen in 2012 year. So what? Now, according to a company representative, "a fence has already been built around the future production site." The only obvious disadvantage of this car is the price for 6 million dollars. For this money, you can upgrade to a “like new” 6 – 7 An-2. Also, opponents of Twin Otter say that 252 machines from 850 are lost in aircraft crashes. However, it is important to take into account the “holes” of airplanes of this type.
Hostage plane
About An-70 written a lot. His fate tightly intertwined with "twists" in the Russian-Ukrainian relations. It is worthwhile for the presidents of fraternal peoples to meet and agree on expanding cooperation - An-70 is on horseback. There are regular claims of Moscow to Kiev - the plane is not needed, funding stops. Stretched for decades. And on the sly, officials and functionaries lobby their interests. So, deputy prime minister Dm Rogozin for no reason called An-70 "Virtual plane". And he shocked the specialists with the words that "we saw it take off from a short strip and the ground only on paper", that by its technical characteristics it is almost a direct competitor to the purely Russian IL-76MD-90A (IL-476). It is strange that the Deputy Prime Minister did not see the short take-offs of An-70, but the visitors of MAKS saw it. The truth is not from the ground, and from the concrete strip LII them. M.M. Gromov, but the run-up of the car is phenomenally short - like the Su-30 fighter. Landing is not less impressive - the four-motor hulk, the mass for 100 tons stops almost immediately, like a sports car. We will make a discount on the fact that flights on air shows always take place with a minimum load and half-empty fuel tanks, but the potential of An-70 is obvious. And the commander of the Airborne Forces General Vladimir Shamanov claims - Aircraft troops need. The minimum airspeed of the An-70, confirmed by the tests, is 98 km / h. Ela - 220 km / h. Fuel consumption - 4,4 tons of kerosene per flight hour against 8 tons - almost half. True, at cruising speed, An is inferior to Ilu to 100 km / h. However, Il-76 is not able to deliver troops and equipment in close proximity to the conflict zone, it requires a normal - long - runway, and not a ground "shorty" of the 650 – 700 field airfield in length. The An-70 cab is wider and taller in order to be able to transport military equipment, as the Americans do on their Glo-Master military transport C-17. Colonel-General Anatoly Sitnov in 1994 – 2000 He was the chief of armaments of the Armed Forces of Russia and directly participated in the formation of a technical assignment for a new aircraft:
- We have identified the nomenclature of the most important military cargo from 20. Everything was taken into account: the system of loading, unloading, take-off and landing. And it fully complies with the technical conditions. The parameters of the aircraft ahead of all existing cars today. Americans in the middle of 90-x, having learned the characteristics of engines D-27, it was announced that these are the 5 generation engines, and in 15 – 20 years they will do the same. It took two decades - did not. The plane is also suitable for solving special problems; conversion to the civilian version is possible. On its basis, it is realistic to make a passenger version. For this plane it is necessary to fight, especially since the Russian in it to 80%, including scientific groundwork.

A. Sitnov: We must fight for An-70.
Dmitry Kiva, Antonov’s General Designer, expressed even more categorically at a press conference in the An-158 showroom at the MAKS demonstration site:
- Let Russia refuse this aircraft - I will launch it into production in my Kiev. There are buyers for him.
It will be difficult for him to do this - 280 Russian and all 80 Ukrainian enterprises are involved in airplane cooperation. Mass production, assembly, are assumed in Russia, in Ulyanovsk. But it seems that our leaders from the government, the presidential administration, and UAC are pushing Ukrainian aircraft manufacturers into the arms of others. Production of An-158 and other machines of the company "Antonov" are ready to accept other countries. They will pay the money, get the know-how.
Why do our Oak and the Ministry of Industry and Trade with the participation of the Ministry of Defense, by hook or by crook, delay the holding of joint An-70 state tests with Ukraine? State tests are the final point for deciding whether we need this aircraft or not, whether it meets the stated tactical and technical characteristics. Perhaps the answer lies in a recent statement by the Prime Minister of Ukraine Mykola Azarov: “I had a meeting with the French leadership and the leadership of the airline Airbus, and they told me directly that your plane (An-70) is better than ours (A-400M), but we will do everything to ensure that your aircraft does not find a sales market. ” Long live free competition! Or Russian-French friendship?
"Effective managers" can offend even the famous general designer. For a solemn presentation IL-476 was not invited twice Hero of Socialist Labor Heinrich Vasilievich Novozhilovunder whose leadership and created IL-76:
- Probably, they are afraid that I will say something uncomfortable. They scream at all angles - this is a new aircraft. And if you look at the glider, the aerodynamics - not a millimeter from the old car did not move.
There is nothing bad to say about IL-476 - the good fellows, that they transferred production from Russia to distant Tashkent, modernized the stuffing, the wing design, reduced the crew. The plane found a second life - the Americans are following the same path, constantly improving successful models. Bestseller Boeing 737 made the first flight in the year 1967 and constantly, for almost half a century, develops.
The first after God
Head of UAC M. Pogosyan and his accomplices dream of leaving us with "Superjet" and the killed industry - enterprises providing aircraft factories with avionics, hydraulics, chassis and hundreds of other positions, are not involved in the construction program of the “Superjet”. Helicopter Ka-62, painted with lacquer contours, the Superjet also turned, only from Russian Helicopters - engines, gearbox, rotor blades and much more are being supplied from abroad. Mid-haul liner MS-21which Irkut is preparing to produce, from the same company - the engines are still imported, equipment for the most part, too. "Superjet" and MC-21, from the point of view of Anatoly Sitnova, no more than "resetting the aircraft industry." And the blow under the breath of the domestic GLONASS system - in the aircraft, built on the import stuffing, the American system of global positioning GPS works.
However, they say, the MS-21 will have more of our components. Wait and see, there is no aircraft yet. What is significant, Pogosyan broke the signing of a firm contract for the purchase of 30 MS-21 aircraft between Irkut and Sberbank-Leasing. “Take the Superjet, or there will be no deal,” - approximately like this, according to the words of those present, Pogosyan said. The result is an agreement on 20 MC-21 and ... 20 "Superjet" liners. A solid jackpot from 1,4 billion dollars goes to Sukhoi Civil Aircraft (GSS).
And what about Tu-334? General Director of JSC "Tupolev" Alexander Bobryshev not inclined to contradict Poghosyan. Moreover, it seems, he is with him. The most successful aircraft of the company, surpassing the "Superjet" in many ways, seems to him a dangerous topic - for Pogosyan, the Tu-334 is like a red rag for a bull. Answering the question of the portal Avia.ru, whether the Tu-334 will fly, the head and “patriot” of the company replies: “Probably not.” And the president’s approval resolution on the Tu-334, he believes, is not a decree: “According to the resolutions, it is possible to proceed to the formation, but not to form it”. But there is a gap - an agreement has been signed on the supply of upgraded 15 aircraft TU-204CM for Russian airlines Red Wings and VIM-Avia". However, only this event passed unnoticed, and it is not known whether the KLA will give an opportunity to put these agreements into practice. For M. Pogosyan, this car is an annoying and harmful alien that interferes with its very existence.

Tu-204SM on takeoff.
MAKS confirmed that the main face of our aviation industry is M. Poghosyan and nobody is afraid of anything. Now he is in the aviation industry first after God. For him, there are no aircraft, except those where he participated as a designer or manager. Prime Minister M. is zombied: on the first day of the salon, Dmitry Anatolyevich announced that the successful foundation of projects in the aircraft industry is “international specialization and cooperation, when one project combines advanced scientific and technological developments, optimal technological solutions or best management practices from various countries. We also have such examples: this is the creation of our regional Sukhoi SuperJet 100 aircraft in collaboration with leading world manufacturers, whose authority is generally recognized. ”
I wonder what the unemployed aircraft manufacturers think about this? Pogosyan continues to lead everyone by the nose - from ordinary citizens to the country's president. And on the speakerphone it’s spreading: “The keys to the Ferrari car were found in the parking lot ...” At the same time, somewhere in the north of the Leningrad region, for six days, retired helicopter pilots, lieutenant colonel Alexey Ustalov and colonel Igor Zelenovsky with local caring comrades pulled out of the quagmire combat attack aircraft of the Great Patriotic IL 2. Last Sunday, almost a whole airplane was brought to Samara. It will become the basis for the restoration of Russia's only “flying tank»To the 75th anniversary of the Victory. The editors of AN participate in the realization of this noble goal.
Why should not Putin offer to “poke the gruel,” as he did at the conference on shipbuilding in Vladivostok, which is responsible for the aircraft industry and, accordingly, the country's defense capability? The farther, the more difficult without a basis in the form of powerful civil aviation to equip with modern units and devices new combat vehicles - Su-35, T-50 PAK FA. They fly beautifully, brightly, but they are not suitable for real combat. And then, God forbid, the adversary will come to us and put everyone on the right path. Who is the first in line for instruction, and so it is clear.
Author:
Originator:
http://argumenti.ru/toptheme/n405/283047
Photos used:
photo of the author
149 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Peaceful military
    Peaceful military 14 September 2013 06: 44 New
    20
    Not funny conclusions, from the category, the patient is more likely alive than dead.
    Ukrainians, as usual, had fun, which added sadness.
    1. Horde
      Horde 14 September 2013 08: 47 New
      12
      EXHIBITION of aircraft is an indicator of our industry in aircraft construction. The demonstration of our achievements was not at all impressive. What is there from the ACHIEVEMENTS of the aircraft industry? RACE? Nnda the country gave birth to a trotter. And what else? from real, what’s in production ..
      -TU company has nothing to boast of
      -firm IL boast nothing 476 ?? is an achievement?
      MIG company is nothing new
      -YAK nothing
      -SU only su and nothing else, amers brought their f22 and 35, 35 will build THOUSAND, and su-35 48 pieces !!!
      -KAA nothing to brag about
      -I have mi-38, but it’s not in the series
      -AN single instances
      only one superfood, but we won’t brag about it - this is not our plane.
      something else? missed nothing?
      and yes Putin scored on max.
      1. Armata
        Armata 14 September 2013 11: 45 New
        10
        Quote: Horde
        and yes Putin scored on max
        Putin and Dima scored at the exhibition in tagil 25 on September. There will be only the main yap Rogozin to look at the Terminator 2.
        1. Horde
          Horde 14 September 2013 11: 58 New
          -2
          Quote: Mechanic
          Putin and Dima scored at the exhibition in tagil 25 on September. There will be only the main yap Rogozin to look at the Terminator 2.


          it seems that they are just disgusted to look at even the modest achievements that exist in the country
          1. Ruslan_F38
            Ruslan_F38 14 September 2013 12: 07 New
            +8
            The Rysachok participated in the flight program, and the other showed a brutal essence in the coloring of the Russian Air Force, with missile shells suspended under the fuselage - just an attack plane for the poor.
            - an interesting instance.
            1. Horde
              Horde 14 September 2013 12: 50 New
              +2
              Quote: Ruslan_F38
              interesting instance.


              interesting if the Mongols made it
              1. Genry
                Genry 14 September 2013 17: 59 New
                -3
                Quote: Horde
                interesting if the Mongols made it

                No, definitely interesting! Instead of AN-2.
                Only without bluntly installed launchers. How will he sit on his belly?
                Wow!
                And probably on the back.
                1. Horde
                  Horde 14 September 2013 18: 09 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Genry
                  Only without bluntly installed launchers. How will he sit on his belly?
                  Wow!
                  And probably on the back


                  he understood what he said?
                  1. Alex 241
                    Alex 241 14 September 2013 18: 12 New
                    +3
                    I read a lot of things here, but this is a masterpiece in general! laughing
                2. Alex 241
                  Alex 241 14 September 2013 18: 19 New
                  +9
                  Quote: Genry
                  Wow!
                  To do this, there is an “emergency reset of suspensions” and “reset to non-explosion”
                3. dmitrich
                  dmitrich 15 September 2013 04: 52 New
                  -4
                  from Omsk engines on the AN-2 refused, now we will buy in Ukraine.
          2. Armata
            Armata 14 September 2013 12: 44 New
            +9
            Quote: Horde
            it seems that they are just disgusted to look at even the modest achievements that exist in the country
            This is not the case. They were promised to show them Armata, but she is not there yet. And to look at what they themselves cut is not an option, you have to admit that the T90 today is the coolest car to date. And for some reason they don’t buy it from us.
            1. Horde
              Horde 14 September 2013 12: 59 New
              +2
              Quote: Mechanic
              They were promised to show them Armata, but she is not there yet.

              there’s no armata, we don’t buy t-90, but a lot of chatter, and we live
            2. POBEDA
              POBEDA 14 September 2013 16: 09 New
              +4
              And why the heck to buy the old model when the latest is on the way? The T-90 is essentially the T-72B. Theirs and since dogs are uncut in the army. There will be Armata, then there will be purchases. And let the T-90s be exported, if not everyone is full. Some Indians bought or assembled more than 1000 pieces from the delivery kits. Do you think that the Americans are figurative on the M1A2 conveyor? Nope .. made 10000 pieces and that's it.
              1. Armata
                Armata 14 September 2013 16: 27 New
                +7
                Quote: POBEDA
                And why the heck to buy the old model when the latest is on the way? T-90 is essentially T-72Б. Theirs and since dogs are uncut in the army. There will be Armata, then there will be purchases.
                Read carefully. Armata in the coming 5-7 years will not. I say this as one of those involved in the development. But everyone hung noodles about the show (and a closed show). And the fact that T90 is bought by everyone except Russia is a fact. So you can distribute applause with your feet to anyone, including under-covers, and if anything, we’ll still fight at T72. And by the way, tell us what's new in Armata? This is purely for me, for self-education.
                1. Normal
                  Normal 14 September 2013 18: 53 New
                  0
                  Quote: POBEDA
                  Nope .. made 10000 pieces and that's it.

                  10000 pieces is quite a bit, huh?
                  We need at least 1000 T-90s that are supposedly T-72B (what are the Indians so stupid that they buy T-72 instead of T-90B?)
                  Quote: Mechanic
                  And by the way, tell us what's new in Armata? This is purely for me, for self-education.

                  Throw through the navel. This is a forbidden trick! How can you, Eugene? It’s the same as Emelianenko versus the first-rate sambo wrestler. How not ashamed? laughing
                2. varov14
                  varov14 14 September 2013 19: 50 New
                  -1
                  Calm down, this is from the same opera as 35 do not really fly. The main thing is to say loudly OK!
                3. poquello
                  poquello 16 September 2013 01: 06 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Mechanic
                  Read carefully. There will be no armata in the next 5-7 years. I say this as one of those involved in the development.


                  I have long wanted to ask a person taking part in the development, the armata is an open project or you have a barn enterprise where employees are not bound by obligations not to relate to the production topic.
            3. Andrey Yuryevich
              Andrey Yuryevich 15 September 2013 03: 38 New
              +1
              T-90 only we do not buy, others then stand in line! and what for us? we still have a lot of t-34 .....
        2. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 15 September 2013 03: 35 New
          +1
          promised the same "armature" to show ... ???????
        3. dmitrich
          dmitrich 15 September 2013 04: 50 New
          0
          and you are no different from him
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Siberian German
        Siberian German 14 September 2013 12: 37 New
        -2
        hammer - a brief and complete analysis
      4. Gluxar_
        Gluxar_ 14 September 2013 16: 09 New
        10
        Quote: Horde
        EXHIBITION of aircraft is an indicator of our industry in aircraft construction. The demonstration of our achievements was not at all impressive. What is there from the ACHIEVEMENTS of the aircraft industry? RACE? Nnda the country gave birth to a trotter. And what else? from real, what’s in production ..

        We showed our achievements both at MAKS and in Le Bourget. You look at the essence of air shows incorrectly.
        What new products did competitors have this year? Can you list? This year, Boeing or the Europeans showed something new? The creation of a new airplane or helicopter is a unique project with a period of tens of years. No country can create a new airframe every year and this is not necessary. Generations of aircraft are updated every 10-20 years.
        Quote: Horde
        -TU company has nothing to boast of — IL company has nothing to boast of 476 ?? is this an achievement? —MIG company is nothing new-YAK nothing-SU only soo and nothing else, the amers brought their f22 and 35, 35 will be built in THOUSAND, and the su-35 48 pieces !!! - KA has nothing to boast of — MI is mi-38, but it’s not in the AN series, there are only a few superfoods, but we won’t boast about it — it’s not our plane. What else? Didn’t miss anything? But yes, Putin scored at max.

        There is no longer either Ak or Su, there is one corporation, just like Boeing or Airbus. The UAC immediately leads several new projects, there are a superjet and MS-21, and Tu-214, and An-148, and IL-96-400m and much more, not to mention military aircraft.
        Also about helicopters. The United States is buying our helicopters, what else needs to be said about the achievements of our country in this industry?
        And the United States did not bring either f-22 or f-35 to mind and are unlikely to do so. This is just an example of super-pilot projects in aircraft construction, and not a breakthrough.

        The same with the Superjet, this is our plane. A civilian aircraft that is exported to countries of the Western Hemisphere, which was not even in the Soviet period. The plane is created in cooperation, but the main components are Russian.

        Well, about Putin, I scored on the MAKS well that I did not score on the Far East and Syria, priorities must be set correctly.

        So minus the comment.
        1. Horde
          Horde 14 September 2013 17: 08 New
          +4
          Quote: Gluxar_
          You look at the essence of air shows incorrectly.
          What new products did competitors have this year?


          do you look right? towards competitors? -so right? Maybe if you look “correctly” in the direction of your competitors, then will you count the number of new and modernized models with a Boeing and a watermelon? Can you do this? Boeing alone was released and modified over 20 years while in Russia there were 5 liner model liberals in power, and dozens of modifications are counted in modifications, not counting military products, sales are estimated at HUNDRED BILLIONS. This Russia buys hundreds of billions by bleeding its own industry, killing design schools and the country has turned into a RAW MATERIAL APPENDIX of which everything is given to say. You are not looking there.


          Quote: Gluxar_
          There is no longer either Ak or Su, there is one corporation, just like Boeing or Airbus. The UAC immediately leads several new projects, and there is a superjet and MS-21, and Tu-214, and An-148, and IL-96-400m and much more, not to mention military aircraft


          why are you fooling your head, what other AK SU? in your beloved west, where you look, there is Boeing, and Mkdonald-Douglas, Lockheed and helicopter Bell, Sikorsky, and motor Prat and Whitney. And only we, like sheep brought a water herd of su still lives, the rest die.
          Quote: Gluxar_
          And the United States did not bring either f-22 or f-35 to mind and are unlikely to do so. This is just an example of super-pilot projects in aircraft construction, and not a breakthrough.


          stop lying already disgusting ... fool angry
          Quote: Gluxar_
          the same about the Superjet, this is our plane.


          yes this is YOUR plane ...

          Quote: Gluxar_
          Well, about Putin, I scored on the MAKS well that I did not score on the Far East and Syria, priorities must be set correctly.

          Yes, it’s important for 10 thousand per person, he’s doing business there
        2. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 15 September 2013 20: 06 New
          +6
          Quote: Gluxar_
          Well, about Putin, I scored on the MAKS well that I did not score on the Far East and Syria, priorities must be set correctly.

          Well done Alex! Everything is correctly said: "Not to mushrooms, Petka." But the prime minister was noted and that's enough.
          Quote: Gluxar_
          So minus the comment.

          You know, I also put the article "-". If a decision is made at the state level, there is nothing to smear the snot on the site. After the VD, the sequestration is coming, every penny counts, and then import purchases from a country whose leadership does not particularly show brotherly feelings for Russia. You need to feed your producers and develop your aviprom.
      5. AleksUkr
        AleksUkr 14 September 2013 16: 13 New
        +4
        Quote: Horde
        only one superfood, but we won’t brag about it - this is not our plane


        Unfortunately, it is not only not ours, but extremely dangerous to health. True, Manturov and Poghosyan have a different opinion, although they are not going to fly on this plane, unfortunately.
        SuperJet-100 is a tombstone to the Russian aviation industry. Sculptors Khristenko and Poghosyan, and now Manturov.

        Novosibirsk Komsomol members loudly and throughout the country voiced a revolutionary proposal: “The President - for the Superjet!” To everyone but the president The proposal is at first glance sound - a plane that has sucked out all the financial juices from the aircraft industry should be presented to the government squadron. The fleet of the special flight detachment "Russia" has 58 aircraft - 43 aircraft and 15 helicopters.

        But for the Superjet, for some reason, there was no place there. Apparently, the verdict of the experts of the Federal Security Service (FSO) was too tough for the main lobbyist of the ship, Mikhail Poghosyan. A too foreign car, with a small internal diameter of the passenger compartment and not able to fly to most of the country's regional airports, proved to be of little use for ensuring the work of the first person of the state. And the main danger is the possibility of the presence of malicious “bookmarks” in the completely imported electronic stuffing of the liner. No one has canceled it. This practice has long been known - at the command of a satellite or a radio signal of a certain frequency, the computer unit can give false information or simply turn off. That is how during conflicts, NATO suppresses air defense of objectionable states that had the misfortune to acquire system components in one of the countries of the alliance.
        1. Avenger711
          Avenger711 14 September 2013 16: 55 New
          -8
          Do you believe in bookmarks? It would be better if you believed in God, he is more real.
      6. vladimirZ
        vladimirZ 15 September 2013 04: 45 New
        +5
        The collapse is not primarily in the aircraft industry, industry and the economy. The collapse in the minds of all of us, from the average citizen to the leadership of the states of Russia and Ukraine!
        The chaos in the thoughts, ideologies, and paths of the country's development inevitably comes to an end with the destruction of our usual way of life, unemployment, poverty, and the living of the majority of the people.
        What can I say about the "latest" developments of aircraft designers. They are not needed by the current unfortunate leaders of our states; in domestic developments, "you can’t cut a lot of dough."
        Modern time is a lazy rogue and fraudsters, all kinds of traitors, working out 30 pieces of silver from unbridled uncles.
      7. sasha127
        sasha127 15 September 2013 08: 42 New
        -1
        Well, what can I say. The only thing is that our civil aircraft industry almost reached the hilt.
      8. Theophanes
        Theophanes 15 September 2013 15: 12 New
        -2
        Yes g ... Poghosyan ruined the entire aircraft industry of Russia !!! What will we fight when there are no planes? We will pay with blood for the long patience of Pogosyan and other great designers. Do you need to make or buy other planes of this class? But who will sell? We look very pale in the rearmament of the army. Will M. remain at the helm for a long time ?!
      9. Lyokhin63
        Lyokhin63 10 November 2013 17: 59 New
        0
        Quote: Horde
        Americans brought their f22 and 35, 35 will build THOUSAND

        Do you seriously believe that? Given their cost? I want to say "do not talk nonsense."
        Quote: Horde
        476 ?? is this an achievement?

        476-deep modernization of the IL-76. Wing, engine, avionics, cargo compartment. This is an achievement. While maintaining the advantages of the prototype.
        Quote: Horde
        RACE? nnda the country gave birth to a trotter

        At one time, they laughed at the AN-2, in the era of jet aircraft, it was considered stupid to create this machine.
    2. berimor
      berimor 14 September 2013 12: 32 New
      0
      This article once again shows a "brotherly" attitude towards Ukraine. As they say, I’ll go to my own detriment, but, most importantly, I’ll make my neighbor feel bad!
      1. Horde
        Horde 14 September 2013 12: 44 New
        -20
        Quote: berimor
        This article once again shows a "brotherly" attitude towards Ukraine.


        ZHIDY not brothers Slavs
        Quote: berimor
        As they say, I’ll go to my own detriment, but, most importantly, I’ll make my neighbor feel bad!


        a neighbor, a country and one people are divided, Ukraine will die first, and Russia after her
      2. AndreyAB
        AndreyAB 15 September 2013 17: 36 New
        +8
        Ukraine built a decent An-70 aircraft, but the leaders did everything to destroy it, now they are in euros, and there the Airbus will not let it go to the market, and Europe will most likely put forward an “enlightened” environment under which Ukraine’s reviving industry will slowly fall into the dust - an example the great Baltic states - now the saying is like that of a Latvian x ... yes the soul can still be attributed and indefatigable self-awareness and everything, you can forget about the economy.
    3. Gluxar_
      Gluxar_ 14 September 2013 15: 43 New
      +8
      Quote: Peaceful military
      Not funny conclusions, from the category, the patient is more likely alive than dead. The Ukrainians, as usual, amused, which added sadness.

      Ukrainians are such Ukrainians, it seems that they were hanging somewhere in 2004. An-2-100 is a breakthrough of the year, and the ka-62 is some kind of "dull shit." No comments.
      And I advise my Ukrainian friends to write articles not for Russians, but for Europeans. tell them what their finished planes are and offer their products.
  2. Shumka
    Shumka 14 September 2013 07: 21 New
    +6
    article set a minus for a one-sided minor, damn it, mood in the morning is spoiled. ((((((
    1. Vashestambid3
      Vashestambid3 14 September 2013 07: 41 New
      -16
      Quote: Shumka
      article set minus for one-sided minor


      Well, I'll give a medal for useful information))) smile
      1. abdrah
        abdrah 16 September 2013 04: 59 New
        0
        And your medal, American, like a pigeon guy caresses negative .. Do normal people need such medals, especially heroes.
        there is something to ponder.
    2. Rus2012
      Rus2012 14 September 2013 11: 32 New
      +2
      Quote: Shumka
      article set a minus for a one-sided minor, damn it, mood in the morning is spoiled. ((((((


      Better a headache than a defeat in battle!
      Dissection of flaws, zelo is useful than varnishing of rubbish ...
      The article is an iron plus! He wrote with pain in his heart and a man who cares for the cause!
      Articles from the same series -
      "Ivanov and Alyoshin - new air carriers?"
      http://argumenti.ru/rassledovanie/n311/131373

      PS: advice to minus-guns - not for you, dear ones, to fight with "effective managers", so at least do not bother people who are happy for domestic aviation!
    3. tegezen
      tegezen 14 September 2013 11: 48 New
      +4
      Article rubbish. Custom-made one hundred pounds. Boguslaev will award this Leonov a prize.
      1. Constantine
        Constantine 14 September 2013 13: 27 New
        +9
        Quote: tegezen
        Article rubbish. Custom-made one hundred pounds. Boguslaev will award this Leonov a prize.


        There is a moment. The question with AN was posed as if Russia were to blame for having to resort to such measures to save Ukraine from final destruction.

        In general, the article is filed with the expectation of emotions, and this is a sign of articles of a certain class. Throwing poop on the fan, with or without, a similar technique in all the same articles. And of course, the source of the article itself is saturated with colleagues in the workshop Latynina and the like. Just go over and look at the general information background. sad
    4. The comment was deleted.
  3. Lyapis
    Lyapis 14 September 2013 07: 25 New
    27
    Three conclusions that I made after reading the article:
    - the evil Poghosyan is ruining the entire aviation industry;
    - the air industry does not create anything new, but from what it does, everything is wrong or wrong;
    -MAX-useless, useless attraction for no one.
    In general, all the polymers pissed ...

    But seriously, the domestic aircraft industry really has a lot of problems, but still not everything is as gloomy as described by the author. The article, in my opinion, is somewhat one-sided, and the author did not even try to consider the issue objectively, focusing only on the negative.
    1. brewhouse
      brewhouse 14 September 2013 08: 21 New
      15

      The landing of the An-70 is no less impressive - a four-engine giant, weighing 100 tons, stops almost immediately, like a sports car ...
      True, An is inferior to Il to 100 km / h in cruising speed.
      However, the Il-76 is not able to deliver troops and equipment in close proximity to the conflict zone, it needs a normal - long - runway, and not an unpaved "shorty" of a field airfield of 650-700 meters in length ...


      You read and before your eyes you get a dirt patch of field somewhere near Prokhorovka, on which the An-70 sports cars are slowing down, and T-34s are rolling out of their belly in order to kill the approaching German "tigers" on the fly.
      In fact, the An-70's landing ability praised by the Ukrainian side is just an advertising nuance, which in real life and war is not decisive.
      Are there many such natural soil pads that An-70 can accept without additional engineering training even in the steppe arid regions of the same Ukraine? Can someone be able to name the coordinates of at least one such site? Yes, they are practically nonexistent. Any unpaved airfield should be prepared using heavy engineering and road equipment. And even if bulldozers and skating rinks can be delivered to a potential landing site, it makes sense to build not a dirt, but a full-fledged airfield with a normal runway.
      An-70 will not sit on an unprepared collective farm field, especially with a load.
      And adjusted for the Russian climate, its supposedly planting capacity is generally of little value.
      Right now the flood and the flood in the Far East. Well, where can he sit there on muddy soils? How will he take off from the swamp? What will happen to this dirt platform when the equipment delivered by airplanes passes through it? And if it rains?
      We already had in our history an episode in the Berlin operation, when our planes drowned in mud at dirt field airfields due to rains, and the Germans, having concrete runways, dominated the air.
      But the speed of the aircraft is often in peacetime and in wartime much more important for the success of the business and the task. This also applies to the delivery of the wounded and injured by the Ministry of Emergencies, when every minute counts. This also applies to the transfer of equipment or landing by BTA aircraft. A leisurely flight of the An-70 over an area of ​​enemy air defense can cost the lives of those on board this aircraft.
      Further. Why is it necessary to land large and expensive BTA aircraft in "close proximity to the conflict zone", where they can become easy prey for enemy aircraft and air defense? What is meant by the words "immediate proximity"? A kilometer from the front line or the battlefield, two, ten or one hundred? Who will equip this site for the An-70? Who will chop and take out trees and shrubs? Fill the ditches? Plan a site? Who will lead the take-off and landing from the ground? How will refueling be organized if necessary on an unpaved ground? Who will guard her at last?
      So instead of giving millions and billions of our money to an openly raw Ukrainian plane, it’s better to invest a small part of them in the modernization and development of the aerodrome network on our own territory, which, in principle, is now being done.
      In general, there are many questions for the An-70. And Rogozin is right, considering him a "virtual machine." So far, there has been a lot of bragging on the Ukrainian side, but little is done.
      In this situation, a reliable, proven and even upgraded IL-76 is preferable. No wonder they say, “An old friend is better than the new two.” I’ll generally keep silent about the economic advantages for the Russian aviation industry. It’s also obviously better when the plane is produced at its plants, and not with the capricious, moneyless and unreliable Ukrainian partner.
      1. Oleg Kharkov
        Oleg Kharkov 14 September 2013 11: 33 New
        -2
        Well, do you remember how they built airfields in Odessa during World War II? Concrete stripes built? Or cut down the forest and leveled the primer with the involvement of the local population? Is it possible to set up concrete runways in all conflict zones? Of course, our speed is everything, but fuel consumption, load capacity and engine power is nonsense. Also, the Americans ride their Abrams - so what super-heavy - we set them up a bunch of super-tracks in Europe and America, oh, in Iraq and Afghanistan there are no such roads, well, we’ll ride there limited. In general, after such comments, I begin to understand the logic of your Pogosyan and Rogozin.
        PS Moreover, the comparison of the AN-70 with the IL-476 should flatter An-u, since these are aircraft of different classes and the class of the AN-a was planned to be clearly lower than the IL-a (as a replacement for the AN-12).
        1. brewhouse
          brewhouse 14 September 2013 15: 25 New
          +8
          You essentially could not argue with me. Instead of arguments, a bucket of verbal garbage was dumped.
          Well, let's analyze specifically what you wrote.
          I personally don’t remember how airfields were built in Odessa during World War II. In general, I doubt that they were built there. Do you remember? Then tell me. It will be interesting to find out how the forest was "cut down" there. By the way, what kind of forest was cut down in Odessa? Where was this dense forest located? And where were the airfields you mentioned located? wink
          Just keep in mind that the An-70 weighs up to 135 tons, and the then Li-2, which began to be released a year later after the delivery of Odessa, weighed 10 tons.
          If planes weighing over 100 tons were to land in Odessa you mentioned, then be sure that you would build concrete strips as nice because there is no other way.
          In general, I agree with you, let Ukraine drive the local population to build unpaved airfields for its ground flight. At least some people will have some work.
          Russia will use normal reinforced concrete runways in the old manner, expanding its aerodrome network. hi
          1. Oleg Kharkov
            Oleg Kharkov 14 September 2013 15: 54 New
            -5
            I read a historical book in my childhood: "besieged Odessa", and that was remembered. But so offhand after 15 seconds of searching, I found the link http://odesskiy.com/geroicheskaya-oborona-odessi/den-54-27-sentjabrja-subbota. html describing this event. The location of the airfield and the construction process. Your irony regarding those events is incomprehensible. This was an example of the impossibility of building a well-equipped runway. But if the Russian army always hopes to fight in greenhouse conditions, then of course it does not need the An-70. But something tells me that this is your personal opinion, and not the opinion of the General Staff of the armed forces.
            1. Avenger711
              Avenger711 14 September 2013 16: 58 New
              +6
              After WWII, heavy aircraft were based only on concrete.
            2. brewhouse
              brewhouse 15 September 2013 00: 35 New
              +9
              I followed your link. Here is an excerpt:
              It was impossible to build an airfield in extremely short terms by the forces of extremely small engineering units of the defensive region.
              The Executive Committee of the City Council intended to attract 3500 people for the construction of the airfield, and in two days twice as many people, mainly women, came to the assembly points ...
              They were brought into brigades, each brigade was assigned a site. We worked all day, from morning to evening.
              “... The new airfield hid under cherry trees and abandoned houses ... The romantically minded Aggei Yelokhin starts to reason:
              - A happy place! And you know why? Odessa women built with their own hands ... We will bow to the legs of women after the war, carry on their hands "


              Thus, it took 7000 people to build an airdrome to receive almost weightless airplanes by today's standards in the suburban area of ​​a warm southern city.
              Question to the audience: how many thousands of people will it take to build a dirt airfield capable of receiving and sending several tens of 130-ton An-70s per day?
              And if you build not in Odessa?
              And if you build in the autumn rains or in the March-April thaw?
              And if in the cold under minus thirty?
              And if you need to cut a forest, uproot stumps and shrubs?
              And if there is no engineering equipment?
              Then how many people will it take? And where to get these people?
              And if tens of thousands of excavators are required for each An-70 type dredger, then what for does such an airplane need? They will not take him for nothing.
              As the saying goes, the game is not worth the candle.
              I am for a real and reliable IL-76 on reinforced concrete runways.
              You can ride the virtual Antonov Kabe earth-moving arable land yourself for your money.
              1. eagle11
                eagle11 15 September 2013 09: 05 New
                -2
                It’s fun to read, people’s comments "in the dark", dear, do you even know that the RCA has a bunch of characteristics? I’ll tell you a secret, one of them, the maximum mass of the aircraft (landing and take-off). So, far from every airfield, even with airborne missiles (there are various PAGs, they differ in thickness), it is capable of accepting IL-76. For example, the airfields of DOMNA and Cheryomushki can’t take IL-76, precisely by weight hars. In the Trans-Baikal Territory, at the moment, IL-76 can only be received by the KADALA airfield (it is monolithic), but it is in private use, pay a denyu ...
                1. eagle11
                  eagle11 15 September 2013 09: 27 New
                  -6
                  I forgot to write about different soils. In general, we really need an An-12 replacement
        2. Avenger711
          Avenger711 14 September 2013 16: 57 New
          +6
          IL-76 is, An-70 is not. That's all. No matter which An-70 is economical, there will be no sense from a virtual machine.
      2. Genry
        Genry 14 September 2013 16: 30 New
        +5
        Quote: Brewhouse
        the An-70's landing ability praised by the Ukrainian side is just an advertising nuance, which in real life and war is not decisive.


        Hate the AN-70, but don’t fool around how to use planes properly.
        Russia needs a plane of this type, but it does not need dependence on Ukraine, which wants to eat Russian fish and sit on the Euro membership.
        Soil airfields are very important in wartime. They can be located near the place of hostilities and where necessary.
        What do you need to build or repair a dirt airfield? Yes, just a bulldozer, scraper and grinder. It is easily delivered by helicopters if not in place. Such an airfield turns into dirt only if no measures are taken (water-discharge ditches). Radars, drives and other aerodrome equipment are all on wheels and can easily be moved.
        Aircraft of the SU-25, MIG-29, YAK-130 family are designed for unpaved strips, but there are practically no transporters, and this will greatly limit the urgent delivery of important goods, equipment, infantry, and the wounded (especially for expensive equipment, aircraft delivery, for shutting down strategic holes or repair is justified).
        In the event of shelling and damage, the soil strip can be fixed in a couple of hours, while hummocks will be dismantled from chipped concrete slabs on the concrete ....
        So do not hight planes flying from the ground.
        1. Avenger711
          Avenger711 14 September 2013 16: 59 New
          +5
          What ?? What primer can the MiG-29 work on ??
          For chipped concrete slabs there is a tractor.
          1. Genry
            Genry 14 September 2013 17: 28 New
            -4
            Quote: Avenger711
            What ?? What primer can the MiG-29 work on ??

            It has overlapping air intakes to prevent dirt from entering the engines. Front-line fighter!
          2. Genry
            Genry 14 September 2013 17: 40 New
            -7
            Quote: Avenger711
            For chipped concrete slabs there is a tractor.

            Well, you pull the slabs and get a primer.
        2. Fin
          Fin 14 September 2013 21: 34 New
          +6
          Quote: Genry
          Soil airfields are very important in wartime. They can be located near the place of hostilities and where necessary.

          Forget about 2MB. No normal military commander will land a transport aircraft with cargo worth tens or even hundreds of millions of rubles. to a dirt airfield, and even close to hostilities. There are enough airfields in the Russian Federation, you just need to restore them.
          The most basic thing here is politics. Also, no one needs a competitor. The French clearly told you why the Russian Federation should act differently. The plane is made with Russian money, this is a gift. Now promote it, there is Africa, South America, the very thing for the ground there.
        3. brewhouse
          brewhouse 15 September 2013 00: 18 New
          +6
          What do you need to build or repair a dirt airfield? Yes, just a bulldozer, scraper and grinder. It is easy to deliver ...


          Everything is easy for you. "Yes, all ... it's easy ..." You would write fairy tales for children of primary school age ...
          For people like you, I’ll remind the proverb “It was smooth on paper, but forgot about the ravines, and walk on them.”
          But in general, shovel in your hands and go build with your friend Kharkiv your favorite unpaved airfield. How to build, then tell us how easy it is and whether there is a great demand for your product. Confirm your theory with deed. Then we'll talk. And I don’t want to discuss your stupidity and idle talk. Farewell.
          1. Oleg Kharkov
            Oleg Kharkov 15 September 2013 21: 18 New
            -3
            Quote: Brewhouse
            "It was smooth on paper, but forgot about the ravines, and walk on them"
            Namely, it is only on paper in the conflict zone that there are always comfortable runways capable of accepting heavy transport vehicles. And it’s somehow strange when they confuse the possibility of landing on unpaved runways, with necessity. But you are right - the argument is empty. And it also seems to me that the A400M will go for the Mistrals to Russia. Russia is simply "asked", no matter what, to take and "help" the EU with markets.
    2. Rus2012
      Rus2012 14 September 2013 11: 38 New
      -5
      Quote: Lyapis
      . The article, in my opinion, is somewhat one-sided, and the author did not even try to consider the issue objectively, focusing only on the negative.


      Dear colleague, everyone knows about the positive and so on, the purpose of the material is to show swagger (Putin said) and the yellow metal — some of the bosses from aviation, to the detriment of the country and people!

      But in general, the material is intended for knowledgeable and thinking for the fatherland, rather than fermented patriots ...
      1. bddrus
        bddrus 14 September 2013 14: 59 New
        +4
        you still have a fight who is more a patriot! it’s disgusting to read - everyone considers himself the main “caring” for the fatherland!
        1. Armata
          Armata 14 September 2013 15: 26 New
          +7
          Quote: bddrus
          you still have a fight who is more a patriot! it’s disgusting to read - everyone considers himself the main “caring” for the fatherland!
          Dear, such as dung for a bathhouse in the spring. So do not even worry.
    3. maxvet
      maxvet 14 September 2013 19: 59 New
      +5
      Quote: Lyapis
      The article, in my opinion, is somewhat one-sided, and the author did not even try to consider the issue objectively, focusing only on the negative.

      Judging by the article good at MAKS only Ukrainian products, the rest is gov ... but
    4. varov14
      varov14 14 September 2013 19: 59 New
      -3
      So it is better to identify the negative in advance so that in the future the positive ass is not soaped.
  4. Normal
    Normal 14 September 2013 07: 26 New
    +4
    Thanks to the author, it’s immediately obvious that he’s “sick” not for his pocket, unlike the “effective managers”, but for the domestic aviation industry.
    The MAX report is consistent with my experience.
    along with the French fighter "Rafal" and the Chinese aerobatic team. There were still Swiss on the F-18, but almost no one saw them - the American equipment failed, the plane simply broke.

    “Rafal” flew just great. The Swiss F-18 flew on the first day, but in the morning there was very low cloud cover. This flight was not remembered for anything special, except that far from a new aircraft, after a certain modernization, it does everything that super-modern cars do.
    They expected a lot from the Chinese on Chengdu J-10 light fighter jets with Russian AL-31FN engines, but their performance seemed like a bland addition to the brilliant arch-complicated aerobatics “Swifts” and “Knights”. They hoped to see the exotic, a kind of unique Chinese circus, only in the sky, but against the background of the masters of their craft, they looked like diligent students.

    I also completely agree.
    Normal RU September 9, 2013 17:14 | Interview with the commander of the Chinese aerobatic team.
    There was a pilot at MAKS not worse than ours (at least in my amateurish opinion and impression) I flew at Rafale. And the Chinese .... nothing outstanding ...
  5. Edward72
    Edward72 14 September 2013 07: 32 New
    11
    After reading the article, it somehow became sad in my heart. And what’s the most disgusting thing is that you can’t do anything with these effective managers. Although you understand by consciousness that sunny Magadan is their permanent place of residence.
  6. vadson
    vadson 14 September 2013 07: 37 New
    +5
    Hmm, but still that odd fellow on the letter m.
    I understand everything, I want to cut the dough. But stsuka, if you don’t have a cool baby in civilian aircraft industry, you can’t get away. He bastards his own fellows. Also, “abroad will help us”, Kuyzh without them.
    1. the polar
      the polar 14 September 2013 08: 39 New
      +5
      Quote: vadson
      Hmm, but still that odd fellow on the letter m.
      I understand everything, I want to cut the dough. But stsuka, if you don’t have a cool baby in civilian aircraft industry, you can’t get away. He bastards his own fellows. Also, “abroad will help us”, Kuyzh without them.

      he senses what kind of “politika” they are expecting from above and which one he will approve and support. So, he’s six in the matter of the collapse of the aviation industry, he is used and paid for it. Above must be cleaned, and cleaned to blood. Only in this way can something be changed for the better.
      1. varov14
        varov14 14 September 2013 20: 24 New
        0
        Under Poghosyan, a sharashka must be created for a long time; An excellent stimulant and the main thing tested by ancestors. And so the head is busy, how to cut the dough more, is it something everyone wants to pick up?
  7. The comment was deleted.
    1. AK-47
      AK-47 14 September 2013 09: 38 New
      -3
      Quote: JUDAH
      ... and its price exceeds 100 rubles.
      "..."

      +++++++++++
    2. O_RUS
      O_RUS 14 September 2013 09: 49 New
      +8
      Quote: JUDAH
      In addition, today special aviation gasoline is not produced in the country, but imported from Finland, and its price exceeds 100 rubles


      Wow!!! Well, at what level of power do you need to decide in order to disrupt the production of gasoline in your own country and then establish a purchase in Finland? How much does someone regularly float in the “stocking”?

      Maybe someone has information - Av gas was produced in Russia? Where was the production located? thank
      1. Rus2012
        Rus2012 14 September 2013 12: 11 New
        0
        Quote: O_RUS
        Did they produce av gas in Russia? Where was the production located?

        Aviation gas was produced at many oil refineries in the USSR for decades - Baku, MPZ, Orsk, Krasnovodsk, in Guryev, in Kuibyshev, Saratov ...
        At ASH-62 is B-91 / 115 and B-100 / 130. The release of B-91 / 115 is virtually discontinued, and Avgas100LL - the price is astronomical - 100rub liter.
        More details - http://www.forumavia.ru/forum/2/0/9567077983581157030181174108520_3.shtml
        1. O_RUS
          O_RUS 16 September 2013 18: 39 New
          0
          Thanks for the data.
    3. Rus2012
      Rus2012 14 September 2013 11: 44 New
      0
      Quote: JUDAH
      imported from Finland, and its price exceeds 100 rubles
      Ahuet


      And there is...
      And ASH-62 along with An-2 at the end was transferred to Poland.
      And now we see what came of it ...
      1. clidon
        clidon 14 September 2013 12: 23 New
        +7
        “At the end” is still the 1960th year.
  8. Normal
    Normal 14 September 2013 07: 59 New
    +6
    Trotter - hope for military appeal
    .......
    New is well forgotten old
    .......
    Hostage plane
    .......
    The first after God
    .......


    Everything described once again confirms that all the words about the development of the aviation industry that we hear from the lips of the president, prime minister, deputy prime ministers, "effective managers" and other "gentlemen" are just a smokescreen behind which they hide the reluctance and inability to develop the domestic aviation industry. Instead of its development, we are imposed a dependence on the West, “close cooperation” with which deprives us of a significant share of jobs in the advanced, technological industry, and kills the initiative and domestic design developments.
    As always, the words of our government radically diverge from its deeds, and the example of several dozen modern fighter jets and front-line bombers should not deceive anyone. Even in these few tens, our power was granted only after Libya. And the development of BTA is not shaky or roll. Civil aircraft industry rested on a Super-duper jet. The "mace", as befits a mace (not an arrow, not a spear, or even a dart), does not fly far, if it does.

    Why shouldn’t Putin offer to “eat the balance”, as he did at the shipbuilding meeting in Vladivostok, which is responsible for the aircraft industry and, accordingly, the country's defense capability?


    Yes, because "not the 37th year." Yes, and Putin’s words, his entourage knows the price, it’s not an electorate. But there is no real responsibility, because the meaning of the current elite is complete irresponsibility for any of its actions and for inaction.
    1. not good
      not good 14 September 2013 11: 42 New
      +1
      Apparently, this is why our government is stubbornly moving away from the organization of the Ministry of Aviation Industry. We have to appoint an extreme one, but I don’t want to work and be responsible for the results.
  9. Lyokha79
    Lyokha79 14 September 2013 08: 02 New
    +8
    This year I managed to go to the MAX. I have been dreaming for a long time and now the dream has come true. The sight is amazing. True, the weather failed on the first day of free visits. Honestly, I don’t know what day the author writes about, but on the first day the Swiss flew.
    I agree with the author that the Chinese, citing the weather, flew weakly. Our "Swifts" even in such conditions performed much better.
  10. VadimSt
    VadimSt 14 September 2013 08: 02 New
    +1
    But it seems that our figures from the government, presidential administration, UAC are pushing Ukrainian aircraft manufacturers into the arms of others.

    Then, it’s not the figures, but the DECKERS, and how much money has swelled into the project, and the plane, according to experts, is good!
  11. Strashila
    Strashila 14 September 2013 08: 05 New
    +1
    Everywhere one thing ... drank dough, no one thinks about patronymic. It is required to establish a medal "Great Varovayka" in the likeness of Petrovskaya for a booze, cast-iron .... pood.
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 14 September 2013 09: 43 New
      -3
      Quote: Strashila
      Everywhere one thing ... cut the dough, no one thinks of patronymic. It is required to establish a medal & yauot; Great Varovayka & yauot; in the likeness of Petrovskaya for a booze, cast-iron .... pood.
      And chained to a leg, like Australian convicts?
      1. Quzmi4
        Quzmi4 15 September 2013 21: 24 New
        -3
        WITH A WRIST ON THE BACK !!!
  12. Lech from ZATULINKI
    Lech from ZATULINKI 14 September 2013 08: 09 New
    +5
    We have mediocre projects as well as managers a dime a dozen, let’s recall at least the widely publicized DAM SKOLKOVO project when mediocrity and mediocrity come to grips in advance, we can say we are rolling into a swamp from which we will have to get out at our own expense.
  13. major071
    major071 14 September 2013 08: 20 New
    +5
    The French threw money in their pocket to someone from our government and that’s it, problems started with the AN-70, but it’s a really good plane. But in our time, this does not mean anything, as they say: "the girl feeds, he dances her." Coughing up and all ...
  14. Lyokha79
    Lyokha79 14 September 2013 08: 42 New
    -1
    Swiss Flight:
  15. Lyokha79
    Lyokha79 14 September 2013 08: 43 New
    -2
    Chinese group.
  16. Budilnik
    Budilnik 14 September 2013 09: 15 New
    -1
    I have to take a closer look at Pogosyan ...
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 14 September 2013 09: 44 New
      +3
      Quote: Budilnik
      I have to take a closer look at Pogosyan ...
      And better on top of the trunk.
    2. Genry
      Genry 14 September 2013 17: 50 New
      -9
      Poghosyan is doing everything right. You do not like that he collected all the advanced ideas in the world and applies in airplanes.
      Now all Russian air suppliers are starting to pull themselves up. Superjet will soon be completely assembled from domestic components.
      1. Horde
        Horde 14 September 2013 18: 06 New
        -1
        Quote: Genry
        Superjet will soon be completely assembled from domestic components.

        who told you that?
      2. AleksUkr
        AleksUkr 14 September 2013 18: 08 New
        +1
        Quote: Genry
        he collected all the advanced ideas in the world and applies in airplanes.

        You are mistaken, my dear. Not ideas, but simply components. And your world wants to shut off oxygen - what next? And he sleeps and sees the suffocating aircraft industry of Russia!
        The Russian Federation produces two dozen civilian aircraft per year. Air industry rescue military orders. At the same time, the civil aircraft industry as such is in a state of coma. The Superjet-100 program did not pay off - these passenger planes are practically not sold abroad, and Russian carriers buy a car only because "it is necessary."
  17. AK-47
    AK-47 14 September 2013 09: 25 New
    14
    Gratitude to retired helicopter pilots, Colonel Alexei Ustalov, Colonel Igor Zelenovsky and caring comrades from Samara, who pulled out a WWII Il-2 combat attack aircraft from the quagmire.
  18. Koronik
    Koronik 14 September 2013 09: 25 New
    +5
    Well, it hurts gloomily. Although things are not completely bad in our aviation industry. The author points to the cargo planes of Ukraine, giving them priority, but they really have not shown themselves. Where are their contracts for the supply of aircraft to other countries except Russia?
    1. varov14
      varov14 14 September 2013 19: 54 New
      -1
      It is strange where the contracts come from if they are 80% dependent on Russia.
  19. Avenger711
    Avenger711 14 September 2013 09: 31 New
    0
    But what about the Tu-334? General Director of Tupolev OJSC Alexander Bobryshev is not inclined to argue against Pogosyan. Moreover, it seems he is at one with him. The most successful aircraft of the company, surpassing the Superjet in many ways


    Stop lying. For 334 years no one needs the Tu-20 and there is no one to blame the Tupolevites except themselves. This is an archaic car with very mediocre characteristics due to overtightening.

    The head of the KLA M. Poghosyan and his accomplices dream of leaving us with a Superjet and a dead industry - enterprises that provide aircraft plants with avionics, hydraulics, chassis and hundreds of other positions are not involved in the Superjet construction program.


    Maybe because their products are completely uncompetitive? Customers do not care where parts were made and planes around the world are manufactured by selecting the best components around the world. So what, did all these enterprises work before or when, when in the country no aircraft were produced at all?

    The Ka-62 helicopter, flaunting with varnish contours, also turned into a "Superjet", only from the "Russian Helicopters" - engines, gearbox, main rotor blades and much more are delivered from abroad.


    And who is to blame for the fact that the manufacturers of these nodes still can not give an adequate product, and the whole project is essentially because of them?

    Fight for the An-70? Well, if there is 80% of the Russian, then let Ukraine give away what does not belong to it and rolls to hell. Already 22 years old, as independent, it is time to grow up and learn to behave, rather than finely crap and steal the all-Union heritage. The latter generally belongs to Russia by default, having paid debts for the entire USSR as an official successor.
  20. clidon
    clidon 14 September 2013 09: 36 New
    +9
    Honestly, I noticed one feature, the more real successes we have, the more minor the tone. Well, yes, in the early 2000s, MAX was more colorful and interesting. With a fan of fighters without a customer (or a foreign type of Indians), a bunch of helicopter mock-ups sparkling with foreign engines and lots of joint projects and just projects (like give us a lot of money and it will have no analogues). Do you want a curiosity that will never fly anywhere? Pity on MAX! An interesting aircraft with the reverse sweep "The Best in the World" (SLvM) S-37 or a stub plane (from the same Tu-204) - Tu-334 with three crew members in the fashion of the 70s and engines that need to be changed almost every year - all this with us. Surprise and groan. All this sparkled with some unhealthy brilliance, like sparkles from a broken mirror - the aircraft industry of the USSR.
    But now of course everything is much more boring ...
    - Helicopters that dozens go to the troops and are popular around the world, occupying a significant segment of the market.
    - Fighters for which there are real orders and deliveries to the troops have begun and there are a bunch of foreign customers. Su-35, Su-30
    - Transport workers, the production of which was not only not lost, but was transferred to Russia and modernized. IL-476.
    - Modern air defense systems. This year, for example, Vityaz.
    - SSJ civilian aircraft, the number of commercial orders has exceeded two hundred.
    - Fifth generation prototypes that fly in a group. Real, not what we were shown in the late 90s.
    And so on. Of course, you can always pick a spoon in the soup and say something about the cook. Yes, MAX becomes more utilitarian and pragmatic. But not everyone likes the dashing 90s.
    1. Horde
      Horde 14 September 2013 12: 02 New
      -3
      Quote: clidon
      stub plane (from the same Tu-204) - Tu-334 with three crew members in the fashion of the 70s and engines that need to be changed almost every year - all this with us


      only the ENEMY can reason like that
      1. clidon
        clidon 14 September 2013 12: 22 New
        +4
        Well then, continue to talk like a FRIEND and continue to wonder - why is it that nobody wants to take our civilian planes.
        1. Horde
          Horde 14 September 2013 12: 36 New
          -2
          Quote: clidon
          Well then, continue to talk like a FRIEND and continue to wonder - why is it that nobody wants to take our civilian planes.


          mow under a fool? our aircraft industry is ruined by many years of NON-FINANCING, to hell with you and people like you, about the NK-93 can you hear? it is now the BEST MOTOR IN THE WORLD.
          1. clidon
            clidon 14 September 2013 13: 00 New
            +5
            Well, yes, even in the 90s? When planes were sold at dumping prices, and then (like China), "chewed", sent back ... There is trouble in the system, when the machines were created not for competition, but according to plan. And it turned out uneconomical, noisy, with components incomprehensible to the whole world (although this is no longer our fault) and the corresponding "Soviet" service - "you bought, you suffer."
            In general, the Tu-204 (the elder brother of the Tu-334) is sold openly, its production has been debugged, there has never been a line for it. The same applies to the serial IL-96 or An-148.

            PS NK-93 on PAPER was the best motor in the world. Read what they write who actually worked with this engine, at least at the air forum (avia.ru). “Unfortunately, the engine did not show the declared characteristics,” “The de-icing protection was never developed,” etc.
            1. Horde
              Horde 14 September 2013 13: 26 New
              0
              Quote: clidon
              In general, the Tu-204 (the elder brother of the Tu-334) is sold openly, its production has been debugged, there has never been a line for it. The same goes for yourself.


              funds for the development of the Tu-204 and, say, super-superfoods are not comparable, the dry unit was brought up, but our CARDS are interrupted from water to kvass. These are IMPOSSIBLE working conditions. However, EVERYONE understands this. Our airplanes are the best in the world, but DESTROYING our own aircraft industry.

              Quote: clidon
              NK-93 on PAPER was the best motor in the world


              I’d better listen to the opinion of the directors of Kuznetsov, how they killed the most advanced motor in the world.
              1. clidon
                clidon 14 September 2013 13: 39 New
                +6
                So, is it really not clear why our “carcasses” have been slaughtered from bread to kvass for 20 years with established production. The best in the world in fuel consumption - I agree. For a small resource of engines, I agree. Well, yes, and at a price, but as time shows, such an expensive product is selected not only on the basis of the initial price. Then, with a 3-pilot scheme, they just started to leave now ...

                I’d better listen to the opinion of the directors of Kuznetsov, how they killed the most advanced motor in the world.

                That is, do you believe advertising? ) Funny, it turns out - nobody believes the stories of AvtoVAZ directors and managers, but please "Kuznetsovsky". They then surely cut the uterus.
                1. Horde
                  Horde 14 September 2013 14: 53 New
                  -2
                  Quote: clidon
                  That is, do you believe advertising? ) Funny, it turns out - nobody believes the stories of AvtoVAZ directors and managers, but please "Kuznetsovsky". They then surely cut the uterus.

                  our cars were never good, not then, but our planes were always good then, but they were simply killed. Do not compare these things. In addition, the quality of Kuznetsov’s engines can be seen in the example of the NK-33, you may know what it is
                  1. clidon
                    clidon 14 September 2013 20: 01 New
                    +5
                    "Good" is how? The fact that from a commercial point of view (economy, noise, resource) over the past 50 years (that is, somewhere from the mid-60s), our civil aviation has consistently been inferior to the western one, in my opinion, is no secret to anyone. There were happy exceptions, like the Yak-40, but they only emphasized the rule.
                    Well, the fact that we have good tank diesel engines does not mean that we make excellent car engines. This is about NK-33.
                    1. Horde
                      Horde 14 September 2013 21: 27 New
                      -2
                      Quote: clidon
                      profitability, noise, resource) the last 50 years (that is, somewhere from the mid-60s), our civil aviation has steadily yielded to the western one in my opinion it's no secret to anyone


                      well, two of you in the history of aircraft construction. Our planes were inferior in the number of issued pin_dos, all the same, the first economy in the world, the watermelon was only in the project and the tail still did not raise, this is to the 60th, but as for resources and consumption, Information of this kind at that time was closed due to the Cold War. Our best airliner, say the end of the 80s, was the IL-62 of the last modifications, it could fly half the world.

                      Quote: clidon
                      Well, the fact that we have good tank diesel engines does not mean that we make excellent car engines. This is about NK-33.


                      AGAIN TWO? yes no five. FIVE TWO. laughing
                      did you decide to screw up in all subjects?
                      NK-33 ROCKET ENGINE OKB KUZNETSOVA was developed for the N-1 lunar rocket late 60s early 70s amers still can not do this. What is the tank engine here?
                      1. clidon
                        clidon 14 September 2013 21: 53 New
                        +6
                        Well, not you will teach me, believe me. )))

                        Secret Soviet civilian aircraft is strong. Very much. So much so that there’s simply nowhere to go.
                        Just ask who bought these wonderful, competitive cars in the world. Well, if they were no worse than the American. Well, those that are Tu-154, Tu-134. This is despite the fact that the Yak-40, which at the time of its appearance was quite interesting (a compact cheap reagent), was sold (horror!) To the capitalist Federal Republic of Germany (though not very successful) and Latin America. Therefore, the fables regarding the secrecy of the technical characteristics of these machines, which were revealed in all their glory, sat down the deaths of the USSR, leave to yourself.
                        IL-62M was our best airliner. But with respect to world developments at that time, it was a very mediocre machine. With a "secret" fuel consumption of 46,6 g / pass.-km (747-300 th gave out at that time 22 g / pass.-km).

                        Soviet airliners produced decent batches for the same reason that they produced the Moskvichi-412e in the 80s - the market was closed and the quality of the machines had little effect on their “feasibility”. If only they didn’t fight, then all right.

                        And here is the tank engine?

                        You as a child need to chew everything? "The presence of advanced unique military technologies does not automatically guarantee the availability of massive civilian technology."

                        PS That NK-33 is taken not for uniqueness (how many years did it fail in warehouses?), But for cheapness. Exactly like the RD-180.
                      2. Horde
                        Horde 14 September 2013 22: 39 New
                        -4
                        Quote: clidon
                        "secret" fuel consumption of 46,6 g / pass.-km (747-300 th gave out at that time 22 g / pass.-km).


                        are you juggling?
                        how can we compare fuel consumption in terms of passenger / kilometer for wide-body and normal dimensions of aircraft? You would also compare the b-747 and tu-160 there are people there are 10 crew, and there are no passengers at all according to your method, the consumption flies to infinity. fool


                        Quote: clidon
                        The presence of advanced unique military technologies does not automatically guarantee the presence of mass civilian. "


                        Nnda amiable again by. The conversation was about unique Kuznetsov technologies, so I brought it to the NK-33 as a high unsurpassed quality, I didn’t talk about military technology, but about the space and related aircraft engines NK-93, as products from one design bureau.

                        Quote: clidon
                        NK-33 is taken not for uniqueness (how many years did it fail in warehouses?), But for cheapness. Exactly like the RD-180.


                        cheapness - “would you not chase pop for cheapness” in relation to what is cheap? to NON-EXISTING F1 can be? or to what other amerovskie engines? the pin_ dos are super-expensive f-35s who want to build thousands and are not embarrassed by the high cost. The point is not cheapness, but in the very existence of the engines, our NK-33s are there, but pin_doses do not have these and therefore take what they really have.
                      3. clidon
                        clidon 15 September 2013 00: 21 New
                        +6
                        are you juggling?
                        Well, you yourself are proud here of the old "narrow-bodied" ("normal" in your terminology) in the late 80s. The Western aircraft industry is not to blame for the fact that the "advanced" (in your opinion) domestic aircraft industry could not give out a distant wide-body body by that time and had to fly on "normal" cars with high fuel consumption.
                        Therefore, I compare one distant plane with another.
                        Tu-160 and 747y cars for different purposes - do not distort. But the 747 (767th) and 62M are just the devices for one purpose and tasks. Who managed to do how.

                        The conversation was about unique Kuznetsov technologies, so I brought in nk-33,

                        You didn’t show me the unique "Kuznetsov" technologies in civil aircraft engines. But the rocket engine of the late 60s is not going to be attached to the Tu-334.

                        cheapness - “would you not chase pop for cheapness” in relation to what is cheap?

                        "What other American engines" of course. For example, RS-68.

                        What is the difference between creating my fifth generation and purchasing cheap engines to launch my carriers with satellites, I will not even explain. Turn on your head.
                      4. Horde
                        Horde 15 September 2013 08: 06 New
                        -4
                        Quote: clidon
                        the western aircraft industry is not to blame for the fact that the "advanced" (in your opinion) domestic aircraft industry was not able to give out a wide-body wide body by that time and had to fly on "normal" cars with high fuel consumption.


                        you need to compare two "narrow body" if it is not clear, but if you really want to admire on your knees in front of the "west", then maybe let us compare your western miracle b-747 wide-body with another wide-body created in Russia and developed in the USSR is ECIP
                        -Fuel consumption in cruising
                        flight mode, (g / pass-km) 15
                        , as you can see, OUR miracle is more wonderful than the backward "advanced" aircraft of the "West"

                        You didn’t show me the unique "Kuznetsov" technologies in civil aircraft engines. But the rocket engine of the late 60s is not going to be attached to the Tu-334.


                        Have you already forgotten what it is about? about NK-93 powerful, quiet and economical in your “west”, which you kiss below your back, you couldn’t create this, like NK-33, therefore, you could only ban it through our liberals.
                        What other American engines, of course. For example, RS-68.


                        but this engine is worse than our nk-33 and rd-170/180 so amers buy ours, this is obvious to everyone except you.
                      5. clidon
                        clidon 15 September 2013 11: 03 New
                        +6
                        Two narrow-bodied? Yes, please - Boeing 757-200 spends - 24,3 g / pass.-km. I don’t even understand your perseverance, the old IL-62 airliner (at birth a pretty good car) by no means at the end of the 80s was anything other than a flying museum.

                        "EKIP" is that? How many produced them? Is it their turn? Or is this another 90s movie in the style of "unrecognized geniuses - give a lot of money." On paper, I will draw you a consumption of -20 Kg per passenger. Fortunately, the paper tolerates everything. But the Boeing flies and carries people.
                        You are somehow naive, you believe any fairy tale. True, you yourself wrote in Miracle. If only in the ekranoplanes or something ... Also from that opera, but at least more realistic and the samples were.

                        Have you already forgotten what it is about?

                        In my opinion, you point blank do not want to notice the fact that you have already been answered. However gopniko-hamovaty style of communication as it gives me a reason to doubt your intelligence.
                        The fact that we did good rockets does not automatically mean that we could make good commercial engines. These are different areas of activity.

                        but this engine is worse than our nk-33 and rd-170/180 so amers buy ours, this is obvious to everyone except you.

                        Is this all for you personally? )
                      6. Horde
                        Horde 15 September 2013 16: 35 New
                        -4
                        Quote: clidon
                        Two narrow-bodied? Yes, please - Boeing 757-200 spends - 24,3 g / pass.-km.



                        Quote: clidon
                        However gopniko-hamovaty communication style


                        I see you do not want to understand humanly? studied at a Jesuit school? or were you so dragged into the synagogue to lead disputes?
                        when they say that OUR planes were not the worst, but in some ways the best, we must compare EQUAL PRODUCTS.
                        Regarding the IL-62 created in 1962, it is necessary to correlate not the b-757 created in 1983 with completely different engines, but the planes created for that period. The B-707 or VC-10 created in 1958, so if you can finally grasp it yourself you will understand which plane was the best.
                        People like you, who write in Russian, but who cry out all Russian, do not deserve a good attitude towards yourself, so that you can be offended, not offended ...

                        Quote: clidon
                        EKIP “what is it? How many did they produce? Is it their turn? Or is it another mullet of the 90s in the style of“ unrecognized geniuses - give a lot of money. ”On paper, I will draw you a consumption of -20 Kg per passenger. Fortunately, the paper suffers. But the Boeing flies and carries people.


                        it was precisely the advanced and most original products of the EKIP and NK-93, BURAN, ENERGY, SKIF that were apparently the cause of the liberal revolution in the USSR because the West realized that if not to take emergency measures, the Russians would bypass the West in key areas.
                      7. clidon
                        clidon 15 September 2013 17: 10 New
                        +2
                        You probably will not read it - I wrote - "the last 50 years our aviation has lagged behind." You immediately write that the Il-62 “in the late 80s” was “our best long-range airliner,” but you demand to immediately compare it with the older one. On the one hand, I understand you - in the late 80s we had nothing to compare with Boeings 747 (767mi) in the field of long-distance transportation. However, I will not “tailor” you the result to “acceptable”.
                        But, if you so wish, then let's compare the best that we had in the 80s with the Tu-154M with the "classmate" Boeing 757-200. The first has 31 g / pass.-km (5300 kg / h), the second 23 g / pass.-km (3600 kg / h). The first 4 crew members, the second 2.

                        here are the most advanced and most original products

                        It would be better not advanced and original, but high-quality and effective. Then you look and the USSR would remain alive.
                      8. Misantrop
                        Misantrop 15 September 2013 17: 25 New
                        +2
                        Quote: clidon
                        Then you look and the USSR would remain alive.
                        Even the best car will inevitably end up in a ditch, if at the wheel - a stupid and greedy stupid half-educated person ... request
                      9. clidon
                        clidon 15 September 2013 20: 25 New
                        +4
                        But if he (the car) is serviceable, then there are more chances. And the "scatter" of billions of rubles into "original" (image-building, as they would say now) projects did not add stability to the economy for sure. Like in general, nonsense in the field of non-military (or non-strategic) construction.
                        However, this is completely a departure from the topic.
                    2. Horde
                      Horde 15 September 2013 18: 01 New
                      -3
                      Quote: clidon
                      You probably will not read it - I wrote - "the last 50 years our aviation has lagged behind."


                      b-707 and vickers transported passengers until the beginning of the 70s and then became military men (tankers, etc.); therefore, the il-62 was at least twenty years old with them until the b-757 was created, it was the BEST PLANE.
                      Next were the wide-body b-747 later il-96 with ps-90
                      at the first expense 22g / p / km
                      the second 26
                      it is COMPATIBLE
                      There couldn’t be any lag. And if the Tu-204 were set up with the NK-90 at the beginning of 93, as planned, such a plane would have winged Boeing like a bull cow in all respects.
                      It would be better not advanced and original, but high-quality and effective. Then you look and the USSR would remain alive.


                      I know why the USSR collapsed not from the fact that there were Ekips, ekranoplans or a flurry, but because they lost in the INFORMATION WAR and they simply fooled us and continue to fool people's heads, as it was bad in the USSR, for example, you ...
                    3. clidon
                      clidon 15 September 2013 20: 22 New
                      +3
                      Do not invent on the go. The IL-62 was somehow interesting until the 747th appeared, which became a bestseller and closed most of the long-range airlines. And this is not "further", but the 1970th year. That is, three years later than the line went IL-62, and not twenty ... This is even if we discard the fact that the 757th is generally out of place. By the way, you yourself were talking about the end of the 80s and the overwhelming competitiveness of our aircraft. Or do you think that an advanced, competitive technique is one that fights with previous generation aircraft?
                      NK-93 is halva, about which you do not talk, but it will not be sweeter. At least at the time of testing in the late 90s, the engine was not ready and did not show better parameters than the PS-90A. And in a piece of paper, as I already wrote, you can write something wrong. If only they gave money.

                      The USSR collapsed from a systemic crisis. When the troubles of the economy, overlap with the crisis of ideology and power.
                    4. Misantrop
                      Misantrop 15 September 2013 22: 04 New
                      +3
                      Quote: clidon
                      The USSR collapsed from a systemic crisis. When the troubles of the economy, overlap with the crisis of ideology and power.

                      In the late USSR, those who were not responsible for their decisions were commanded. There are a couple of good phrases on this topic:
                      "His fate was decided by those in whose presence it is simply impolite to be talented" (c)
                      "A first-class leader surrounds himself with first-class subordinates. The environment of a second-class leader consists of third-class people" (c)
                      No lawless economy could withstand that lawlessness of mediocre decisions. Here we again return to the role of the individual in politics. request
                    5. clidon
                      clidon 15 September 2013 22: 45 New
                      +3
                      I would not like to start a conversation here about the collapse of the USSR, but I will only notice that the system of irresponsibility of the top leadership developed in more than one year and not even one decade.
                      At the same time, they understood at the top that they were in a crisis (including economic) and were looking for a way out. It is desirable to be simpler and more visible. It all seems simple and straightforward now, but at that time it seemed that you just need to push, accelerate, discuss and everything will work.
                      Therefore, I do not think that the economic crisis was the main one, but that it had a significant impact is undoubted.
                  2. Horde
                    Horde 16 September 2013 07: 57 New
                    0
                    Quote: clidon
                    And this is not "further", but the 1970th year. That is, three years later than the line went IL-62, and not twenty ... This is even if we discard the fact that the 757th is generally out of place. You yourself, by the way, were talking about the end


                    about the fact that you are from a Jesuit school, I was not mistaken. How many times do I have to say that the IL-62 and B-747 are different aircraft? Is stupidity curable? What do you constantly compare them? they have different indicators of consumption per passenger-kilometer. Correctly with the b-757 aircraft, which was released in 1983, therefore the difference is 20 years fool
                  3. clidon
                    clidon 16 September 2013 17: 05 New
                    0
                    I understand that you have nothing to say. In the world, some long-range planes were exchanged for others (the same 747th was also released in a shortened version), but you needed just that - a distant narrow-body. ) So the Boeing 757 is “not like that” - this is a medium-range car, so that the IL-62M is “forever the best” and nobody has beaten its parameters so far. That's right at the temple with a finger twist. ) Preferably at the mirror.
    2. lucidlook
      lucidlook 15 September 2013 21: 37 New
      -3
      Quote: clidon
      "What other American engines" of course. For example, RS-68.

      It’s a good engine, no doubt ... only with the fact that it’s more expensive than the RD-180, it’s also weaker than the same RD-180 (the pressure in the chamber is generally 2.5 times) and, according to reviews, more complicated and capricious. And so - what, the brilliance of American engineering! lol
  21. lucidlook
    lucidlook 15 September 2013 21: 12 New
    -4
    Quote: clidon
    but for cheapness. Exactly like the RD-180.

    Yes, yes, they are Americans - little crooks, in a word. Something cheap about them, something cheap about them - both airplanes and their engines. So, the RD-180 is licensed to be assembled solely for reasons of economy, and not because until now they cannot really make an analog either in terms of thrust ratio or reliability. lol

    /sarcasm/
  22. clidon
    clidon 15 September 2013 22: 47 New
    +3
    Precisely because they are expensive, they are looking for a way to save. As with the transport of NATO troops on the Ruslans, despite the fact that the United States has its own transport aircraft.
  23. lucidlook
    lucidlook 16 September 2013 00: 36 New
    +1
    Quote: clidon
    Precisely because they are expensive, they are looking for a way to save.

    It's five! You really do not see a hole in such, so to speak, logic? Or the argument reached the stage of "Stalingrad"? wink

    I will help. Look, if everything is so expensive for them, and they constantly save, then it is logical to assume that as a result they should get something cheap. But why does it still fail? This is the cheapest. Where is it? Maybe their planes are cheap? Maybe tanks? Rockets? Submarines? Ships? Rifles? YES ANYTHING!
  24. clidon
    clidon 16 September 2013 15: 51 New
    0
    Here it really feels - a man climbed into a bottle. ) Yes, the Americans are not cheap, except for dollars and gasoline (the high standard of living and the corresponding salaries affect), but there are things that can be saved, but without losing combat effectiveness - uniforms, transportation, components for machinery, but Critical ”technology-equipment, with which even if they are a hundred times more profitable abroad, will not be scattered.
    I am even surprised how trivial things make me say things here.
    When your engine costs 20 million, and a foreign 9 choice, with a limited budget, is obvious.
  25. lucidlook
    lucidlook 16 September 2013 16: 01 New
    0
    Quote: clidon
    When your engine costs 20 million, and a foreign 9 choice, with a limited budget, is obvious.

    It is not only just cheaper, how do you want to portray it (why? - another question). It is also more powerful, technologically more advanced and more reliable.

    And the overwhelming majority of amers are hellish patriots, take my word for it, because I lived there. "The American elephant is the best elephant in the world!" - And so not only in words, but also in business. And if they for so many years using de facto Russian engines, they are probably not the first in the field of space engine building. Or how?
  26. clidon
    clidon 16 September 2013 16: 24 New
    0
    Are they more powerful at times? Is this a new word in technology without which the American space fleet will not be able to launch satellites? Or is it just a cheapening?
    And Americans are not only patriots, but also pragmatists. That is why the transportation of Ruslans (and not because the United States does not have such aircraft), the purchase of the Mi-8 for the Afghan army (and not because I do not want to put my own), etc.
  27. lucidlook
    lucidlook 16 September 2013 20: 24 New
    +1
    It is more powerful - it is a fact.
    Thrust-to-weight ratio: 73.4 vs 51.2
    Total power at sea level: 390 tf vs 359 tf
    Extent of expansion: 1:37 against 1:22
    Chamber pressure: 263 atm vs 101 atm
    Dry weight: 5480 kg vs 6600 kg

    Maybe not at times, but not by a fraction of a percent. Once again I repeat my thought - RD-180 и more powerful и cheaper than an american. To expose it as a cheap analogue of RS-68 is at least dishonest. He is better, and better in all indicators, including - yes - at a price too.

    Although, personally, it seems to me that it’s too much for cheap.
  28. clidon
    clidon 16 September 2013 20: 44 New
    0
    And I did not expose it as the worst engine. I just wrote that the Americans is a way to reduce the cost of the launch program and nothing more.
    No comparison or humiliation of our taxiways, I did not do.

    Actually, the reason for this lag is also well known - the same shuttles and the high cost of labor.
  • lucidlook
    lucidlook 16 September 2013 01: 02 New
    0
    And you can’t say that ... when they were released, and spare parts for them were abundant, and the staff was where to train (everything during the Union), then they bought.

    Here, take at least the old Tu-154:


    And now they want to take the Tu-204 (first of all, those who have had carcasses in the fleet for more than a year), and they would have taken the Tu-334 with pleasure if there had been political will at the top. But, alas, we are moving on a new path.

    I understand that you really want to portray the Tu-204 as something terrible, but will it work out? And the point is not even how many grams / kg / km it is worse / better than what it wins or loses. Understand the world more one aircraft manufacturer. And in every segment there is competition. Sometimes even more than two corporations. So what? Do all US companies drop their Boeings just because Airbus flies 2 grams cheaper? Not at all! There is no such thing. There are many other (including political) factors that at the moment (that is, right now) lead to the fact that the technical features of the liners do not play a decisive role. See this already so ... and for a very long time (decades).

    Do you propose to get into this meat grinder with clean numbers, with an ideal plane from the future and without a political resource, without a lobby? Well, and how do you imagine this? Have you ever seen this in history? Only seriously.
    1. clidon
      clidon 16 September 2013 16: 25 New
      -1
      Here, take at least the old Tu-154:

      So take and see who bought it in non-homeopathic doses. We, our puppet allies (CMEA, Vietnam, Laos), those who have problems acquiring Western products on the market (Iran, North Korea), a couple of blacks by the trick (often for the Air Force government) and that’s all. Well, and even China, which bought about a dozen Tu-154s in the early 90s (tried it) and returned them back to our airlines.
      Those who had money and could choose - even Iraq, India, Finland, friendly to us - a bunch of third world countries, preferred to buy planes of capitalist countries. While Germany used the same Yak-40, and the IL-62 even managed to fly several years with the Dutch. The fact that the market of those times is “not” is evident even on the example of the popularity of such a machine as the Tu-134. It would seem that the regionalist should go like hot cakes by the thousands. But this heir to the Tu-104 was "taken" so reluctantly that its prevalence is lower than that of the "elder brother" Tu-154. Therefore, no matter how much you conjure, how many do not wring your hands, but the real promising market for the Tu-204, Tu-334 has already been designated - these are Iran, North Korea and Cuba ... True, they, too, are not particularly in a hurry to change their fleets for Russian aircraft. A lot of talk, but little work.
      Of course I don’t have such a primitive opinion about the aviation market, it has politics, it has state support, but due to a combination of factors, the old “Soviet” aviation repeats the fate of Soviet cars. “A couple of grams” is far from the only problem of our aviation industry.
      1. lucidlook
        lucidlook 16 September 2013 20: 37 New
        0
        I was ready to put a minus and leave, but this stopped me:
        Quote: clidon
        “A couple of grams” is far from the only problem of our aviation industry.

        Exactly! To the very point! And it is necessary to solve problems in a complex, and not just blame engine building for all the troubles. But here, if you really dig deep, it will come to such things as educational reform and raising the prestige of the profession of design engineer, and then life, culture and other roads will continue.

        As a result, in order to raise and reform the aircraft industry, it is necessary to raise and reform the whole country. Maybe it will come to that, one day ... who knows, maybe through programs like SSJ-100 (when 90% of all components and assemblies for it will be produced in the Russian Federation), God willing it will not strangle Embriere with his E-Jet E2 .

        It’s a pity only - to live in this wonderful time,
        I do not have to - neither me nor you.

        / Nekrasov /

        Why such pessimism? Because again they buy imported. All new and new contracts for the supply of all sorts of Bombardier and Airbases.
        1. clidon
          clidon 16 September 2013 20: 49 New
          +1
          Actually, I (if you look at how the debate began) is only for a systematic solution to problems, many of which are known to me firsthand. Moreover, both old Soviet and newly acquired obstacles are mixed up here ...
          The only way we can get chance take its place in world civil aviation. And keep the niche of the military and transport branches.
  • Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 14 September 2013 11: 44 New
    +2
    In many troubles of our Russia we blame the "foreign leaders" - the imperialists are to blame for the damned! And who is to blame for the destruction of domestic aircraft manufacturing? Imperialists too? No, criminals live in our country! Components are being brought from abroad, dooming their own aviation industry to extinction. The space industry has the same problem. The frequent crashes of our launch vehicles are a consequence of the ongoing crisis in this industry. Against such a negative background, it is surprising to curtail aviation programs with Ukraine. It seems that our officials are not interested in working with the Ukrainians, because there is nothing to “snatch” from these projects. Sad gentlemen.
    1. lucidlook
      lucidlook 17 September 2013 00: 33 New
      0
      Wait, this is still the WTO has not fully shown us its rotten essence. A couple of years will pass, then the flowers will be replaced by berries, and such "stability" of production will come.
  • dvvv
    dvvv 14 September 2013 12: 33 New
    +2
    Quote: Avenger711
    And who is to blame for the fact that the manufacturers of these nodes still can not give an adequate product, and the whole project is essentially because of them?

    - who's guilty? I think the only answer is that the management that works poorly is to blame! When for many years they ruined their aviation industry and the entire economy of the country as a whole, and now they are joyfully sawing money that is supposedly spent on reviving aviation at the tomb plants and training systems and in the absence of responsibility for the collapse and cut. Therefore, Poghosyan also believes that he is one of the culprits, as are those who stand with him and above him. The money spent on SSJ did not bring profits and will never bring. The State Bank financed it and he buys it all and losses only grow, but IT does not fly ...
  • dvvv
    dvvv 14 September 2013 12: 51 New
    -4
    Quote: clidon
    But now, of course, everything is much more boring ... - Dozens of helicopters go to the army and are popular around the world, occupying a significant segment of the market. - Fighters for which there are real orders and deliveries to the troops have begun and there are a bunch of foreign customers. Su-35, Su-30- Transport workers, the production of which was not only not lost, but was transferred to Russia and modernized. IL-476. - Modern air defense systems. This year, for example - “Hero.” - Civil aircraft SSJ, the number of commercial orders has exceeded two hundred. - Fifth generation prototypes that fly in a group. Real, not what we were shown in the late 90s.

    I agree that it has become boring to look at these achievements. If in 90, when nothing was financed, it could be forgiven, but now, alas, no.
    - Helicopters bought and sold by dozens are the same Soviet Mi-8s with various upgrades and engines made by the unloved MotorSICH. Moreover, if this ingenious machine was made almost all of the former USSR, then the Mi-38 is gone .. this is clearly the style of the SSJ is visible. Engines and gearboxes and blades and avionics are imported and far from Ukraine. The saddest thing, but the Ka-62 is also so conceived and also does not fly at all. Of course, many have forgotten how to do it and cannot do it, but to plague an entire industry to a screwdriver assembly such as Lada-Largus in which the Russian nameplate is simply criminal. All the achievements that are advertised are just shameful Soviet developments with the addition of modern technologies and not always successful.
    The same picture with numerous versions of the Su-27, many of which were conceived in those days when there was no smell of pohosny.
    It is proud that they changed the engines on the IL-76 to others and digitized the car and replaced the unreleased units with the ones currently manufactured, although no one has produced a new version of Il. Moreover, the same engines there as on the Tu-204 because there is no other engine and they do not produce
    Well, of course, prototypes fly ... In the 90s there was 1 pc, and now 3 pcs, although the engines are old and there are no weapons, and it's not a fact that the electronics turned out. And how many more prototypes will fly?
    1. clidon
      clidon 14 September 2013 20: 16 New
      +7
      - If the Soviet Mi-8s are in demand all over the world and meet the highest requirements, then why not upgrade and sell them and buy them? If you don’t want to go take pity on the Americans, they’re buying the Chinooks, and these are Cold War cars.
      - Mi-38, when it really appears, it will already be discussing. In the meantime, without it, buyers in bulk.
      - The Ka-62 is primarily a commercial machine - nothing prevents it from selling it (because it flies) and refine its version of engines.
      - The Su-27 is a 4th generation aircraft. Then next to discuss the next version of the F-15. The car is even older. However, it is going for export and is considered quite modern. Buyers for Sukhoi are stably, their own Air Force receive them. And the 5th generation is now available only to the Americans and so far has not even been exported.
      - Americans are proud of their S-130 Hercules, which are even older and fully meet the requirements.
      - In the 90s there were really no prototypes of the 5th generation. Now there are 4 cars (since 2010). The engines there are not so old - from the Su-35 with improvements. The fact is that as early as 7 years ago, I heard only one thing: "Russia is not able to take any new cars into the air - the PAKFA will remain on paper." But they are already flying, and God forbid, by 2019-2020 they will go into series.
  • Lone gunman
    Lone gunman 14 September 2013 13: 03 New
    +9
    I’ve probably written the article “Young Leninist” in no other way, everything is bad as always, but modern aviation in general is ga.no, and the saying to the hens is not a laugh,
    type- "they told me directly that your plane (An-70) is better than ours (A-400M), but we will do everything so that your plane does not find a sales market." Long live free competition! Or Russian-French friendship? " ??? do we really buy huge batches of A-400M aircraft ??? I won’t say anything bad about the An-70 plane — a decent aircraft,
    further Tu 334- "334 crew cabin, similar to the Tu-204/214 cockpit, designed using electronic display screens and an automatic flight control system, allows for comfortable crew working conditions. The Tu-334 fuselage has the same cross section as the Tu-204 , with which the Tu-334 is unified by 60, but has a shorter length. "Practical analogue of the Tu-204, only the location of the engines is different,
    or - “The farther, the more difficult it is to equip new combat vehicles - Su-35, T-50 PAK FA with modern aggregates and devices without a foundation in the form of a powerful civilian aircraft industry. They fly beautifully, brightly, but are not suitable for a real battle." ?? ? who is this "provocateur" Vladimir LEONOV or is he a relative of Dmitry Kiva?))), or maybe he forgot for a second that the Russian budget is not as big as in the US ??? if not right reasonably correct ...
  • michajlo
    michajlo 14 September 2013 13: 06 New
    +3
    Good day to all!
    The article also liked her sober critical look at the real state of things in the Russian aircraft industry and the servile drunkenness of “undercover politics” (Kiev and Moscow SUCCESSFULLY SPEND, and people want to LIVE TOGETHER).
    I am not special in aircraft and military, especially.
    But I can seriously talk about electronics and medicine.
    But the fact that Sukhoi is an avalaner, THIS is essentially a "ASSEMBLY of foreign parts from around the world" with "GPS instead of GLONASS" - THIS IS CHANGE OF THE HOMELAND.
    Just comparing the stories and today, how can a civilian say frankly, why is there much to admire the "untested and unshooted" 5th generation machine "?!
    As a model for perfumed politicians with their spouses, it’s impressive, but how will pilots fight on it?
    What will happen tomorrow: = 4 pilots on 2 planes ?!
    At the time of the Second World War, the Union had good (maybe not the best tanks and aircraft T-34, Il-2, La-3, 5), but they were CHEAP, produced THOUSANDS and many Soviet ASAs changed 2-4 cars for 3- 4 years of participation in the database !!!
    It is possible that the author in the article paid a lot of attention to Ukraine? I do not argue.
    But think for yourself forum users, if only Moscow itself approached the issues of COOPERATION and COOPERATION from the point of view of the DEFENSE capability of Russia, the “Tethering” of Ukraine to the CU, and not with the “HOW MUCH LARGER BUBLA TO CUT down” approach to Russian aligarchs, our people (Russian and Ukrainian) would be closer.
    A. Sitnov: We must fight for An-70.
    Dmitry Kiva, the general designer of Antonov, expressed himself even more categorically at a press conference in the An-158 salon ... It will be difficult for him to do this - 280 Russian and only 80 Ukrainian enterprises are involved in cooperation on the plane. Serial production, assembly, are expected in Russia, in Ulyanovsk. But it seems that our figures from the government, presidential administration, UAC are pushing Ukrainian aircraft manufacturers into the arms of others. Production of An-158 and other Antonov vehicles ready to accept other countries. They will pay the money, get the know-how.


    Well, already bio-laboratory MO_USA near Kharkov, successfully working! So we can wait for American missiles and systems near the Russian borders ...
    Remember dear military experts, what are “super-new” and how many helicopters, planes and what excess pilots and technicians participated in Chechnya / 1995/1999 and Georgia / 2008?
    After all a peaceful pause is drawing to a close then it will be too late to scratch the back of the head. fool
    For smart and caring people, it’s expensive every day, and we have calm years and an election term (4 years each) - “simply and elegantly * look" under the sweet promises of the "sons of the people" to trusting and equitable voters and empty government decrees "with criminal the responsibility for WREATING "only Aunt Dusi and Grandfather Flora.
    1. bddrus
      bddrus 14 September 2013 15: 15 New
      +8
      "UNCHECKED AND UNFIRMED" machine of the "5th generation" ?!
      - when did you see that a proven and fired shell was created right away ?? what nonsense?
    2. Genry
      Genry 14 September 2013 19: 21 New
      -4
      Even your post, as a page of the site for suckers (pay and we will be completely FREE .... !!!).

      Quote: michajlo
      The article also liked her sober critical view of the real state of things in the aircraft industry of Russia

      In the article there is no word about the aircraft industry, but only dissatisfaction with the exhibition.

      Quote: michajlo
      and Kholuy's execution of "undercover politics"

      You should not judge by yourself.

      Quote: michajlo
      But the fact that Sukhoi is an avalaner, THIS is essentially a "ASSEMBLY of foreign parts from around the world" with "GPS instead of GLONASS" - THIS IS CHANGE OF THE HOMELAND.

      You wanted to say Superjet, but as a "connoisseur", you could not remember the name. By the way, it is 66-70% (or more) of the cost of labor invested in Russia (http://superjet100.info/wiki:v-ssj-80-importnyh-komplektuusih).
      GPS - for European certification, otherwise sell horseradish.

      Quote: michajlo
      Just comparing the stories and today, how can a civilian say frankly, why is there much to admire the "untested and unshooted" 5th generation machine "?!

      SU-27 is also unfired, and ... ??? We admire the fact that it can already be basic (fly a pancake), the rest will follow.

      Quote: michajlo
      if only Moscow itself approached the issues of COOPERATION and COOPERATION from the point of view of RUSSIA'S DEFENSE CAPABILITY, the "ATTACHING" of Ukraine to the CU, and not with the "HOW MUCH LARGER THE BOB TO CUT down" Russian aligarchs, then our people (Russian and Ukrainian) would be closer.

      Are you an intermediary and are fighting for your kickbacks? Specifically, what ...?

      Quote: michajlo
      Well, already the bio-laboratory MO_USHA near Kharkov is working successfully! So we can wait for American missiles and systems near the Russian borders ...

      That's brotherly! And Russia still needs to help them. It may slow down Ukraine with initiative, otherwise it will push ...

      Quote: michajlo
      For smart and caring people, it’s expensive every day, and we have calm years and an election term (4 years each) - “simply and elegantly * look" under the sweet promises of the "sons of the people" to trusting and equitable voters and empty government decrees "with criminal the responsibility for WREATING "only Aunt Dusi and Grandfather Flora.

      Yes, in Ukraine, at the end of the week they promise an earthquake with destruction. Have time to pray. And who are Dusya and Flora?
      1. michajlo
        michajlo 14 September 2013 21: 45 New
        -3
        Good evening, dear "English nickname"! Sorry, I don’t know how to call you by name? And I’m not used to using other people's "foreign cliches" and even on the patriotic website of VO. My name is Mikhailo.

        You, I see my entire note on the paragraphs, each in the hotel "scattered"! What a lot of anger has accumulated over a week?
        So if you have nothing to say about your personal thoughts and conclusions, and you probably do not care what happens tomorrow or after 5 years, continue in the same vein.
        Maybe you cry "cheers Kremlin / Kiev helmsman help"? God forbid.

        Best regards, Mikhailo! hi
  • POBEDA
    POBEDA 14 September 2013 16: 34 New
    +6
    The problem of domestic aircraft industry is only one - the lack of state support in the formation of demand for civil aircraft. Barrage duties on the purchase of Boeing and Airbus - and our companies will begin to buy Tu-204, dry, MC21, etc. And the demand for long-haul liners can be satisfied by resuming the production of IL-96
    1. clidon
      clidon 14 September 2013 20: 06 New
      +8
      First you need to introduce even greater barrage duties on foreign cars and then again everyone will transfer to the "Lada". Then you look and “Moskvich” will be reborn. That will be joy to all.
      1. maxvet
        maxvet 14 September 2013 20: 34 New
        -2
        Quote: clidon
        First you need to introduce even greater barrage duties on foreign cars and then again everyone will transfer to the "Lada". Then you look and “Moskvich” will be reborn. That will be joy to all.

        After all, duties are offered on the basis of the best motives, and how they relate to "oneself", then howl- "make us ride in basins, and there are no old and available old \ foreign cars - Putin is cutting loot from AvtoVAZ"
        somehow
  • michajlo
    michajlo 14 September 2013 16: 41 New
    -2
    Quote: bddrus
    "UNCHECKED AND UNFIRMED" machine of the "5th generation" ?!
    - when did you see that a proven and fired shell was created right away ?? what nonsense?

    Good afternoon, dear nickname!
    In this I agree with you, the worker will get the 4-6 or 8th prototype. And even then, after taking into account the observations from the veins after the break-in of 6-10 aircraft, it is possible to run in a series.

    But specialists / people with experience in uniform, from aviation, have written more than once that it is being destroyed and so far a light fighter (MIG) and NOT much are being produced, but a lot of things, but everything comes reports and decisions. But put on the commercial rails of the military industrial complex, billions from the treasury gobbles up, and the release of military equipment is still being transferred, the number of units is decreasing and the price is rising ...

    So just shouting “cheers” to the military-industrial complex, the Defense Ministry, and personally to the “Guarantor” is not enough, with a sober look at things and prospects, it’s just right to cry.
    1. bddrus
      bddrus 14 September 2013 21: 56 New
      +3
      dear michadzhlo, you have already said more than once that you are not an expert, then why be clever about what you do not understand ???
      "so just scream" "everything is gone, we all die" apparently enough for you, except to cry
      1. michajlo
        michajlo 14 September 2013 22: 15 New
        -2
        Good evening, dear Ruslan!
        Thank you for your assessment of my "ignorance", you are right, I probably will not have time to build aircraft.

        Let me ask you, "In your healthy distrust of the empty promises of the authorities is HARMFUL"?
        So far, I haven’t found anywhere that the promised weapons and spare parts arrived on time, everything is of high quality, reliable and at a price according to the original Agreement (without numerous Supplements) !?

        If my thoughts and considerations seem to you to be "defeatist," undermining morale, please describe what you consider suitable for these troubled days and what fate will prepare for us tomorrow.

        I would be very grateful if you would raise my low "technical and moral level" on the subject of aircraft and military-industrial complex.

        Sincerely, Mikhailo.
        1. bddrus
          bddrus 15 September 2013 11: 10 New
          +6
          Well, you see how to find out the name of the interlocutor, I already taught you! but I also don’t know about airplanes and military-industrial complex - therefore, I don’t try to draw smart conclusions, not to mention lecturing someone. By the way, your message about "healthy mistrust ", especially in the application to online comments, to put it mildly, it seems to me not true.
          I probably will not have time
          - I envy your self-confidence, I probably will not be able to - not a specialist.
          I absolutely do not say that everything is done on time, but I am sure that there are such examples. If in the advanced countries that have not survived the perestroika and the collapse of the state, airbuses and Boeing and combat aircraft are delayed, then we definitely have it. Nevertheless, I rejoice when something comes off the slipway and I'm upset when it lingers (like Gorshkov for example).
          I have not found anywhere yet
          - what and where were you looking for? tell me.
          it’s better for you to raise your level yourself - especially since I have a life around, and you have “troubled times”
          1. michajlo
            michajlo 15 September 2013 13: 09 New
            -4
            Good afternoon, dear Ruslan!

            It's nice to see that someone was interested in my thoughts and statements, or (just) "got it." In my humble opinion, any mutual interest (both support and dispute) and exchange of opinions, or the provision of useful links and materials to another is useful.

            Maybe you shouldn’t ascribe to yourself non-existent merits in raising the computer literacy of the “ignorant”, Well, you see how to find out the name of the interlocutor, I already taught you!
            but if it helps you, because, on such a trifle, I do not intend to deprive you of illusions.

            I personally am glad for you that although your situation is good and I wish you all the best from the heart. good Well, if it seems to you that if I say figuratively with the words of a classic Russian chanson
            And I have in clear weather
            A gloomy soul that burns.
            I slurp well water
            Repairing an accordion and my wife reproaching
            (V.S. Vysotsky "), thank God this is not so, I just lost the" naivety and chastity of childhood "with age.

            True, if you recall that already once there was the following event:
            - in the evening, multi-colored lights shone on one ship, music played loudly on the upper decks, passengers danced and amused themselves "well-dressed and all jewels were the highest layer".
            - Well, in the hold of the same ship, the sailors selflessly tried to close up a large torn hole, they died in ice water and the passengers on the lower decks drowned in the same way, and only a few of them got into lifeboats.
            - Well, the name of this ship was "Titanic".

            I can’t afford to be in my chest and “tear a vest” and prove to forum users that I am a greater patriot of Russia than Russian citizens, because I am not Russian (just a Carpathian Rusyn, a citizen of Ukraine, living in Slovakia). But I consider myself fully entitled to speak out as a patriot of the USSR, and if I publish something better than you, from inside Russia, I’m glad to express my opinion. But if my critical perception of ANY power, no matter whether it’s Russian, Ukrainian, Slovak, etc., annoys you “cheers-patriots” or “citizens in execution”, then it’s your business, your point of view, and I don’t impose anyone on anyone and always I can explain it reasonably.

            In the event that I was wrong, intentionally or unwillingly offended someone with improper scandals, I will apologize without hesitation to any forum users or people to whom I was undeservedly critical or uncivilized. I, like every educated person, understand that I am only a living person, not guaranteed against mistakes. The proverb "There are only ideal people in the cemetery" applies to any of us, including me. request

            PS
            This is not for you Ruslan, do not personally accept, but for all members of the forum, I’ll just clarify the language differences.
            For members of the forum, reading and pronouncing my nickname “michajlo” in English as “michajlo”, I can inform that this nickname is written “Latin / without Slovak diacritics” and read (“in transcription”) as “michailo”. I live in Slovakia and besides my PC at home / at work (US / SK / RUS / UKR), there is only a “key layout” (US / SK) everywhere and it can be difficult to write your nickname abroad to invite you to any website (Russian / Ukrainian-speaking).

            Sincerely, Mikhailo. hi
            1. bddrus
              bddrus 15 September 2013 19: 55 New
              +5
              I admit right away (I thought it was obvious) - “michadzhlo” is a provocation, so that you pay attention to your appeal to your interlocutors “English-speaking nickname” or just “nickname” - and you actually addressed differently.
              I do not understand you:
              I am only a living person, not guaranteed from mistakes
              - and there -
              from a distance I’m moving something better than you, from inside Russia
              .
              Like
              every man brought up
              - and right there
              You "cheers-patriots" or "citizens in the performance"
              . After all, you can also “see from afar” something or label it as “agent of the State Department” (or “agent of the Kremlin” - I’m confusing them lately)
              1. The comment was deleted.
              2. michajlo
                michajlo 15 September 2013 21: 04 New
                -3
                Good evening Ruslan!

                Sorry, I have a problem with the attachment of the picture again, those comments are entered, but the picture is not.

                Sincerely, Mikhailo.
              3. The comment was deleted.
              4. michajlo
                michajlo 16 September 2013 00: 23 New
                0
                sad I apologize for the technical problem, I can’t upload a picture from either Ubuntu or Windows. So there is definitely a problem on the side of the site. Weekend after all ...

                Good evening Ruslan!
                I am glad that little by little, the fog of suspicion is dissipating.

                But before blaming someone for something, it may be worthwhile first to make sure that they were not mistaken !?

                Like for example in this picture? / Not pass.

                I will be glad to continue to exchange opinions with you. tongue

                Regards, Mikhailo, Slovakia
  • EGORKA
    EGORKA 14 September 2013 17: 33 New
    +5
    An-70 needed aircraft yesterday, we didn’t have time to complete it and agree, and the political situation changed and it’s not enough to start doing something now, then it will be inappropriate to close the program because of political disagreements, money will not be lost until the political situation clears up.
    They can do the An-70s themselves, they don’t have any money either, do business with China, lose the plane and give up the technology, China will require a joint venture, at least 50/50, what Russia offered, but capricious Kiev refused, otherwise we would have agreed perhaps.
    1. maxvet
      maxvet 14 September 2013 20: 26 New
      +3
      Even if they write in the article that he (An70) is 80% Russian and 280 Russian and 80 Ukrainian enterprises took part in the creation, can there be more chances to build it alone in Russia than in Ukraine?
  • EGORKA
    EGORKA 14 September 2013 17: 37 New
    +5
    In general, at some points, the article is biased.
    1. Genry
      Genry 14 September 2013 20: 51 New
      -5
      With this name, "Aerobatics in a lie and the sky" is not just bias, but black envy and anger.
      1. Horde
        Horde 14 September 2013 21: 30 New
        -1
        Quote: Genry
        With this name, "Aerobatics in a lie and the sky" is not just bias, but black envy and anger.

        to whom is envy? and why anger? explain ...
  • krokodil25
    krokodil25 14 September 2013 17: 45 New
    +6
    In addition to RUSSIA and the United States, no one knows how to do combat aircraft, draw conclusions yourself and all kinds of log hacks do not have the right to talk about the combat qualities of the aircraft !!!
    1. Horde
      Horde 14 September 2013 18: 08 New
      -5
      Quote: krokodil25
      Roma RUSSIA and the United States no one knows how to do combat aircraft,


      Well, you give, the tender for India can remember who won?
    2. castle
      castle 14 September 2013 19: 35 New
      -6
      You, my sir, first read the materials before writing comments. Combat aircraft can be made by many different countries, but some countries have found it reasonable to make money on the sale of other products, although aircraft offer. Next - Eurofighter Typhoon was not created in either the United States or Russia. Flies in Europe and Saudi Arabia ordered 72 of them. Or do you want to say here that Japan does not know how to make combat aircraft? Able and how!
  • VKBZ45
    VKBZ45 14 September 2013 17: 47 New
    +1
    What can I say on this subject?
    Like in the good Soviet times, who is closer to the body.
    I can’t say anything bad about modern airplanes. But.
    In the old days, the army ordered the parameters of a specific type of aircraft and announced a competition for its creation as a minimum of three KB.
    Then, comparative tests were carried out and the most acceptable development was determined.
    After that, money was invested in it and what happened was obtained.
    Not everything in this scheme was ideally often triggered, as it is customary to say today, Administrative Resource (see above).
    But this scheme worked.
    1. Lyapis
      Lyapis 14 September 2013 18: 21 New
      0
      I could be wrong, but since Soviet times, this scheme has not changed much. And as you rightly noted, she, that now, that then does not always work perfectly. But apparently this does not go away. sad
  • Evgeniy667b
    Evgeniy667b 14 September 2013 19: 20 New
    -5
    But is it time to put Poghosyan in place? Is his selfish interests above the state: In any case, I want to believe in it.
    1. Genry
      Genry 14 September 2013 20: 46 New
      -5
      Quote: Evgeniy667b
      Really his selfish interests are higher than state: In any case, I want to believe in it.

      Less to you!
      Poghosyan makes planes, and you do not like it.
      But the talkers need to put the minuses.
      1. Armata
        Armata 14 September 2013 20: 51 New
        +2
        Quote: Genry
        But the talkers need to put the minuses
        It’s interesting how can you differentiate chatter from facts?
      2. Horde
        Horde 14 September 2013 21: 35 New
        -4
        Quote: Genry
        Poghosyan makes planes, and you do not like it.


        it’s good that he doesn’t do vacuum cleaners, but at all, like past the cash register - “he does vacuum cleaners, but you don’t like it” ... laughing
  • VKBZ45
    VKBZ45 14 September 2013 19: 43 New
    +7
    Lyapis
    I could be wrong, but since Soviet times, this scheme has not changed much.

    Absolutely, in my opinion.
    I think that the new Minister of Defense has an opinion on this problem, and has already done a lot.
    But it takes time.

    Evgeniy667b
    Why put it in place?
    Just give a place of competition and everything will fall into place.
    Nevertheless, drying today is unsurpassed in the world.
    And our pilots know how to fight if they mastered the plane.
  • EGORKA
    EGORKA 14 September 2013 20: 48 New
    -4
    Quote: maxvet
    Even if they write in the article that he (An70) is 80% Russian and 280 Russian and 80 Ukrainian enterprises took part in the creation, can there be more chances to build it alone in Russia than in Ukraine?

    probably technically possible, but no one has canceled the intellectual property rights of Ukraine.
    1. maxvet
      maxvet 15 September 2013 09: 20 New
      +6
      I mean, if the ratio in cooperation is correct (80 to 20), then Ukraine is unlikely to be able to produce An70.
      By the way, the question is, 80% of the Russians are subject to the intellectual property of Russia, i.e. Can Ukrainians sell An70 without Russia?
      1. Cristall
        Cristall 15 September 2013 13: 36 New
        +9
        ONLY in cooperation with Russian enterprises.
        The plane was then made for specific tasks, and this is Russia, not Ukraine with 893 km in length.
        This is a joint product and it is expensive for ANTK - this is its brainchild.
        if 80% is true - it’s even good. You can depend less.
        In general, even if I threw back my natural defenses of my native interests, it was possible to go in an interesting way. To establish production as they both want in Ulyanovsk. Gradually developing production - to establish the release of the missing 20% ​​at home (naturally competitive with Ukrainians --- market relations)
        as a result, all 100% will be localized. And there will only be left? Copyright? With 100% production on its territory, I don’t think that ANTK will have leverage.
        This is my amateurish look. (I repeat that if you cast aside my support for ANTK)
        1. maxvet
          maxvet 15 September 2013 17: 16 New
          +3
          You voiced my thoughts
  • sergey158-29
    sergey158-29 14 September 2013 21: 57 New
    -4
    Yes ... read and wept, drinks drank and got carried away ... wassat
  • goats denis
    goats denis 14 September 2013 23: 02 New
    -3
    "They fly beautifully, brightly, but they are not suitable for a real battle. And, God forbid, an adversary will come to us and guide everyone on the right path. Who is the first in the line for instruction, and so it is clear."
    This once again proves that Russia is a third-rate state. We go to the bottom.
    1. Arabist
      Arabist 14 September 2013 23: 12 New
      -5
      This proves once again that you are not worthy to call yourself a Russian. Do not even pull on the hundredth digit yourself.
      1. goats denis
        goats denis 14 September 2013 23: 23 New
        +1
        I am a Russian realist and I see that we will never become a Great Power, we have nothing, we produce nothing. And you live in the clouds, believe everything that they say to you from the Kremlin. The bitter truth is better than a sweet lie.
        1. Arabist
          Arabist 14 September 2013 23: 27 New
          -7
          You are not a realist, you are just a theoretician "fucked up all the polymers." If you have nothing, this does not mean that everyone has it. For all your posts you are a typical loser. Look at the site we have done and take a ride around the country it will become better. However, nothing will help you.
          1. goats denis
            goats denis 14 September 2013 23: 59 New
            +3
            Well, how many more examples are needed to descend from heaven to Russia? Even this article about MAKS 2013 did not convince you that all that concerns our aviation is window dressing. No, you ride around the country, go to some industrial enterprise, ask how much the engineer, technologist, worker get. How ordinary people live in the village. Then you will understand which of us was deceived
  • Vlad_Mir
    Vlad_Mir 14 September 2013 23: 02 New
    +5
    Strange article a bit! Of course, not everything is rosy, but not so sad!
    1. stranik72
      stranik72 15 September 2013 12: 53 New
      0
      Actually sadder than you think. Russian aviation has no future, military aviation science is destroyed, there is no institute of strategic research, there is no VVIA named after Zhukovsky, there is no SRI of ERAT, and testing centers are almost destroyed. From MAI there were "legs and horns." Engine building was killed, there’s nothing to say about electronics, here recently they showed a commercial about the “pride of Russia” company that manufactures PRIMA-type radio stations and something else, there is a 100% imported element base, which can be discussed further. GLONASS could not bring to mind, have already allocated money for a new yet "more modern" (expensive) system. Here is someone enriched while there is such corruption, nothing shines for us. All these management companies of the TIAK, the Engines of Russia, the Helicopters of Russia, are called upon only to squander sovereign money no more. By their deeds you will know who is XU. So MAKS 2013, showed that they are all HU, but the landings will not be "stability" her mother iti.
  • cnbktn12
    cnbktn12 15 September 2013 02: 32 New
    +6
    IT IS STRANGE THAT AN2 IN A TURBO SCREW OPTION IS PREVIOUS AS AN INNOVATION. IN THE LAST YEARS OF THE USSR, AN-2T TURBOVTNOVOY was released.
  • Evgeniy667b
    Evgeniy667b 15 September 2013 04: 27 New
    -2
    No one claims that Su's planes are not so good. Every time I see a brand new Su-34 above my head, it inspires me. But firstly there are few of them and they have their own tasks, more than the front-line level. And MIGs have always been in our armed forces !!! therefore, lobbying the interests of one design bureau only for commercial purposes, as M. Poghosyan does, is fraught with consequences ...
  • Thunderbolt
    Thunderbolt 15 September 2013 06: 38 New
    0
    Last Sunday, almost a whole airplane was brought to Samara. It will become the basis for recovery. the only in Russia, the “flying tank” to the 75th anniversary of the Victory.
    Comrade, author of the article .... here’s the thing --- learn the materiel or something. I won’t tell you for other cities and towns, because. I don’t know, but in my Samara this glorious stormtrooper has long been based on the majestic pedestal, to the glory of the glorious deeds of our grandfathers. I remember in the years of my pre-conscription, hooligan-reckless youth I climbed the wing to the cockpit once and held on to the tail gun. at that time, police "bobiks" were plying around then)))). Oh, youth, it was a matter, but now I'm different soldier
    1. Fin
      Fin 15 September 2013 09: 06 New
      +2
      And another IL-2 in Severomorsk on a pedestal.
  • Thunderbolt
    Thunderbolt 15 September 2013 06: 49 New
    +3
    And another reconstructed IL-2 flew from a native aircraft factory over the city, I’m attaching a video. And also ... Eternal Glory, to the pilots and radio-gunners who went to attack the war. The enemy bombarded them with bullets and shells, and they went to attack without deviating from the target .. And the German columns burned.
    1. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 15 September 2013 07: 28 New
      +1
      .........................................................
  • KononAV
    KononAV 15 September 2013 12: 01 New
    +5
    They made their planes shitty, they all shouted. They bought foreign cars, they all shouted that it’s bad to buy them, they began to follow the path of cooperation, also crap. You decide
  • stranik72
    stranik72 15 September 2013 12: 39 New
    +5
    Quote: berimor
    This article once again shows a "brotherly" attitude towards Ukraine. As they say, I’ll go to my own detriment, but, most importantly, I’ll make my neighbor feel bad!

    Yes, Ukrainian officials are not better than ours, believe me they are the same, if they are only interested in briefly the cache. And the "homeland" "its prosperity" is the terms la people, for you and me.
  • shasha
    shasha 15 September 2013 12: 55 New
    +5
    yes it’s very difficult to ruin Russia
  • dvvv
    dvvv 15 September 2013 13: 48 New
    -3
    About aviation and business in the light of this exhibition.
    Combat aircraft in peacetime, under capitalism, for sure, is nothing more than cutting dough and resolving political issues. It is impossible to evaluate anything in peacetime and especially the properties of military equipment, because the criterion of truth is always practice.
    Here in military aviation where all PR, cut, politics and puffing up at Poghosyan just turns out. No one knows how they will behave in a Su-35 battle and what for them that thrust vector and exhibition aerobatics for the war. Moreover, you can endlessly pamper the theme of PAK FA and make 1 prototype per year. Saying that there is success from the fact that they fly as many as 4 pieces is a clear delusion. This is being created for a long time and by amer it is possible to judge too, their F-22 and F-35 are being created for a very long time and, I suspect, they also saw money there beautifully and have a lot of money.
    Commercial aviation also has a political component, but it is disproportionately smaller and the product and its support are of great real importance, i.e. there is a practice that really allows you to evaluate what has been done and what is the profit. Then Poghosyan has a complete collapse - 3-4 billion bucks is swollen and there will definitely be no profit. The whole calculation goes to losses and their size, and the further the more losses.
  • Felix2012
    Felix2012 15 September 2013 14: 08 New
    +6
    Everything is mixed up, people are horses. By Points
    1. I was at the MAKS. I really liked the Chinese performances, and not just me. Very well-coordinated, disciplined, accurate, spectacular
    2. Regarding the "successful" regionals AN 148 and AN-158
    At the VASO fence, nobody needs an unnecessary 2 pcs of AN-148. Maybe the author will attach these super "successful" aircraft? you look at the commission rises.
    The sale of each AN-148 brings our budget 300 million rubles of loss. Antonovtsy settled well, losses to us, profit to them.
    Yes, and in terms of components, 47 manufacturers from 12 countries, plus 34 manufacturers from Ukraine - it turns out that 81 manufacturers are not from Russia and their share, EVERY aircraft, approximately VASO should put about $ 18-20mln! According to the VASO report, the share of Russian components in the prime cost An-148 about 20%
    So maybe the AN-148 has amazing flight characteristics, and it makes the SSZh-100 "one left" ?? !!
    NO! it flies slower (because of this it’s lower and unprofitable), it’s less lucky, and in addition also for shorter distances.
    According to the characteristics of the SGI, the Mexican customer said the following:
    Interjet has already completed approximately 250 takeoffs and landings in 25 days, "Garza says, adding that the results are" extraordinarily good, "" much better than expected, "he adds. Http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/ interjet-to-begin-superjet-revenue-
    flights-in-weeks-389813 /
    3. As for the long-suffering AN-70. I would like for our army to have an airplane with such characteristics.
    I think that with the signing of the Ukraine Association in the EEC, it will be possible to bury the Ukrainian aircraft industry. Specialists to us.
    4. The collision with IL-476 is completely incomprehensible. The production has been recreated. Or does someone think that transferring production from Tashkent to Ulyanovsk is like moving a television from one room to another?
    5. Where without howls about the TU-334?
    As much of the budget was spent on the plane as on the CSO, only the CSO is successfully sold, flies, brings money to airlines. But TU-334 is not needed by anyone except the creators (or maybe you also want to cut the budget on it ?. Do not forget that all the accessories on it are in "fraternal" Ukraine, with all the ensuing consequences).
    In the modern world, airplanes are created for buyers_ airlines. Tupolev’s words: what kind of aircraft we’ll build, so buy one - are no longer relevant.
    It’s like with ZIL and GAZ. One belched Bull, others created a Gazelle, and now a completely new car, I really hope successful.
    6. Did not understand the passage about SU35 aircraft, etc.? So, for a minute, SU-34s are already working perfectly for combat use in counter-terrorism activities.
    too lazy to write further
    1. stranik72
      stranik72 15 September 2013 19: 18 New
      -2
      Felix, are you in the KLA working in PR deportation? For only such a nonsense could write such nonsense. The fact that you are a lazy hamster is not even discussed, about the SU-34 only a monkey from Claudia could write that it works great for combat use. As for Tupolev’s words, you’re just a nerd repeating someone else’s box, As for money, KLA, and “your SSJ” bankrupt the entire Russian aviation industry, it’s 3 tons heavier than it was announced, it can land on 6 runways in Russia and there are a lot of other problems, and each plane incurs losses primarily to manufacturers, about the price of TU-334, and a lie on the AN-148 Himmler applauds you from the other world. In a word, do not kid, sit quietly in your office and don't smell by the next year on the street you will sweep the sidewalks with the hog. According to IL-476, the production of a plane of the last century was resumed, which, in principle, for the Air Force in this configuration and with these performance characteristics is not like a plane of the 21st century, and therefore also commercial prospects 0. What else did the UAC destroy? Yes, in Voronezh, on VASO, they created a production of composites on their own money, even with the Europeans they signed a contract for the production of motogandols for their watermelons, and that they transferred this production to Ulyanovsk by order of the UAC and now also applaud, and if we recall the ruined UAC and other manufactures, then for a long time and everyone understands that the KLA is the grave digger of Russian aviation. And for a minute, the SU-35 is the first aircraft in the history of Soviet / Russian aviation which, according to the results of military tests, received a negative conclusion. So smell next.
      1. Horde
        Horde 15 September 2013 19: 34 New
        -3
        Quote: stranik72
        Felix, are you in the KLA working in PR deportation?


        unskilled influence agent, installation stink upwind without evidence.

        Quote: stranik72
        And for a minute, the SU-35 is the first aircraft in the history of Soviet / Russian aviation which, according to the results of military tests, received a negative conclusion.


        Oops, what is it? do not explain? This is bad...
      2. Felix2012
        Felix2012 15 September 2013 21: 45 New
        +2
        As usual, a lie surfaced about the “three tons” advantage. CSJ is Lighter than all its competitors
        How is it about the "one" plane bought by Interjet ??? !!! You are not trained in natural accounts until 20 ?? !!! Hmm ..... The costs of modern education make themselves felt. I am sorry for you, but I will tell you a terrible secret, after the number 1 goes 2, then 3, then 4, then get on elementary mathematics courses
      3. Felix2012
        Felix2012 15 September 2013 22: 01 New
        +1
        By the way, about 6 GDP that SJ.HA-HA-HA can sit on !!!! This lie is no longer relevant, rewrite the manual !!!
        The collapsed aircraft industry is also irrelevant, the SSJ rather saved it
        As for Poghosyan and me, the next year you answer the sidewalks? Will you give a tooth ??!))))) I will go sob into the pillow and prepare a whisk))))
        SU35 had military tests? So far they are chasing him in Akhtubinsk.
        Tell about the commercial prospects of IL-476 to the Oakovites, otherwise 80 planes are no longer a commercial prospect, panimash-whether))))
        The government included the Tu-334 among the priority projects in the field of civil aviation and, according to Igor Shevchuk, for all the years of work on it allocated about $ 1 billion from the budget for this program .-- WHERE THE PLANE ??? !! what did the grandmother spend ?? !!
        $ 500 million was allocated from the budget of the Russian Federation for cc, they paid for the work of TsAGI, etc.
  • dvvv
    dvvv 15 September 2013 16: 36 New
    -4
    Quote: Felix2012
    I think that with the signing of the Ukraine Association in the EEC, it will be possible to bury the Ukrainian aircraft industry. Specialists to us.

    - Of course, the ukraviaproma will not benefit from this, but ... the European seems to have died from this. Moreover, MotorSICH is a completely commercial enterprise and the bourgeoisie are successfully buying its shares and the devidents are receiving. The association itself does not kill, but Russia may try to kill in retaliation for dislike
  • dvvv
    dvvv 15 September 2013 16: 44 New
    -3
    Quote: Felix2012
    The collision with IL-476 is completely incomprehensible. The production has been recreated. Or does someone think that transferring production from Tashkent to Ulyanovsk is like moving a television from one room to another?

    - to customers from what? These are problems of the aviation industry which did not agree with Tashkent. Put other engines and digitize, of course, success for the current aviation industry ... but these engines already have a lot of courage and novelty in them. And most importantly .. have NOT yet produced a single serial! Moreover, the car is completely outdated in terms of cabin size so precisely and there is no one to buy it except for its Air Force. Amer, by the way, have already changed avionics 3 times on their cars and engines, and there are a lot of letter variations and no heroism and Ponto. In short, if you consider that the Tashkent factory was an assembly plant and the whole package came from Russia, then there’s nothing besides new slipways in Ulyanovsk could not appear. Just the necessary update of the old machine for new components and the only engine that Russia makes
    1. Felix2012
      Felix2012 15 September 2013 21: 51 New
      +2
      No newness in the engines ??? !!! So, for a minute, the payload and range increased. But for you, this, of course, is nonsense.
      As for the hamster, I did not insult you, so hold your tongue, you still need it
  • dvvv
    dvvv 15 September 2013 16: 55 New
    -4
    Quote: Felix2012
    Where without the howls about the TU-334? The plane spent as much from the budget as it did on the CSO, only the CSO is successfully sold, flies, brings money to airlines. But TU-334 is not needed by anyone but the creators

    - there are figures that spent 334 billion money on the Tu-4, or so it seems? Can you give a link about the costs? SSJ enriched whom? ))) The Mexicans that 1pc which at a loss vaparil themselves?) Aeroflot which the first set in any way will not change the following?) And how much do they fly at Aeroflot and how much do they cost at the fence? You would read what pros write in specialized forums than to enrich themselves with knowledge at exhibitions.
    That 334 is no longer needed, then the fact ... the project is ruined and money wasted, thanks to the Pogosanshchina and Manturovism. After all, no one interfered with them creating a new plane and producing the already existing 10 years! Moreover, there were a family of 204 and 334 and in the series they would have been licked for a long time and the PS-90 could have been brought to mind earlier and the factory personnel and suppliers were not lost. And now they bring everything, literally everything complicated, and they demolish and sell their land for trade.
  • Grishka100watt
    Grishka100watt 15 September 2013 18: 52 New
    0
    And here, such articles are very popular.

    Local "scholars" instantly turn on and begin to scum, assenting to each other, everything positive, constructive, Russian. De-need to show their position, to identify you understand the negative aspects, direct on the right path.
    Thank you, your total pile of shit thrown over will surely transform into positive bright vibes and build us a bright future.

    You are really great.