Russia is forced to abandon the aircraft An-70

118
In early March, it became known about the cessation of Russia's participation in one of the most interesting Russian-Ukrainian military projects aviation. For a number of reasons, the Russian Ministry of Defense was forced to delete from its plans for the creation and construction of An-70 military transport aircraft. Previously, it was planned to take part in the final stages of this project, as well as to acquire several dozen such aircraft. However, recent events have forced the Russian Ministry of Defense to abandon further participation in the project.



2 March, the Izvestia newspaper, citing a source in the Ministry of Defense, reported that the Russian military had excluded the An-70 military transport aircraft from their current state armaments program, calculated for 2011-2020 years. Previously it was assumed that before the end of the decade, this type of aircraft would be ordered and transferred to the 60 air force. Nevertheless, the new Ukrainian leadership ordered the cessation of military-technical cooperation with Russia. As a result, the Russian Ministry of Defense and the aviation industry cannot continue to work on a joint project and purchase new equipment. Due to the impossibility of continuing the joint project is excluded from the current state armaments program.

The last stage of bilateral cooperation in the development project of an operational-tactical military transport aircraft began in 2010. Then Russia and Ukraine began joint development work, the purpose of which was to finish the new aircraft and the subsequent start of its serial construction. It was reported that about 2,95 billion rubles would be spent on these works. In April, the Russian Minister of Defense Anatoly Serdyukov told 2011 that the new An-2011 2020 aircraft had been procured in the new 60-70 state armaments program. Later, these plans were repeatedly confirmed. According to the plans of that time, the cost of one military transport aircraft was supposed to be approximately 67 million dollars (approximately 2,1 billion rubles at the rate at the beginning of 2012 year).

In 2011, A. Serdyukov argued that research and development work should be completed by the end of the year. At the end of the summer of 2011, he announced the start of a new phase of flight tests. Until a certain time, great hopes were pinned on the joint project, but later clouds began to thicken over it, which, among other things, contributed to the new developments of the Russian aircraft industry.

The first alarming message was received in February 2013 of the year. Then the Russian ambassador to Ukraine, Mikhail Zurabov, said that the joint project could be terminated. The ambassador called the success of the IL-76MD-90А project a reason for such a decision. Thus, the construction of the Ilyushin aircraft could have put an end to cooperation with Antonov. A little later, the Ukrainian military confirmed that Russia had frozen the implementation of a joint project.

However, in the autumn of 2013, the two countries nevertheless agreed to continue the work. It was planned to complete joint tests of the aircraft before February 1 2014. According to the test results, it was supposed to make a final decision on the further course of the project. In the future, serial construction of new aircraft was to begin.

Last summer, when the specialists of the two countries were to be engaged in the preparation of the An-70 batch production, the new Ukrainian leadership ordered the cessation of all military-technical cooperation with Russia. Thus, our country has lost the opportunity to continue its participation in a joint project. In the meantime, in the spring of last year, the Antonov company completed testing of the An-70 aircraft, and in January, the 2015 car was put into service with Ukraine.

Problems with the joint project have already led to litigation. Last year, the Russian Ministry of Defense filed a lawsuit in the Moscow Arbitration Court for recovery of a penalty in the amount of 103 million rubles from Ukrainian aircraft manufacturers. The reason for the suit was the failure of the project implementation deadlines. Arbitration Court upheld the claim. Later this decision was confirmed by the appellate and cassation courts.

According to the source "Izvestia", in the near future there may be a new lawsuit related to the problems of the An-70 project. A few years ago, the Antonov company received from the Russian military 2,95 billion rubles, which it was planned to spend on completing the development of the project. Since the Ministry of Defense and the Air Force lost the opportunity to order new aircraft, it is expected to return the money spent. At present, the leadership of the military department is considering the possibility of filing such a claim. According to the Ukrainian media, the Antonov company has not yet received official messages regarding the termination of the joint project.

The latest decisions of the Russian Ministry of Defense could have a negative impact on the future of the An-70 project. This military transport aircraft, the main customer of which should have become the Russian Air Force, was developed from the end of the seventies, but still did not go into the series. Moreover, several times the fate of the project became the subject of serious disputes. At the same time for several decades, significant sums from the military budgets of the USSR, Russia and Ukraine were spent on the project.

The first blow to the project, which was in its early stages, was Perestroika and the collapse of the Soviet Union, after which the pace of work decreased significantly. In the future, it was planned to implement the project by the forces of Russia and Ukraine. Began construction and testing of experienced aircraft. However, in 2006, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced its reluctance to continue its participation in the project. The reason for this was the numerous shortcomings and flaws of the aircraft.

The subject of the claims were both the problems of the aircraft and the shortcomings of the engines used. So, the TV channel "Star" reports that during the first stage of state tests 382 deficiency was revealed, and 95 demanded immediate elimination. After several years of improvements, the plane saves about fifty problems. Five of them concern gas-dynamic stability of turboprop engines. There were serious problems with the D-27 engines manufactured by Motor Sich. During one of the first stages of testing, which ended in the 2001 year, 116 problems were identified. In addition, 30 cases of unstable operation and 22 cases of spontaneous engine shutdown were noted. It took some time to refine the engine, which adversely affected the timing of the project.

Correction of the identified deficiencies lasted for several years. It should be noted that these works led not only to the backlog from the original schedule, but also to a serious change in the characteristics of the aircraft. As a result, the modified An-70 has ceased to fully comply with the requirements. However, this military transport aircraft was included in the procurement plan under the State Arms Program for the 2011-2020 years.

After the improvements, the An-70 was able to compete with the Il-76 family of aircraft in terms of its characteristics. Nevertheless, he retained a number of problems that prevented the beginning of mass production. The final blow to the joint project was the decision of the new Kiev authorities to cease military-technical cooperation with Russia. For this reason, the Russian Ministry of Defense struck out the An-70 project from its state armaments program. It is planned to upgrade the fleet of military transport aircraft by purchasing IL-76MD-90А aircraft.

This year Aviastar-SP Aviation Plant (Ulyanovsk) is to transfer several Il-76MD-90А aircraft to the military. The contract signed in October of 2012 of the year implies the construction and supply of 39 aircraft of this type. It was originally planned that this order would support the domestic aviation industry, restore full production of the IL-76 family of aircraft (previously they were built in Tashkent, but the plant ceased operation), and also update the fleet of military transport aircraft. In addition, now the new IL-76MD-90A will have to replace the joint development planned for the purchase of An-70. Perhaps the rejection of the Ukrainian-Russian aircraft will lead to the emergence of a new contract for the supply of IL aircraft.


On the materials of the sites:
http://izvestia.ru/
http://tvzvezda.ru/
http://biz.liga.net/
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/
http://arms-expo.ru/
118 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    11 March 2015 05: 34
    It's a pity(
    A new plane, a new development, this is also in Africa - a new plane and a new development is good.
    And failure is bad
    1. +6
      11 March 2015 07: 16
      And that's not all ... The legendary “Ruslan” was also ruined.
      On August 15, 2014, Deputy Minister of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation Yuri Slyusar said that the Russian-Ukrainian project to resume production and modernization of the An-124 Ruslan heavy transport aircraft was no longer on the agenda due to the political situation, like other joint Russian-Ukrainian projects in aircraft manufacturing .
    2. +40
      11 March 2015 07: 41
      Quote: Gans1234
      And failure is bad

      It should be remembered that initially (back in the USSR) the aircraft was developed as a specialized, medium, military transport aircraft with short take-off and landing on unpaved airfields (sites), i.e. for special operations. But in the end, for some reason (I don’t know the reasons), it turned out to be a heavy military transport aircraft of the same class as the Il-76. An-70 is only slightly inferior to Ilam, standing in the arsenal of the Russian army.
      As colleagues correctly noted, the An-70 has become a hostage of politics in a new historical period. There was no particular need for it, but this program (like a number of others) was a kind of anchor, which kept the Ukrainian economy from drifting towards the opponents of Russia.
      This political technology was not born yesterday, but existed in Russia in the Middle Ages.
      Russia does not actually need this aircraft (and this is an IL-76 class aircraft). Its cost is higher than the modernized IL (not to mention the operational cost), but the LTX is lower. In addition, dear colleagues, this aircraft did not pass state tests in Russia, which is mandatory for the adoption of the machine into service. Therefore, it’s too early to speak of an aircraft that meets all the requirements of the Russian Air Force.
      A dozen years ago, Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Air Force, Army General Mikhailov VS gave a pejorative assessment of the An-70 aircraft. Alas, since that time, little has changed in this plane.
      And therefore, dear colleague Ivan, in this case, I have to disagree with you. For two decades, the plane could not be brought to mind. Technology has already gone ahead. The leadership of the independent declared Russia an enemy, and therefore the political reasons for clinging to this project fell away. It is for the better. What happened in a neighboring country (Ukraine) we experienced in the 90s, and therefore everyone understands that this is for many years.
      We will build our planes.
      1. +3
        11 March 2015 08: 39
        I wonder what could be the Russian replacement for Ruslan? Yes, and the analogue of the Dream needs to be created ...
        1. +2
          11 March 2015 08: 55
          Only Ilyushin Design Bureau can offer something to MTS, IL-112, IL-114. But they are still different from the An-70, which could replace the An-12.
          1. +5
            11 March 2015 13: 18
            In any case, it is necessary to load your defense industry, and not the enemy. Military transport aircraft will be developed by Ilyushin Design Bureau. The An-70 is certainly a good thing, but you can redeem the rights to it and make it with us, or you can give the task of remaking the project so that they could not get to us with the lawsuits. Ilyushinsky ate a dog on military transport aircraft, we have documentation on the en, something else from Soviet times, I think that there will be no problems. Orders will not hinder our kb and oak and money for the development and development of new projects will definitely not be superfluous. Well, let the urks try to build their own airplanes in the EU, something tells me that they won’t get out of their shit, and Antonov’s KB has been living out of recent years. Well, it’s always possible to lure specialists to us.
            1. ADK57
              +1
              12 March 2015 00: 22
              According to the latest publications, UkrSMI An-70 will be delivered to Iran. Now the company is working on issues of import substitution of Russian components.
        2. +1
          11 March 2015 11: 15
          A killer whale can replace Mriya, and Yermak will be a substitute for Ruslan, but this will be the end of the twenties.
        3. -1
          11 March 2015 11: 45
          And why actually? By and large, Ruslan is not needed. Even now it is used mainly by the civilian Volga-Dnepr for exceptional missions, while the military almost never uses it.
          1. 0
            11 March 2015 15: 37
            The military are the main customers. Despite the sanctions, the Americans and the French are actively using Ruslans.
        4. The comment was deleted.
      2. +3
        11 March 2015 15: 08
        Quote: Gamdlislyam
        Russia does not actually need this plane (and this is an IL-76 class aircraft)

        In fact - it is very necessary. For example, because a tank can enter the An-70, because the dimensions allow it. But in the IL-476 - no.
        It is clear that now is not up to the An-70, but frankly - it's a pity the army needs it.
        1. -1
          11 March 2015 15: 38
          Correct remark. AN-70 is a very good machine and is larger than the IL in terms of cargo compartment dimensions. In addition, the turboprop engine cannot be inferior to the IL engine in terms of efficiency.
          1. +5
            11 March 2015 16: 02
            Quote: NordUral
            The AN-70 is a very good machine and is larger than the IL in terms of cargo compartment dimensions. In addition, the turboprop engine cannot be inferior to the IL engine in terms of efficiency.

            Alas, a colleague Eugene, just with the efficiency of engines, Motor Sich and jumped. Fuel consumption on the An-70 is comparable with the consumption of IL-76MD-90A. Engines for the An-70 have not yet been brought to mind.
          2. 0
            11 March 2015 17: 18
            And the cruising speed is 100 km / h less, and the range with a load is an order of magnitude less
            1. +2
              11 March 2015 19: 45
              An-70 was created as a medium-haul aircraft, of medium payload for unpaved and other airfields, with a short landing and short take-off. It makes no sense to compare the AN-70 and IL-76 (476), the planes are different and for different tasks !!!
        2. +2
          11 March 2015 16: 29
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          In fact - it is very necessary. For example, because a tank can enter the An-70, because the dimensions allow it. But in the IL-476 - no. It is clear that now is not up to the An-70, but frankly - it's a pity the army needs it.

          Dear colleague Andrey from Chelyabinsk, for transporting tanks, the An-22 and An-124 are used in the Russian Military Technical Aviation. Despite the fact that the dimensions of the An-70 cargo cabin are wider and higher, but he will not be able to translate the tank, since it weighs from 48 tons (these are only our tanks that are so lightweight and foreign ones are heavier). The maximum airborne weight that can be lifted from the concrete strip (having run almost 2 km) by the An-70 does not exceed 47 tons. The flight range with such a load is only 1350 km. Carry tanks at such a distance by plane - you’ll remain without pants (it’s cheaper and faster to transfer them on trailers).
          1. 0
            12 March 2015 00: 35
            Railway transportation is even cheaper than a transporter to drive in which 1 tank fits ...
        3. +2
          11 March 2015 19: 00
          An-70 loading capacity of 47 tons.
          IL-476 carrying capacity of 60 tons.
        4. +2
          12 March 2015 17: 25
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          For example, because a tank can enter the An-70, because the dimensions allow it. But in IL-476 - no.





          Hindus drove on IL-76, removed side screens, ammunition, etc. but nobody ever carries combat-ready equipment



          in AN-70 only BMD / BMP


          Which, in principle, is understandable



          An-70 is a plane short take-off and landing. Can carry goods to unprepared airfields or sites all 700 m long
      3. +1
        11 March 2015 16: 42
        Quote: Gamdlislyam
        it turned out to be a heavy military transport aircraft of the same class as the Il-76. An-70 is only slightly inferior to Ilam, standing in the arsenal of the Russian army.

        There is no difference in peacetime. In the event of a local conflict, when "spooks with stingers" are walking around the Airport, the An-70's ability to dive abruptly onto a very short runway and just as sharply gain a safe altitude will be decisive.
        The fact that for the Il-76 is called a steep "Afghan approach" from which, by the way, it is impossible to go to the second round, for the An-70 is a regular mode.
        1. +1
          11 March 2015 21: 18
          Quote: ism_ek
          In the event of a local conflict, when "spooks with stingers" are walking around the Airport, the An-70's ability to dive abruptly onto a very short runway and just as sharply gain a safe altitude will be decisive.

          It’s not worth it, dear colleague Ilya, wishful thinking.
          The length of the takeoff and run of the An-70 is more than that of the Il-76MD-90, and significantly. In addition, the An-70 did not pass the "Afghan approach" tests. And since the acceptance of the An-70 engines is bad, it is only a person inclined to fantasies to assert that this aircraft can sharply gain a safe altitude.

          Quote: ism_ek
          The fact that for the Il-76 is called a steep "Afghan approach" from which, by the way, it is impossible to go to the second round, for the An-70 is a regular mode.

          Can you tell me, dear colleague Ilya, where was the An-70 tested for this "regular mode"?
          In Russia, he did not pass such tests. Yes, and it would hardly have passed, since after the Omsk take-off, the repaired aircraft has been flying for about 20 years (from time to time, going to repair and eliminate defects). Antonov did not build any more flying machines.
          You should not give out advertising PR for real machine data.
          1. 0
            12 March 2015 12: 32
            Quote: Gamdlislyam
            The take-off and run length of the An-70 is more than that of the Il-76MD-90, and significantly.
            This is a lie :(
            Quote: Gamdlislyam
            Can you tell me, dear colleague Ilya, where was the An-70 tested for this "regular mode"?

            The AN-70 was originally designed as an aircraft with a short take-off and landing length. Naturally, these characteristics were checked first.
      4. 0
        11 March 2015 22: 21
        The plane is really good. In this regard, I trust the deceased military pilot and test pilot of the XNUMXst class, test pilot of the State Research Institute of Civil Aviation Alexander Veniaminovich Akimenkov. He spoke very well about this plane.
        But apparently, not fate. Yes, and too long they tried to bring it. And now, in the absence of relations with the Ukrainian defense industry, and most likely when covering this entire defense industry with a copper basin in the near future, this project becomes unviable if China does not pick it up.
      5. +1
        12 March 2015 15: 27
        Stop putting people into fornication. If you are comparing the TTX An-70 and IL-76, not to mention not comparing the design time and for what tasks, you do not make a competent conclusion. To begin with, the An-70 was to replace the An-12, and the Il-76 was to be replaced by the Il-106. If you take the main criterion for carrying capacity, then the IL-106 should have been about 80 tons. By the way, if you weren’t finished, then the Europeans with their A400 are very glad that the An-70 has not actually been launched into the series until now. Comparing the TTX of An-70 and A400, the blind will see the qualitative advantage of the An-70. And one must understand that the IL-76MD-90A is a necessary measure, despite the fact that the machine is apparently good, but the competitor S-17 Globmaster3 has been flying for more than 20 years. Stop comparing aircraft of different categories.
    3. -1
      11 March 2015 10: 56
      Only if this is not a new Ukrainian development. After tiled body armor, I somehow do not trust them.
    4. sent-onere
      +1
      11 March 2015 14: 03
      It is necessary to have a project that IS NOT ANYTHING THERE WAS AN INDEPENDENT STATE EXCEPT RUSSIA. Purely Russian. There are READY projects. And you need a similar one, Ilyushin, most likely, and an amphibian, this is SibNIIA and Bartinievsky Design Bureau (in fact there are two Usoltsevsky and one at Berieva).

      Engines are better in the same place where they did 117 to design in Klimova, if their resources allow.

      In general, you MUST have a range from 1 to 80 tons for commercial and military transportation. For Siberia and the Far East, it is precisely amphibian that is capable of transporting from the place of manufacture or delivery by sea to the place where the equipment will be installed. There are no airships without options for heavy equipment. And with them, anyway, the segment up to 20-40t will be airplane including From below, up to 15-20 tons, vertical take-off and landing devices like multicopters and completely new circuits, closer to airplanes, will eat up. They allow you to have genuine point-to-point transportation right up to the installation of the product in place, whether it is a mine or an enrichment factory, a settlement / hunting base.
      As seen by amphibians, Kasatka KB Usoltseva and SibNIIA will look best in the segment up to 40 tons. She in the form of a large model was ALREADY tested and flew well, confirming h-ki. By the way, as an amphibious drone, a large one is also interesting due to the outstanding aerodynamics - aerodynamic quality is slightly less than 30 - time in air with an diesel engine can be measured for days, and the machine is also capable of hovering WITH LOAD.
    5. sent-onere
      +1
      11 March 2015 14: 09
      As I understand it, now the green light should be given to the Tu-330 project, which, together with the new IL-76, will close the needs of the BTA. This, I believe, will be very positive, because The technological line Tu-204 / Tu-214 is being developed, which gives unification, cheapening of the entire series, further development of technologies, etc.
    6. +4
      11 March 2015 15: 56
      I put a minus article! The title of the article is clearly with a liberal bias (a liberal in our understanding, I think this is a curse!) What does it mean "forced to refuse," and what are some alternatives to supply this semi-finished product with a 30-year history of its creation? Or are the fascist authorities in Ukraine trying to shove him on conditions that are unfavorable for us? I don’t understand at all, well, Ukraine has refused us cooperation, cooperation and cooperation, why poke and point a finger at a sick person? I think everyone is already aware of what is happening and there will be no more return to this project, and why is "forced!" Were we forced to abandon this type of equipment or were we forced to refuse?
      Regarding the aircraft itself, it has already ceased to be what the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation ordered, we needed an average transport aircraft, and this miracle with a nightmarish number of remarks and shortcomings has long passed into the category of heavy ones, and in terms of the fuel component it became very voracious (by the way, almost a third of the fuel is spent on shortened takeoff and landing). By and large, we still got rid of the raw product more than we lost. Moreover, the Russian Federation has already filed a lawsuit against Antonov for reimbursement of investments in the amount of $ 3.2 billion.
    7. +1
      11 March 2015 18: 59
      And it is right that they refused, the plane will essentially cease to exist, since the engines are completely Russian development, electronics, too, like, Ukrainian there is only the fuselage.
      1. 0
        11 March 2015 19: 31
        Quote: Lt. air force reserve
        And it is right that they refused, the plane will essentially cease to exist, since the engines are completely Russian development, electronics, too, like, Ukrainian there is only the fuselage.
        By the middle of summer, the Ukrainian airline Antonov will develop a turbojet modification of the An-70 aircraft, which Russia has refused. The plane is going to get rid of Russian parts, equip with American-French engines and sell, in particular, to Iran.
        One of the designers of An-70 explained to Gazeta.ru that due to the ban on military-technical cooperation with Russia, An-70 would completely free from Russian details.
        At the same time, instead of the original D-27 propeller-engine, the screws for which the Russian plant is making, they are going to install CMF-56 turbofan engines made by Snecma and American General Electric on the plane. Such engines are installed on the latest versions of Boeing-737 and A-320, the SaM56 engine for the Sukhoi Superjet aircraft is manufactured on the basis of CMF-146.
        “The aircraft will be called An-188. From the An-70 there will only be a glider, because he has a great glider. And everything else will be different. First of all, we will put on it new engines: instead of Ukrainian propellers with Russian propellers, there will be French engines that now stand on А-320 (CMF-56). The internal equipment will change accordingly, ”explained one of the designers of An-70.
        He added that the An-188 project will be ready by the summer of 2015.
        http://www.gazeta.ru/politics/2015/03/06_a_6436473.shtml
        1. +2
          11 March 2015 19: 46
          Quote: Alibekulu
          An-70

          All the "value" of this aircraft is in the propellers.
          Take off and landing from unpaved airfields. Lying in the daytime from airfields with a hot climate in the highlands.
          1. +1
            11 March 2015 20: 52
            Quote: marshes
            All the "value" of this aircraft is in the propellers.
            Take off and landing from unpaved airfields. Lying in the daytime from airfields with a hot climate in the highlands.
            hi Shalom agay.
            And if with our Ukrainians, we would have fouled the joint venture on AN-70.
            Given that Kazakhstan could be a bridge of cooperation for the aviation industry of the Russian Federation and Ukraine. And by the way, Oleg Panteleev, the head of the Aviaport industry agency, notes that the availability of the An-70 project is very high.
            On the difference of courses, a cheap plane could get out. But the risk is of course big ..
            1. +2
              11 March 2015 21: 02
              Quote: Alibekulu
              But the risk is certainly great ..

              Sholom, Sholom smile
              Previous cooperation ended with the landing of one of our generals, I personally know him, and employees of UKROBORONexport.
              Now under investigation is the director of the Semey tank, there is from the Russian Federation.
              And also with Israel.
              So far, Americans, Europeans and Chinese have not been planted. smile
              By plane, not bad just for us. 6 turboprops with a large payload would not be in the way.
              A turbofan, for the state transport airline would go. Those services were offered, civil or military, ChSnikam. And the crews smile with "shoulder straps".
        2. -5
          11 March 2015 21: 15
          Our Kazakh brothers (forum participants and not only!) Are very happy with this fact, they are already spraying saliva. They cannot understand only one thing, vinipuhs are such that a project with the same imported engines will at times cost the project more and you can forget about competition. Yes, I also forgot to recall that the plant stopped its work until April, and so far there has been no talk of resuming work, only about cutting workers (about 800 people), and in Kharkov, at the expense of the middle management.
          1. +2
            11 March 2015 21: 22
            Quote: juborg
            Our Kazakh brothers (the forum participants and not only!) Are very happy with this fact, they are already spraying saliva

            We have the S-295, there is the possibility of acquiring the A-400M, and other types of aircraft.
            An-70 is considered as one of the options.
          2. +2
            11 March 2015 21: 48
            Quote: juborg
            Our Kazakh brothers hike
            You are not my brother .. negative
            Quote: juborg
            Only one can not understand, vinipuhs are such that a project with the same import engines will increase the cost of the project several times and you can forget about the competition.
            Not your money, and not your problems ..
            As for the high cost, it means Kazakhstan can afford it.
            Quote: juborg
            Yes, I also forgot to remind that the plant stopped its work until April, and so far there is no talk about the resumption of work, only about the reduction of workers (about 800 people), and like in Kharkov, at the expense of middle managers.
            Freak man, that’s it, if there was a joint venture, so he would have been working in such a hard time ..
            By the way, because of serious problems in the Russian economy and serious political problems of Ukraine, many experts from different countries come to Kazakhstan from these countries. They are looking for work in business, marketing, public relations, etc. and so on.
            1. +1
              11 March 2015 21: 57
              Quote: Alibekulu
              By the way, because of serious problems in the Russian economy and serious political problems of Ukraine, many experts from different countries come to Kazakhstan from these countries. They are looking for work in business, marketing, public relations, etc. and so on.

              Belarusians can be pulled up Sushki to modernize, Ukrainians Migi and Anushka.
              1. +2
                11 March 2015 22: 01
                It is a pity of course, but when we were brothers, apparently it was a long time ago in childhood. Now, apparently, Kazakh is an enemy of the Russian !? Or how?
            2. -1
              11 March 2015 21: 58
              What can I talk about if you're not my brother !? Pick your nose snot further.
              1. +1
                11 March 2015 22: 49
                Quote: juborg
                Pick the nose snot on.
                Wasn't you a freak who smeared snot, about how "Kazakhs could kill in the bus just because I am Russian"
                Quote: juborg
                What can you say if you are not my brother !?
                Chauvinist is not my brother, regardless of nationality ..
                Quote: juborg
                Now, apparently, the Kazakh enemy is Russian !? Or how?
                You do not distort and do not translate arrows, provocateur small ..
                And to the enemy of the Kazakhs, you must grow up snot about "oppression". It hurts a little hysteria ..
                1. -3
                  12 March 2015 00: 37
                  Listen to vinipuh, don’t give a damn where you live. It’s hard for you to hide your saliva-spraying joy that Russia broke off the supply of the plane, and you didn’t try. And as for the chauvinist, you said that, but I only confirmed that YOU are definitely not my brother.
                  1. +1
                    12 March 2015 02: 04
                    Quote: juborg
                    And about the chauvinist, you said this, and I just confirmed that YOU are definitely not my brother.
                    I did not sign up for the shovik brothers.
                    Quote: juborg
                    Listen vinipuh, do not care where you live.
                    If you're in deep shit, then it's not for me.
                    Quote: juborg
                    Your saliva-splattering joy is that it is difficult to hide the deliveries of the aircraft to Russia, and you didn’t try to.
                    Proofs in the studio. Give me a specific comment, disease .. laughing
                    I watch the bugs completely overwhelm you ..
                    The Kazakhs "cut" you on the bus. Then suddenly you write Kazakhs as brothers .. fool (I note that in this discussion they did not call you that). That's not all you left from Kazakhstan in the 90-s ...
                    So you're covered in saliva ... request
                    Then you give out c / a by picking your nose .. what (oh great master krakozabok?)
                    Definitely, you should go to the doctor for a long time .. feel
                    1. -3
                      12 March 2015 02: 46
                      Hike you for your long and tongue already visited the bath ?! I have friends among Kazakhs, believe me, they are very worthy people. And we lived very amicably, until people like you appeared. But die your agility, otherwise you won't be enough for a long time, you will go to "g" out of anger and envy.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
                      2. +1
                        12 March 2015 04: 09
                        Quote: juborg
                        Hike you for your long and language already visited the bath?
                        I do not want to imagine where you were sticking your .. belay wink
                        Quote: juborg
                        I have friends among the Kazakhs, believe me, they are very worthy people.
                        These worthy people would hardly have stayed your friends if they knew what kind of libel you write about Kazakhs ..
                        Quote: juborg
                        on "g" you will come out of anger and envy.
                        For now, only you are here, everything will not be amused ..
                        P.S. Proofs, by the way hde ?! As they say there: "" proof or pidagas! ""
  2. +19
    11 March 2015 05: 45
    In addition, now the new IL-76MD-90A will have to replace the joint development planned for the purchase of An-70.

    The upgraded IL-76 with new engines is certainly a good aircraft - I think there is no doubt about it. But why contrast it with the An-70 turboprop? These are cars of different classes with slightly different tasks and different fuel efficiency. Or is it not so?
    1. +1
      11 March 2015 11: 01
      Yes, no one opposed these planes just three years ago the country was called such Ukraine, and now the mattress satellite dill wrap like this.
    2. +7
      11 March 2015 12: 28
      Yes, do not oppose.
      IL-76MD and An-70 planes with practically the same characteristics (while the An-70 they are worse, but the cost is higher)
      And Russia has no replacement for the An-12
      An-70 was just designed to replace the An-12, but for some reason it became a competitor of the Il-76MD
      By the way, it’s the policy of the Ukrainians, to take either a Soviet project or equipment to carry out modernization (often on paper) and to steam Russia with foam at the mouth.
      Examples of T-90 and T-84, Superjet and An-148/158
      And everywhere the same thing; Russians can’t do anything, they have technology, but here we have ...
      And everywhere Russia MUST HAVE to buy from us
      And at the same time there was such a juggle (example Superjet http://superjet.wikidot.com/wiki:ssj-airports, by the way on this site describes how the slops pour on our plane)
      It amazes me how our onanists love to yell for any reason;
      Roads are expensive (42 million rubles, in Germany from 3 million euros, in the United States from 1,9 million dollars)
      Feed grain (24%)
      Poghosyan (and the T-50?)
      etc.
      At the same time, our equipment is successfully manufactured and also successfully sold abroad (SUPERZHET has about 200 orders, not including China and India)
      And Ukrainians instead of cooperation dumped and inserted rolls into the wheels
      So I'm glad that the competitor is being removed from our road
      1. FID
        +3
        11 March 2015 13: 47
        Quote: Belgorod
        And at the same time there was such a juggle (example Superjet http://superjet.wikidot.com/wiki:ssj-airports, by the way on this site describes how the slops pour on our plane)

        What is your plane? Super is a designer from imported components .... By the way, about 100 cars have been produced to this day, only 50-60 flies, can you tell me where the rest are? And then orders abyss ... forgive me ...
      2. sent-onere
        +3
        11 March 2015 14: 07
        Quote: Belgorod
        Yes, do not oppose.
        IL-76MD and An-70 planes with practically the same characteristics (while the An-70 they are worse, but the cost is higher)
        And Russia has no replacement for the An-12
        An-70 was just designed to replace the An-12, but for some reason it became a competitor of the Il-76MD
        By the way, it’s the policy of the Ukrainians, to take either a Soviet project or equipment to carry out modernization (often on paper) and to steam Russia with foam at the mouth.
        Examples of T-90 and T-84, Superjet and An-148/158
        And everywhere the same thing; Russians can’t do anything, they have technology, but here we have ...
        And everywhere Russia MUST HAVE to buy from us
        And at the same time there was such a juggle (example Superjet http://superjet.wikidot.com/wiki:ssj-airports, by the way on this site describes how the slops pour on our plane)
        It amazes me how our onanists love to yell for any reason;
        Roads are expensive (42 million rubles, in Germany from 3 million euros, in the United States from 1,9 million dollars)
        Feed grain (24%)
        Poghosyan (and the T-50?)
        etc.
        At the same time, our equipment is successfully manufactured and also successfully sold abroad (SUPERZHET has about 200 orders, not including China and India)
        And Ukrainians instead of cooperation dumped and inserted rolls into the wheels
        So I'm glad that the competitor is being removed from our road



        These are NOT two planes for one task, but two planes for TWO tasks. IL-76 is the main operational tactical transport aircraft of the BTA and the Airborne Forces, and the An-70 is the operational tactical transport of short take-off and landing. Yes, in terms of carrying capacity, it went far beyond the An-12 (the replacement of which was being developed), but in terms of its role and the main method of application from advanced poorly equipped soil strips, it exactly corresponds to the TTT. IL-76 and its modern modifications, of course, can also fly off the ground, if anything, but it is designed for concrete.
        1. +2
          11 March 2015 14: 48
          An-70 tactical transport short takeoff and landing.

          IL-76 and its modern modifications, of course, can also if something fly off the ground, but still it is designed for concrete.

          I completely agree with you. All the same, jets are designed for concrete strips, and not because of weight, but because they work like vacuum cleaners. And for unequipped airfields turboprop - "what the doctor ordered" good
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. -3
        11 March 2015 16: 04
        Quote: Belgorod
        IL-76MD and An-70 planes with practically the same characteristics (while the An-70 they are worse, but the cost is higher)

        An-70 has the same take-off characteristics as the An-12. He can dive very cool on a very short unpaved runway. In the front line, where enemy sabotage groups operate, this is very important. Reducing the runway for every hundred meters multiplies the survivability of the aircraft during landing. Remember how Ukrainian Il-76 was shot down in Lugansk. Saboteurs sat a few kilometers from the runway. How much force is needed to protect such a perimeter?
      5. 0
        12 March 2015 20: 37
        Tu-334 was largely ruined by cooperation on the implementation of the project with Ukraine.
  3. +12
    11 March 2015 05: 47
    We are not to blame for this. Dill themselves dealt cards! There is no silver lining IL TU - all the more so many people have already moved from Antonov. It hurts of course to look at it, but we need to move on.
  4. +13
    11 March 2015 06: 09
    Back in 96, I read about the problems associated with the development of aircraft. There were problems with engines and other aircraft systems even then! 19 years have passed since !!! And even in difficult 90 years, the Russian Defense Ministry did not stop financing the project! As a result, NOTHING has been created in 20 years !!! Where did all the regulatory authorities look? ?! Draining huge amounts of money and wasting time!
    1. +3
      11 March 2015 06: 44
      This project was a gesture of goodwill - an attempt to establish strong relations between the former Soviet republics and again tie the military-industrial complex into a single whole. As a result, an excellent aircraft - Russia does not need anyone paid for (at best), at worst, will be adopted by NATO after the modification in Airbus)
      1. +5
        11 March 2015 07: 38
        NATO An-70 is all the more unnecessary; they have their own A-400M.
        1. +2
          11 March 2015 08: 19
          Europeans told Yanukovych that the An-70 is an excellent aircraft, but it won’t go to the EU, because there’s nothing to beat off Airbus buyers.
          1. +1
            11 March 2015 22: 04
            Quote: 0255
            Yanukovych was told that the An-70 is a great plane, but it won’t go to the EU

            laughing Type:
            You’re a good guy, on the one hand,
            But why the fuck you, on the other hand.
        2. +1
          11 March 2015 12: 46
          These (Ukrainians) handed over documentation to the An-70 Europe, and they bunged the plane and Ukrainians under the knee in the ass (do not get confused under the feet of the small fry)
          Ours requested documentation for the An-2 (an interesting project for the revival of small aircraft) - Ukrainians muzzle brick I don’t understand yours !!!!
          And then the documentation was already found in the city of Paris, on Airbus. Any questions?
          And most importantly, dolboklyuev experience does not teach anything
          Well, how much Europe throws them, but they are few and few.
          It remains to say -Flag in their hands
  5. +6
    11 March 2015 06: 16
    Well, that will be his work ...
    and specialists with AN should be pulled out until they fled to Ukraine.
  6. +7
    11 March 2015 06: 19
    A huge mistake, real idiocy!
    The success of the IL - 76 is not a reason to abandon the An-70, these are aircraft of different classes.
    An-12 needs a replacement, but it isn’t ...
    1. +3
      11 March 2015 06: 40
      Quote: Nitarius
      Well, that will be his work ...
      and specialists with AN should be pulled out until they fled to Ukraine.

      In modern conditions, when Ukraine stops all cooperation with Russia, we not only had to abandon the An-70. The most interesting thing is that Russia will not suffer from this, but the Ukrainian Antonov Design Bureau will be bent, sorry, the design bureau was good.
      1. +1
        11 March 2015 06: 46
        Quote: La-5
        good was kb.

        Yes, regional planes are their topic, which is exactly what the Russian Federation is missing now
    2. +1
      11 March 2015 07: 41
      Yes, the An-12 replacement is still needed; instead, the An-70 stuck into the Il-76 niche.
    3. +2
      11 March 2015 07: 50
      Quote: Ivan Tarasov
      IL - 76 is not a reason to abandon the An-70, these are aircraft of different classes.
      An-12 needs a replacement, but it isn’t ...

      Dear colleague Ivan Tarasov, IL-76 and An-70 are in the same weight category - heavy transport aircraft.
      An-70 was not originally designed to replace the An-12. All that they have in common is the design bureau, where they were born, and screw propellers.
      1. +3
        11 March 2015 09: 09
        IL-76 and An-70 are in the same weight category - heavy transport aircraft.

        IL-76 (Maximum take-off weight 210 t) (Payload up to 60 t)
        An-70 (Maximum take-off weight 135 t) (Payload up to 47 t)
        An-12 (Maximum take-off weight 61 t) (Payload up to 21 t)
        1. +1
          11 March 2015 09: 46
          Quote: Sma11
          IL-76 (Maximum take-off weight 210 t) (Payload up to 60 t)

          Dear colleague Alex, do not confuse the IL-76 standing in service and the new modernized IL-76, which will only go into service.
          Below I give the data on IL-76T (the most common modification)
          Il-76T modification
          Wingspan, m 50.50
          Aircraft Length m 46.59
          Aircraft height, m ​​14.76
          Wing area, m2 300.0
          Weight, kg
          equipped aircraft 104000
          maximum take-off 170000
          payload 43400-47000
          Maximum amount of fuel, l 109480
          Engine type 4 TRDD D-30KP
          Thrust, kgf 4 x 12000
          The maximum speed, km / h 850
          Cruising speed, km / h 750-800
          Flight distance, km
          with a load of 20 t 6100
          with a load of 47 t 3000
          Practical ceiling, m 12000
          Crew, people 6/7
          Payload: 140 soldiers or 128 paratroopers
          Armament (optional): two 23 mm guns GSh-23L
          1. +3
            11 March 2015 11: 14
            Below I give the data on IL-76T (the most common modification)

            Well, you forgot about IL-76TD (MD) there are also a lot of them good
            An-70 was not originally designed to replace the An-12.

            what
            Short takeoff / landing transport aircraft. The development of the aircraft design was started by Antonov ANTK / p / box A-3395 (Kiev) in 1987 on the basis of Decisions of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR of 23.07.1984 No. 797-173, the Order of the IAP of 20.08.1984 No. 378, as well as the Decisions of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR of 20.05.1987 No. 587-132 and the Order of the MAP of 01.07.1987 No. 340 and by decision of the military-industrial complex of the Council of Ministers of the USSR of 10.02.1989 No. 44. The Customer (military unit No. 25966-A) and the Contractor (ANTK) signed an agreement dated May 91078, 16.05.1989, No. 70, according to which experimental design work was carried out on the topic “Creation of the An-1 aircraft (12st flight copy ., a copy for statistical tests, a copy for fatigue tests). "The aircraft was intended to replace the An-XNUMX mass transport aircraft in military transport aviation units
    4. avt
      +4
      11 March 2015 10: 15
      Quote: Ivan Tarasov
      A huge mistake, real idiocy!

      Whose? Whose? You are aware that ALL military-technical cooperation with Russia is practically prohibited by the US in Ukraine and is really frozen - we can’t pull out a turbine for frigates. And you want to put a plane for BTA in a series! The plane is a pity, but it, like the 124 program, is really killed. For 124mu, we can somehow upgrade something from the storage, but with 70 everything - a big and thick cross on the machine. They bought 148 and it’s like with all the giblets, they will do it. By the way - on the An-2 there are 12 gas turbine pieces.
      Quote: Basarev
      Yes, and an analogue of the Dream needs to be created.

      Do you have a “Buran” for her? This is a highly specialized airplane with limited use and not every airfield will accept it.
      1. 0
        11 March 2015 13: 22
        Here are 148 bought and it seems with all the giblets

        An 140
      2. 0
        11 March 2015 21: 56
        Quote...
        Do you have a “Buran” for her? This is a highly specialized airplane with limited use and not every airfield will accept it.

        If it is needed, it will be. And highly specialized aircraft are also needed! For them - their work, no one will do ... hi
      3. +1
        11 March 2015 22: 25
        Quote: avt
        Do you have a “Buran” for her? This is a highly specialized airplane with limited use and not every airfield will accept it.

        Fair.
        Only now, the only Mriya is not without work.
        Orders - around the world, some oversized cargo only fit there.
        What I agree with is that it is not economically feasible to start developing such a giant for the sake of producing 2-10 aircraft.
        Is it possible for the development and subsequent demonstration of the triumph of engineering design? But times are not the right ones now.
    5. -4
      11 March 2015 13: 01
      IL-76 and AN-70 aircraft of the same class !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      1. The comment was deleted.
  7. +2
    11 March 2015 06: 29
    From the very beginning, An was stillborn, since they spent so much time on him, so many comments, and even were not allowed into the series. It’s a pity. It’s a pity that the money that dill will not be returned, but it would be possible to put on new developments. There is no evil without good.
  8. +1
    11 March 2015 07: 39
    It would be interesting to hear what they say on this occasion. VAF. winked
  9. 3vs
    +2
    11 March 2015 07: 49
    It seems that we are unlikely to get what they will, as well as the Mistrals.
  10. 0
    11 March 2015 09: 17
    It's a pity the An-70 military-technical project, however, like the aircraft itself.
  11. 0
    11 March 2015 09: 49
    Quote: Gamdlislyam
    Quote: Gans1234
    And failure is bad

    It should be remembered that initially (back in the USSR) the aircraft was developed as a specialized, medium, military transport aircraft with short take-off and landing on unpaved airfields (sites), i.e. for special operations. But in the end, for some reason (I don’t know the reasons), it turned out to be a heavy military transport aircraft of the same class as the Il-76. An-70 is only slightly inferior to Ilam, standing in the arsenal of the Russian army ...


    You are wrong, not for special operations, but as the main workhorse in the army to replace the An-12 and the old man An-22 Antey, who has been in service for almost half a century. IL-76 can not compete with it in any way - reactive, it requires good paved airfields. In all respects, it exceeded the A-400 airbus, being ahead of the pace of design and in the future should have earlier reached the world market, where it could win the lion's share. It must be assumed that the West made a lot of efforts to ensure that the Ukrainians politicians buried the project of a promising aircraft with all possible forces in order to remove the competitor from their mediocre car. What they have succeeded.
    1. +1
      11 March 2015 11: 54
      Quote: Engineer
      IL-76 can not compete with it in any way - reactive, it requires good paved airfields.


      "Regular operation of the aircraft is allowed on unpaved airfields with a soil strength of 8 kg / cm2 and more. On unpaved PPUs with a soil strength of 6-7, individual flights are allowed."
    2. +4
      11 March 2015 12: 07
      Quote: Engineer
      You are wrong, not for special operations, but as the main workhorse in the army to replace the An-12 and the old man An-22 Antey, who has been in service for almost half a century. IL-76 can not compete with him in any way

      Dear Alexander Vladimirovich, you’ll decide, please, which aircraft the An-70 was designed to replace, capable of lifting a maximum of 47 tons. The An-12 is capable of lifting only 20, and its take-off weight is more than half. An-22 lifts from 60 to 80 tons with a take-off weight of 225-250 tons (twice as heavy as An-70).
      The radius of the An-70: with a maximum payload of 1350 km; with a payload mass of 35 tons - 2550 km; With a payload mass of 20 tons - 3300 km. In this case, the take-off run with maximum load - 1800 m, mileage - 1500 m. The aircraft, in fact, lost the ability to take off and land from the ground.
      But the data on the IL-76MD-90A: the maximum flight range (for fuel) - 6000 km; with a load of 52 tons - 5000 km, take-off run with a maximum take-off weight - 1600 m, mileage - 900 m.
      So it turns out that the Il-76MD-90A "cannot compete with the An-70 in any way", because surpasses the Ukrainian car in all respects. And nothing to do with the West.
    3. +2
      11 March 2015 13: 19
      I will disappoint you - see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oi7AMIY35A (Take-off of IL-76 from the ground)
      IL-76 PERFECTLY takes off and lands on the ground
      This is one example of the Khokhlyat distortion of facts;
      1 An-70 has a lifting capacity of 37 tons, from the soil only 20 tons
      2 There is a substitution of the concepts of unpaved airfield and unprepared site. On an unprepared site, KhokhloAN DOES NOT SIT.
      Ukrainians pushed their super-super-plane for the so-called airmobile brigades, but we have a different concept An 124 to the nearest airfield, and then Mi-26 to the destination
      And if you google you will find a lot of interesting hohlosracha
    4. 0
      11 March 2015 15: 15
      You are still an optimist! The Europeans asked for technical documentation from Antonov, promising ... (well, there’s something good there, you will produce parts for us, and this is for your tea ..)) and they did those technical data. making your plane. Moreover, they immediately declared, in the forehead, that Antonov would not be allowed into the European market, it was a dangerous competitor, cheaper than their counterpart and more efficient. Here is such a cuckold Antonov ... This is how you should not love your country and your enterprise ...
  12. +1
    11 March 2015 10: 52
    Abandoned what is not. Refuse Boeing, Airbus, Embraers in favor of IL, Tu, Yak ,. Dry passenger airplanes do poorly.
    1. 0
      11 March 2015 13: 26
      Dry passenger airplanes do poorly.

      Sure?
      192 cars ordered + India and China will build under license 100 cars in each country.
      And if it’s interesting and brains are ready to take a different opinion, read https://lurkmore.to/%D0%A1%D1%83%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B4%D0%B6%D0%B5 % D1% 82
      WELL VERY INTERESTING !!!!!!!!!!!!!
      1. 0
        11 March 2015 22: 33
        Quote: Belgorod
        Quote: valokordin
        Dry passenger airplanes do poorly.

        Sure?

        He read, they were too clever with composites - even the doors slid shut.
  13. +1
    11 March 2015 11: 49
    For debts, take the rights to the An-70. "Motor-Sich" is not a state-owned company and Boguslaev has always been a supporter of the vehicle, so negotiate with him a license for the engine. It will be cheaper than inventing an aircraft from scratch, and there will be time savings ...
    1. +1
      11 March 2015 13: 28
      WHY is hemorrhagic
    2. +1
      11 March 2015 19: 34
      funny honestly!
      And will you also take the entire technological chain? + Test.
      And you didn’t take into account that the engine only makes the engine. And not the plane itself, in its entirety.
      1. +1
        12 March 2015 12: 34
        The An-70 was originally planned to be made at the facilities of the Russian Federation. Ukraine simply does not have at the moment the technical capabilities to produce the An-70 in a large series of 5-7 aircraft per year, this is the maximum and that with the absolute support of the government, which has never been and never will be There are many components and technical developments just from Russia. The same chassis, for example, or the blades for engines, avionics, again, from Russia. To buy the rights + license for engines and the Russian Federation will be able to build this aircraft.
        1. +1
          12 March 2015 18: 44
          Well, the motor seems to produce blades. most likely Russian fuel. Well, up to capacities here you are mistaken. 5-7 aircraft is pretty solid power. And frankly, to be honest, the An-70 contracts have long been violated. Even before all this Natsi buchi. By the way, not Khokhlov. Boguslaev, on the contrary, would be beneficial.
  14. +5
    11 March 2015 11: 53
    The terms of reference for the An-70 were given in another country - in the USSR, for another army and other airborne forces and other tasks. Which are no longer there.
    In “Antonov” thieving swindlers have long ruled the ball.
    Kiva with two sons opontal everything that can bring personal benefit to the family.
    But they are there - the great masters of window dressing. The same board An-148 seven times solemnly rolled out - for different figures from the government.
    Always and everywhere for full-scale tests built 3-5-7 prototypes. It was TWO An-70, one long ago ditched along with the crew, remaining after a large PL can only be a repair manual. New An-70 Ukraine is not able to build.
    But the third 10 anniversary of this unlucky plane is chased by air shows.
    It would have been better to have placed it in an aviation museum - there were few talented but unhappy airplanes ...
    Hopes for NATO are Ukrainian nonsense: they don’t buy military equipment from questionable countries with an obscure orientation. But NATO members licked everything they needed - for nothing and questioned the need for this car for Russia, and even a couple of years was lost on it.
    Today's Ukraine, which has released 24 (five) aircraft in 5 years, the aviation industry is not capable of, and is not needed: a Ukrainian. Western friends will never let planes go to the world market, and they closed the Russian and post-Soviet market to themselves.
    After the “project Ukraine” is completed, the new Russia will restore the aviation industry in the Ukraine and New Russia.
    1. +1
      11 March 2015 13: 32
      Bravo!!!!!!!!!!
      Not brained Russia! There are people in Russia who think for themselves, rather than hawala Internet stamps
      I’ll add that the planes were built with Russian money
    2. +3
      11 March 2015 22: 46
      Quote: RoTTor
      In “Antonov” thieving swindlers have long ruled the ball.

      I think the Antonov brand itself is worth fighting for.
      At least out of respect for the memory of an outstanding Russian constructor.
  15. +1
    11 March 2015 12: 26
    The question of the foresight of politicians. Why was it necessary to build high-tech enterprises in the territory of the brothers in mind. And how many of our specialists fell into this vile trap. I understand that V.I. Lenin wanted the best. Those who had to take notes remember one of Ilyich’s first decrees on the transfer of Ivanovo factories to Uzbekistan marked Russians should atone for their national suburbs. The favorite topic of Lenin is Great Russian chauvinism. Now is not better. This is a big topic. Maybe someone will take up the analysis?
  16. 0
    11 March 2015 16: 56
    Joint projects, therefore, the right to use certain technical solutions is joint. They can be implemented in the following projects, because the development of aviation does not stand still. And their own, home-grown projects were closed for the sake of developing friendship between peoples. They can also be reanimated. And to operate the equipment, which is half-equipped with imported spare parts, is crazy ... Such is the opinion of the amateur.
  17. 0
    11 March 2015 18: 22
    It is a pity that the plans do not have a well-powered medium-range 20-ton medium. In military logistics - you need a car of such carrying capacity and independence from take-off and landing conditions.
    1. +1
      11 March 2015 18: 59
      Why not in the plans?
      IL-214 (also known as MTS - multipurpose transport aircraft [3]) is a tactical military transport aircraft developed jointly by the companies of the SV Ilyushin Aviation Complex, NPK Irkut and the Indian company HAL.

      Technical specifications

      Crew: 2 pilot
      Capacity: 20 t
      Length: 37,7 m
      Wingspan: 32,25 m
      Height: 11,0 m
      Maximum takeoff weight: 68 t
      Mass fuel in internal tanks: 23 000 kg
      Powerplant: 2 × PD-14M
      Link: 2 × 15 600 kg
  18. 0
    11 March 2015 18: 32
    And why not let out, without Ukraine, act like China dignity.
  19. -2
    11 March 2015 21: 46
    This is where the IL-476 is mentioned as a very good and almost new aircraft, but evaluating its capabilities it becomes sad. As you know, all heavy army weapons were designed to limit the width of the railway platform 3,5 m and therefore at least tracked, but the design width is maintained. This means that tanks and everything on their chassis, air defense systems, modern infantry fighting vehicles cannot be transported by the IL-476, because it has a cargo compartment of 3.45 m in width. All modern heavy transport vehicles or initially oriented to the transportation of heavy weapons have a cabin width of 4-4,4 m, this is the An-70, An-22, An-124 and S-17, S-5A, and also A400
    and Y-20. Only the lighter and outdated An-12, S-130 fall into the dimension 3,15-3,45 across the width of the cargo compartment. Alas, in the same place was due to its obsolescence and IL-476. So what can he carry? Only under it created landing equipment, lightly armored, and ordinary transport trucks, not counting the humanitarian aid and various supplies in the boxes.
    It’s not profitable to make a tanker or a drl from it, as foreign and tender experience shows, and therefore it has no future. If their warriors are tormented, but no one else buys, in any case China and India for sure. The fact that it was partially redesigned and digitized is a good move, because people need to be taught, and the aviation industry today cannot pull anything new. Now, if redesign was more ambitious and even the width of the cargo compartment changed, then this would be a very good option and 476 could meet modern requirements.
  20. +2
    12 March 2015 11: 33
    The An-70 was designed under the terms of reference issued back in Soviet times and not the fact that for 36-40 years the military’s requests have not changed. When they say that he went beyond the dimension of the An-12 which was intended to be replaced, they forget to clarify what the military ordered instead of the An-12 and which performance characteristics did they want? I think that its 47 t payload was not a surprise to the military, because they collaborated with the Antonovites from the preliminary design and construction of the first flight model and it’s just stupid to talk about some kind of scam on the part of the Antonovites. An operational tactical transporter just needs to carry any or almost any army cargo over short distances of 1000-1500 km and use shortened GDP. The strategic ones will carry a lot and far, and also any army cargo, but there are different requirements and American S-17 feels great in their niche, but not the IL-476. The Indian tender showed this and the IL-476 flew there in all positions, regardless of friendship and price.
    In the line of IL-476 transporters in the 80s, when the An-70 was ordered, it was not listed at all, but it was blinded from what it was and what it could in our time, and not what the military asked for. Instead of 476, an analogue of the S-17 was to come and perfectly complementing each other to carry everything that was needed and where it was needed.
    Here, the An-12 niche could be easily and cheaply replaced by a deep modernization of the existing resin, as the Chinese did, because its capabilities in the weight category of 20 tons did not change much. But it is outdated and the replacement of all equipment and technologies would be very useful and timely.
    Alas ... a lot of politics, voluntarism and limited opportunities for both finance and the capabilities of the aviation industry destroyed everything reasonable and now we have what we have.
    Good or bad, the An-70 turned out really nobody knows because everything is not very completed and there is no operational experience, but there is a bad ending when they ditched a good idea and threw out the money.
  21. 0
    12 March 2015 12: 16
    We are now friends of families in BRICS. smile
    You look, and Embraer KC-390 will become our horse.
  22. 0
    12 March 2015 14: 12
    There is no such aircraft IL-476. Generally not.
  23. -1
    12 March 2015 15: 10
    Quote: CERHJ
    As for the IL-476, of course, he did not reach the S-17, but he came very close and the military was happy with it.

    - Are you sure?) Have a conclusion and publication? Read the story of the creation of S-17 and understand why the S-5 went out and what is the difference. 3.45-3.37 = 8. Having 4 cm per side, how do you load the T-72? Of course, removing the entire hitch. In principle, if you take it apart, you can take it easily, but who needs it?
    1. 0
      April 2 2015 12: 16
      Who in general needs to carry tanks at the rate of 1 tank-plane :-)))!
  24. 0
    12 March 2015 15: 11
    But the Indians do not want to disassemble the T-90, and the Chinese, too. Is it interesting that Armata also has such restrictions?
  25. -1
    12 March 2015 15: 16
    Quote: CERHJ
    But for some reason it is hard to believe. That one, "wounded" car went through the entire cycle of tests at a time when the Russian Ministry of Defense did not control it.

    - one flew, and not one was built at all and passed the tests, there was enough time, however) Claims, as I understand it, are different and they are political on both sides and economic on the part of Russia and the aviation industry, where there is someone to cut the loot. The military is not here, I suppose and use what they are given
  26. 0
    14 March 2015 15: 02
    Still, the plans for the An-140 would be changed to Il-112 ...
  27. 0
    16 March 2015 05: 36
    Yes, FIG knows. I would just be scared to buy equipment in Ukraine, more complicated than a hammer. After all, there can always be dill, which will undermine, file down the detail and then we will understand the causes of the accident. Let Ukrainians dream about these mega-plans.
  28. 0
    16 March 2015 19: 18
    http://www.aex.ru/news/2015/3/16/131606/
    “Machines of a heavy and superheavy class will have to be able to transport all available and promising nomenclature of equipment of ground forces and airborne forces. This also applies to the Armata tank, as well as military vehicles based on it, which in their overall dimensions cannot be transported by Il-76 aircraft, ”the source noted.
    1. 0
      16 March 2015 19: 25
      Well, Armata and An-70 will not be able to be transported due to weight restrictions, it’s even T-72B3 only empty - without ammunition, rubber-fabric screens and fuel, it can drag, and even then to a miserable 1100km.
  29. -1
    16 March 2015 23: 23
    T-72B3 - 46 tons combat weight. So what screens and BC are you talking about? And how much should an operational tactical, but not strategic tank transporter lead?
    “Range: - with a maximum payload of 1350 km”
    Payload mass: - maximum - 47000 kg
    http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-583.html
    Now common sense has appeared that it’s enough to pour crocodile tears about the unrefined An-12, which the An-70 was supposed to replace according to the technical requirements of the 80s! I mean that IL-476, which was riveted from the fact that there was no luck at all except humanitarian aid and obsolete weapons! But he was accepted and riveted joyfully depicting the achievement of the aviation industry! He is not in the subject today. The A-70, of course, was a crude solution and a half-abandoned project, but it was a milestone of the update that was planned in the USSR and in the company with Il-106 and An-124 it was just supposed to carry everything then known at any distance. The An-70 can carry the same T-90 in the operational-tactical depth of defense, although it wasn’t created for this by a Strategist like S-17 because it is not demanding on the runway and has no restrictions on the carrying capacity and dimensions of the cargo compartment for all types of weapons for our time. The “new” IL-476 does not meet such requirements, while the An-70 fits into its niche, albeit crude. Why An-124 is needed is a question, but I hope it is needed, although there are few runways that accept it
    1. 0
      17 March 2015 14: 50
      1. Can you read? 46 tons is the weight of an empty tank, and only the main caliber ammunition weighs under a ton. Transferring an empty tank a thousand kilometers by plane ... A joke of humor is probably like that.
      2. Everything is clear, you can not continue, the aircraft, which has a maximum load greater than the weight of the empty An-12, was created to replace this very An-12. Such a "high level" sofa IksperDov is not often found.
  30. 0
    18 March 2015 13: 57
    Quote: Dog of war
    Everything is clear, you can not continue,

    - sayings like yours I do not comment
  31. +1
    31 March 2015 10: 16
    silt and a point! there is nothing to feed the junta!
  32. 0
    April 3 2015 06: 21
    mriya cooler too sorry
  33. 0
    23 June 2015 20: 16
    It's sad ... this is how the stupidity of several individuals in Kiev puts an end to not only promising technology, but probably also the aviation industry itself ... recently one of the fans of the current Vlada boasted - like felt boots cannot build anything like "mriya" and "ruslan" ". but the question - whether they themselves will be able to build at least one such aircraft without us - was ignored. to jump - not to roll bags, and not even to design modern technology ...
  34. 0
    3 July 2015 18: 45
    Yes. I don’t understand at all that everyone here is being killed because of the AN-70-AN-140. Let's close our factories, close the Ilyushin design bureau, you’re all. Yes, fuck me to their design bureau, they chose their own way. Airbus did just that, otherwise they threw it (KIND OF A LEGEND THAT EXISTS, THAT WANTED TO DO THIS BOARD TOGETHER, BUT SLEEPY AND FORGIOUS EUROPEANS WRONGED THE BACK WHEN THEY HAVE STUDIED THE DOCUMENTATION, so that they don't need to give anyone orders Antonov, and himself: "Well, we will somehow interrupt here, let the Antonovites build"
  35. 0
    5 July 2015 07: 23
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Quote: Gamdlislyam
    Russia does not actually need this plane (and this is an IL-76 class aircraft)

    In fact - it is very necessary. For example, because a tank can enter the An-70, because the dimensions allow it. But in the IL-476 - no.
    It is clear that now is not up to the An-70, but frankly - it's a pity the army needs it.

    And they say that watermelons grow on the Christmas trees.