Forever engine

114
Domestic aviation industry is fully dependent on the West

The Communist Party faction in the State Duma held hearings on the subject “State and prospects of the domestic aircraft and aircraft engine-building in terms of import substitution”. Why did Russia lose those leading positions that we occupied even 25 years ago? Participants in the hearings gave an answer to this question.

The discussion was chaired by a member of the State Duma Committee on Defense Vyacheslav Tetekin. In his opening remarks, he emphasized that the situation is more than deplorable. As a result of unprofessional management decisions, our country is no longer a world aviation power. The USSR occupied one third of the global market for civil aircraft. If we could keep our share, we would not cut funds for high-tech industries, healthcare, and education. The total market for aircraft engines alone is $ 60 billion. In fact, huge amounts of money fall out of our state budget. The task of the participants in the discussion, the chairman emphasized, is not only to conduct a detailed analysis of the industry, but also to outline ways out of the crisis.

Airworthiness and poor management

The aviation fleet of domestic companies on 80 percent consists of Western-made aircraft. Therefore, a complete transition to import substitution in civil aviation is almost impossible. We had to deal with this since the 2000 year, when we found out whether we have analogues of Boeing-767, and it was concluded that IL-96-300 could compete with it. But today this plane practically does not fly, fulfilling a responsible, but limited mission - the transportation of the first persons of the state.

Forever engine

Andrei Sedykh collage


At the same time, we have an IL-96-400T cargo aircraft, which is able to carry a maximum payload of 92 tons. For comparison, the Airbus А350 is a good civil aircraft, from which the most common kerosene tanker is made today, but its maximum payload is just 72 tons.

Successfully passed the tests of the Tu-204CM, but, according to Andrey Tupolev, the head of the Marketing Center of Tupolev OJSC, the grandson of our genius aircraft designer, it is not produced because there are no orders, the project is not supported by anyone, but something must be done. Nevertheless, a certificate from the MAC has been received. This means that we also have a mid-range aircraft.

As for local airlines, you need to remember about An-140. This is quite a decent Ukrainian car, which was produced by us. When Vladimir Putin visited the Samara plant last July, there, in connection with the stalled production of An-140, they expressed their readiness to make IL-114. This car received a certificate of airworthiness from the hands of Viktor Stepanovich Chernomyrdin in 1997. Today production is mothballed. And Uzbek Airlines has been successfully operating these machines for more than 10 years. True, they are not our engines, because TV7117C was not very reliable. At the request of the President of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov, we installed the Canadian PW127H and in December 1999 received a certificate of airworthiness.

Due to the fact that the Tashkent Aviation Production Association named after V.P. Chkalov virtually ceased to exist, we restarted the Il-76 aircraft at Aviastar-SP plant in Ulyanovsk to serial production, but the Il-114 remained in limbo. The President instructed the government to consider organizing the serial production of IL-114 in Russia. Such production could have been deployed at the Aviakor plant in Samara, but instead of starting work, we again began to push the water in a mortar, offering to cross the Il-114 with the non-existing Il-112. IL-112 - the last aircraft on which I conducted a mock-up commission as general designer in December 2004. Today 80 percent of the drawings of this aircraft are made. But if we are going to be based on the IL-112 plane, which is not yet ready, postponing the production of the IL-114, then in the near future, we will not have any aircraft either on the local or on the regional routes.

Not so long ago, a general meeting of the Russian Aircraft Manufacturers Union was held, at which a very decent amount was announced, which was additionally allocated to United Aircraft Building Corporation. In a personal order, I asked about the possibility to allocate a very small part of this money to us, in order to start digitizing technical documentation before they make the final decision on where to make IL-114 - in Samara, Nizhny Novgorod or Kazan. As a result, the question hung in the air, and you cannot start the plane without digitizing.

On the issue of import substitution: there are not so many foreign products on Ilyushin aircraft. Only once, at the request of Presidents Boris Yeltsin and Bill Clinton, or more precisely, according to the decision of the commission of Viktor Chernomyrdin, we made a Russian-American aircraft, having received a certificate of airworthiness for it in 1999 year. In those days, we were fiercely criticized: the engines were bad, the equipment was worse than ever. I had to choose an American engine and the appropriate equipment.

IL-96-300 due to the need to put on it is not 18-tonne NK-56, and PS-90 to 16 tons had to be shortened by 5,5 meter. But working with the Americans, we increased the length of the fuselage almost 10 meters. If the plane was made in the passenger version, it would today transport up to 400 passengers.

Another problem: a large number of finished products that complete the aircraft systems, including those for IL-76, are made by Ukraine. It cannot be said that there are a lot of them critically, but they exist. Fulfilling the state order for the construction of 39 IL-76, we have a stock of finished products for only five aircraft.

Almost all Ukrainian enterprises produce products according to drawings made in Russia. It would seem that he handed over the drawings to the relevant Russian company and it will begin to produce what our neighbors do not supply today. But not everything is so simple. We have OJSC Aviaequipment and the Radio Electronic Technologies Concern (KRET), with whom UAC works on import substitution issues. But the problem is not organizational confusion, but the fact that not all chief designers have a set of working drawings. A number of design bureaus should conduct development work for import substitution. Of course, this need may lead to the birth of better finished products than Ukraine previously supplied, but it will take time and money, which we don’t have, and it’s not quite clear who will allocate them.

Problems require solutions, and time is running out. Even the IL-76 serial production organized in Ulyanovsk may stop after a while. This matter must be very seriously dealt with.

Heinrich Novozhilov,
aircraft designer, twice Hero of Socialist Labor, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Do not reinvent the plane

About seven years ago, a young representative of the firm Sukhoi spoke at a meeting. He shouted that their plane - in the form of slides - has no competitors, that he has the best aerodynamics and everything. At the same time, such characteristics as 39 800 kilograms - landing weight, speed on the glide path - 260 kilometers per hour plus the ability to fly from the 1600 strips of meters were heard. As a leading test pilot of the Tu-334, I could not stand it and clarified that even with such a weight, if you follow the course exactly, you could barely fit into the dry lane. As for the comparative characteristics, the Tu-334 landing weight is not 39 800, but 43 500 kilograms, speed on the glide path - 235 kilometers per hour. So whose aerodynamics is better?


Andrei Sedykh collage


Now for the Tu-204CM. This is a deep, good upgrade of the Tu-204. Carried out the tests, the car received a certificate, but with the height of the airfield 500 meters this aircraft is not needed by anyone. No airline will take on such a fly. This means that it is necessary to carry out a new certification in order for the car to get the height of the airfield at once 2000 meters and become necessary. But so far everything remains at the level of conversations.

Some of our comrades say that the Il-114 is overweight and therefore is not needed by anyone, but ATR has replaced him. I conducted tests ATR 42, flew and ATR 72. These chassis cars are designed for good European lanes. IL-114 is made instead of the IL-14, so it has more massive chassis, that is, it is made just for our regional airfields.

I, who conducted the tests of the Il-114, today feel sad that this aircraft was written off successfully in Uzbekistan. According to the results of a special meeting in the KLA on whether the country needs an Il-114 or not, it was concluded that the car should be launched without fail. Only the representatives of the FSB and border guards participating in the meeting, as it turned out, require no less than 80 – 85 of such aircraft. At the same time, according to the forecasts of the State Civil Aviation Research Institute (GosNIIGA), for passenger traffic to 2020, the whole 96 IL-114 will be needed.

We do not need a turboprop aircraft in 10 years. A maximum of three years, he should already fly. That is, we are talking about the need for the immediate launch of the IL-114, especially since, according to GosNIIG calculations, the An-24 will end with us by the 2018 year. Thus, we simply have nothing to fly in principle, let alone expeditions to the Arctic, Antarctica, and so on.

The comparative characteristics of the two cars are impressive. An-24 carries 52 passengers, fuel consumption - 850 kilograms per hour, the crew - four people. IL-114 can carry 64 passenger, fuel - 520 kilograms per hour, the crew - two people.

For Boeings and Airbuses, our airlines must pay in dollars and euros. Aeroflot and Transaero supported the government. But then came the Crimea. It would seem to take three of the six available from Aeroflot Il-96, send them to the Crimea and change crews and technical personnel to fly all over Russia. Instead, all the IL-96 put to the fence, and one was burned at all. Now the remaining five cars "Aeroflot" gives to Voronezh.

I conducted tests IL-96, he could safely carry people from Simferopol to Kamchatka. This is our plane, for which you do not have to pay in currency, which means that ticket prices would be acceptable.

Ruben Yesayan,
Test Pilot, Deputy General Director - Head of the Flight Testing Center of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise GosNIIG

There are many composites, no responsibility

The Tu-334 and the Tu-204CM are in fact in no way inferior to the western “Airbus” and “Boeing”. The low altitude of the airfield is a fixable matter, the planes should be launched into a series, but no one does. We need the Ministry of Aviation Industry, I personally speak about this at least since 1990. With such a low level of organizational work, we will have no aviation. I will give an example. MC-21 (“Main Aircraft of the 21st Century”) is a project that uses many composite materials. But AeroComposite, which develops them, did not conduct any tests on them. And we are going to transport 180 people on this machine. This is utter irresponsibility. In the newspapers, of course, a solid PR: such unique airplanes! And this machine does not exist and it will appear only by 2020 year. So why don't we run the Tu-204CM?

Vladimir Dmitriev,
Director of TsAGI them. Zhukovsky (1998 – 2006), vice-chairman of the military-industrial complex (2006 – 2008), doctor of technical sciences, professor

We put our money in someone else's pocket

All the talk about the fact that the Tu-334 no buyers, lies. There were 400 orders, but one senior officer, reporting upstairs, said it was a virtual project.

All airlines today buy a cat in a bag. At the same time, we could really build a lot of our aircraft at the expense of funds spent on maintaining the airworthiness of a foreign fleet. Only in one month, some of our air carriers are forced to give 200 million dollars to this.

Once we, together with Genrikh Vasilievich Novozhilov, dealt with the issue of delivering our military contingent to IL-86. The car passed the state tests and was actively used, we transported on it on 450 people. By the way, the fuselage section is made so that the plane can be double-decked. At the exercises, five IL-86 brought more than two thousand soldiers. The chassis of this car allows it to land on a class B airfield with a concrete slab coating, which is much worse than ground.

Boris Likhachev
President of Rusavia-Sokol M LLC, executive director of the “National plane Tu-334-100” foundation

We do better ourselves, and we buy abroad

An airplane is an apparatus that must ensure, first of all, the safe movement of citizens. This is the basis of everything. And in this respect, what happens in the KLA in terms of creating the MC-21 is a complete disgrace. The same - in the entire domestic aviation industry. In Ulyanovsk, the assembly line Tu-204CM has already been destroyed. The aircraft is thrown out of the product line of the United Aviation Corporation, not because it is bad, but because the MS-21 has crossed the road.

In 2002, I did not sign the opinion of the expert council on the creation of the Superjet aircraft and I still think that I was right. With full responsibility, I can say that by the 2018 year MS-21 will not appear. We are stepping on the same rake as the Superjet. Of the 19 aircraft that are in the "Aeroflot", nine are at the wall and go for parts. Not organized by the normal service of maintaining the airworthiness of these machines in operation. The production time of a small tube for hydraulics (the order was carried out in Italy) is a month and a half. And because of it, the entire aircraft fails.

The idea of ​​creating the Ministry of Aviation Industry today is really, more than ever, relevant. Without a vertical power that would eliminate the existing fragmentation of our aircraft industry, we will not get away.

It is also necessary to legally prohibit aircraft manufacturers from ordering imported equipment in the event that the country has its own manufacturers capable of creating similar products. Let today they are a little behind in development, but tomorrow they will go far ahead.

We made a great engine NK-92, then NK-93, which was ahead of 15 years. But work on them stopped.

An airplane is an engine that has wings attached. Without engines there will be no aviation industry.

Today, the existence of the industry is dependent on the West. Why 80 percent of income from the production of PowerJet SaM146 (CM146) goes to France and only 10 – 20 percent remains in Russia? Why do not we produce onboard aircraft control systems, when our institutions are able to do them better than the French? Go to the Research Institute of Aviation Equipment and see for yourself.

Tu-204 is a reliable car, the only liner that landed with a full load of passengers in an emergency situation when the kerosene ran out. No aircraft in the world can plan as Tupolev’s cars do.

The production of Tu-334 is stopped. For ten years we have been fighting for this aircraft to live on. Yury Alexandrovich Bardin was removed because he believed in this car. You can not do that with the chief designers.

Today, the production chain of aircraft in Russia is broken. The chief designer - the person who assigns tasks to the institute, determines what is needed for the aircraft, can no longer do this, because the UAC, United Engine Corporation and Aviapribor-holding are sitting above it. What they say is what he should do. Only the newly created Ministry of Aviation Industry can clean up the industry.

Alexey Ignatov,
Honored Designer of Russia, Advisor to the Department of Aviation Industry of the Ministry of Industry and Trade

There will be a task generator, and everything else will appear

Talking about the revival of the aviation industry in the country is possible only if we ourselves begin to produce for ourselves such a number of aircraft that pulls all the most accomplished in the defense industry - materials, structures, information and radar parts, and so on. Today, only seven percent of domestic passenger aircraft are domestic. If we do not have our own aircraft, our engines will simply have nowhere to put, no one except us needs them.

The Soviet Union, with minimal financial resources, was helped by the structure of managing industries. The Ministry of Aviation Industry accumulated science, technology, training, and cooperation. Implemented the main principle of management - planning. There were managers, performers, reporting. All this allowed to form the legal field, standards and regulations, to optimize all processes for the manufacture of aircraft. There was local production inside the country, we didn’t need anyone. The country has achieved this in 12 years - from 1929 to 1941 a year, solving successively the issues of reviving and building energy, transport, industrialization, education and, of course, training. It was along this path that China, India, Argentina, and other countries subsequently went. Resigned to restrictions in energy, transport, computer science and then in food, we got the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The USSR had a sales market in Eastern Europe, Africa, South America, Southeast Asia, India and China. Where can we find our planes, cars, phones and televisions today? Who turned this production? Now the Ukrainian market is being taken away from us. But this is our space, a single economy.

The Ministry of Defense Industries broke up in 1997, transferring all business to the Ministry of Economy. As a result, aviation began to fall.

We had a long walk with the proposal to form a branch ministry. After all, it is a generator of state tasks, a controller of their solution. It is unthinkable to be both a general customer and a performer.

Russia should have its own planes, companies, pilots. Should work domestic highway systems. This is nothing. They say there are not enough funds. At the same time, our companies declare the need to purchase more than 450 Boeing, Airbus, Bombardier and Embraer. With the money spent on these aircraft, we could load all our production and get 1000 – 1100 machines. And of course, engines would be required. All industries involved in the production of materials, as well as electronics, avionics, and so on, would be involved. Of course, the most important task of training the necessary personnel would also have to be solved, without which nothing can be moved from the dead center.

In addition to the Ministry of Aviation Industry, it is necessary to create a central board for prospective fundamental research, to make an inventory of all technologies, including all this in the general technological chain.

It is required to reconsider all the standards and requirements, it is worth remembering at the same time that the GOSTs of the Soviet Union were stricter than existing now in international law.

But most importantly, we must start producing all the aircraft we have. Without Tu-334, Tu-214, Tu-204, IL-96 and other domestic cars there will be no need for our engines.

The task is to continue the development of existing technologies and develop new ones. You should not drag foreign engines and other products 40-year-old to Russia into Russia, you need to invest in creating your own.

Why Russia lost those leading positions that we held 25 years ago? Participants in the hearings gave an answer to this question. History with import substitution suggests that to solve the accumulated problems need a government order and political will. Many speakers argued the need to revive the headquarters of the industry - the Ministry of Aviation Industry.

We are able to stoke, we have forgotten how to build

When the system in our country changed to a liberal-democratic one, everything went awry. To begin with, our leaders from overseas rewrote the Constitution to us. So we live according to the Basic Law, which is dictated by the General Staff over the hill. Then they did everything in order for Russia to learn how to correctly evaluate the quality of their products and buy them. Next, we took up our education. EGE completely weaned children to think. The creators are gone. Heads of departments in MADI, RUDN and MATI say that freshmen do not know elementary physics. With mathematical preparation, too, things are not the best way, although the theme of the introduction of modern computing tools is somehow supported in schools.


Photo: gov.spb.ru


Once Dmitry Medvedev spoke about some of the incidents in our aircraft industry as follows: “We must work hard”. This phrase, uttered five years ago, still echoes so far. Nothing more is done. All newly created corporations, shaking up organizations to nothing qualitatively new in the aviation and space industry did not lead. Destroyed and not just the structure of the FSB and the Interior Ministry. Instead of the bodies that should control the legality of all actions committed on the territory of the country, we have a bunch of corrupt armed people.

Our pundits are not interested in the Russian direction of work. It is much more profitable to execute foreign orders. This allows them to fly abroad, receive travel and publication fees. Beautiful, easy, pseudoscientific life. Those who are engaged in real science are simply not allowed to go abroad.

It is necessary to do everything to make the purchase of foreign equipment absolutely unprofitable for us. There is a desire to buy another airplane - put in the treasury its double value, and then buy. Immediately there will be an interest in domestic products.

Designers were derived. In the space industry, civilians began to engage in construction. The new leadership again signs plans for joint work by the ISS, which Russia has long been absolutely uninteresting for. I remember very well how Yury Koptev in Houston “broke his arms”, forcing him to drown the “World”. Because the Americans said they would not pull the two stations.

But the most offensive is that there is practically no Russian science on the ISS. Fundamental good results are only in medical biology. In other areas, such as remote sensing, nothing happens. We are forced to close the theme of the formation of the cosmonaut-ecologist profession, because we don’t even see the whole Baikal under the Mir-2 station, but we can fully see America.

The Academy of Sciences supported the idea of ​​an environmental patrol. We created an entire school, prepared about a hundred people, it was an interesting program. A new division on ecology was formed, the Scandinavian countries and Canada showed interest in our work, as we will fly over them.

Probably, we have become very rich, once we squander all our achievements, including the Burans.

Vladimir Dzhanibekov,
space pilot, general, twice Hero of the Soviet Union

Property industry - simplify and reduce

Paradoxical situation: there is no serial production of helicopter engines in Russia, despite the fact that our helicopter industry, unlike aircraft production, largely retained its competitiveness and supply prospects. The TB3 VK-2500 engine has been produced for many years and is used on almost all helicopters around the world. It was developed by the Russian Klimov Design Bureau, but its production was transferred to Ukraine by Motor Sich. And only now the long-standing task of mastering its production in Russia is being solved.

At present, OAO Klimov is carrying out a set of qualification tests for a Russian-made engine. He passed the bench hours and is now on the strut.

The problem is as follows. Since during the development of this engine in Russia, quite a lot of changes were made both in the basic materials and in the technological processes, it is not possible to fully reproduce what is on Motor Sich. It is not even well known what exactly is there. Therefore, the program of qualification tests is a large complex of works. Unfortunately, there is a tendency to simplify this process, and to reduce the work, although there are all the necessary regulatory documents and requirements. This, in principle, is peculiar to our industry, unfortunately. But in this case, to ensure the safety of the operation of Russian engines, the entire complex of tests must be performed. For this, in particular, the Central Institute of Aviation Motors (CIAM) also struggles, encountering quite strong opposition from not only the engine developers, but also our customer number 1.

The helicopter version of the TV7-117 engine (TV7-117V) is an example of the import substitution that has taken place to a certain extent. Several years ago, the Pratt & Whitney engine was considered as the main engine on the Mi-38 helicopter. But then the Canadian-American side refused to participate in the project, since the helicopter had a dual purpose - military transport and multipurpose.

Now on the Mi-38 installed Russian engines. And the problem, as it turned out, is that the base sample is certified in 1997 and its production is mastered at the plant named after V. V. Chernyshev in Moscow, but the last production copy is made either in 2008 or 2009. , and on the Mi-38 work as a result of converted helicopter versions of turboprop engines.

The heavy transport Mi-26 is our largest helicopter with the Ukrainian D-136. Here, as an alternative, a variant of an engine based on PD-14 is considered - the flagship of the Russian engine building, which accumulates quite a lot of promising solutions. If the program is successfully implemented, it should replace the American Pratt & Whitney with the MS-21.

Yuri Fokin,
Head of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise "TsIAM them. P.I. Baranova "

There is no project without contracts

Before allocating funds from the 2015 for the draft-technical design of a wide-body aircraft, it is necessary to develop a technical assignment (TK) for it, protect the project, and start development work. We still haven’t seen anything through the Expert Council on the Federal Target Program (FTP) “Development of Russian civil aviation technology for the 2002 – 2010 years and for the period up to the 2015 of the year”. We need documents written in our language and made in the adopted standardization system.

The cornerstone of what is happening in the industry today is the lack of a customer among developers and manufacturers.

When the Federal Target Program “Development of Civil Aviation Equipment” was formed in 2000 – 2001, all work was carried out jointly with the Federal Agency for Air Transport. But then the ministry, which is the headquarters of the industry, actually refused to coordinate technical assignments for our planes in any way. TK on the "Superjet", MC-21 and everything else they did not subscribe. The most significant signature belonged to the State Research Institute "Air Navigation", which has now joined the State Research Institute of Civil Aviation (GosNIIGA).

To all our requests to show how many and which planes are needed, the Ministry of Transport responds that this is a question of the airlines.

In order to engage in a project, you need to have firm contracts to supply at least 50 aircraft with payment obligations, and so on. And that's about this rock, we are fighting so much time.

It would seem that the president approved the political course, according to which it is necessary to develop industry, transportation, to coordinate all joint activities. Nevertheless, there is no agreed work at the ministerial level.

Our main task is to ensure the completion of the creation and support of the sales levels of the aircraft that we have. The fact that someone allegedly buried Tu-204CM, I did not hear anything. Moreover, Yury Slyusar, who is now appointed president of the United Aircraft Building Corporation, while he was the deputy minister of the Ministry of Industry and Trade, made every effort to carry out work aimed at starting to sell this aircraft as soon as possible.

By the way, the Ministry of Industry and Trade a year ago, when the Crimea issue arose, appealed first to the Ministry of Transport and then to the government with a proposal to create an airline based in Crimea from Red Wings with Tu-204. But things are there.

As for IL-96, Tu-204 and An-148, we tried to solve the problem of their sales by forming a state consolidated order. About two years ago there was such an order of the president. Understanding that commercial carriers basically refuse from this, we formed a plan with government customers, having worked through a financing mechanism. But when it came to talking about allocating funds for it in excess of those envisaged, the Ministry of Finance took a tough stance: do not have money, what you want, then do it. The only thing that we were able to offer to customers from the already available resources was to somehow try to stretch the deliveries of airplanes and helicopters in time, but in order to maximally ensure the advancement of a larger amount of equipment.

Through the Ministry of Internal Affairs, a comprehensive targeted program has been prepared to provide this ministry with aviation equipment, in which there are both civilian aircraft and helicopters. The program has been agreed, but there is no decision on sources of additional financing.

On the one hand, we are supposed to help the aviation industry as part of anti-crisis measures, and on the other hand, we have to somehow provide funding for priority projects (Irkut MS-21 and PD-14 for it), for which we have a state program around 50 billions a year. At present, we are making changes in the federal program to replace the materials that are laid in the composite wing, keel, with domestic ones. Accordingly, it is necessary to refine the technology, and this means a shift in all terms.

At the end of the year, General Director of AeroComposite CJSC Anatoly Gaydansky promised to put the wing made in TsAGI for testing.

Despite the fact that IL-96, Tu-204 commercial airlines are not particularly in demand, and if they are needed, they are not very large (compared to national carriers) or are in financial difficulties, however there are a number of components that you don’t want , but you still need to import. Because on these cars the first person of the state, heads of the Ministry of Defense and other important persons fly.

31 was formed in March and approved by the order of the Minister a sectoral plan for import substitution on civil issues. It shows the type of aircraft, and the specific components planned for replacement, and the timing. There is an understanding of who will do it.

Now the government has set a task for all ministries to form such plans and mechanisms for their implementation by June 1.

There is really a lot of work on IL-114, there are ongoing meetings. At Aviakor, with the support of the plenipotentiary in the Volga Federal District, Mikhail Babich talked a lot about the willingness to take on the IL-114 project as a whole, including the implementation. They even formed a business plan, but then Russian Machines, a holding controlled by Oleg Deripaska’s financial-industrial group Basic Element, which includes Aviakor, said they were ready to take on the risks of the project only for their production part.

The decision to transfer the production of IL-76 aircraft to Ulyanovsk was made in March 2006. But the IL-76MD-90A state tests did not pass to the end. It is clear that the time and money needed to produce a completely new aircraft of the IL-76MD-90А type is not from the reserve of the Tashkent plant, it will take a lot. For 2020 year out and the creation of IL-112. At the same time, until there is a military machine, there’s nothing even to say about the civil one.

Sergey Fominykh,
Deputy Director of the Aviation Industry Department of the Ministry of Industry and Trade

Himself Superjet

Discussing the “Superjet” does not make sense for the simple reason that with the current dollar rate this car transports two times less passengers than the Tu-204, and at a much shorter distance. At the same time, in support of the SuperJet program, 600 million dollars are invested.

It is completely unacceptable that the KLA is now the only actor in aviation. There are practically no those who would get to the Tupolev company, despite the fact that unmanned equipment was developed here in 50's. In the 1994 year, we already had a five-pit in a shock version. "Tupolev" has always remained in the first roles.

However, today the KLA does not even involve the design bureaus in competitive work on unmanned vehicles, and the money is mostly forwarded to Sukhoi. Since August 2004, the Tu-334 program has not been funded. Despite a government decree on Tu-334, the KLA, which probably does not comply with the state, decides to stop work on the topic.

Today, for the organization of production at the Kazan Aviation Plant, taking into account the digitization of documentation (we have it all on paper), about three billion rubles are needed. There are initial data at the plant, only political will is required. But as far as I understand, now even with a change of the head in the UAC, they are not going to revive the topic.

Igor Kalygin,
Chief Designer Tu-334 Tupolev OJSC

Our salvation is a tough state system.


What is happening today in the aircraft industry is well reflected in the old Russian proverb “At seven nannies there is a child without an eye”. As long as we have combined aircraft manufacturing and engine building corporations without a ministry, we will not get off the ground. In order for aviation to become a state matter, it is necessary that it should be headed by a state person, that is, a minister whose sole responsibility is the production of aircraft and their delivery to carriers.

All the functions that the relevant minister had in the Soviet Union should now be added to the most important thing - working with airlines and creating favorable conditions for them to purchase domestic aircraft. Now we need to spend money on it. And the state understands this. It is time to collect stones. It is simply impossible to produce aircraft in the now prevailing mess. Here Alexey Fedorov says that the 93-th machine can not be done. Two days later, Fedorov is no longer the president of the KLA and the discussion begins anew. Our salvation is a tough state system. And then everything will be done, we will release new planes and engines, and not repeat what was done yesterday.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

114 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    April 29 2015 21: 20
    The main problems why Russian planes do not buy in the west:
    1) Missing service
    2) Composite materials are practically not used in Russian aircraft (and this is an additional weight and, as a result, more fuel consumption).
    3) There are no powerful economical engines. On the IL-96, the 4 engines are installed not from a good life, but because there is no alternative. PS-90 produces thrust of 16 tons of everything, on a Boeing 767 one engine creates thrust of 30 tons, on a Boeing 777 one engine creates thrust of 50 tons. An engine with a thrust of 57 tons is being developed.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. -1
        April 29 2015 21: 33
        Quote: avt
        Nobody needs a competitor. Everything else is pi ... and provocation.

        Compare fuel consumption of IL-96 and Boeing 767. It is not in favor of our aircraft.
        As for the service, it’s like buying a Buick car in the USA to bring to Russia and hoping that here you can get the parts for it. Airplanes need warehouses with spare parts on every continent to quickly deliver them to airlines. Composite materials affect fuel consumption. Airlines strive to minimize fuel consumption.
        Quote: avt

        Four dvigla were one of the requirements for certification for flights across the ocean during the design of airplanes, just look when the cars appeared on the routes with two engines. And at the same time look at how hard the same PS-90 made its way, when in the 90s the amers openly spoke in Perm - we will not give you the design and manufacture of engines - you will only be engaged in the repair of pratles and whitles.

        Airbas created the A340 and A330. Aircraft differ only in the number of engines (On the A330, the engines are slightly more powerful). Now 4-engine A340 - 0 orders.
        1. jjj
          +12
          April 29 2015 21: 44
          Western civil aircraft are built to maximize profits. Our planes were created for the safe transportation of passengers, taking into account the conditions of complete lack of navigation and manual modes of piloting "over the rails".
          As for the crews, they already talked about the need for a third in the cockpit. And that means four will be required to fly across the ocean. And the four engines will return. Won 380 and even 474 th fly and in the future will continue
          1. -1
            April 29 2015 21: 58
            Quote: jjj
            Western civilian aircraft are designed to make the most profit possible.

            Maximizing profit drives the progress, new technologies appear that allow creating more efficient engines and lighter aircraft fuselages.
            For example, space rocket science only wants to create a more efficient engine that allows changing the ratio of fuel and payload (now 90% of the weight of the rocket is fuel and oxidizer, and only 10% of the payload).
            Quote: jjj
            taking into account the conditions of complete absence of navigation and manual modes of piloting "over the rails".

            Now Glonass has appeared, in all cities with a population of one million, airports are equipped with modern facilities that allow you to land an airplane even with zero visibility using instruments (special transmitters allow you to determine the exact position of the strip).
            Quote: jjj
            As for the crews, they already talked about the need for a third in the cockpit.

            One person can break the head to another, the third does not help prevent crime.
            Quote: jjj
            Won 380th and even 474th fly and in the future will continue

            This is because these aircraft models are very large and heavy, and so far there are no such powerful engines that you can install two engines instead of four.
            1. jjj
              +1
              April 29 2015 22: 19
              What is the weather like today over the Potomac?
              1. +1
                April 30 2015 09: 01
                All this talk about aircraft types, engines, import substitution, competitors, etc. in Russia is a waste of time until the main issue has been resolved - the creation of the Ministry of Aviation Industry.
                The honored authors of the article are right: Genrikh Novozhilov, Ruben Yesayan, Vladimir Dmitriev, Boris Likhachev, Alexey Ignatov, Anatoly Sitnov:
                The idea of ​​creating the Ministry of Aviation Industry today is really, more than ever, relevant. Without a vertical power that would eliminate the existing fragmentation of our aircraft industry, we will not get away.

                With minimal financial resources, the Soviet Union was assisted by the structure of managing industrial sectors. The Ministry of Aviation Industry has accumulated science, technology, training and cooperation. Implemented the main principle of management - planning. There were managers, performers, reporting. All this made it possible to form a legal framework, standards and regulations, and to optimize all aircraft manufacturing processes. There was local production inside the country, we did not need anyone or anything.

                Why did Russia lose the leading position that we held 25 years ago? Participants in the hearings answered this question. The history of import substitution suggests that to solve the accumulated problems need state order and political will. Many speakers argued for the need to revive industry headquarters - Ministry of Aviation.

                When the system in our country changed to liberal-democratic, everything went and went wrong. To start our leaders from across the ocean have rewritten the Constitution for us. So we live according to the Basic Law, which is dictated by the General Staff over the hill. Then they did everything so that in Russia they learned to competently evaluate the quality of their products and buy them. Then they took up our education. USE completely weaned children from thinking. Creators have disappeared.

                Without the MAP, and other sectoral ministries, carrying out the state political will and ordering in the most important industries, nothing good will happen, even if you "stick up" in your work, as Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev urges.
            2. +2
              April 29 2015 23: 02
              3% -4% of the payload, and if you use Pushkin’s engines, it will be 24%!
            3. +1
              April 29 2015 23: 40
              Quote: Lt. air force reserve
              In all cities with a million people, airports are equipped with modern facilities that allow you to land the plane even with zero visibility, using instruments

              Do you have any idea of ​​what a "blind landing" is? Only not theoretically?
              Not a single commander of a ship, behind which passengers are sitting, will land a car in the absence of eye contact with the ground.
          2. +3
            April 29 2015 22: 48
            Quote: jjj
            Western civil aircraft are built to maximize profits. Our planes were created for the safe transportation of passengers, taking into account the conditions of complete lack of navigation and manual modes of piloting "over the rails".
            As for the crews, they already talked about the need for a third in the cockpit. And that means four will be required to fly across the ocean. And the four engines will return. Won 380 and even 474 th fly and in the future will continue


            The profit lies in the fact that they fly (and do not stand on the ground) and do not fall. Security is the main component of profit, well, it's just logical.

            No one is going to introduce a third crew member. He just has nothing to do in the cockpit of a modern airplane. 380 is very large, while there are no such powerful engines. New 747 modifications failed miserably, with almost no orders. The main bet now is on the dreamliner which is certainly not small, and on the A-350 both are twin-engine. Another modernized version of the 777, with new powerful engines and an extended fuselage - there is an opinion that this will be the plane with the lowest fuel consumption per person (777 also has two engines!)
          3. -2
            April 29 2015 23: 10
            Our aircraft were created for the safe transportation of passengers, taking into account the conditions of the complete absence of navigation and manual modes of piloting "over the rails"

            And why did they fight so often?
            1. +1
              April 29 2015 23: 33
              Because their resource flew for a long time.
              1. +1
                April 30 2015 00: 23
                In Soviet times?
            2. +1
              April 30 2015 02: 22
              Quote: clidon
              And why did they fight so often?

              And how often? Can you give comparative statistics?
              1. 0
                April 30 2015 10: 54
                USSR 1982-91
                The number of accidents per 100 million passenger \ kilometers, 0.08
                USA 1981-2011
                The number of accidents per 100 million passenger \ kilometers 0.015

                From the IAC report
                The Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) is the executive body of 11 states of the former USSR (Commonwealth of Independent States) on the functions and powers delegated by states in the field of civil aviation and the use of airspace. It was established on the basis of the intergovernmental “Agreement on Civil Aviation and on the Use of Airspace” signed on December 30, 1991.

                http://www.mak.ru/russian/info/doclad_bp/1992-2001/doklad_za_1992-2001_godi.html
                1. +2
                  April 30 2015 15: 17
                  Small typo "USA 1981-2001"
                  Strange people believe that not noticing flaws is patriotism, not betrayal and sabotage. recourse
          4. 0
            1 May 2015 09: 24
            [quote = jjj] Western civilian aircraft are designed to make the most profit possible.
            But do they not think about this when designing domestic cars? If so, then it’s sad and whoever knows how to count money will never buy it.
        2. +3
          April 30 2015 07: 57
          It is better to find who in the government lobbies the interests of Western air companies and shoot them as an enemy of the people, although there is no need to look, and so everyone knows the heroes in person ........ so why the supreme is silent ......
        3. 0
          April 30 2015 18: 35
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          Now on the 4-engine A340 - 0 orders.


          Airbus A340 is a long-range four-engine turbojet wide-body passenger aircraft developed by Airbus SAS. As of May 2006 was ordered 389 aircraft.
          By the end of September 2010 year was delivered by 374 the plane. 15 November 2011 year production A340 was officially discontinued.
          1. 0
            April 30 2015 19: 56
            Quote: And Us Rat
            On November 15, 2011, the production of the A340 was officially discontinued.

            Therefore, they stopped production, because there were 0 orders, in addition, the aircraft was more expensive to maintain than the A-330.
      2. -5
        April 29 2015 22: 26
        What are these balabolas, that is, the Communist Party did not restore order in the country when she had so many years had a majority in the Duma ?! What zyuganov leaked won the election he won with Yeltsin ??? Yes, because they stole like everyone else, but it is better to steal aside, to blame and not to RESPOND for anything !!! And now the village is in trouble ... whether, the cosmos - whether ... or so on. Yes, there are a lot of issues ... whether, BUT ... whether all together, along with the Communist Party, etc. jackals. And the order in the country is slowly being brought in, certainly not thanks to them. But rather contrary. Most of the writing is a lie, and the rest is half told, it is pure lobby. It is not offensive, but after the collapse of the Union, no one needs our civil aviation - it is not profitable - fuel consumption, noise, number of crew, etc. Gifts for half the price to friend countries ran out, and so no one wanted to buy it. Something like this. By the way, the IL-86 couldn’t fly by noise in Europe
        1. +4
          April 30 2015 01: 11
          Quote: maxim947
          Most of what is written is a lie,

          If I were you, I would not scatter categorical "conclusions": you, apart from slogans, do not see any intelligible arguments - everything is at the level of "heard somewhere."
          What is written is sad reality. Do not believe me - take the time to visit any aircraft factory - they will tell you a lot about it.
          1. +1
            April 30 2015 09: 03
            Everything is very simple - if there were orders for these planes (which are discussed in the article), then they would make planes. There were no orders. An airline is a private shop, it buys what is more profitable, while observing all the technical regulations established for it. Everything else is Wishlist. And I am absolutely not happy about this fact.
        2. +4
          April 30 2015 02: 26
          Quote: maxim947
          By the way, the IL-86 couldn’t fly by noise in Europe

          And of course he had nowhere else to fly?
          1. 0
            April 30 2015 10: 48
            Quote: aviator65
            Quote: maxim947
            By the way, the IL-86 couldn’t fly by noise in Europe

            And of course he had nowhere else to fly?

            And fuel consumption is too high
      3. +2
        April 29 2015 22: 41
        Quote: avt
        Nobody needs a competitor. Everything else 3,14 ... and provocation. This type

        If the product were comparable with competitors, it would be bought.
        In private business, politics is less than it seems. Create a competitive aircraft and engine and they will buy it.

        Quote: avt
        At the same time, look at how hard the very PS-90 made its way when, in 90, amers openly spoke in Perm - we will not give you the design and manufacture of engines - you will only deal with prattle and whittle repair


        PS-90 was banned from export, since there were mechanisms developed by Prat Whitney. It is logical that if you get other people's technologies, then their creator sets the condition that they should not compete with the original source.

        But there are modifications of PS-90 that do not have a ban on export. Only no buyers ...
        1. avt
          +2
          April 30 2015 08: 51
          Quote: Falcon
          If the product were comparable with competitors, it would be bought.

          Hike, another victim of the Gaidarov Witnesses sect, who piously believe in the All-Regulating Market? Well, look at the fate of the An-70 for a start, when, in cooperation with the Germans, Russia and Ukraine tried under the nickname An-7X in Europe not only to sell it - to produce it together. And why, to compare with competitors, - with the A-400, which even in the drawings was not at the time when the An-70 flew, ended ????????????????????????????????????????????? Characteristics declared and obtained after the manufacture of A-400 with An-70 reluctance to compare?
          Quote: Falcon
          PS-90 was banned from export, since there were mechanisms developed by Prat Whitney. It is logical that if you get other people's technologies, then their creator sets the condition that they should not compete with the original source.

          So all the same, they crush the competitor? laughing
          Quote: Falcon
          But there are modifications of PS-90 that do not have a ban on export. Only no buyers ...

          For any Actually as required to prove -
          Quote: avt
          Nobody needs a competitor. Everything else 3,14 ... and provocation
          1. -3
            April 30 2015 10: 43
            Quote: avt
            Hike, another victim of the Gaidarov Witnesses sect, who piously believe in the All-Regulating Market?


            I don’t seem to get personal, and I would ask you too.

            Quote: avt
            All-Regulatory Market "


            I do not believe, but am a participant in it.

            Quote: avt
            Well, look at the fate of An-70 for a start, when in cooperation with the Germans Russia and Ukraine tried not only to sell it under the nickname An-7X in Europe - to produce it together


            A-400 is a military aircraft. I do not think that we will have Europe Su-27? This is basic defense security.

            Just do not forget that in addition to Europe there are China, India, Iran, Brazil, etc. Something nobody stood in line, not only for An-70, but also for Il-96, Tu-204, An-148, An-140, etc.

            Quote: avt
            C-90 was banned from export, since there were mechanisms developed by Prat Whitney. It is logical that if you get other people's technologies, then their creator sets the condition that they should not compete with the original source.
            So all the same, they crush the competitor?


            Karaz this means that no. No need to misinterpret the facts! I will explain on the fingers: Country X needs to make a wheel, for their own needs. But country X only makes wheels and doesn't make tires. Country Y does both. They agree that country X will purchase tires from U only if the wheels X do not compete with wheels U. Otherwise, it makes no sense for country Y to sell tires X to country.

            Quote: avt
            But there are modifications of PS-90 that do not have a ban on export. Only no buyers ...
            For any Actually as required to prove -
            Quote: avt
            Nobody needs a competitor. Everything else 3,14 ... and provocation


            Our Zhiguli also buy less and less. This is also "Nobody needs a competitor. Everything else is 3,14 ... and a provocation"? It's just that Zhiguli are not competitive with modern foreign cars.
            1. avt
              0
              April 30 2015 11: 18
              Quote: Falcon
              A-400 is a military aircraft. I don’t think that we will have a Su-27 in Europe?

              But before you think, and even more so
              Quote: Falcon
              ! I will explain on the fingers:

              Bend your fingers about country X and the other 3,14 ... It’s better to get acquainted with specific facts on the same An-7X program, which the Germans were actively moving, and then it was cut off.
              Quote: Falcon
              I don't seem to get personal

              A statement of fact which you confirm.
              Quote: Falcon
              All-Regulatory Market "

              I do not believe, but am a participant in it.

              So before getting offended, it is better, as in a joke - either to put on trousers, or to take off a cross - or to operate with facts on a specific commercial project, or to continue singing mantras to the All-Regulatory Market and Holy Investments.
              Quote: Falcon
              Just do not forget that in addition to Europe there are China, India, Iran, Brazil, etc. Something nobody stood in line, not only for An-70, but also for Il-96, Tu-204, An-148, An-140, etc.

              And then it turns out especially fluidly with respect to the same Iran where the An-148 was delivered and there was a desire to produce, but US sanctions, which somehow suddenly turned out to be binding on everyone, India generally flies and modernizes the An-32, and the Brazilians generally do the planes themselves and they push it to themselves wherever they can, for example, linking the contract for the military Su with the counter deliveries of their civilians. I don’t want to talk about the copy machine in China.
              1. -3
                April 30 2015 11: 44
                Quote: avt
                It is better to familiarize yourself with specific facts on the same An-7X program, which the Germans actively moved, and then cut off.

                Cut off because they take no less part in the A-400 project ... And it is more economically feasible.

                Quote: avt
                And then it turns out especially fluidly in relation to the same Iran where An-148 was delivered and there was a desire to produce, but we have sanctions, which somehow suddenly turned out to be binding on everyone.

                Only before these sanctions did Iran have a Boeing fleet and not Anov.


                Quote: avt
                India generally flies and upgrades An-32

                What are you talking about? About military aircraft or civilian aircraft. In civilian airlines there is not one An. Everywhere Boeing and Airbus.

                Quote: avt
                Brazilians generally do the planes themselves and push themselves to where they can

                And which Brazilian aircraft can compete with the Il-96 or Tu-204 or An-70? Do you even see what they produce. And then I tell you about Thomas, and you tell me about Yerema ...

                Quote: avt
                I don’t want to talk about the copy machine in China.

                That’s why our authorities probably forbade the sale of our aircraft to a politically independent China, and the poor Chinese had to buy Boeing for civil aviation ....

                Quote: avt
                A statement of fact which you confirm.
                Quote: Falcon
                All-Regulatory Market "

                I do not believe, but am a participant in it.

                So before getting offended, it is better, as in a joke - either to put on trousers, or to take off a cross - or to operate with facts on a specific commercial project, or to continue singing mantras to the All-Regulatory Market and Holy Investments.


                I confirm that I am a participant in the business process, which is associated with markets and investments. And if you do not do this, then this does not mean that you can be an expert ... And say what works there and what doesn't
                1. avt
                  0
                  April 30 2015 12: 40
                  Quote: Falcon
                  Cut off because they take no less part in the A-400 project ... And it is more economically feasible.

                  Yeah laughing It’s a matter for the marketer to have a ready-made airplane, but then to do it from scratch and, moreover, according to its characteristics, worse than An, and their own declared ones could not stand it. laughingKaaaneshno "Airbus" is profitable - they beat off the budget line, as it is on the market - "there is no such crime that the capitalist would not commit for the sake of 300% profit"
                  Quote: Falcon
                  Only before these sanctions did Iran have a Boeing fleet and not Anov.

                  And before the Boeings, they generally had British shelves, so what?
                  Quote: Falcon
                  I tell you about Thomas, and you tell me about Yerema ...

                  That's right - I'm talking about the fact that a competitor is being killed in the bud by destroying production, and no one takes it back to me. it was not there - a couple of pieces from the reserve of the old can still be assembled, and so all the cooperation is killed.
                  Quote: Falcon
                  . And if you do not do this, then this does not mean that you can be an expert ... And say what works there and what doesn't

                  laughing laughing Or maybe it means that you cannot be an expert ... " laughing Oh, this is a young, unfamiliar tribe ... " laughing Well, God willing - life will teach, but for now - bank with the proud title of top manager in the "business process".
                  1. 0
                    April 30 2015 15: 07
                    Quote: avt
                    Yeah, it’s a pity - to have a ready-made airplane, but then do it from scratch and, moreover, according to its characteristics, it is worse than An, and even its declared ones could not stand it. Kaaaneshno "Airbus" is profitable - they beat off the budget line, as it is on the market - "there is no such crime that the capitalist would not commit for the sake of 300% profit"

                    Once again, this is a military plane. The main thing is safety and financing of its production. And this applies only to state programs. This does not apply to private carriers.

                    Quote: avt
                    Quote: Falcon
                    Only before these sanctions did Iran have a Boeing fleet and not Anov.
                    And before the Boeings, they generally had British shelves, so what?

                    The fact that before the sanctions no one took our planes there either. Have you forgotten what you wrote about?

                    Quote: avt
                    Or maybe it means that you cannot be an expert ... "Oh, this is a young, unfamiliar tribe ..." Well, God willing - life will teach, but for now - bank with the proud title of top manager in the business process ".

                    No one is banking. It is just jarring when people who are not versed in the economy talk about investments and markets, and try to prove the point.
                2. avt
                  -1
                  April 30 2015 12: 56
                  Quote: Falcon
                  And which Brazilian aircraft can compete with the Il-96 or Tu-204 or An-70? Do you even see what they produce.

                  By the way, about the Chinese - they make their own with the help of ukrov, very similar to the Tu-334, only the fuselage is smaller and they localize the assembly of air buses - the air buses competently crushed the Russian aviation industry, which, according to top managers, is not needed well, Gref won, though with regard to cars, so and said - let the Germans do it. So they vparized their own, only the "market people" just got through and started talking about a long-haul airplane with the Chinese. Maybe Slusar will be able to break through the European lobby in the government
                  1. 0
                    April 30 2015 15: 12
                    Quote: avt
                    Quote: Falcon
                    And which Brazilian aircraft can compete with the Il-96 or Tu-204 or An-70? Do you even see what they produce.
                    By the way, about the Chinese - they make their own with the help of ukrov, very similar to the Tu-334, only the fuselage is smaller and they localize the assembly of air buses - the air buses competently crushed the Russian aviation industry, which, according to top managers, is not needed well, Gref won, though with regard to cars, so and said - let the Germans do it. So they vparized their own, only the "market people" just got through and started talking about a long-haul airplane with the Chinese. Maybe Slusar will be able to break through the European lobby in the government


                    Actually, it was originally about Brazil, but oh well ...
                    Just for erudition look at the fleets of passenger airlines in China. There are only Boeing and Airbus. Everything else, their production, goes to state structures. You can do a long-haul together with anyone, but if it is not competitive (in terms of reliability, resource and economy), then no lobby will help.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. 0
                        April 30 2015 17: 14
                        Quote: avt
                        Here are the words of the true "Witness Gaidarov", you can still hear the notes of a graduate of the Gaidar Institute or the Higher School of Economics. More about the dollar rate, which itself jumps, conjuncture, etc. Well, all of that

                        Apparently, intelligence does not allow not to switch to a personality ..
                        On the topic, as I understand it, there is nothing more to say ...
                        Just for information, I'm a graduate of the aerospace university. And I am writing on this topic as I understand the technique ...
                        Quote: avt
                        By the way, when you translate all your terms into Russian, make sure of the exact and capacious characterization that the dead man Livshits gave, and he wasn’t for a minute

                        I studied them in English, apparently you need to translate.

                        Quote: avt
                        There is no money for the production of aircraft in Russia

                        No one gives money to Boeing and Airbus for the production of civilian aircraft, they just buy them ...
                        Quote: avt
                        then I will notice you and maybe I will even listen

                        Why did you decide that I need you to notice me. I just entered into a discussion about technology and manufacturers. But she slipped into insults and hatred in the style of cheers of patriotism.
                        The forum implies a conversation on an equal footing, not aspirations that would have noticed someone
      4. +3
        April 30 2015 05: 35
        hi Since the time of the signed Boeing leasing agreement, this fuss has been going on with the suffocation of its own aviation industry. And the most interesting thing is all happening with our hands, that's where the horror is.
    2. +5
      April 29 2015 21: 36
      Quote: Lt. air force reserve
      The main problems

      Yes, that's right.
      In addition, PS-90 went to acceptable parameters for reliability and resource for a very long time.
      But now the Tu-204СМ could very well import substitute.
      IL-96-400 was sent to the lousy company Polet, now bankrupt, not a single spare motor, expensive service. This is largely a consequence of small series.
      In general, the question is not simple. There is also a technological lag, which should be eliminated during the establishment of PD-14 production and, possibly, organizational calculations of the industry’s development. We should not forget that 10 years ago we were bare-assed, we repaid our debts and no large-scale development, and it was not possible to plan something. Indeed, without large series, each Tu-214, An-148 and others bring millions of dollars of loss on each assembled copy.
      1. +6
        April 29 2015 21: 44
        What to look at the West?

        How would their airlines enough. It is necessary to put on domestic airlines domestic aircraft. And to let out not piece, and normal series. Then there will be no problems with spare parts.

        And in Voronezh, VASO, sharpened by IL-76, 86, 96 stands as an organ otviagrenny.
        1. -2
          April 29 2015 21: 50
          Quote: Banshee
          How would their airlines enough. It is necessary to put on domestic airlines domestic aircraft. And to let out not piece, and normal series. Then there will be no problems with spare parts.

          And in Voronezh, VASO, sharpened by IL-76, 86, 96 stands as an organ otviagrenny.

          And with whom will they compete? Only competition drives new technologies. And the Russian transport market is limited in comparison with the whole world. If the Russian airline can compete with Boeing and Airbus, it will increase Russia's GDP by 0,5-1 trillion dollars.
          1. +6
            April 29 2015 22: 18
            Quote: Lt. air force reserve
            If the Russian airline can compete with Boeing and Airbus, it will increase Russia's GDP by 0,5-1 trillion dollars.

            the fact of the matter is that the same Boeing and Airbass lobby for all this and even keep the domestic Russian market in a steel vice, and the world market from which our ILs and TUSHKs left in the 90s has nothing to say.
            Here we need the support of the state, as well as our domestic air carriers. It is clear that you need to invest in your own and this is profitable. But after the 90s, you have to practically start everything from scratch.
            1. +1
              April 29 2015 23: 55
              Quote: NEXUS

              the fact of the matter is that the same Boeing and Airbass lobby for all this and even keep the domestic Russian market in a steel vice, and the world market from which our ILs and TUSHKs left in the 90s has nothing to say.

              They will start buying if our planes really are more economical than the Boeing 787 and Airbus A350.
              1. +2
                April 30 2015 00: 20
                Quote: Lt. air force reserve
                They will start buying if our planes really are more economical than the Boeing 787 and Airbus A350.

                they want to resume the production of TU-160 ... But I look at our aircraft industry, and the feeling is that everything is ruined ... TUpolev can’t even break into our market, Ilyushin too, and Yakovlev is not far from them. This I'm talking about civil aviation.
                But the military is even worse. The TU-160, in order to start producing it in a short time now, the whole country will have to strain both in terms of financing, and in specialists and materials. With PAK FA, too, not everything is rosy. The engines of the second stage do not seem to be on time will be.
                One pleases-WAVE STARTED. And I really hope ... no, not so ... I believe that we will return the former greatness of both our civil aviation and military.
                1. +1
                  April 30 2015 02: 02
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  .I believe that we will return the former greatness of both our civil aviation and military.

                  good MANDATORY! I support! hi
              2. 0
                April 30 2015 10: 51
                Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
                Quote: NEXUS

                the fact of the matter is that the same Boeing and Airbass lobby for all this and even keep the domestic Russian market in a steel vice, and the world market from which our ILs and TUSHKs left in the 90s has nothing to say.

                They will start buying if our planes really are more economical than the Boeing 787 and Airbus A350.

                And the service will be comparable and it will be possible to lease it inexpensively. There is a whole range of problems
            2. +3
              April 30 2015 06: 50
              Right thoughts. Sadly, our gentlemen are just blind rushing back and forth. For example, look around and don’t have to look at the Yankees. By the way, they did a great job doing our job and threw the civilian aircraft industry. It turns out that it’s possible. China also rolled out its car for this period. I remember the screams here. Oh, this is An with Amerovsky stuck together. But it is made and the characteristics are on the level .. Even Ukrainians met this deadline and also rolled out a new car. But she already dead. India also did not have its own car. But the president set the task and soon his first-born will be rolled out and the SRK is also 1 years old. And the above arguments are garbage. When Chubais paper signed this argument was paramount. How many years have passed and the argument is the same. Nothing has changed nicely. Throw the noodles on your ears. We don’t seem to have our own developments. There is no state will and those tasks for which financing will go. In one right, an order for at least 6 of these machines is needed. Now explain to the gray ignoramuses why those countries were able to do this and we rush about in this swamp still. I am sure that a lot of liberal experts are still sitting in important offices and it is better to buy one creed from them abroad. This vicious practice has been going on under the approval of the Yankees from those distant 50s. It's time to break it. We can and should do no better than those strangers, but better our own planes. It is a matter of survival in this high-tech world. Stop sprinkling yourself with ashes, it's time to start showing what we can and can do ..
      2. +2
        April 29 2015 22: 59
        Quote: Alekseev
        But now the Tu-204СМ could very well import substitute.


        He is very heavy. All competitors (A-320 and Boeing 737) are much lighter, and new modifications max and neo and even more so. We are not talking about the engine yet. Look at the red wings flight statistics, it seems that the PS-90 engines in their 10 Tu-204 refused more often than the 7000 737 Boeings around the world. This is statistics, nothing personal ...

        Quote: Alekseev
        IL-96-400 was sent to the lousy company Polet, now bankrupt, not a single spare motor, expensive service. This is largely a consequence of small series.


        Well, flying vryatli is related to the failure of the Il-Xnumx. The trouble is that it was originally created obsolete.
        On transatlantic flights he had to compete with the 747, but he had been flying much more and had been flying by that time for 20.
        In its passenger capacity class, it had to compete with the A-330 and 777. But they are both twin-engine and much easier.

        The A-340 could become the only possible competitor, but here again we return to the PS-90 engines, and the A-340 did not become a legend, to put it mildly.
      3. +2
        April 30 2015 01: 50
        “There was local production inside the country, we did not need anyone or anything. The country achieved this in 12 years - from 1929 to 1941, consistently solving the issues of reviving and building energy, transport, industrialization, education and, of course, training . "
        I don’t understand. In the 29th year of the USSR, everything began from scratch, there was nothing. And over 12 years, such results.
        And now we only hear from our government: well, even so, it could be worse.
        The reference point is 2000. And what was worse in 2000 than in 1929?
        15 years have passed. What are the results? The villages continue to empty, industry continues to bend (ate the Soviet legacy). We are told that a lot of housing has been built in comparison with the USSR, what kind of comparison of housing commissioning can be discussed, if in Soviet times this housing commissioning for citizens was at the expense of the state, and now it is the construction of predominantly luxury housing available to the elite?
        We are told that demographics have improved. “For the second year, the achievements presented to us are about natural growth. Does the Prime Minister know that this growth was only 33,7 thousand people, and the increase due to the migration balance exceeded 280 thousand at the end of 2014? And in which regions is the number growing? for the Russian peoples who are restoring their spirit of life. But why among the above-mentioned regions there is not a single Russian region? Why does the number of ethnic Russians continue to decline, and all this is hushed up? At such a rate of deformation of the country's civilizational image, it should soon be renamed.
        http://politobzor.net/show-51849-otchet-predsedatelya-pravitelstva-chto-eto-bylo
        .html
    3. sent-onere
      -7
      April 29 2015 21: 47
      All this noise is aimed at pushing through the rusted Tu-334 (alteration 134, lover to fall on the tail). Most often mentioned. After all, it is necessary to ditch the Sukhoi-Superjet, which is being produced and will soon become entirely from domestic components (for the domestic market). The dominance of imported aircraft began by Medvedev. When the plane with the team of the Lokomotiv club (planned as Chernobyl) was crashed, he started shouting about flying coffins and banned most of the domestic planes from flying. Now it will be difficult to displace Boeings and Airbus. In the presence of Sukhoi-Superjet production, the purchase of a similar but old Boeing-737 continues. And these communist writers, use computer and office equipment of whose production? Why are they not yelling about the use of "domestic"?
      1. +2
        April 29 2015 23: 04
        Quote: sent-onere
        Why are they not yelling about the use of "domestic"?

        Everything is very simple. You can’t cut as much from domestic production as you do from import supplies, and less effort is required to cut.
        Here is a scumbag of lope to lie and wink at locksmith Ivanov, or even engineer Shapiro - they will not understand. And they would even understand - where did they get so much from?
        But Shapiro's Sales Representative from some kind of intermediary who sells at least planes, at least office equipment, at least that, very much even understand. And the envelope will appear. Or maybe not even an envelope, but just a piece of paper with the details of an account in a Swiss bank. Because this Shapira his company has planned "hospitality". As I don’t remember who else in Soviet times said, “two worlds, two Shapiro”.
        Well, and from whom will they get?
      2. +1
        April 30 2015 11: 00
        Quote: sent-onere
        All this noise is aimed at pushing the rusted Tu-334 (alteration of 134, a lover to fall on the tail).


        Tu-334 is an aircraft created on the basis of Tu-204 units. Roughly speaking, this is a short version of the Tu-204. There is no alteration of the Tu-134 in it.
    4. sent-onere
      +5
      April 29 2015 21: 50
      Sorry, to measure the reliability of an airplane, the possibility of planning it, is self-made. Reliability is proved by the possibility of take-off, even if one of the engines fails. And, as a rule, in the high temperature range close to 25-30 degrees of heat. Il- could evacuate people from Yemen 62, and therefore could because the engine thrust is enough for high temperatures. The Tu-154, which sat in Izhma at an abandoned airfield when electronics failed, this also characterizes the reliability of the aircraft. Their residual prices, and reasonable remotorization for a single thrust engine of 18-20 tons, makes them ... The same thrust of a single engine is also needed for the Tu-204, Il-96, and Novozhilov says this.
      1. +2
        April 29 2015 22: 59
        Quote: sent-onere
        Measure the reliability of the aircraft, the possibility of its planning, this, I'm sorry, home-made.

        It says about the wing that the most important thing in an airplane
        The advantages of a large and well-designed Tupolev wing are revealed at ranges five to six thousand kilometers or more.
      2. 0
        April 30 2015 00: 05
        Quote: sent-onere
        Reliability is proved by the possibility of take-off, even if one of the engines fails.

        Aircraft reliability - this is his ability to perform the whole range of intended tasks, with a minimum number of failures, or their complete absence. That's all. Almost all aircraft can fly at high temperatures - they are all designed to operate in a wide temperature range.
        As for the IL-62 - this is our only aircraft capable of flying without landing at such distances.
    5. sent-onere
      +4
      April 29 2015 21: 53
      Quote: Lt. Air Force stock
      The main problems why Russian planes do not buy in the west:
      1) Missing service
      2) Composite materials are practically not used in Russian aircraft (and this is an additional weight and, as a result, more fuel consumption).
      3) There are no powerful economical engines. On the IL-96, the 4 engines are installed not from a good life, but because there is no alternative. PS-90 produces thrust of 16 tons of everything, on a Boeing 767 one engine creates thrust of 30 tons, on a Boeing 777 one engine creates thrust of 50 tons. An engine with a thrust of 57 tons is being developed.





      Unfortunately, they don’t listen to you and they won’t listen. In the clan oligarchic system of our government, everything is focused on making a profit and not a result. Until there is a change in the system, we will not see anything.
      1. +2
        April 29 2015 23: 10
        Quote: sent-onere
        Until there is a change of system, we will not see anything.
        That is, you are a supporter of "destroy to the ground, and then"? 1917 and 1991 are not enough for you? Will "then" be better than "now", and if so, when? People do not live in a bright future, but in the present. And again, will the foundation hold up?
        1. +2
          April 30 2015 01: 04
          Quote: Nagan
          That is, you are a supporter of "destroy to the ground, and then"? 1917 and 1991 are not enough for you?

          The fact of the matter is that they managed to destroy - but "then" does not start in any way. Consequently, the "System" requires replacement, as it is incapable of creation request
          And the revolution has nothing to do with it: there is nowhere else to destroy. And there are people who can change the situation, thank God. You just need to help them get to the "steering wheel" ..
      2. +2
        April 30 2015 02: 13
        There will be no system change. For 25 years they have grown into it tightly. Voluntarily, no one will refuse such a feeder.
    6. +2
      April 29 2015 22: 34
      Quote: Lt. air force reserve
      The main problems why Russian planes do not buy in the west:
      1) Missing service
      2) Composite materials are practically not used in Russian aircraft (and this is an additional weight and, as a result, more fuel consumption).
      3) There are no powerful economical engines. On the IL-96, the 4 engines are installed not from a good life, but because there is no alternative. PS-90 produces thrust of 16 tons of everything, on a Boeing 767 one engine creates thrust of 30 tons, on a Boeing 777 one engine creates thrust of 50 tons. An engine with a thrust of 57 tons is being developed.


      Forgot about the resource. We have all the civilian equipment resource lower than that of imported.
      Regarding engines, PS-90 only nominally corresponded to European counterparts, in fact, there were a lot of problems with reliability and overheating of supports
    7. +5
      April 29 2015 22: 44
      Quote: Lt. air force reserve
      The main problems why Russian planes do not buy in the west:

      -Competition (mine before figs) and protectionism.
      -QUALITY
      This is basic. Annoying "little things"
      -A-321 and 737-900 are slightly lighter than the Tu-204 and have a wing of a smaller area - 120-125 square meters against 184,3
      -With installation English Rolls-Royce RB.211-535E4 engines and American Avionics Kit Honeywell, Tu-204-120 reached the level the best world analogues ...
      - release of pieces of Boeing 737 and Airbus A320 (by xnumx machine monthly)

      Quote: Lt. air force reserve
      Tu-334 and Tu-204СМ are in fact not inferior to Western "Airbus" and "Boeing".

      I do not agree with the authors.
      it’s enough at least once that those and those are visible
      ================================================

      And how much did the Egyptian Ibragim Kamal (the head of KATO Aromatic) help with the finances of the Tu-204?


      ==============================================
      written in 2013:
      Today, the main volume of air transportation not only on international but also on domestic routes is carried out by overseas “watermelons” and “bobiki”. The effective demand of the population is satisfied ... But who can guarantee that if international relations worsen, Russia will not be "sanctioned" like those that apply to Iran? And they, among other things, prohibit the sale of civil aviation equipment and spare parts to this country. It seems that it would be nice for our state to have some kind of “emergency stock” of transported capacities of local production in case events develop according to the “Iranian scenario”. In the best way, our "air independence" will be able to provide 50-60 aircraft type Tu-204-300. Their capabilities should be enough to maintain regular communication between major cities of Russia
    8. +2
      April 29 2015 23: 05
      Quote: Lt. air force reserve
      on a Boeing 767, one engine creates a thrust of 30 tons; on a Boeing 777, one engine creates a thrust of 50 tons.

      Do not specify which ones? Just wondering:
      Boeing 767: 2 turbojet engine General Electric CF6-80C2-84 ° F, thrust 2 × 26260 kgs, engine with maximum thrust, a minimum - 22600 kgs.
      Boeing 777: 2 turbojet engine Pratt Whitney PW4084, thrust 2 × 33600kg

      Please specify where you get the data - do not take people away from reality. hi
      1. 0
        April 30 2015 00: 04
        Quote: avia1991
        Do not specify which ones? Just wondering:
        Boeing 767: 2 turbojet engine General Electric CF6-80C2-84 ° F, thrust 2 × 26260 kgs, engine with maximum thrust, a minimum - 22600 kgs.
        Boeing 777: 2 turbojet engine Pratt Whitney PW4084, thrust 2 × 33600kg
        Please specify where you get the data - do not take people away from reality

        Boeing 767: General Electric CF6-80C2 2x 29483,5 kgf (65 lb).
        Boeing 777: GE90-115B 2x510 kH (2x52005 kgf)
        I got everything from Wikipedia, the data in kgf using online value converters.
        1. +1
          April 30 2015 01: 01
          Quote: Lt. air force reserve
          All from Wikipedia,

          Do not trust this "Encyclopia" too much - there and "lumin" is "cast iron".
          In addition, you are, in fact, comparing a "cart with a car": you are trying to put an engine developed in the 80s next to a 201 ++ model.
          And with the conversion of Newtons into "kilogramseconds", the Air Force lieutenant should be ashamed to turn to the converter hi
          Continue to divide Newton by 9.8 - get what you want! wink
          1. -2
            April 30 2015 08: 45
            Quote: avia1991
            And with the conversion of Newtons into "kilogramseconds", the Air Force lieutenant should be ashamed to turn to the converter
            Continue to divide Newton by 9.8 - get what you want!

            I am not a techie. And I have an indirect relation to the Air Force.
            Quote: avia1991
            In addition, you are, in fact, comparing a "cart with a car": you are trying to put an engine developed in the 80s next to a 201 ++ model.

            Recent modifications of the PS-90A2 have not gone far from the original.
            1. 0
              April 30 2015 17: 17
              Quote: Lt. air force reserve
              I am not a techie. And I have an indirect relation to the Air Force.

              Accepted hi
              Quote: Lt. air force reserve
              Recent modifications of the PS-90A2 have not gone far from the original.

              But it is not much behind.
          2. 0
            April 30 2015 08: 59
            Quote: avia1991
            Do not trust this "Encyclopia" too much - there and "lumin" is "cast iron".

            Here is a link to the official GE website, look at their data.
            B-777
            http://www.geaviation.com/commercial/engines/ge90/
            B-767
            http://www.geaviation.com/commercial/engines/cf6/
        2. +1
          April 30 2015 01: 40
          I forgot to add: "dry weight" of PS-90A engine - 2950 kg, GE90 - more than 7500 kg. Do you notice the difference? The specific thrust of almost the most modern General Electric engine is not too much higher than that of the "old" PS: 6,88 versus 5,42 kgf / kg. And if we compare the older modifications of Pratt & Whitney PW4084, installed on the Boeing 777, at about the same time with the appearance of the PS, we get our advantage at all: we have the same 5,42 versus 5.0 for "them".
          In fact, this means that the mass characteristics of our aircraft with PS-90 were not inferior to imported "litacs" due to the number of engines, having the SAME thrust on takeoff, and at the same time more survivability, in case of engine failure.
          1. 0
            April 30 2015 09: 03
            Quote: avia1991
            In fact, this means that the mass characteristics of our aircraft with PS-90 were not inferior to imported "litakas" due to the number of engines, having the SAME thrust on takeoff

            The 4th engine is more expensive to maintain, the engines change to produce a certain engine resource, and so replacing a 2 engine is cheaper than a 4th.
            1. 0
              April 30 2015 17: 26
              Quote: Lt. air force reserve
              The 4th engine is more expensive to maintain, the engines change to produce a certain engine resource, and so replacing a 2 engine is cheaper than a 4th.

              The cost of replacing engines (work) does not have a fundamental effect on the cost of operation. And the cost of the 777th engine itself, by the way, to put it mildly, is MUCH higher.
              In general, it’s not entirely clear WHAT are you fighting so fiercely for? Trying to prove EVERYTHING BAD? This is known without you. Suggest a way out? Only REAL, not general words about the global reconstruction of the world. hi
    9. +4
      April 29 2015 23: 07
      Uguk. We are releasing almost an imported Superjet - there are "laws" according to which it is exhaust / noise (the latter I just laugh. delays from "reliable partners".

      Tell me more about fair competition. I'm still screaming.
      Oh yeah, about the accident rate ... So the Douglas, Boeing, airbuses, too, are sort of floundering - you don’t have to go far — remember France if I'm not mistaken.
      1. +1
        April 29 2015 23: 15
        Quote: ShadowCat
        remember France if I’m not mistaken.
        There, it seems, it was not the technique that "banged", but the pilot's roof went off. So whatever he was on, it would still go bang, whether at least a flying saucer on anti-gravitators.
        1. -1
          April 30 2015 02: 54
          Quote: Nagan
          It seems like there was no technique,

          Technique, technics! wassat What - they couldn’t think of how to avoid a cabin door lock in an emergency situation?! .. Overdid it, no one thought about the human factor ..
          1. 0
            April 30 2015 13: 44
            Quote: avia1991
            Quote: Nagan
            It seems like there was no technique,

            Technique, technics! wassat What - they couldn’t think of how to avoid a cabin door lock in an emergency situation?! .. Overdid it, no one thought about the human factor ..

            If the pilot can get around, then the hijacker can
        2. 0
          April 30 2015 03: 27
          At a press conference on March 26, French investigators announced that co-pilot Andreas Lubitz deliberately put the plane into descent mode. At the same time, he was in the cockpit alone, as the crew commander, having transferred control, briefly left the cockpit. Later, the commander tried to go back, but to no avail - the door to the cockpit was locked from the inside. The commander knocked, rang the doorbell [51], tried to use force. Until the moment of the collision with the ground, the second pilot remained silent, did not contact the dispatcher and did not answer his repeated calls. At the same time, judging by the recording of the flight recorder, his breathing was normal


          The aviation authorities in Canada, New Zealand and Germany have introduced new rules that require the mandatory presence of two people in the cockpit throughout the flight [67] [68] [69]. The European Aviation Safety Agency has recommended the introduction of such rules in all airlines [69] [70]. The US Federal Aviation Administration now also requires two people to be present in the cockpit during flight [67] [68]. A number of airlines have announced the introduction of relevant regulations [67] [71].

          Everything is pulled from the wiki.

          those. First, reduce to a minimum, and then vice versa increase. Recently watched several Discovery films about air crashes. The bottom line is that people are forced to work for wear and tear with minimal salaries and ease of job loss. Conclusions suggest themselves.
          ps Yes, there were four people in the cockpit (I asked Dad. He’s a former pilot), he answered me asleep, and three people write a bulletin, and even if something (someone’s bad, etc.) can be taken without loss of performance.
      2. 0
        April 30 2015 13: 43
        Quote: ShadowCat
        Uguk. We are releasing almost an imported Superjet - there are "laws" according to which it is exhaust / noise (the latter I just laugh. delays from "reliable partners".

        Tell me more about fair competition. I'm still screaming.
        Oh yeah, about the accident rate ... So the Douglas, Boeing, airbuses, too, are sort of floundering - you don’t have to go far — remember France if I'm not mistaken.

        In Europe, a lot of airports are near residential buildings. For example, when you fly to Lisbon, the plane lands just above the city. another 10-12 years rested in Egypt, planes took off directly above the hotel - IL-86 clearly differed in a very loud sound - it was immediately clear that ours flew
    10. +3
      April 29 2015 23: 10
      You might think they do not buy only in the west. the problem is that nobody buys them at all from those who can buy something else. The same China tried our cars and returned. And while I did not make more orders.
      Of course, you can patriotically create funds, broadcast about hundreds of cars that will be sold "just about" and eventually fail to sell even a finished car.
    11. +4
      April 30 2015 00: 21
      Quote: Lt. air force reserve
      There are no powerful economical engines. The 96th engine is installed on the IL-4 not from a good life, but because there is no alternative. PS-90 produces a thrust of 16 tons in total, on a Boeing 767 one engine creates a thrust of 30 tons, on a Boeing 777 one engine creates a thrust of 50 tons. An engine with a thrust of 57 tons is being developed.

      Not so simple...
      In those days, the ICAO rule that long-range planes should have more than 2 engines was in effect, this was later rewritten for Boeing.
      1. 0
        April 30 2015 00: 28
        Quote: Wheel
        In those days, the ICAO rule that long-range aircraft should have more than 2 engines


        ETOPS (Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standards / Extended Twin OPerationS - Extended Flight Rules for Twin-engine Aircraft) - the standards, special requirements for flying on a twin-engine aircraft over reference-free terrain, developed by the International Civil Aviation Organization - ICAO. According to ETOPS standards, the route of a twin-engine aircraft should be built so that it is constantly within a certain flight time to the nearest airfield, where it would be possible to make an emergency landing in the event of failure of one of the engines.

        This made it possible to regulate flight rules across the ocean, desert or polar zones for twin-engine aircraft such as А300, А310, А320, А330, А350, ATR 72, Boeing 737, Boeing 757, Boeing 767, Boeing 777, Boeing 787, Bombardier Q Series, Embraer E-Jet.
        In 1953, the US Federal Aviation Agency introduced the “60 minute rule”, according to which twin-engine aircraft were required to be within 60 minutes of the flight to the nearest airfield. ICAO, on the other hand, expanded the coverage of the rule to 90 minutes, to leave for the alternate aerodrome with two engines. This rule was used mainly by European companies.

        In the early 1980s, an expert commission on ETOPS was created in ICAO to justify the increase in acceptable intervals to 120 minutes and the development of relevant norms and rules. After long discussions, an ICAO document, known as Appendix 6, was approved, which allowed twin-engine aircraft to fly more than 60 minutes from the airfield under certain conditions.

        The successful trouble-free operation of twin-engine aircraft, according to ETOPS 120, allowed ICAO to release an application outlining the criteria for ETOPS 60, 120 and 180 minutes. By these standards, airplanes continue to fly today.
    12. +2
      April 30 2015 06: 06
      And I repeat again that the main reason, and the main one, for the problems of Russia and the CIS is the dismemberment of the USSR by corrupt brainless communists. Back in 1991, the USSR produced 40% of the world's aircraft !!!

      And the communists continue to struggle with their country with such libels today, continuing the "glorious" traditions of their predecessors, who destroyed our country twice in the last century - in 1917 and in 1991.
      1. +1
        April 30 2015 08: 53
        You have piled up both sand and sugar, and gamma and tea.
        1. 0
          April 30 2015 10: 57
          Oh really? That is, do you consider everything good in our country to be solely the merit of the Communists? But what about the miraculous heroes of Suvorov? Tsarist Russia grew with lands and peoples. But didn’t the Communists divide the territory of the former Ingushetia on the basis of nationality by planting a time bomb that exploded in 1991?
          1. +1
            April 30 2015 11: 55
            In the ninety-first they were communists only on party membership cards. And according to the worldview (the only true criterion in this case), they have long been traitors.
            1. 0
              April 30 2015 16: 24
              And where were the other 17 million "communists"?
    13. 0
      April 30 2015 13: 19
      How then did it happen that the Tu-160 engine is the most powerful in the world?
      Composites have less reliability, more expensive maintenance. Ferrari drives a lot on the roads?
      The service of exported military equipment somehow turns out to be.
      Russian passenger planes are not bought because there is no money for their leasing! And also because of "political moments".
      Freight is being shipped with might and main simply because they are beyond competition.
  2. avt
    +5
    April 29 2015 21: 21
    “About seven years ago, a young representative of the Sukhoi firm spoke at one of the meetings. He shouted that their plane - in the form of slides - had no competitors, that it had the best aerodynamics and everything. At the same time, such characteristics were sounded as 39 kilograms - the landing weight, the speed on the glide path - 800 kilometers per hour, plus the ability to fly from the runways of 260 meters. As the leading test pilot of the Tu-1600 aircraft, I could not resist and clarified that even with such a weight, if you go exactly on the course, you can hardly fit on a dry runway. As for the comparative characteristics, the Tu-334 has a landing weight of not 334, but 39 kilograms, the speed on the glide path is 800 kilometers per hour. So whose aerodynamics is better? "------- Singers about the superiority of the Superbudget in everything and everything, what can you say?
    test pilot, deputy general director - head of the flight testing center of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise GosNIIGA. There is no suggestion about the obsolete layout of engines and the third crew member.
    1. xterr
      0
      April 30 2015 01: 53
      The wing area of ​​the Tu-334 is larger, so lower landing speed. Now ask yourself: why is the wing area larger? And do not forget that in addition to landing in flight, there are still take-off, climb and horizontal flight.
      1. +1
        April 30 2015 02: 10
        Quote: xterr
        And do not forget that in addition to landing in flight there are still

        Come on, come on? And what conclusions should we come to? ..
      2. avt
        +1
        April 30 2015 08: 41
        Quote: xterr
        And do not forget that in addition to landing in flight, there are still take-off, climb and horizontal flight.

        And don't forget
        Quote: avt
        - Singers about the superiority of the Super Budget in everything and everything that you can say? But just exactly like Ruben Yesayan,

        With digits.
  3. +9
    April 29 2015 21: 29
    I don’t understand anything about this, it’s just a shame crying
    1. +5
      April 29 2015 21: 39
      Quote: vanavate
      I don’t understand anything about this, it’s just a shame crying


      Plus 1 to the post and 100 to the rating! hi
      There are few people left who know how to say "I don't know"! request
      Yours! Yes
      1. +2
        April 29 2015 22: 05
        I trust you completely. But I have a different approach. I don’t know - just keep quiet and do not write anything. I read what experts write. Live and learn. And you will die a fool. belay
    2. +6
      April 29 2015 22: 53
      Quote: vanavate
      I don’t understand anything about this, it’s just a shame

      VERY





      At one time, as we familiarized ourselves with the Tu-204-120, Anglo-Saxon experts nicknamed it the Airbus killer ...
      -Kmax * M for Tu-204-300 is 13,9 versus 13 for A320
      - in terms of fuel efficiency, the Tu-204-100 is 35% better than the Tu-154M.
      -The heavier (111 tons) Tu-204-200 (Tu-214) created in the development of the project can carry 150 passengers over a range of up to 6980 kilometers. In cruising flight, it consumes 3400 kg of fuel per hour, or two times less close in dimension IL-62M.
      -on the whole planet Earth there are only three relevant families of “narrow-body” - Boeing 737NG, Airbus A320 and Tupolev-204 / 214.
      - Until very recently no foreign model, from commercially available narrow-body airliners, could not compete with the Tu-204-300 in flight range with a full passenger cabin. Indeed, neither the Airbus A319 / 320 nor the Boeing 737-800 with all seats occupied unable to cover distance between Moscow and Vladivostok (6420km) or Khabarovsk (6140 km) without intermediate landing, which makes their use on such long routes unprofitable.
      / In a sense, the relatively compact Tu-204-300 “sharpened” for long-haul flights follows the Boeing’s path with its strategy for developing direct flights (point to point traffic). And she proved her case in the case of the 777 model and is used today in the marketing of 787 Dreamliner. According to the American manufacturer, the development of a network of direct flights in the world will continue at an increasing pace. /
      1. 0
        April 29 2015 23: 51
        Quote: opus
        the distance between Moscow and Vladivostok (6420 km) or Khabarovsk (6140 km) without an intermediate landing,

        Something somehow hooked on this statement .. flying from Moscow to Irkutsk, I covered 5000 km. What do you want to say: what is from Irkutsk to Vladik 1400 ?? Will not be enough?
        1. +2
          April 30 2015 10: 47
          Quote: avia1991
          What do you want to say: what is from Irkutsk to Vlad 1400 ?? Will not be enough?
          No, I don’t want to. 1400 - Not enough.
          For reference: The distance Vladivostok Irkutsk on the highway is 3969 km, and in a straight line - 2285 km

          1. Moscow: 55 ° 45′06 ″ s. w. 37 ° 37′04 ″ c. d.

          2.Иркутск:52°17′00″ с. ш. 104°18′00″

          3. Vladivostok: 43 ° 07′00 ″ s. w. 131 ° 54′00 ″


          4.Earth ball (oblate sphere)What we see with our eyes (cactus) is its projection onto a plane with cuts and stretching.






          5. The next time "flying", almost every airline has a colorful magazine (in a pocket), at the end of its types of aircraft with flight characteristics, as well as a list of routes (how it flies) and with distance.



          I replied?
    3. -5
      April 30 2015 06: 23
      But are you not offended for the dismemberment of the USSR by corrupt brainless communists in 1991, which led, inter alia, to the deplorable situation in the aircraft industry?
  4. Tribuns
    +3
    April 29 2015 21: 37
    When you read the conclusions of professionals about the current state and hopeless future of the Aviation Industry, it becomes extremely dirty at heart ... I would like, like a boy, to hide from shame somewhere in the corner, bite my nails and spit on the liberals who broke our industry, science and education and turned our country with a liberal liberal economy into a raw materials appendage of the industrialized West ... And not the president, and neither Prime Minister Medvedev even stutters about the need for a transition to an industrial-mobilization economy to boost our industry ...
    And, until this is done, Russia will not be able to enter the industrialized countries and will, as now, depend on the industrial West, whatever the current leaders of the country tell us and promise!
  5. +3
    April 29 2015 21: 38
    The revival of our aircraft industry should begin with the return to everyday life of the world-famous legendary state symbols, the faces of Russia in the aircraft industry - “Tupolev”, “Yakovlev”, “Ilyushin”.
    If there are no traditions, if they are artificially torn in “harmless” renames, then there is no development, a run begins in a circle that leads to the inevitable degradation of society and a regular Maidan, i.e. the destruction of the foundations of society. Change the state symbols on the Kremlin towers to a Mercedes star or the Coca-Cola logo, and the city will slowly begin to degrade first in consciousness and then personally. And the symbol “Kalashnikov” gives strength and confidence in the battle with just one name. The military-industrial complex and the aviation industry are the locomotives of the economy, pride and guarantors of our identity.
    What does “MS-21” or “Sukhoi Super Jet SSJ-100” or “PAK FA” mean for our memory and for the world market? Nothing! The empty sounds of a foreign language are consonant with profanity, so that the whole English-speaking public on the world market could understand before going into series what kind of aircraft it is. From German Pack (PAK) means "rabble, scum." Perhaps from here the sad presentation to the whole world of this aircraft in Indonesia on the Great Victory Day three years ago - 9 of May 2012 of the year.
    During the Great Patriotic War, in the regiment's combat magazines, the reduction of the PAK meant Killed in an Air Crash. The expression “As you name the ship, so it will sail” is relevant in general in all areas of any product.
    State symbols are soldiers on the battlefield yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Because our life is structured in such a way that all our thoughts and decisions are formed around symbols and myths - this is a property of human consciousness. We perceive symbols even when we do not notice them. Heraldry, banknotes, architecture, urban planning, painting, theater, literature and music - all based on symbolism and myths. It shapes our personalities and our society. This is our matrix, our foundation and the key to our development on Earth. What you look at is what you turn to.
    1. +2
      April 29 2015 22: 20
      Quote: w3554152
      The revival of our aircraft industry should begin with the return to everyday life of the world-famous legendary state symbols, the faces of Russia in the aircraft industry - “Tupolev”, “Yakovlev”, “Ilyushin”.

      exactly !!! But only the state can do it, not private owners. AND THIS IS NECESSARY TO DO YESTERDAY.
    2. +1
      April 30 2015 07: 12
      Taking off my hat. you can’t say better
  6. 0
    April 29 2015 21: 38
    The article is good, for the time being topical. But things are still there. Without state protectionism will not move. And you need to consider the kickbacks to our officials from the aircraft manufacturers Boeing and Airbus. They almost completely crushed the Russian aviation market and will not leave without a fight.
  7. exalex
    +5
    April 29 2015 21: 39
    The matter is left for the "small", which is the largest. Where to get sensible shots who, at least from afar, saw the drawings or understood them. Here also Kezhugetovich adds heat "Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu set the task to work out the issue of resuming production of Tu-160 supersonic strategic bombers at the Gorbunov Kazan Aviation Plant.http: //vz.ru/news/2015/4/29/742882. html
    And everything is needed immediately and now .. So much time is wasted, as much evil takes on this "tandem" with endless promises.
  8. +6
    April 29 2015 21: 54
    One businessman from airbas in 2000 said! We have invested too much money so that your planes do not fly !!! @@@@ angry
    1. +3
      April 29 2015 22: 22
      Quote: kimyth1
      One businessman from airbas in 2000 said! We have invested too much money so that your planes do not fly !!! @@@@ angry

      here I am about that. The domestic market in Russia, Airbus and Boeing are held in a stranglehold sad
  9. +3
    April 29 2015 21: 57
    Despite a government decree on the Tu-334, the KLA, which probably does not obey the state, decides to stop work on the topic

    While the "iPhone" will flourish in the government, we are unlikely to see any changes in the industry in general, and in the aircraft industry in particular.
    1. 0
      April 29 2015 23: 54
      Quote: TOR2
      we’re unlikely to see any changes in the industry as a whole,

      Why are you being modest? Speak directly: "IN THE ECONOMY IN GENERAL!" .. at least it will be more accurate .. wassat
  10. 0
    April 29 2015 22: 05
    The first time I meet the topic without comment. Especially so interesting and painful.
    Where are the experts? What are our odds?
  11. The comment was deleted.
  12. +4
    April 29 2015 22: 10
    And about small aircraft in general silence afterlife.
  13. +2
    April 29 2015 22: 14
    All this hype with the notorious import substitution brought a lot of dough to everyone who hangs around with this term for all meetings and meetings, it is impossible to revive in a year what has been breaking for decades
  14. +6
    April 29 2015 22: 14
    Well, Shoigu learned how to set tasks (and that's good), but it seems that there are still problems with thinking. Just now there was a note about aircraft construction (and in particular about the resumption of the Tu-160), so it flashed there that it was unlikely, due to the loss of some technologies (in particular, welding of a 12-meter titanium beam, the main power element of the fuselage). Under the "bad and soviet" Soviet power, they knew how and could, but under the "developed" democracy they forgot how. Humpbacked and says, "Yes, the apparatus must be changed. Just about, the watchman yells, and I have been telling the chairman for a long time, it's time to change, I drive all night, but not enough until lunchtime." The problem is not whether there is a service, composites. The problem is, first of all, in the country's leadership, and everything else is derivative (as in mathematics).
  15. +3
    April 29 2015 22: 43
    "Our salvation is a tough state system," but Deeeeeeeeeeffffffffffeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! fellow
  16. +2
    April 29 2015 22: 46
    Twenty-five years they have ruined such a GREAT and POWERFUL country, but now they have come to their senses and shout out loud that everything is bad. Do not scream, but roll up your sleeves to rake these Augean stables. Unite in one fist and turn the cheekbones of this liberal dermocratic pack, and restore order in the country.
  17. +3
    April 29 2015 22: 48
    On the whole, as I understood it, they wanted to show how the disorder was rooted in our aviation departments: everyone speaks quite reasonably, everyone has their own view on the problems and causes - but at the same time there is a feeling that they hear each other badly ..
    All converge, however, in only one: it is necessary to revive the Minaviaprom as a unifying, coordinating, and determining Objective of the STATE structure.
    And no Deripaska, with their "peculiar" concept of benefits for business, should be allowed to participate in the revival of a strategic industry! Money - let them invest. BUT WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO VOTE when prioritizing.
    On the other hand, state support for such a structure should be guaranteed, consistent and - WEIGHT. Otherwise, we will fly on "Cessna" (who has enough money).
  18. 0
    April 29 2015 23: 19
    It’s good that there are people who understand TTX. But in my opinion this is not the point. More recently (and today) they yelled (yelled), the state should not control business. But no one spoke about the control of state business. And our situation is the result of fair, market competition. Private business, where itself, where through government agencies controlled by them, created the situation they need. What cries about foreign investment what led us to? Related foreign enterprises bought ours, bankrupted them. Now what, again, call uncle? Does he need it? He doesn’t need it at all. A competitor is an enemy. A good enemy is a dead enemy. If the country needs something, then the country itself must strain. And the call to help my neighbor, I want to eat, you sing for me, in my opinion this is at least stupidity.
  19. 0
    April 29 2015 23: 27
    Interestingly deffki dance. The first time I flew on the Yak-40. I don’t even get it. Is it a bus or plane? Then he flew to Tu-scary - they wave their wings. The last time I flew abroad on Ile. Even the ears were not stuffed up. Comfort -100% Returned on a Boeing - like in the Moscow metro at rush hour. And why are you crying?
  20. +1
    April 29 2015 23: 32
    For power hurt!
  21. The comment was deleted.
    1. +1
      April 30 2015 02: 46
      Quote: Radikal
      Perm Motors OJSC, the controlling stake of which belongs to the notorious Pratt & Whitney.

      And for some reason I have other information:
      Proton-PM OJSC has completed the placement of an additional issue of shares, as a result of which the company has a new shareholder - the Federal Property Management Agency. Currently, its share in the authorized capital of the company is about 4%. The main shareholder, owner of 91,16% of the shares of Proton-PM, is FSUE GKNPTS named after MV Khrunichev (structure of Roskosmos).


      More details: http://www.newsko.ru/articles/nk-461871.html
    2. 0
      April 30 2015 10: 56
      Quote: Radikal
      You see at the root of the problem - the PS-90 engine was developed by Perm Motors OJSC, the controlling stake of which belongs to the notorious Pratt & Whitney. Therefore, first of all, it is necessary to deal with this "issue", then our aviation will have engines!


      Where did you find this information?

      Perm motors are part of the UEC.
      They just had collaborative projects with Pratt & Whitney
  22. +1
    April 30 2015 01: 23
    You can talk a lot about the reason. But there is one reason. Need political will. She is not.
  23. xterr
    0
    April 30 2015 02: 13
    The meaning of the article: the last hope of the aviation industry - Tu-204 and Tu-334 aircraft.
    1. +2
      April 30 2015 03: 00
      Quote: xterr
      The meaning of the article: the last hope of the aviation industry - Tu-204 and Tu-334 aircraft.

      The meaning of the article: "It is necessary to load aircraft factories with the production of what they have, so that the enterprises do not bend down! And at the same time, revive R&D on promising developments!"
      Unless, of course, we have not yet given up the dream of a "superpower" status ..
  24. 0
    April 30 2015 02: 33
    A tube from Italy, a serious matter. Do not make a tube in Russia.
  25. +2
    April 30 2015 03: 34
    Everyone can “buzz”, in the need for changes, but as soon as it comes to, for example, the reduction of a certain “social sphere”, suppose for the needs of the same defense, Zyuganov is the first to raise the hi - everything is lost, ineffective leadership, the conquests of October collapse. .. Why, these very conquests, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation could not defend or save in the 90s? Maybe just because of too "effective leadership"? Maybe because for years they said one thing and did another? You can simply recall the artistic irony of effective leadership in those years - having watched the film "Genius", when the toilets were pasted over with inventions and patents, and you had to stand in line for ordinary wallpaper and toilet paper! Messrs. Communists (he himself is such, but a private) have forgotten how the decline of the Motherland began!
    It is only necessary to thank fate and the people that a man appeared in Russia, in the person of GDP, who, together with the people, pulled Russia out of shit and returned it to the world Olympus! And do not be ironic, in the form of criticism, but to help Russia and the people overcome all difficulties together, and not hope for a change of power and its effectiveness. Passed already!
  26. 0
    April 30 2015 06: 33
    I didn’t understand for whom the article was written. For the scientific council of the aviation industry?
  27. 0
    April 30 2015 07: 06
    I will add that the IL-86 (96) is the most accident-free aircraft!
  28. +2
    April 30 2015 08: 58
    Look at the root and not at the numbers. When there is its, then the country cannot be blackmailed by anything. It doesn’t matter, it’s better, worse, the main thing is that it would work properly. Soviet aircraft were reliable and worked properly, and for this they destroyed Soviet aircraft. Only having its own production, industry, you can not be afraid of any sanctions. All those who are happy for the import, either enemies or skins. Only one justifies import, when it is not your own and there is no time to develop, then they are bought from other countries, and then in order to establish production at home. This was done in the Stalin period. Now it is a banal betrayal.
  29. -1
    April 30 2015 10: 11
    Quote: w3554152
    The revival of our aircraft industry should begin with the return to everyday life of the world-famous legendary state symbols, the faces of Russia in the aircraft industry - “Tupolev”, “Yakovlev”, “Ilyushin”.


    Behind us we have the legendary design bureaus, the great history of the domestic aircraft industry and personnel. Refusing legendary symbols is like giving up your first name, last name and patronymic. Why didn’t anyone in the government give up his name and name himself PACK, Mack, DAK FAC, Jet Super, or MS-21 Agent? How it's called? Probably, in the words of Stalin: "You, or an enemy of the people?"
  30. +1
    April 30 2015 11: 55
    Such an industry was ruined, poher!
    How could it be handed over to hucksters?

    The most important thing that surprises me is that no one has yet been held responsible for the destruction of the national economy.
    And in general, "our" liberal crap did everything possible to evade responsibility. Already furnished with the laws corresponding. Now already according to law You don’t show anything to anyone! That's what they thought about when the country was torn ... Straws were laid.
    Okay, we will "fill up" the mattress, and we will deal with our crap liberal oligarchs. They don't think they can get away with it.
  31. 0
    April 30 2015 13: 26
    Quote: Wheel
    In those days, the ICAO rule that long-range aircraft should have more than 2 engines was in effect, this was later rewritten for Boeing

    Absolutely right. The Il-96 was built exactly under this rule, so that on long-distance flights, for safety reasons, the plane had 4 engines. When the West saw what a powerful competitor had appeared, they immediately changed the rule for 2 engines. And our Aeroflot traitorous leaders, including Yolkin's son-in-law (and himself a former pilot) Okulov, and then the glamorous Savelyev, with dog loyalty began to buy "bobiks" and "watermelons".
  32. 0
    April 30 2015 14: 55
    And fun in the department at Rogozin. People are banging their heads against the wall, they are blowing bullets, and Rogozin jokes on Twitter as we are doing well, and soon it will be even better.
  33. 0
    6 May 2015 08: 48
    "It is necessary to establish public control over civil projects. This is a worthy task for open government and other public institutions. This is done all over the world."
    http://www.vedomosti.ru/newspaper/articles/2015/05/06/ne-rozhdennii-letat

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"