Military Review

IL-96 and Vaso. Almost tragedy with a good ending

132
22 July 2016, residents of Voronezh, who happened to be in one place of the Left Bank region, were able to observe a rather rare phenomenon for today. From the runway of the aircraft factory, a huge airliner painted in Russian colors went up and went towards Moscow. Observers were, let's say, satisfied with what they saw. Just because about the problems VASO not aware of just lazy. And then a demonstration that the plant is still alive.




The departing aircraft was the Il-96-300, built on the order of the special flight unit "Russia", the first of the two remaining operators in the world of this model.

We have recently (after the next Boeing catastrophe) talked about this plane. Today I will repeat a bit, for there seems to be a movement towards the revival of the production of this remarkable machine in all respects.

Still, a couple of words about stories, in order to refresh the memory.

The story is simple to impossible. IL-96 - the continuation and further development of the IL-86, our first domestic Airbus. For its creation, the Ilyushin Design Bureau once received a State Prize. And the plane was quite good, as, by the way, all Ilyushin Design Bureau passenger planes. And reliable, as evidenced by the fact that for all the time (albeit small) operation of 106 IL-86 and 29 IL-96 in accidents and catastrophes, which were few, not a single passenger died.

In the history of the aircraft, however, there was a nuance in relation to engines. The planned NK-56 had to be abandoned due to the overload of the Kuibyshev plant with military orders in favor of the Perm engine PS-90, which was obviously weaker. We had to significantly alter the airframe for this engine, which caused deterioration in flight characteristics, since the chief designer Novozhilov had to reduce the length of the fuselage, reduce the wing area and the passenger capacity of the aircraft.

The IL-96T transport variant was rescued by the appearance of the PS-90-2, but this happened much later. But IL-96T is in production since 2009, which, unfortunately, cannot be said about its passenger counterpart.

The fight against 86 and 96 did not begin yesterday. Many European countries suddenly closed their airports for our aircraft, citing the high level of noise. The Ilyushin Design Bureau did not sit with folded arms, and looked for ways to solve the problem. And found.

In 1991, the Ilyushin Design Bureau concluded a contract with British companies Pratt & Whitney, as a manufacturer of aircraft engines, and Collins, manufacturers of avionics.

The result was the appearance in the 1993 year IL-96M, which met all Western requirements. The plane could take on board the 435 passengers and carry them over a distance of 13 000 kilometers. And quite naturally, the aircraft was certified for flights, both in Russia and in Europe, and even the United States. Not a bad start, a wonderful prospect.

So what is next? And then the policy began. Then Boeing intervened, which was absolutely useless to the Russian rival. Only this, and the desire to seize the Russian aviation market, can explain the subsequent events.

The fact that the representatives of Boeing bought the whole government in bulk at that time, and Mr. Khristenko in particular, someone might not believe it. But the fact is that as soon as the production of the first IL-96-300 for Aeroflot began, our government "suddenly" cancels customs duties on foreign aircraft imported into Russia. Not all, but with a capacity of more than 300 people.

At the headquarters of "Boeing", probably, the day after that they drank to the health of our authorities. And then the 767-e went into the open gate and the European Airbus followed them. The Ilyushin Design Bureau and Vaso got not just a blow, it was actually a knockdown.

Here it is also necessary to tell about how the chaos did take place in those years. As our folk earned a penny to the detriment of the state (and us, by the way). In 2000, a leasing loan to Aeroflot in the amount of 219 million was allocated. For the purchase of 7 copies of the IL-96-300 and 10-ti Tu-204.

And here the Aeroflot plots showed themselves in all their glory. The result was a purchase on this money of six "Ilov" and ... four used "Boeing 767". Tu-204 "flew" in the truest sense of the word. Yes, the facts of these outrages were checked at various levels, but they did not bring results.

Well, and finished off the IL-96 in 2009 year, as I already wrote, the great figure Vitya Khristenko. He stated from his high chair that it was pointless to compete with the best aircraft manufacturers in the world, and production of useless planes should be stopped.

"Whew!" - said domestic airlines and rushed for kickbacks when buying a used Boeing and Airbus. And it is not surprising that in the 2014 year, Aeroflot quickly wrote off the remaining IL-96, which, by the way, could still fly and fly.

But why? After all, it is no secret that all the airport and technical services at our airports are aimed at Boeing and Airbus. It turns out that there is absolutely no need to train flight and technical personnel to fly and maintain domestic equipment. She's not here ...

It reminds, frankly, the old Soviet anecdote about caviar in the grocery store. It is not on sale, because no one asks.

And we, consumers, are often fed with absolute nonsense regarding our aircraft. Yes, we never learned how to make passenger cars, although we have been striving for this very much for 40 years already. But the planes, I'm sorry, we have always been on top.

Lie first. IL-96 consumes more fuel.
If you look at the numbers, then yes, more. But sorry, these 7-9% are not such a significant difference. Especially if you go to the item 2.

The second lie. Safety aircraft from the "best manufacturers."
It’s difficult to pass through numbers here, because yes, Boeing flies a lot more. And they wind up with enviable regularity. Elahs do not fall, but you can not say that they fly. IL-96 operates the squad "Russia" and the Cuban company "Cubana".

But statistics say that the Boeing-767 with its two engines in the event of a single failure - an aircraft mogil for everyone. That shows the same statistics. 23,8% disasters "Boeing" is caused by the failure of the engine. IL-96 is able to fly with two engines of four. Not the fact that it is normal, but will be able to sit down without sticking ten meters into the ground. And the Boeing?

The third lie. Boeing is cheaper to operate.
Advocates of the Boeing buying idea are preaching the idea that Boeing’s already 25% cheaper to operate. That is certainly nonsense, it's not even in numbers. And in where this money will go. Of course, it is better to send 100 thousand dollars to America, "Boeing", than to spend 118 thousand, leaving them in Russia. Without questions, of course, support the "Boeing" is very patriotic and profitable. The only question is - to whom?

The fourth lie. Boeing is cheaper to buy.
Oh yeah! Of course, the Boeing, which years 10-12, cheaper. But if you look at the official figures, the new 767 is worth 180 million dollars. Against 92 million in IL-96. Questions?

Even if it is more expensive in the service staff and for Il-96 fuel, three new IL-96 will be in any case more profitable than three shabby Boeing.

But this is not about economics at all. The point is in the accounts, which regularly receive bonuses and bonuses from overseas "partners." The fact is that all our air carriers are bought in the bud for the very green papers with portraits. And therefore, for these papers, they will fight for the Boeing case with the same fury as their grandfathers and great-grandfathers beat the same "partners" at the wheel of Ilovo. Not passenger.

It seems to be a sad picture. Yes, at Vaso today, as well as at Ilushin Design Bureau, it’s not that it’s not the best of times, I would say - probably it can’t be any worse. Nobody needs the mud, a joint project with the Antonov Design Bureau also rested for political reasons.

But, as sometimes happens in fairy tales, a kind magician suddenly appeared in a spotted helicopter.

Guess who it is? That's right, Shoigu. Who else?

The Ministry of Defense gives a chance for survival. Yes, not on a global scale, as it would be desirable, but quite a decent chance to preserve a unique plant and team. And to work for the good of the country.

The fact is that despite the final collapse of the IL-96 − 300, the “Ilyushins” did not surrender. And designed and built a new aircraft: IL-96-400. This miracle can accommodate not 300, but 435 passengers. PS-90А-1 engines allow you to fly with a maximum load of 10 000 km. By the way, the Cubans have already drawn in Voronezh, asked the price. But this is Cubans, what do they understand in airplanes? They are still on the IL-96-300 fly ...

But the point is not that. On the basis of the passenger aircraft was created transport, 96-400T. And so they became interested in our Ministry of Defense. More precisely, what is called IL-96-400TZ. Fuel servicing truck.

Until now, the tanker Il-78M, which is essentially the brainchild of Il-76, is in service with the VKS of Russia. It can move 40 tons of fuel over a distance of 3000 km. As a good indicator, IL-78 is used not only by Russia, but also by India, Pakistan, and China.


But the IL-96-400TZ can transport 65 tons per 3500 kilometers. Feel, as they say, the difference. Plus, new avionics, which, quite understandably, are three heads taller than what was developed in the 80s of the last century.

The Department of Defense even voiced the number in 30 tankers. And there is some hope that the neighbors will also decide to purchase such a machine in return for the IL-78M. Especially Indians who like to spend money on good things (“Rafali” doesn’t count).

By the way, IL-96 − 400ТЗ can be transformed into simple transport aircraft with a payload of 92 tons using simple operations. Which is also useful and practical. Two in one, scrap and mount included in the kit.

And as a bonus, the Ministry of Defense voiced a really awesome thing: there are plans to purchase 2024 passenger IL-14-96 or 300-96 before 400, too. Why so much is not entirely clear, but what's the difference?

You know, it looks like some kind of fairy tale with a happy ending. To knock - to beat off fingers, to spit - to spit up the district if only not to jinx it. Such a development of the plot after the collapse of the program for 96-300 and An-148, there has been more than an improvement in the situation. Light at the end of the tunnel, if you want.

Based on the above, we decided that it would be quite good to get to the plant in order to familiarize ourselves with the situation on the spot. And sent a request for accreditation. So we are waiting for the results, and it is quite possible that we will have to familiarize everyone with the situation first-hand.
Author:
132 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Wolka
    Wolka 29 July 2016 06: 48
    +72
    it is gratifying, but still it is necessary to legislatively ban our airlines from buying money from the budget to buy air junk, only domestic volatiles such as Sukhoi-Superjet-100, MS-21, or IL-96, etc.
    1. captain
      captain 29 July 2016 09: 25
      +54
      But it’s not necessary by law (there will be problems with the WTO), we have Aeroflot state-owned company and why did they refuse ILs there? But it is necessary to forbid junk to buy. And our leasing companies must be put at the service of our country, not the United States. And stop spending budget money on the purchase of foreign aircraft.
      1. Jurkovs
        Jurkovs 29 July 2016 09: 59
        +39
        there will be problems with the WTO

        After all the Western sanctions and our response, no WTO problems. This organization has already died. The United States has concluded Pacific economic partnership and is concluding the Atlantic, so there is not a single gram from the WTO.
        1. Simpsonian
          Simpsonian 29 July 2016 10: 09
          +10
          How are these sanctions incidentally friends with the regime of this WTO?
          1. Dormidont2
            Dormidont2 29 July 2016 15: 23
            +2
            here is a comparison of IL96 and Boeing 767 http://www.ato.ru/content/sravnenie-ekspluatacionnoy-ekonomiki-il-96-300-i-boein

            g-767-300-na-opyte-aeroflota
            1. nov_tech.vrn
              nov_tech.vrn 30 July 2016 08: 22
              +4
              Dormidont, these reports are not new like the Aeroflot system itself, look for another Aeroflot report about the economic inefficiency of the An-148, they especially emphasized the unattainability of a 300-hour flight time, now the same "Aeroflot" in other hands fly for 400 hours a month ...
            2. Drshan
              Drshan 30 July 2016 21: 34
              +1
              Dormidont2 RU Yesterday, 15:23 PM ↑ New
              here is a comparison of IL96 and Boeing 767 //www.ato.ru/content/sravnenie-ekspluatacionnoy-ekonomiki-il-96-300-i-boein
              g-767-300-na-opyte-aeroflota


              Your link is out of date.
            3. nov_tech.vrn
              nov_tech.vrn 31 July 2016 17: 29
              +5
              let me quote:
              - If you compare two main aircraft: Boeing 767 and IL-96-300, then an American with two engines carries 200 passengers and consumes 6 tons of fuel. IL-96 takes on board 300 passengers and 15 tons of cargo with a flow rate of only 7 tons. Divide tons into kilometers - and everything will become clear to you. In addition, the IL-96 is a magnificent machine: a spacious cabin, large screens - the blind will see everything. The diameter of the fuselage is 6 meters, like a tunnel in the subway. Feel yourself in a normal, reliable liner with four engines. By the way, in its entire history the IL-96 did not end up in any disaster. He did not destroy a single person.

              Anatoly Knyshov, test pilot, Hero of Russia:

              - When in the 90s I flew to IL-96 to the States and I still had fuel in my tanks for another three hours of flight, the Americans were terribly surprised. The representative of their aviation authorities then bluntly stated: for some positions, this type of aircraft is unattainable for us. It is strange that Russia is still able to create a competitive product. On the IL-96, on the instructions of the general designer, I made six landings with simulated failure of all engines. No one has done such a thing on any foreign type. And on the IL-96, this can be done even by a crew of an average level of training.
          2. Skifotavr
            Skifotavr 30 July 2016 02: 55
            +6
            Quote: Simpsonian
            How are these sanctions incidentally friends with the regime of this WTO?

            Not friends at all. But the United States with the sixes on such trifles ... well, you understand.
          3. A.Lex
            A.Lex 30 July 2016 13: 16
            +3
            No way! WTO - in itself, and sanctions - in themselves. And what’s most important and interesting - they are nowhere to intersect! Urr00dy bld!
          4. archer20
            archer20 30 July 2016 18: 40
            +2
            They are normally friends. Anglo-Saxons are lovers of drafting contracts with pre-laid hooks. Well, our Christians with the Kudrins, too, did not study very closely all aspects of the signed papers when they prepared this agreement with the WTO.
      2. Simpsonian
        Simpsonian 29 July 2016 10: 08
        +1
        Quote: captain
        But it is necessary to forbid junk to buy.

        But what about the WTO? Yes, let people coffin, think ...
      3. Corsair
        Corsair 29 July 2016 10: 37
        +13
        Quote: captain
        But not legally required (there will be problems with the WTO)

        It is necessary to somehow register or inform the board of directors in a voluntary manner that 30-40% of the fleet should be domestic aircraft by such a deadline and then there will be orders from the plants, otherwise the Boeing with its kickbacks in the green blinks will not give a chance.
      4. Koshak
        Koshak 29 July 2016 12: 44
        +13
        Quote: captain
        But it is necessary to forbid junk to buy.

        It is necessary to significantly increase customs duties on used aircraft, as they did with used cars.
      5. g1v2
        g1v2 29 July 2016 13: 40
        +9
        The sludge was abandoned, because there are items 1 and 3 above - IL-96 consumes more fuel and IL96 is more expensive to operate. Plus an extra pilot. Il96 was created under socialism and there were requirements for it - reliability and security. Under capitalism, the main thing is profitability and low cost of operation. Aeroflot is engaged in commercial haulage, and if it flies on an il96 in these conditions, it will HAVE to increase the price of tickets. This is for the very smart. That is, passengers will try to fly by other airlines, where ticket prices are lower. An example is Transaero, who scooped up old trash abroad (the average age was 18 years old somewhere) and dumped the remaining 3 large companies, lowering ticket prices.
        There are Aeroflot superjets ordered 50 units that have not yet been released ms21 - about the same. The point is not that Aeroflot does not want to fly on Russian planes, but that it would be beneficial to it. yes
        The military and government agencies have other requirements. They are just TTX il96 suit in principle. They do not need to sell tickets to them. For them, il96 is what you need. soldier
        By the way, IL96 modernization work is planned to make it profitable for airlines. The market for long-range aircraft in the Russian Federation is approximately 120 pieces. Developing an airplane from scratch is unprofitable for such a market. Therefore, there were 2 options - a serious modernization of IL-96 and a joint aircraft with the Chinese. Recently, Putin and the Chinese agreed on a joint aircraft. The point is its admission to the huge Chinese market. But the decision to modernize the il96 was also made. Until a joint Russian-Chinese aircraft is designed and built, the modernized IL96 will be promoted. Well, then back to the government. hi
        1. Temples
          Temples 29 July 2016 14: 54
          +5
          Transaero example


          Airline was founded December 28, 1990 !!!!! Alexander Pleshakov, son of the Minister of Radio Industry of the USSR, Colonel General P. S. Pleshakov and Tatyana Anodina, who is Chairman of the Interstate Aviation Committee.

          I think everything is clear with the parents of Transaero.

          Business as such in this enterprise is zero.
          Loans, kickbacks, sweeps ....
          The end is known.

          About aeroflot with its fleet, in an article, Roman lucidly explained everything.

          Or who else filled the country with Boeings and Airbuses?

          Aeroflot in different years of its existence was accomplished by different organizations in essence, in terms of management, policy and goals of existence.
          Only the name is invariable.
        2. alekc73
          alekc73 29 July 2016 15: 14
          -6
          You were bombarded by fermented patriots. But there are problems with the IL-96 and Tu-204CM. It is not only the government and foreign competitors. Commercial companies will never take planes inferior in reliability and consume more fuel. Nobody needs an airplane that stands at the fence.
        3. Pilot
          Pilot 29 July 2016 17: 01
          +1
          Quote: g1v2
          will promote the upgraded il96

          It is stated, it is clear. +
        4. Alex_59
          Alex_59 29 July 2016 22: 09
          +6
          Quote: g1v2
          ILNUMX was created under socialism and there were requirements for it - reliability and security. Under capitalism, the main thing is profitability and low cost of operation.

          Nothing prevented the modernization of the Il-Xnumx under the new trends. The bobik 96 is already in its third generation, if you take the first 737-737 and the last NG these are two different aircraft. Why didn’t you do this with IL-100? Because this requires desire and will. And our officials are only interested in kickbacks. Apparently, VASO hadn’t gotten their hands yet - otherwise its hangars would have been rented out for rent of warehouses with junk from China, or for construction. As did in Saratov with the Saratov aircraft factory.
        5. aba
          aba 29 July 2016 23: 04
          +8
          WILL HAVE TO INCREASE PRICES FOR TICKETS.

          To begin with, most companies do not buy airplanes, but lease them. And now the crisis, the ruble has fallen, but the agreement is in bucks and the euro. So who is the first to raise prices, who bought the Russian or leased a foreign ?!
          Now about the expensive maintenance of Russian aircraft. In the years beloved by the oligarchs, all major airfields were transferred to service foreign countries and now we shout that our roads. And if they didn’t translate, then just foreign ones would be expensive to maintain.
          I have said more than once and in different topics that they used to boast that "if we can't do something, we'll buy it." But it turns out that sometimes it may not work, and sometimes it may happen that you cannot buy parts for them and service - sanctions! So, having bought an imported one, we turn on a time bomb, though we do not know how and when it will explode.
          Russia now needs protectionism more than ever! Otherwise, with financial stabilization, the liberal government and officials fed by oligarchs will finish off our industry completely! And then you don’t even have to discuss better or worse, cheaper or more expensive ...
          1. michajlo
            michajlo 30 July 2016 03: 33
            +8
            Welcome all!

            I completely agree with the opinion of Abay!
            (True, if he is an adult and not a teenager, then it would be worthwhile to indicate at least your name, otherwise anonymous people have proliferated here as "drunken shtirlits" who are ashamed of their own name or are afraid to indicate).

            From my personal experience of long life abroad, I can only say that we are in Russia

            it is necessary to adopt the German patriotism,
            because the Germans say:

            "I buy a German product because it is the best!" (for the Germans, of course).

            Those. Germans knowingly buy products from German manufacturers, maintain their plants, help create or maintain jobs,
            contribute to the DEVELOPMENT and MODERNIZATION of the PRODUCTION of German companies and their products and INCREASE the DEFENSE of their country - Germany !!!

            And everyone thinks and does it this way, from the burgher and the housewife down to the directors and ministers!

            And we hear similar calls from senior management and see the puffing cheeks of thick greasy bureaucratic faces, and many high-tech products are bought abroad!

            Moreover, the top officials themselves drive Western cars, wear Western watches, write with Western pens, and dress in Western suits and shirts. And their children, and their wives with their mistresses, all "toil", study and live abroad, living "on legally stolen funds", developing hotel and rentier business abroad ...

            I am not writing only about the aircraft themselves and military equipment.

            And the few of our firms that produce their Russian counterparts or copies of products, in most cases do not have enough experience and culture in the production of high-tech products, hard OTC, a competent and beautiful Passport and Manual in an expensive and practical A4 folder,
            instead of which a passport and an A5-format instruction in the form of a book stitched with 2 staples are attached to a good product of a "bawdy-looking"
            with which it is inconvenient to work and for which it is a shame to any experienced engineer and specialist ...

            So PATRIOTISM must be implemented from above and by any means EXTEND PRODUCTION TOTAL in RUSSIA, to promote its sales and implementation in our country.

            As for kickbacks and exceptions for the import of different western used rubbish into Russia and the EEZTS, all documents have the names and signatures of (without) responsible officials who, sooner or later, MUST RESPOND TO ONE FOR SALE OF THE HOMELAND and the betrayal of her interests.

            What I suppose is that in 4-6 years it will begin to be done by the top leadership of the country, because the phrase will not always sound
            "well, now is not the 37th year" (they say, steal calmly and continue gentlemen patriots!)
          2. Drshan
            Drshan 30 July 2016 21: 48
            +1
            For aba
            Russia now needs protectionism more than ever! Otherwise, with financial stabilization, the liberal government and officials fed by oligarchs will finish off our industry completely! And then you don’t even have to discuss better or worse, cheaper or more expensive ...
            Ready 5+ to deliver1
        6. proud
          proud 29 July 2016 23: 14
          +3
          Thank you for the comment, God sees many things did not know! And all the same, do not twist and the plane is gorgeous!
        7. kondrat13
          kondrat13 30 July 2016 01: 42
          +2
          Why broadcast absurdities? What prices will Aeroflot raise if our planes are half the price?
        8. A.Lex
          A.Lex 30 July 2016 13: 23
          +1
          Shoigu needs to propose the idea of ​​a passenger carrier company, in which a controlling stake would belong to the Ministry of Defense (and therefore to the state). And let them equip with domestic aircraft. It would be interesting.
          1. dvaposto
            dvaposto 30 July 2016 22: 00
            +2
            shoigu for president - this is the way out.
        9. dvaposto
          dvaposto 30 July 2016 21: 58
          +1
          Oh! Yes, conscience must have the leadership of the airlines. all is not enough for them. they have gold parachutes from the risks they do not care for people and company, if only to grab and dump.
          There was a TV broadcast about air tickets from Magadan - there is no conscience at all. money for airport service is claimed as a 5-star hotel, and at the airport toilets on the street.
          and China, too, are not fools. they will pull the blanket over themselves and dump it. What is it that the Chinese are able to do that cooperation is needed with them? assembly in china?
      6. You Vlad
        You Vlad 29 July 2016 14: 59
        +1
        Why refused? There was already an article in the VO here is the link: https://topwar.ru/page,1,2,64526-prezidentu-rossii-pozvolte-i-vsemu-narodu-letat
        -luchshimi-v-mire-laynerami-il-i-tu-s-dvigatelyami-ps-90.html All this is sad!
      7. Felix
        Felix 30 July 2016 08: 14
        +1
        Quote: captain
        But junk must be prohibited to buy

        Yes, to act like a used foreign car - to impose such a duty to cost as new. In order, if the air carrier had a desire to buy imported aircraft, then only new ones.
      8. ARS56
        ARS56 30 July 2016 11: 38
        +2
        Let me remind you - Medvedev personally banned the use of Soviet and Russian-made aircraft, who slammed Russia into the WTO.
        While the government has enemies and foreign agents that Putin has surrounded himself with, we will feed the enemy states and kill our industry.
        1. The comment was deleted.
      9. Titovich
        Titovich 31 July 2016 12: 46
        0
        And immediately. And Khristenko to bring to justice.
    2. Stirbjorn
      Stirbjorn 29 July 2016 09: 52
      +9
      Quote: Volka
      it is gratifying, but still it is necessary to legislatively ban our airlines from buying money from the budget to buy air junk, only domestic volatiles such as Sukhoi-Superjet-100, MS-21, or IL-96, etc.

      Permians finish the family of PD-14 engines, there is also the most powerful modification of the PD-18R, which just might be useful for long-range IL-96 type. let's hope that with their help they will breathe new life for these aircraft. After all, we do not have another long-range aircraft in the future, and the IL-96 captivates with its super reliability
      1. Simpsonian
        Simpsonian 29 July 2016 10: 11
        0
        Now banks that have been legally and efficiently helped from the budget, that is, from our pockets, give loans to air carriers to lease only foreign aircraft. wassat
    3. Orionvit
      Orionvit 29 July 2016 20: 44
      -3
      domestic flying type Sukhoi-Superjet-100, MS-21
      According to experts and operators, that is still rubbish. Where are the new carcasses and il?
    4. Massimo
      Massimo 29 July 2016 21: 45
      +2
      It’s right not to feed FIG amers, and so jobs will be money in the country, and dependence on
      there will be less west.
    5. 11 black
      11 black 30 July 2016 07: 01
      0
      Quote: Volka
      it is gratifying, but still it is necessary to legislatively ban our airlines from buying money from the budget to buy air junk, only domestic volatiles such as Sukhoi-Superjet-100, MS-21, or IL-96, etc.

      "Sukhoi-Superjet" - I PLEASE YOU! repeat

      It is certainly better than Boeing, nevertheless there are a lot of domestic systems there, but damn - aren't there too many foreigners? - MS-21 is much preferable ...
      Quote: Orionvit
      According to experts and operators, that is still rubbish. Where are the new carcasses and il?

      MS-21 with PD-14 is an excellent machine, such "experts" would spit in the face (sorry for the harshness) ... but the Superjet is yes - an imported designer damn ...
      Here he is - Beauty yes If only everything worked out.



      1. 11 black
        11 black 30 July 2016 07: 25
        +2
        I go nuts with the Military Review - so they can’t even cut comments on the censor - for some 2 minutes and all the pictures were cut!
        No - let this one hang - without it, the meaning is lost!


        And a reference to it if they cut it again -
        http://ria.ru/images/90240/83/902408301.jpg
        1. 11 black
          11 black 30 July 2016 07: 36
          +2
          Quote: 11 black
          Quote: Volka
          it is gratifying, but still it is necessary to legislatively ban our airlines from buying money from the budget to buy air junk, only domestic volatiles such as Sukhoi-Superjet-100, MS-21, or IL-96, etc.

          "Sukhoi-Superjet" - I PLEASE YOU! feel

          It is certainly better than Boeing, nevertheless there are a lot of domestic systems there, but damn - aren't there too many foreigners? - MS-21 is much preferable ...
          Quote: Orionvit
          According to experts and operators, that is still rubbish. Where are the new carcasses and il?

          MS-21 with PD-14 is an excellent machine, such "experts" would spit in the face (sorry for the harshness) ... but the Superjet is yes - an imported designer damn ...
          Here it is - Handsome yes If only everything worked out.


          Quote: 11 black
          I go nuts with the Military Review - so they can’t even cut comments on the censor - for some 2 minutes and all the pictures were cut!
          No - let this one hang - without it, the meaning is lost!


          And a reference to it if they cut it again -
          //ria.ru/images/90240/83/902408301.jpg


          Well, what then are you, "Voennoye Oborzenie" - better than a censor? Au - moderators - let's be honest! Write a response to the comment - what exactly did the pictures do not suit you - let the people appreciate your work.
          1. Tsoy
            Tsoy 30 July 2016 15: 22
            +1
            Quote: 11 black
            Write a response to the comment - what exactly you did not like the pictures - let the people appreciate your work.


            I suspect that the administration has nothing to do with it. Because if there was a qualification, you would delete the entire comment. And the link remains on your pictures, so it’s easy to see who is interested. The problem is purely technical, and not the machinations of the moderators.
            1. 11 black
              11 black 30 July 2016 18: 32
              0
              Quote: Choi
              I suspect that the administration has nothing to do with it. Because if there was a qualification, you would delete the entire comment. And the link remains on your pictures, so it’s easy to see who is interested. The problem is purely technical, and not the machinations of the moderators.

              You are probably right, but the interesting effect is that the 2 picture hangs on the page as if nothing had happened, and after 2 minutes have passed, it stops reading, now I understand that there must be a mistake on the site, but some strange mistake recourse
        2. Brain Yurich
          Brain Yurich 30 July 2016 20: 04
          0
          thanks for the reference, the picture is no longer alive)
    6. The comment was deleted.
    7. midivan
      midivan 30 July 2016 16: 30
      +1
      Quote: Volka
      it is gratifying, but still it is necessary to legislatively ban our airlines from buying money from the budget to buy air junk, only domestic volatiles such as Sukhoi-Superjet-100, MS-21, or IL-96, etc.

      as well as institute criminal proceedings against corrupt bastards including the goat Khristenko and give them the opportunity to recapture the losses of our design bureaus and air promises on mittens yes this is as they say on the strategy and tactics of identity smile so that today’s bigwigs have something to think about
    8. clidon
      clidon 30 July 2016 19: 58
      -1
      Well, yes, and all Russians are forbidden to buy foreign cars and things.
    9. dvaposto
      dvaposto 30 July 2016 21: 48
      0
      maybe one brand is enough? Gone are the days of a dozen KB. why compete inside, if we can’t overcome strangers?
    10. Titovich
      Titovich 31 July 2016 12: 48
      0
      Budget money should be spent only on domestic aircraft!
    11. starshina78
      starshina78 31 July 2016 19: 01
      0
      Our corrupt officials, deputies and others, on whom it depends on what and how they will buy in Russia, will find a thousand ways to level out any good business.
  2. Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 29 July 2016 06: 54
    +27
    Article + We produce what we feed ourselves! Other enterprises are starting to work, and these are jobs, a healthy economy. Stop feeding the USA and Europe.
    1. smel
      smel 29 July 2016 07: 17
      +25
      Yes, the article is positive. Thanks to the author. But the end still had to be terrible: all the figures who tried to bury the project were sentenced to long terms of imprisonment with serving in high security camps at gold mining facilities, uranium mining and sawmills
      1. Koshak
        Koshak 29 July 2016 18: 11
        +4
        Quote: smel
        Gold mining camps, uranium mining and sawmills

        Come on - to their factory, to the machines, to the average salary, to the Khrushchevs ... Am I a monster? drinks
  3. denvar555
    denvar555 29 July 2016 07: 06
    +8
    May God grant this to be the beginning of the revival of the enterprise and aircraft in particular!
    1. igor.borov775
      igor.borov775 29 July 2016 15: 49
      +2
      Yes, a voice in the desert. For the normal functioning of aviation industry enterprises, strong state support is needed. It is not so easy to equip enterprises with new equipment. This is the main problem. Even the release of one aircraft per month will not be able to solve all the problems. Issuing 50 aircraft is only the start. China has learned clearly. We need mass. We began to produce our own transport and the order is not common to our orders. No matter how we treat the Middle Kingdom, but they clearly catch the mass production, this leads to an improvement in the model of the aircraft. I even think they know where to put those model cars that they don’t need. the plane is a high-tech machine, it pulls a whole complex of enterprises associated with its production. These are highly qualified personnel and much more. You can build one -10 machines that surpass similar foreign ones. And then what? That is the main question. They want to make the hundredth Sukhoi output up to 48 cars a year. This is encouraging, but very slowly it is happening. Now the only value is Time. Let's hope that we still have it.
  4. quolta
    quolta 29 July 2016 07: 07
    +2
    With China, we are going to design a wide-body aircraft, I think it will turn out no worse than Western
  5. Idiot
    Idiot 29 July 2016 07: 08
    +6
    This is all called misuse of budget funds, i.e. criminal act. Question to the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation.
    1. kepmor
      kepmor 29 July 2016 11: 00
      0
      Dear, well, YOU have found someone to ask such "questions" ... funny, by God!
  6. inkass_98
    inkass_98 29 July 2016 07: 18
    +1
    The article is correct, although it follows in line with yesterday's publication, but it's not scary, everything is more detailed here. By the way, in "SP" there was an excellent article on this topic the other day (moreover, it is typical, close to the text of the current publication laughing http://svpressa.ru/economy/article/153116/)
    Novel, please pay attention to the style:
    painted in Russian colors

    Which ones? Black, yellow and white are also "Russian" colors, you know.
  7. guzik007
    guzik007 29 July 2016 07: 29
    +9
    Well, I finished off IL-96 in 2009, as I already wrote, the great figure Vitya Khristenko. He said from his high chair that there was no point in competing with the best aircraft manufacturers in the world, and the production of useless aircraft should be stopped.
    -------------------------------------------------
    That (including) then stunned me, cast doubt on Putin’s ability to make adequate decisions, because he waved without looking, actually driving a nail into the coffin of domestic aircraft production. I still do not understand that decision.
    Again mnogohodovochki?
    1. mervino2007
      mervino2007 29 July 2016 08: 34
      +5
      Putin has no time to delve into? So at that time the ideas of a rational economy were in the atmosphere of the government. They were based on the above "bonuses", judging by the costs of Boeing to support its brand in other countries. All the same - this dirt in relation to the ruined production of their aircraft will emerge. But, as always, it will go unpunished ...
  8. Vladycat
    Vladycat 29 July 2016 07: 31
    +7
    And as a bonus, the Ministry of Defense voiced a really awesome thing: there are plans to purchase 2024 passenger IL-14-96 or 300-96 before 400, too. Why so much is not entirely clear, but what's the difference?
    .
    What do you mean why. MO begins to become our foundation. Now they will stir up their own Olympics, and then they will create an air carrier under their wing. For vacationers and other citizens.
    1. clidon
      clidon 30 July 2016 19: 59
      +1
      This is not called a foundation - it is called subsidizing from the budget.
  9. 78bor1973
    78bor1973 29 July 2016 07: 32
    +5
    And I remember how the sky was finally closed for Il-96-300 -Medvedev flew to Finland and there allegedly Il had a malfunction with the chassis, they blew it for two weeks after which Aeroflot banned the operation of Russian-made curtain aircraft!
    1. THE_SEAL
      THE_SEAL 30 July 2016 12: 05
      +1
      It’s time to send the bear back to the cupcake. He only has a place there. A disgrace for Russia.
    2. clidon
      clidon 31 July 2016 18: 32
      0
      Here you are somewhat inaccurate:
      - It was not Medvedev who arrived in Turku, but Putin. This is the 2005 incident.
      - Not banned, but suspended operation for 42 days. And not all Russian, and specifically IL-96. Aeroflot then operated this type of machine for almost another 10 years.
  10. Valkh
    Valkh 29 July 2016 07: 37
    +3
    Thank you, Roman! I look forward to continuing the article !!! good
  11. donavi49
    donavi49 29 July 2016 08: 09
    +3
    Unfortunately, the Cubans are already going to buy Boeing, on credit, on preferential terms. At one time, they took Ila and Ana, since Boeings and Watermelons did not sell them. Now the situation has changed.

    As for it’s better to pay 118k for your own than 100k for a Boeing, it’s better to burn 9% more kerosene, etc. The author hangs in the USSR. All AKs are commercial and are fighting for every dollar and will be:
    AK X - offers a Boeing supported flight 767 for 12k rubles
    AK U - offers a flight to IL-96 15,5k rubles

    Which AK will there be a queue for flights, and which one will park the aircraft in the hangar?

    This will work in 3 cases:
    1) Domestic aircraft will be +/- 5% of world analogues, in all operational indicators, fuel, service, daily flight time.
    2) State subsidies. That is, the budget pays for AK U to hold IL-96 and pays 3,6k rubles for each passenger.
    3) The ban on foreign flights, foreign AKs sell tickets according to the regulated mechanism through internal AKs. As in the USSR it was.
    1. Awaz
      Awaz 29 July 2016 08: 33
      +2
      = I kind of agree that at one time, IL was a bit economical. However, now it probably is too. I just want to say my observation. When I was repairing the kitchen at home - having a gas supply, I still bought an electric oven. It seems that according to the sellers, gas is cheaper and all gas oven systems work superfood and all that, and three skins will tear you for electricity, but when I calculated it turned out that the electric stove would be 10 or even 15 years cheaper than gas.
      And the same with the plane. It is clear that infrastructure and service must be created, but what prevents the main aircraft systems from being brought closer to Western standards. Thinly poor for any engines will be foreign, and many systems too, if not foreign then based on them.
      The leasing system should be a priority for Russian aircraft and then a little movement will begin, well, it seems to me. You can generally prohibit the sale of used Western aircraft not registered in the Russian Federation, etc., etc.
    2. pkv. 1974
      pkv. 1974 29 July 2016 08: 41
      +14
      Extra evidence that Ukrainians and economics are incompatible things. I explain:
      A) 12000 rubles = 9% = 13080 rubles, and not 15500 rubles in any way.
      B) The ticket price of 12000 rubles of fuel is about 30% (maximum, often less) - by 3600 rubles, thus 9% of 3600 rubles - 324 rubles. Thus, an airline ticket using an IL-96 will cost 2,7% more - 12324 rubles against 12000.
      C) The state can easily compensate for this difference by taxes from aircraft manufacturers. Plus, aircraft manufacturers and related companies are working, GDP is growing, people are busy with real business - population incomes are growing and they do not care for this difference of 324 rubles, but it is more pleasant to fly on a NEW RUSSIAN airliner than on a tanzania bing.
      But this will not happen, since at the helm of the state for 25 years there have been, at a minimum, people who are not far-sighted, and at the very most corrupt people’s enemies.
      1. donavi49
        donavi49 29 July 2016 08: 51
        +5
        No. Not a single fuel.

        Il sags:
        1) The cost of maintenance and its frequency. That is, more often it is necessary to drive on THAT, it costs more. This article by the way honestly stated.
        2) A lower maximum flight hours indicator for the period, which means more downtime and losses.
        3) Fuel.
        4) The salary of the extra flightmeat, which is archaism.

        Plus, an additional factor is the 4 abandoned motor scheme. This again comes at a price - 4 engines are more expensive to maintain than 2 even more complex ones, more resistance - less fuel efficiency.

        All these expenses:
        a) Go to the ticket price - and it turns out that I described.
        b) The state, if it will subsidize.
        c) In the general price increase, but it will work if you close the market to the rest. Then there will be 15,5k everywhere and passenger flows will equalize.
        1. Awaz
          Awaz 29 July 2016 10: 02
          +2
          for all the shortcomings (some of which are completely solvable), aircraft must be produced. The Chinese at one time produced such wretched cars (and still continue), but there are positive dynamics and they find customers. If selling an airplane is much cheaper, then some of the maintenance costs will definitely pay off. For example, for low-cost airlines, which only buy new aircraft and then quickly sell them. )))
          Of course in the form that it exists now - it’s problematic to sell, but you can build something on its basis ...
          1. donavi49
            donavi49 29 July 2016 11: 54
            0
            So it comes down to selling. The Chinese had the concept of a bucket with a bunch of features of more expensive cars, but for ridiculous money. And gradually squeezed the market.

            With airplanes a little different. And there is no really attractive price offer. Even if in absolute numbers +/-, then Western leasing offers are much better than those from IFC.
        2. guzik007
          guzik007 29 July 2016 11: 07
          +1
          4 abandoned engine circuit.
          -----------------------------------------------
          ... And it does not matter that Boeing in the event of the failure of one dvigla-coffin with passengers, profit is more important to us, right?
          1. donavi49
            donavi49 29 July 2016 12: 01
            +2
            No.

            One engine, even on new ones that cannot go without loss of altitude, allows you to get off the train at the airport, almost everywhere in the world.

            Even with the failure of all engines, there is a chance of an outcome. Vaughn Delgrano put Boeing without automatic equipment on a marshy embankment will not let lie. Or Salenberger, but there the 320 automation helped, which held a corner and rolls, providing a perfect touch.
        3. xtur
          xtur 29 July 2016 15: 56
          +3
          > Plus an additional factor - the 4th motor scheme, which is being discarded. Again, this comes at a price - 4 engines are more expensive to maintain than 2 even more complex ones, more resistance - less fuel efficiency.

          the article clearly stated that 2 engines, with the existing implementation, lead to security problems. And in fact, it does not matter whether it is so or not - it is necessary to close the market for twin-engine aircraft under this pretext, until its powerful engines appear.

          you need to use all the tools to defend your market
    3. kapitan281271
      kapitan281271 29 July 2016 09: 01
      +6
      Personally, I’d buy a ticket to Ilyusha, something like that happened with Sergey Vladimirovich, so it happened, well, his passenger cars don’t ruin him! drinks
    4. Raf01
      Raf01 31 July 2016 00: 43
      0
      The main idea of ​​the article is that a true patriot should work in the red. And the petty-proprietary and bourgeois interests of AK must be suppressed.
    5. The comment was deleted.
  12. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 29 July 2016 08: 48
    0
    IL-96, if compared, then with Hit B-747. This aircraft, with all the success, is being discontinued. This is with the newest engines and Avionics and the new wing. Boeing and Airbus are switching to two-engine aircraft with engines of 25-35 tons. And the Russian-Chinese plane will also be two-engine. Russia will have to master the development and production of an engine with a thrust of 35 tons .... And for the IL-96-300 / 400, there is quite a job in the Air Force of our homeland. Transport / tanker / scout /
  13. Engineer
    Engineer 29 July 2016 08: 59
    +12
    Oh, I would like to tell Roman, everything that I know about the ninety-sixth, but I'm afraid to eat with giblets. I’ll tell you the obvious: IL-96T is an unsuccessful truck and the factory workers know this. It has a very inconvenient loading of containers, which severely limits its operation at different aerodromes. Because he does not make up the competition 747. Ps-90 engines are already obsolete, and there were other engines in the airplane project, and the Ps-90 are weak for the 96th, because they work in high traction mode, which significantly increases the rated fuel consumption. Because in operation it is more expensive than Boeings and it’s stupid to argue here. If they put on it as planned NK-56, then the plane would be relevant now. One hope for the PD engine family. Avionics and avionics go west. Well, and for the price: if one plant makes hundreds a year, and the other a couple of pieces, then which plant will be cheaper? IL-96 is assembled only by order of the presidential special squad and the Ministry of Defense. No airline in its current form will order or order a plane. Neither the Chinese nor the CIS countries, nobody is interested in this machine. Here or it is necessary to seriously modernize the aircraft and develop its replacement. As you can see, the choice was made for the second and now, together with the Chinese, they are engaged in a new wide-body car with our engines. The Chinese market is huge, because the future of the car is obvious.
    1. Kudrevkn
      Kudrevkn 29 July 2016 09: 18
      0
      Is the Russian market with our distances too small? Of course, in terms of passenger traffic (population), it cannot be compared with China and India, but is there something to strive for? As for the performance characteristics of the aircraft, then you are a specialist - you know better, but I am a layman in this matter .... Earlier there was an article about the IL-96 for the presidential detachment, I expressed my opinion, stuck on the minuses like a hedgehog of needles, but I remain with my opinion! After all, my name is Constantine, that is, "permanent"?
      1. Forest
        Forest 29 July 2016 09: 47
        +4
        We have a small market — not just a few, just unrealistically few civilian airfields, unrealistically high prices — it feels like the plane is being refueled with liquid gold. We have flights around the country sometimes less than in any African wilderness.
      2. guzik007
        guzik007 29 July 2016 11: 11
        0
        Is the Russian market with our distances also not small?
        -------------------------------------------------- ---
        In China annually! 100 airfields of the Sheremetyevo level are under construction. Here is the answer for you, who is thicker (Oh! Who has the market more.: =)
    2. Eustace
      Eustace 29 July 2016 12: 00
      +1
      Have you heard anything about the PS-90a engines? They are already put on production cars.
  14. Hyppopotut
    Hyppopotut 29 July 2016 09: 31
    +2
    Unfortunately, with the collapse of the USSR, domestic industry was also destroyed. Including high-tech aviation ...
    But domestic aircraft were some of the best in the world !!!
    But without state. programs, without orders, factories eke out a miserable existence, and many ceased to exist ...

    Well, carriers - they are akin to merchants ...
  15. The comment was deleted.
  16. M0xHaTka
    M0xHaTka 29 July 2016 10: 11
    +6
    And what prevents the introduction of duties on aircraft? By analogy with a car. Over 10 years old? Add 12%. In the piggy bank of the state. Over 20 years old? 25%
    Why is it possible with cars and tomatoes, but not with planes?
    1. pafegosoff
      pafegosoff 29 July 2016 11: 00
      +4
      Because the guys from New York and City will forgive everyone, but not that.
      You can indulge with military airplanes, with helicopters. But liners guys, this is sacred!
    2. NikolaiN
      NikolaiN 29 July 2016 15: 04
      0
      Quote: M0xHaTka
      And what prevents the introduction of duties on aircraft? By analogy with a car.

      For a car, this is going from the common people, it is possible. And for the plane it is necessary to take it from the "sharks" of the business, and they are bastards with teeth, they can bite off something.
  17. Edvagan
    Edvagan 29 July 2016 10: 41
    +4
    as I read about Khristenko, I regretted that there was no Stalin, although I am not a big fan of Dzhugashvili. But he imagined what he would do with Khristenko ....
  18. pafegosoff
    pafegosoff 29 July 2016 10: 56
    +1
    Whatever I am, all for the better!
  19. prior
    prior 29 July 2016 11: 24
    +4
    Taking bribes from Western manufacturers is much easier than creating a worthy domestic product.

    It is high time for Russia to clear itself of such ministers and leaders as Vitya Khristenko.
  20. klybik
    klybik 29 July 2016 11: 39
    0
    the author needs this forum http://www.aviaport.ru/conferences/40654/120.html?#p405802 contradictory look at the subject of defeatism and after accreditation take a couple of skeptics to the factory to dispel doubts ..!
  21. Samoyed
    Samoyed 29 July 2016 11: 57
    +2
    I join, Khristenko and Co. - to wet with ... rags.
  22. Leonid Har
    Leonid Har 29 July 2016 12: 05
    0
    The future lies with large domestic IL-96 aircraft and their modifications. Who will transfer our paratroopers to the enemy, with tanks and with all the ammunition?
    1. Arikkhab
      Arikkhab 29 July 2016 12: 24
      0
      paratroopers? with IL-96? Oh well....
  23. Arikkhab
    Arikkhab 29 July 2016 12: 24
    0
    there is no doubt that the Il-96 is a good plane. I flew it - I liked it. as a refueller the most it. however, the author does not ask the question why all manufacturers switched to 2-engine aircraft? easier, more economical. where did he get the idea that the B-767 (according to statistics today is the most reliable aircraft in the world) with the order of 1 engine will fall ??? the author has not heard about the ICAO requirements called ETOPS? search the Internet for "Comparison of the operational economy of the Il-96-300 and Boeing-767" from Aeroflot (on the website www.ato.ru) and see why Aeroflot abandoned the Il-96s ...
  24. Lyubopyatov
    Lyubopyatov 29 July 2016 14: 33
    0
    Unfortunately, the agents of influence of Boeing, Airbus, and the State Department are known, but not all are officially identified and pulled out for review, and there is no question of how to intern them.
  25. marshes
    marshes 29 July 2016 15: 11
    +1
    I look at how you rivet 96, one but still release it.
    How about 76 aircraft, although there is progress, is there 6 aircraft per year?
    So for your information, the BTA of Kazakhstan is in dire need of military. Tr. planes of high tonnage, even the government will allocate money in the fall. The planes are needed "yesterday" and interest in the 76th would not be desirable to acquire A-400M.
  26. exo
    exo 29 July 2016 15: 26
    +3
    Il-96, not bad. But, the Boeing-767, is much better. About comparing the PS-90 and CF6-80c, it’s even funny to say. I dealt with both. The article is patriotic and illiterate. Although, trying to create a plane, which can be a competitor to the giants, the goal is correct. For the military, of course, the Il-96 and Tu-204/214 base, the only way out.
    Waiting for cons :)
    1. THE_SEAL
      THE_SEAL 30 July 2016 12: 12
      0
      Quote: exo
      Il-96, not bad. But, the Boeing-767, is much better. About comparing the PS-90 and CF6-80c, it’s even funny to say. I dealt with both. The article is patriotic and illiterate. Although, trying to create a plane, which can be a competitor to the giants, the goal is correct. For the military, of course, the Il-96 and Tu-204/214 base, the only way out.
      Waiting for cons :)

      Well, tell me more in detail once dealt.
      1. exo
        exo 31 July 2016 23: 08
        -1
        First: Tell me. I didn’t drink vodka with you. Therefore, at YOU.
        Secondly: PS-90 has a huge number of restrictions, primarily on the edges on the blades. Unreliable GP-26 drive. Not a very successful POS system. Very low-tech maintenance. Has a small overhaul life. Now, of course, more than at the time of my training, on them.
        CF6-80C, for 6 years of operation, almost a minimum of failures. Mostly the replacement of spark plugs. And a relatively sore spot, reverse. More precisely: the shafts of the drive opening the reverse.
        At least, according to the program,
        For lovers of IL-96: Boeing 767 easily flies on one engine. And takes off, too. For this there are ETOPS. The planes of our company, according to the ETOPS requirements, could fly 120 minutes, on one engine. Enough to select a site in the ocean.
        The whole world is moving away from 4 engines. Read an interview with chief designer Il, Novozhilov. There is also about the quality of the PS-90 and about the fact that 4 engines, a measure of compulsion. There are no engines of normal traction and the degree of bypass. And in The USSR, unfortunately, did not have time to create.
  27. denchik1977
    denchik1977 29 July 2016 15: 30
    0
    The production of civil aircraft in Russia has great prospects: firstly, if you do not lose the pace with the launch of the mass production of MS-21, Il-112, Il-114, as well as Il-96-400, Tu-204, Tu-214 , Tu-334, which have already received all the necessary certificates for flight operation, secondly, to install on them promising PD-14 engines and its modifications depending on the power, thirdly, to maximize the level of comfort for passengers of domestic aircraft to the best samples of world aviation, fourthly, there is a chance to conquer a certain segment of the international market in connection with the fact that just a few days ago Boeing announced the termination of the production of 747 and its modifications, a decrease in the number of production of 787-9, and Aiurbus announced a reduction in production by almost half А-380 ... Ps: despite all attempts to "kill" the domestic civil aviation, it will not work, because there are still people in the country who are making great efforts to preserve and further develop it.
  28. cheburator
    cheburator 29 July 2016 15: 55
    +1
    Looking at this mess, you involuntarily recall Stalin and regret that he is not! sad
  29. Hayer31
    Hayer31 29 July 2016 18: 50
    0
    Who is punished for the bonuses received from Boeing? Someone ....... We can talk and the Yankees are selling well. That's all
    1. Lunic
      Lunic 30 July 2016 07: 40
      0
      And who is this SOMEONE? .. that means they still punished someone. :)
  30. Sinbad
    Sinbad 29 July 2016 19: 51
    +1
    I really hope that this will be so, and in the sky they will fly, as in my childhood, Ila, Carcass, Yaki and, even, Ana. And so it would be, it is necessary to introduce personal responsibility for concluding contracts for the supply, etc. of aviation equipment at the legislative level, criminal liability, since any aviation accident threatens the death of hundreds of people.
  31. Karabogazgol
    Karabogazgol 29 July 2016 21: 26
    0
    Voronezh, VASO .... For the Motherland!
  32. Alex_59
    Alex_59 29 July 2016 22: 16
    +3
    The first lie. IL-96 consumes more fuel.

    I’ll add it to the author. The fact that IL-96 consumes a little more fuel could easily be leveled by competent marketing and leasing. In fact, there are no absolutely equal aircraft in the world, and if you take one class, for example, the B-737 and A-319, then one of them is definitely more economical. Suppose at 2-3%, but still. At an equal price, all customers chose the more economical one - what are they, stupid chtoli to overpay 2-3% for fuel? roughly speaking - the leader in terms of profitability would take the entire market to himself. But in practice this is not - both B-737 and A-319 are sold. This means that a more gluttonous and more economical aircraft is also for sale. Just someone offers a flexible credit policy (and without leasing today no one buys airplanes). So, customers are lured to conditions where 2-3% fuel savings become a trifle against the background of savings on percentages of the loan. Ours did nothing of the sort. The Soviet design bureaus simply do not know how, no one helped them, we have the freedom — flounder yourself. At 91, they threw into the market economy a point - further your personal affairs, how you will survive. And the United States easily and its assistance and patronage is - no democracy.
  33. alex86
    alex86 30 July 2016 07: 21
    -1
    Everyone is very happy, but I did not see a happy ending - it will be when mass production begins and the aircraft appears on the market, and independent companies begin to buy it - but for now, it’s only good, even though they have not lost technology. And about profitability - there is no need to deceive yourself, 7-9% (I admit how much in fact, I do not know) - this is a lot for such a technique.
    1. alex86
      alex86 30 July 2016 21: 55
      0
      I have no complaints, but the minus was set for what reasons? We released one liner by order of the special squad - what is the joy? It is clear that for the special squad there should be our plane - but there will be joy when there will be a serial production of aircraft and at the same time there will be no need to find excuses for increased consumption - it should be no more than that of competitors - some of the "patriots" with this will not I agree? They ruined the industry - you need to restore, but one plane is about nothing ...
      1. clidon
        clidon 30 July 2016 22: 44
        0
        So there seems to be a promise that the production of IL-96 will be delayed for some time at the expense of state orders.
  34. Signore Tomato
    Signore Tomato 30 July 2016 08: 39
    +1
    If it were possible to measure the patriotism of a single individual, then at SHOIGU (I’m not afraid to put each letter in capital letters), patriotism would be several times higher than that of our entire government together with Putin!
  35. kav669
    kav669 30 July 2016 09: 35
    0
    The plane is good, the margin of safety and survival is very large.
  36. NKVD
    NKVD 30 July 2016 11: 07
    0
    A very correct article. But in the fall again the majority like sheep will vote for United Russia. Our people love their thieves.
    1. THE_SEAL
      THE_SEAL 30 July 2016 12: 15
      0
      Quote: NKVD
      A very correct article. But in the fall again the majority like sheep will vote for United Russia. Our people love their thieves.

      As I understand it, "vote, don't vote." And Putin will give the Central Election Commission instructions how many percent to give. And so it will be. Well, the United Russia party will again get 99% percent. And the bear will again smile silly and think that he is so popular.
  37. pafegosoff
    pafegosoff 30 July 2016 12: 17
    0
    You reason: 4, 2 motors ... There is a simple formula in the economics of civil aviation. There pioneers can count.
    I remember in the classroom we all calculated these nonsense. The most vile was the Tu-104 - twin-engine (If someone is warped by the word motor, then please - rename the plants). And the most amazing - Tu-114 - four-engine. Behind him is the Il-18, also a four-engined one.
    Then-An-24 and so on ...
    Yes, the more engines, the less chance of failure. So what?
    Reliable fire extinguishing system - and more!
  38. barbiturate
    barbiturate 30 July 2016 12: 19
    +2
    Kickbacks decide everything, Airbus OFFICIALLY rolls back 10% of the deal to the one who orders from her, this is absolutely no secret, Airbus itself openly declares this. I don’t know how many Boeing rolls back, but how much does the IL company give? And her planes are cheaper than Boeing and Airbus, the rollback itself will turn out less, and it’s not profitable to order our thieves in power. No one cares who flies and what, rollback grandmas are important
    1. pafegosoff
      pafegosoff 30 July 2016 17: 15
      0
      I agree. Our Ural titanium company supplies the world aircraft industry with details and quietly keep quiet. What about yourself? Russia is in the balance. And so it is everywhere. Try it, survive!
  39. flay
    flay 30 July 2016 18: 52
    +1
    Quote: barbiturate
    Kickbacks decide everything, Airbus OFFICIALLY rolls back 10% of the deal to the one who orders from her, this is absolutely no secret, Airbus itself openly declares this. I don’t know how many Boeing rolls back, but how much does the IL company give? And her planes are cheaper than Boeing and Airbus, the rollback itself will turn out less, and it’s not profitable to order our thieves in power. No one cares who flies and what, rollback grandmas are important


    So what's the problem ?
    With the cost of IL-96 ($ 92), it’s 2 times cheaper than the Boig-767 ($ 180).
    Let Il begin to cost $ 20 lyam more, which will go to kickbacks. It doesn’t even matter which officials (let the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Investigative Committee, the FSB work).
    Then, at a cost of $ 112 per unit, "Ilyusha" in terms of price still remains "competitive."
    Well, it is necessary to "talk with partners" in the language in which they understand, otherwise how to raise the "marketability" of the aircraft?
  40. dvaposto
    dvaposto 30 July 2016 21: 46
    +1
    as they say, the Freudian clause "crowbar and pry bar are attached", it is a pity that not a screwdriver and a multimeter. could write: a gift - a pair of AK-12.
  41. tracer
    tracer 31 July 2016 04: 31
    +2
    I would like to ask the pilots. Is the author right about "Boeing with one engine won't sit down"? What then drove around tovarisch .... examples of landing a huge variety. For example, two days ago in Texas, a Boeing with one engine sat down, the second was trying to burn .... Besides, about the statistics of "multiple" aircraft accidents with Boeing, well, as it is clearly turned upside down. ALL AMERICA HAS BEEN FLYING FOR TEN YEARS! And the population there is 350 million. Is it impressive? How many thousands of aircraft have Boeing made, and the manufacturer himself no longer knows. No, I am for the fact that Russian planes would fly in the Russian sky and not only in Russian. Just indiscriminately blame the aircraft of this brand straight in the disastrous "case" well, somehow it is not correct. An airplane flying with rubbish does not time but service. More precisely, its cost. Grabber will never spend money on the service. So it is possible to get away with any new plane ...
    1. Dm-sl
      Dm-sl 31 July 2016 09: 17
      0
      An author typically correcting a dent makes a bulge.
  42. Dm-sl
    Dm-sl 31 July 2016 08: 57
    0
    "How our people earned themselves a pretty penny to the detriment of the state (and us, by the way)." And our people continue to try to make money, and those who shout about thieves in power are not lagging behind in this. I remember being at the site inspection, before putting it into industrial operation. And I have a normal attitude towards those who work, I don’t put a spoke in the wheels, but I don’t miss hack either, neither for persuasion, nor for money. The system as a whole is normal, although there were a couple of serious but removable mistakes. Here we go in a mikrika, we talk on abstract topics, I sit and think: to admit the object or not. It seems that everything is honestly done, of high quality, but really 2 mandatory parameters did not pass, I can not put "Confirmed" on them, but you can fix the jamb within a month, and a negative result will be thrown away for a year with the delivery of the object. Well, I think, I will not issue "Inconsistency", but I will write comments and admission with suspensive conditions. But then, to his misfortune, one of the representatives of the "surrendering" began to rant hotly because there were only bribe-takers around, and criminals, and they were not imprisoning anyone (with which I, in principle, agree), but it is necessary to imprison that the Law should be for everyone, and not just for ordinary people, well, etc. I notice that he himself, knowing that his object does not meet the requirements, hopes that I will close my eyes, and how many times today he tried to "agree", suggested discussing this issue in a good restaurant ... "So on you "- I ask," Law and order does not apply? " In response, there was a bunch of philosophizing on the topic "Well, you understand ... there are problems, they did not have time here ..." In short, the next day, after thinking it over all overnight, threw in them the inconsistency of the object with the entry into the protocol, for for the Law everything should be are equal, and those who stand up for it all the more.
    In general, our folk will not miss a penny stolen from another, but he himself does not even think about theft and bribery when it comes to his own selfish question. Almost all the same they gave bribes to traffic cops, and at the same time, "It is necessary to plant traffic cops" - many said. And according to the law, it is a criminal offense not only to the one who took, but also to the one who gave. But who remembers this in our time?
  43. vlad7777kul
    vlad7777kul 31 July 2016 10: 18
    0
    Prohibit the legislative purchase of air junk.
    1. clidon
      clidon 31 July 2016 11: 25
      0
      And what if the airplane flies well?
  44. eco_ad
    eco_ad 31 July 2016 11: 33
    -1
    But this is not about the economy at all. The point is in accounts that regularly receive bonuses and bonuses from overseas "partners". The fact is that all our air carriers were bought in the bud for those very green papers with portraits.

    I'd like to ask: where is our "valiant" Financial Monitoring, where is all the other innumerable host of budget-guzzlers, "fighters" against corruption, who (with their authority) are obliged to monitor the presence of accounts of officials authorized to conclude supply contracts (not only equipment and not only aviation), and receipts to these accounts?
  45. five0clock
    five0clock 31 July 2016 13: 55
    +1
    "The planned NK-56 had to be abandoned due to the workload of the Kuibyshev plant with military orders in favor of the PS-90 Perm engine, which was obviously weaker." .................... .........................................

    I was always amused by drochery on the NK.
  46. cccr51
    cccr51 1 August 2016 16: 15
    0
    I have not read comments, I know what they are. In a nutshell - and now almost the entire government consists of American, public, women.
    1. clidon
      clidon 1 August 2016 18: 42
      0
      Is it because they continue to subsidize the construction of the IL-96?
  47. Romin
    Romin 2 August 2016 16: 56
    +1
    Unfortunately, we will not see "landings" on this topic.
    Since there are "friends" in the subject!
    Khristenko began and continued Shuvalov. I hope everyone knows Shuvalov!;)
    Our undertaker of the aviation industry is not the only one of course from the team.
    I remember filming from the Tu-334, how he ran at a run along the side of the finished "carcass" and with the statements: ... The decision was made .. The project is being closed ...
    And on ILs quietly so lowered the brakes.
    I’ll probably open a huge secret, just ... incredible ...
    Although everyone guesses about it;)
    Boeing paid kickbacks and "marketing" investments. I don’t know about the airbus, but after I caught the Mercedes company on a pop-up expense item in the reports ... representative marketing ... And they dug where he was going and on whom ... Hehe;) so quickly the Temko was hushed up ... Tea at Schroeder was;) and we also found out that the car park is representative - one Mercy;))))
    And hushed up!
    "Ours" got dirty there, so they sit quietly;) data that is!
    As a result, our aviation industry was ruined by our leaders themselves, with their own hands. For "marketing";)
    1. clidon
      clidon 4 August 2016 11: 58
      0
      I’ll reveal another secret here. The same secret payments are made to representatives of the automobile industry - pay attention to AvtoVAZ people buy less and less, and more cars. Well, the matter is clearly unclean.
  48. silver_roman
    silver_roman 4 August 2016 12: 54
    0
    on the facts of these outrages, checks of different levels were conducted, but they did not bring results.

    those who carried out transactions and those who subsequently tried to figure it out and conducted checks to let the jackals get minced. all cattle and traitors. As long as there are such in our country, not the Americans are our main enemies. The enemy is the one who sits inside us!

    Good luck and speedy approaching the end of the tunnel to the whole team and the enterprise as a whole, and we would have more of our beauties in civil aviation. He flew on the IL-96. Wonderful airplane. True, it was a long time ago. in a year like 2004.
  49. Vladimir Vasilich
    Vladimir Vasilich 5 October 2016 13: 08
    0
    We look forward to reports from the factory, and indeed, good news
  50. aleksandrs95
    aleksandrs95 18 October 2016 17: 17
    0
    the main thing is preferential loans in rubles and an unlimited stock of spare parts for quick replacement. the plane will immediately become attractive.