Ukrainian Aviation Industry: Discussion

GarryB wrote:That is a good point... the An-70 and An-124 are excellent planes, but all the BS the Russians have to go through to do anything with their Antonovs just puts them off the types.

The An-26/-32 will be replaced with the IL-112, the An-12 will be replaced by the MTA, the An-70 can be replaced with the Il-476, the real problem replacing the An-22 and the An-124...

They could reactivate the Il-106, which could be an An-22 class aircraft but for heavy lift they only have the An-124 really.

Could just tell em "fuck it, we gave you the tech on the grounds you were part of the Union with us in the first place. So work with us, or partitition the country, or go the way of Greece". And build their own An-124.

I mean would Russia ever have worked with them in the 1st place, if they knew the Ukraine had plans to break away and become some EU-US gimp, riddled with corruption and idiocy?

As far as Im concerned, they're all Russian tech, because Russia was the inheritor of the Soviet Union.
The Ukraine "chose" (ok rather, a corrupt west Ukrainian cabal chose) to break away.

Its really a form of blackmail by the W Ukrainians. Rich shysters hiding behind EU and Ukr Nationalist flags giving shit to tens of millions - both W Ukrainians and Russians in the Ukraine. Surely its time to say "unify or partition".

Hachimoto wrote:This rise a question for me.

What would be the social and political damage if Russia annexed Ukraine to it's territories ? (social more important one)

I'm not from the region so i can't tell.

Ofcourse America and some of the EU would cry that its an "invasion". But then, that kind will moan about all sorts anyway, without any justification.The reality is that its an issue for the CIS alone.

The Ukraine broke away because of a corrupt moron called Yeltsin. So that invalidates any move.
Even when it broke away, the plan was to remain loyal to Moscow. But the Ukraine became so infested with pro American, pro worse parts of the EU style crooks, that in many ways its leadership became a form of enemy to the unified parts of the CIS.

In the west you had some Ukrainians who spoke Polish, others were Nazi supporters, others Germanic. The nationalist claims are pretty ridiculous as it has been part of Russia for the best part of 1100 years.
Kiev is even Russia's historic capital.

Sending the tanks in might cause pr hassles in some countries... but Putin might say "who cares" - given the lies spread about Russia anyway.

Economic pressure is one thing. But that means the vast number of "proper Russians" in the Ukraine suffering.

Its v hard to answer your questions. Annexation of the Ukraine would strain US ties even further... (big deal!) It might strain ties with some EU members. West Ukrainians (eg Lvov) might try and break away (who cares!). People in the East of the Ukraine would be utterly delighted. The current corupt oligarchical elite would throw big tantrums (and hopefully be jailed like Tyumoshenko!) I suppose some parts of the country would go either way.

GarryB wrote:That is a good point... the An-70 and An-124 are excellent planes, but all the BS the Russians have to go through to do anything with their Antonovs just puts them off the types.

The An-26/-32 will be replaced with the IL-112, the An-12 will be replaced by the MTA, the An-70 can be replaced with the Il-476, the real problem replacing the An-22 and the An-124...

They could reactivate the Il-106, which could be an An-22 class aircraft but for heavy lift they only have the An-124 really.

Maybe build an An-124 equivalent, with an airliner variant. I think the Ukraine would need to have some neck to go to the WTO to complain of copying...

Maybe all of this is symbolism. Ukraine pretends to be wonderful. Russia says "look we want to be brothers, but you keep blackmailing/ threatening to betray us. We can partition, ignore, or work with you, but ultimately you must be responsible and not tantrum thowers".

Wasnt UAC about to buy Antonov anyway? But there was some intellectual property issue whereby some stuff was kept by the Ukraine?

What would be the social and political damage if Russia annexed Ukraine to it's territories ? (social more important one)

To put it bluntly Russia has no reason to annex the Ukraine.

Perhaps a better question would be what if large parts of the Ukraine decided to become independent including the Crimea and west or east Ukraine... if the west leaning ukrainians tried to crush such a thing violently it could turn into something nasty... but even then I don't think Russia would intervene.

As far as Im concerned, they're all Russian tech, because Russia was the inheritor of the Soviet Union.

The huge irony of course is that Antonov himself was Russian...

The Soviets had a long history of taking designs from one design bureau and handing it to another to complete... the Mig-29 design was handed to Sukhoi for instance, while the T-4MS design was handed to Tupolev to create the Tu-160.

Give Ilyusion the An-70 design, give Tupolev the An-124 design and then reactivate and fund the Il-106 design they shelved a few years back with new engines.

Wasnt UAC about to buy Antonov anyway? But there was some intellectual property issue whereby some stuff was kept by the Ukraine?

I think they were planning to, but it was blocked... it would have been the best solution for Russia, though if I was in charge I would have stopped all the An programs that competed with Russian aircraft like the An-148 etc and just gone ahead with the An-70, An-124, and a replacement for the An-22... though I think the Il-106 could have achieved the latter.

I am only glad if Antonov gets more business; like the article mentions - the Russian aerospace sector is highly involved in each one of their aircraft.

The An-70 is something that's needed; both as a strategic transport aircraft in the 45-60 ton range, and as an aircraft for the VDV. For a number of different reasons (fuel efficiency/operating costs, production/unit cost, wider & higher cargo bay, shorter take-off & landing, more modern airframe) it's a better fit for both of these roles in the Russian military than the Il-476 is; although the Il-476 has advantages of its own (faster top speed, longer range, greater payload, longer cargo hold, existing production base/expertise/production materials & spare parts/pilot experience) and is required too.
Both have good export prospects and can co-exist side-by-side; customers would be able to chose whether they need the Il-476s features more or the An-70s; I don't agree at all that they are rivals despite their similar weight classes - they are complimentary.
Stopping the purchase of An-70s due to some political disagreements with the Ukraine (EU's Eastern partnership agreement - which is hardly important) is nonsensical; the Ukraine is showing willingness to co-operate for mutual production and exports to 3rd countries and there is no reason to believe that their offer isn't genuine despite the ups and downs in the past. Especially given the fact that the An-70 is 70% built and developed by Russia anyway.
It's just a waste of a good business opportunity and the denial of an aircraft to the RuAF and VDV that meets their requirements more than any other.
Cutting off the nose to spite the face sort of thing. Assuming the article is true of course.

The An-140 is one of the contenders for the replacement of the An-26 in the light transport 5-7 ton range; by all accounts it's a good aircraft for the role with an affordable cost, existing order portfolio mostly in the civilian sector, already assembled in Russia, Ukraine & Iran and may soon be assembled in Kazakhstan too as per the article.
Why not purchase it for the MoD too? Especially if Kazakhstan will place a large order; which will further drive down costs for parts & components and so on.
Of course Illyushin is developing a competing project; the Il-112, but is it worth resorting to protectionism to humour Illyushin's pet project and spite Antonov's for political reasons?
The Il-112 by various accounts has a more optimal cargo bay structure for Russian military needs, and as a newer airframe with new turboprop engines may well have advantages in terms of range, speed, service ceiling and perhaps fuel efficiency.
But do these advantages outweigh the need to forgo a still new yet existing & tested aircraft, with ready production in Russia, available for purchase now, made by a design bureau with experience in light transport production? I'm not so sure; particularly as the Il-112 as yet has no orders, will need production capacity to be invested in and set-up, and will likely be more expensive than the An-140.

The An-148/158 is a pure commercial venture; given that it has only several orders from Russian government agencies (none from the military) and is being produced in Russia anyway; I see no reason why political relations with the Ukraine should affect it's prospects. The more the merrier I say - holding it hostage is just a fast way to lose everyone involved money - simple as that.
So far I haven't seen the An-148 and Sukhoi Superjet competing for the same orders; so that argument goes out the window too.

Like with the An-70; the modernised An-124 and it's potential extension - the An-124-150 are essential for the Russian military; in fact even more so - there are simply no other alternatives for the +65 ton weight class right now at all. Even if Russia develops a An-22 Cock replacement in the 80-90 ton class; that would still leave the Russian military relying on the An-124/An-124-150 for any payload between 100-150 tons.
So again, co-operation with Ukrainian Antonov is a must here regardless of politics - developing a Russian replacement would be long, unprofitable and pointless.

Finally I think that with the collapse of Illyushin's Il-106 project in the 90s; it would be prudent for Illyushin and Antonov to establish some sort of joint-venture on the creation of a new An-22 replacement; sharing the risks and costs while pooling their complimentary talents as the two main ex-USSR transport aircraft producers. Illyushin of course traditionally specialised in passenger aircraft, while Antonov was the one more geared to heavy transport aviation - therefore their experience would be invaluable; a better idea than trying to go it alone.

The legitimate points of the article aside though; I find it it too amateurish and optimistic.

In August, against the background of the "customs war", Russian deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin expressed doubts about the feasibility of further aviation cooperation with Ukraine, including on the An-124 and An-70. According to the official, the problem is that "another party is reluctant to agree on the modernization of the individual units of “Ruslan”. We are not going to wait any longer and we are to make use of foreign experience, localizing all the production in our territory and abandoning the Ukrainian services. Whom will they work with? The Chinese? China, too, has far advanced in this respect. Why do they need Ukraine? I am truly worried about the future of our bilateral industrial cooperation". In addition, Rogozin called the An-70 almost a direct competitor to the Russian Il-476 (or more precisely, Il-76MD-90A).

The possibility of An-70 co-operation with China is dubious at best given that the Chinese already opted for the Il-76/476 a good few years back, and have their own domestic transport aircraft analogues in any case.
An-124 and An-148/158 co-operation with China on the other hand is plausible but it would hinge completely on the Russians anyway.

Moreover, the joint venture on An-140 production could be set up with Kazakhstan to replace the outdated An-24 and An-26

Phrases such as 'could be set up' don't exactly inspire one with confidence. In fact the deal with Kazakh purchase and production of An-140s has been on the cards for some time already and while it would be great if it goes through; there is nothing to suggest as yet that it will; we're still waiting.

Perhaps, the Kazakhstan will buy An-148 units as well.

And this sentence is even worse. Based on what?? Perhaps, Venezuela will buy An-148s or SSJs or whatever else too. There's no evidence of course, but maybe it will happen.
Such postulating and guessing doesn't belong in a serious article.

The problem is that ultimately the Ukrainian aviation industry is not in the best state; a lot of Antonov's assets & workers were moved to Russia several years back (evacuation of industry to the East, so to speak). The remainder suffer the same problems as the rest of the Ukraine's defense industry, low wages, minimal investment into new R&D projects, very few government orders, less than impressive amounts of foreign orders, corruption/quality control/parts quality.

However the Ukrainian aerospace industry, although it's not saying much, is doing a lot better than Ukrainian shipbuilding (close to non-existence), and ground vehicles/equipment production (still in a catastrophic state). The best you can say about Ukraine's aviation industry - is that it's prospects are uncertain.
However, it does indeed have the potential to climb back with Russian assistance and other international investors I believe.
Unlike the other parts of the Ukrainian defense industry; it does have international orders and a sizeable amount of them, it is producing both at domestic plants and abroad, and it still does offer some highly capable designs and machinery; some of which have no analogues anywhere else in the world.

Both have good export prospects and can co-exist side-by-side; customers would be able to chose whether they need the Il-476s features more or the An-70s; I don't agree at all that they are rivals despite their similar weight classes - they are complimentary.

Agree. I think the VDV should have their own aircraft... it would be pretty stupid to have a fast reaction police unit that had to put in a request to the transport department so they can respond to calls.

Equally there are plenty of roles the Il-476 can perform that the An-70 would not really be considered for... certainly strategic transport is one area, and inflight refuelling for tactical aircraft and of course AWACS and laser battlecruiser, and indeed jammer aircraft are a few.

Why not purchase it for the MoD too? Especially if Kazakhstan will place a large order; which will further drive down costs for parts & components and so on.

The Antonov is not an ideal choice in this case as there is a Russian alternative that in many ways is a better aircraft and with the proposed new engines will get even better still.

Once the Il-112 is in production for the Russian government its export potential will greatly increase... and it is money spent on Russian technology.

Of course Illyushin is developing a competing project; the Il-112, but is it worth resorting to protectionism to humour Illyushin's pet project and spite Antonov's for political reasons?

If the An-140 could do the job and the Il-112 couldn't I would agree... that would be protectionism. The fact is that it seems to be the other way around... and general problems they are having with Antonov make the An-140 even less attractive.

The An-148/158 is a pure commercial venture; given that it has only several orders from Russian government agencies (none from the military) and is being produced in Russia anyway; I see no reason why political relations with the Ukraine should affect it's prospects.

The An-124 is produced in Russia too yet there are problems with political relations with the Ukraine.

So again, co-operation with Ukrainian Antonov is a must here regardless of politics - developing a Russian replacement would be long, unprofitable and pointless.

Cooperation with Russia over a barrel usually does not end well for Russia...

Finally I think that with the collapse of Illyushin's Il-106 project in the 90s; it would be prudent for Illyushin and Antonov to establish some sort of joint-venture on the creation of a new An-22 replacement; sharing the risks and costs while pooling their complimentary talents as the two main ex-USSR transport aircraft producers. Illyushin of course traditionally specialised in passenger aircraft, while Antonov was the one more geared to heavy transport aviation - therefore their experience would be invaluable; a better idea than trying to go it alone.

With Antonov being such unreliable partners in aircraft why take such a risk?

The Il-106 was developed and just lacked funding. Now they have some excellent engines they could use and they have the money... why add Antonov into the mix?

Don't get me wrong... I like the An-70, and the An-124, but if Antonov want to negotiate hardball style I think the Russians have domestic alternatives to meet their own needs. They can overhaul their existing An-124s and look at some designs for multipurpose heavy lifters like the KR-860 project from Sukhoi or some expanded model of the Il-106.

From 2009:

MILITARY TRANSPORT AVIATION

There are up to 300 transport aircraft in service with the Russian Air Force, including An-12 Cub, An-72 Coaler, An-22 Cock, An-124 Condor and Il-76 Candid planes.

The An-12, An-22, and An-26 planes will be decommissioned in the near future, Zelin said.

The An-26 plane will be replaced by Il-112B light transport aircraft with higher payload capacity and better fuel efficiency.

"The first Il-112 is expected to make its maiden flight in 2011. The Air Force will order over 70 planes of this type," the general said.

The An-12 will be most likely replaced by a medium-haul transport plane jointly-developed by Russia and India, Zelin said.

The plane, with a 20-ton cargo capacity, is expected to go in service with the Russian and Indian air forces in about eight years.

The An-124 and its modernized version, the An-124-100, will remain in service as a strategic heavy airlift transport aircraft. In addition, 12 Il-76 aircraft will be modernized to Il-76MD-90A starting in 2011.

So the Il-112V will replace the An-72, and An-26/An-32 in the light transport role, while the MTA will replace the An-12. The Il-476 and An-124 will likely fill the role of the An-22, but he does not mention the gap from the lack of An-70.

Certainly the MTA and Il-476 could do the job, but not as well or as efficiently as the An-70 as it was custom designed for the role.

Personally I think the Ukrainians are being very very stupid... it really is in their best interests to get these aircraft into production no matter what terms they have with Russia because more than a few countries in Europe and around the world want an aircraft like that but don't want to buy a C-130J or Airbus A400M. The An-70 is not only superior to both aircraft it will likely be rather cheaper too.

Of course they can't sell what they don't make and without Russia it likely wont get made... talking about cutting off ones nose to spite ones face... they are both doing it.

I suspect the Russians want terms that will prevent previous problems with antonov aircraft from being repeated, which is fair enough... once bitten... twice shy... but for the Ukraine to put hurdles in front of marketable products getting to serial production level just because they have a chip on their shoulder over Russia...

Sounds a bit desperate... especially considering the Mi-2 was not built in the Soviet Union...

George1 wrote:Roll-out of the first prototype of An-178

Would be easy for the EU/US/Canada/Australia to encourage some of their own airlines to throw some orders Antonov's way buy up this model and the passenger versions; the An-148/An-158. It won't cost them a dime either; their airlines meanwhile are likely to save some money on this fine aircraft, compared to the more expensive Western models.

Let's see if they'll do even that. My bet is they won't. Antonov is dead w/o orders from Russia and development of co-operation with the Russian aerospace industry.

TR1 wrote:Nobody in the west is buying the An-148 family, don't even kid yourself.

Private companies will not be pushed into buying a product from Ukraine just cause.

Oh, I'm not kidding myself and I didn't mean to suggest that I was.

I'm sure that the Ukrainians are kidding themselves though.. so.. let's just leave them to it, without further distraction.

Not that great of an airplane family either, to be quite frank. It has been commercially dead for a while.

Dunno, I always thought the An-148 was pretty awesome. Well at least it looks awesome.

I'm a fan of all Antonov's current line-up actually; An-70, An-148, An-140..
And now they're gonna sputter out and die most likely.. a big loss to world aviation.

BTW: http://worldairlinenews.com/2015/04/16/rossiya-airlines-suspends-antonov-an-148-scheduled-flights/

I'm wondering what's up with that.

Just because of the expense?

Or other factors; like a political decision, or problems getting spare-parts, or something to do with the import-substitution program perhaps.

That little f*ggot that got choked.