Russian Transport Aircraft fleet (VTA)

June 20, 11:36
Shoigu: military transport aviation has doubled the number of flights since the beginning of the SMO

MOSCOW, 20 June. /TASS/. The crews of the Military Transport Aviation have more than doubled the number of flights since the beginning of the special operation, and to date, more than 10,000 flights have been completed. This was stated on Tuesday by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu during a meeting of the collegium of the military department.

"Since the start of the special military operation in Ukraine, the intensity of military transport flights has more than doubled. To date, An-124 and Il-76 aircraft have made over 10,000 flights," the head of the military department said.

According to him, the aircraft transported 2,300 pieces of equipment, more than 300,000 military personnel and 160,000 tons of cargo, while A-50 and Il-22 aircraft carried out almost 5,000 special sorties.
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/18066653

They need to sort out the production of new transporters though

Hole wrote:

Maybe some of the existing An-22 can be kept for museums or for airshows and similar.

Anyway this show the importance of a proper replacement. Hopefully the Il-106 or something similar will be made. In the meanwhile restarting production of the larger An-124 can cover the emergencies. And il-76 can help for payloads narrower than 3.2 m

In the meanwhile restarting production of the larger An-124 can cover the emergencies.

they can't & don't need to- there r many An-124s in storage & 1 just been pulled out, with others to folow, if need be:
https://armyrecognition.com/news/army-news/2024/russia-reactivates-an-124-transport-plane-from-25-year-storage-for-ukraine-military-operations

The Il-106 and Slon transport types are waiting for the PD-35 engines to enter serial production, so they will most likely just take An-124s out of storage and upgrade their engines with new Russian parts.

They upgraded the engines for the Bear, so such engine upgrades could be applied to An-22s if they wanted to keep using them... lower vibration and more thrust and lower fuel consumption and better reliability would have further improved the performance of any aircraft that used such engines.

The An-22 crews can now be trained for flying on An-124s or Il-76s.
I wouldn't be surprized if they give/sell some An-22s to China for reverse engeneering!

Tsavo Lion wrote:

In the meanwhile restarting production of the larger An-124 can cover the emergencies.

they can't & don't need to- there r many An-124s in storage & 1 just been pulled out, with others to folow, if need be:

Why do you say they can't?

They can't immediately, but they have all the technology and they should be able soon also to produce new D-18T engines.

They will not... Maybe they do not need to, but I do not agree that they will not be able to produce new An-124 given a 3-4 years to set up everything.

There were plans to restart production back in 2012, but $0.5B were needed then; if they can't afford it now, & w/o new engines, than they can't do it by default. Pl. read these: https://en.topwar.ru/228074-an-124-ruslan-vozmozhno-li-sovershit-nevozmozhnoe.html

https://defence-blog.com/russia-confirms-details-of-an-124-upgrade-program/

https://ruavia.su/serial-production-of-d-18t-engines-for-an-124-aircraft-will-start-at-the-end-of-2027/

Tsavo Lion wrote:There were plans to restart production back in 2012, but $0.5B were needed then; if they can't afford it now, & w/o new engines, than they can't do it by default. Pl. read these: https://en.topwar.ru/228074-an-124-ruslan-vozmozhno-li-sovershit-nevozmozhnoe.html

https://defence-blog.com/russia-confirms-details-of-an-124-upgrade-program/

https://ruavia.su/serial-production-of-d-18t-engines-for-an-124-aircraft-will-start-at-the-end-of-2027/

topwar Is Always pessimistic and with strange allegation.

They mentions new centre sections (i.e. different manufacture and design) for the fuselage, but they are not needed.

Russia was already preparing several years ago to produce new Ruslans. The only issue at that time was the production of the engine.

As it is also mentioned in one of the articles you posted, in 2027 (three years from now) Russia will have serial production of modernised D-18T.
Fuselage, wings, landing gears and all other parts can be produced in Russia without issue, and other internal parts and avionics also.

Needed tooling and parts for final assembly are available in Ulyanovsk, so I do not see where the problem is.

Russia can restart production of new An-124 in 3-4 years, in addition to repairing and bringing back in service mothballed An-124.

Il-106 will not be ready for many more years (unless they just decide to call the newly built An-124 with that name) and the same will be true for the Slon.

The il-106 as An-22 replacement to be in a niche between Il-76 and An-124 will need several more years, especially if it needs new engine. It could be also interesting to do it as twin engine cargo with 2 PD-35

Russia can restart production of new An-124 in 3-4 years,..

they r still struggling with Il-476 production, which r needed even more urgently now that older Il-76s & An-12/22s need replacements/substitutions, & that's why

..bringing back in service mothballed An-124.

has to happen 1st. Denis Manturov, the then director of the Ministry of Industry and Trade, stated that this is not an urgent matter because the An-124’s operational lifespan will be extended until the end of the 2040s through the repair of the current fleet. By the time it's done, there may not be a need to produce new An-124s. For outisize cargoes, existing An-124s should be enough. New An-22s with minimum redesign & off the shelf engines could be produced faster & for a lot le$$ than An-124s, Slons & Il-106.
Russia could also import/lease some Y-20s/Y-20-100Fs &/ buy back some PLAAF Il-76s, if need be. Besides, there'll be a dozen surplus A-400Ms after reduction in their orders, so some nations may sell their Il-76s to get them, or Russia may get them via 3rd countries before importing parts on the black market or producing her own parts, & fitting the engines developed for the cancelled An-70.

Tsavo Lion wrote:

Russia can restart production of new An-124 in 3-4 years,..

they r still struggling with Il-476 production, which r needed even more urgently now that older Il-76s & An-12/22s need replacements/substitutions, & that's why

..bringing back in service mothballed An-124.

has to happen 1st. Denis Manturov, the then director of the Ministry of Industry and Trade, stated that this is not an urgent matter because the An-124’s operational lifespan will be extended until the end of the 2040s through the repair of the current fleet. By the time it's done, there may not be a need to produce new An-124s. For outisize cargoes, existing An-124s should be enough. New An-22s with minimum redesign & off the shelf engines could be produced faster & for a lot le$$ than An-124s, Slons & Il-106.
Russia could also import/lease some Y-20s/Y-20-100Fs &/ buy back some PLAAF Il-76s, if need be. Besides, there'll be a dozen surplus A-400Ms after reduction in their orders, so some nations may sell their Il-76s to get them, or Russia may get them via 3rd countries before importing parts on the black market or producing her own parts, & fitting the engines developed for the cancelled An-70.

They are not struggling.

Russia's United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) produced six Il-76MD-90A airlifters in 2023 and plans to raise its annual output to 18 aircraft in 2024, UAC CEO Yury Slyusar has told Rossiya 24 TV.

https://euro-sd.com/2024/01/major-news/35857/uac-il-76md-90a-output-in-2024/

Russia is not China and is not going to restart production of the aircraft it is retiring, like An-12 and An-22.

Why should Russia get Chinese planes?
They need work for their enterprises, especially now that they are getting more regions and need employment opportunities.

The Y-20 is basically a stretched and slightly enlarged An-70 with jet engines.
Even when the old generation jet engines in the Y-20 will be replaced by more modern ones, it will not be something better than the PD-14 (actually I am not sure they will be better than the PS-90).

And also why should Russia get the A-400M which is basically the crappy copy of the An-70?

It would almost make more sense to reconsider the An-70.

The main problem of the An-70 was the politic games of Country 404, which destroyed a very promising project.

I am not saying that Russia should resuscitate this but there were also several proposed alternative versions, like a smaller version with only 2 D-27 engines which could have been a good An-12 replacement and a stretched variant with either 4 propfan or 4 turbofan engines.
They would be anyway better options for Russia than either the A400M or the Y-20.

Actually, if the Tu-330 is not chosen, I would really like to see something like a shorter An-70 powered by two turboprop or propfan as An-12 replacement.

And I hope they keep the Antonov name.
It is sad that there will not be a replacement for the An-22 coming within the next 5 years, but this does not mean Russia will need to buy Chinese planes.

As said before narrower payload can be transported by the Il-76 and repair and new production of An-124 will cover the larger necessities (albeit in some cases it will be more expensive to operate than a 80 tons payload plane).

For some specific large but not particularly dense and heavy payload, Russia could also build the already proposed beluga like version of the il-96.
They will not be military cargo planes, but they could have their use.

The Y-20 cargo bay is about 4 meters wide...
A bit less than the 4.4 m of the An-22.

... so it is wider than the 3.2 m bay of the  il-76 but much narrower than the almost 5.5 m bay of the C-17 and even less than the proposed il-106 project from the 90s

They are not struggling.

struggling or not, even if orders r not increased from the current figure, they'll be making them for at least a few more years, for their own needs; later export/upgrade orders may keep them busy for a few more years.

Why should Russia get Chinese planes?

as a cheaper stopgap; they can free up many older Il-76s & An-12/72s for upgrades/conversions to tankers & AWACS.

..(actually I am not sure they will be better than the PS-90).

Imported/leased Y-20s can be reengined with them the same way the IL-476s r being reengined, possibly giving them even better performance than the Il-476s.

And also why should Russia get the A-400M which is basically the crappy copy of the An-70?

while it can lift 10T less, it's still better than 0 An-22/70s, & to free up/augment/replace some overworked Il-76s & An-12s, thus prolonging their life even more.

Y-20 is the Chinese modernized version of Il-76

no, it's rather a hybrid of the An-70 nose & the C-17 fuselage, wings & T-tail.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3247848/china-trying-sell-its-chubby-girl-transport-plane-foreign-buyers

I wouldn't be surprized if they give/sell some An-22s to China for reverse engeneering!

If they were interested they likely would have bought the plans from the Ukraine.

I suspect the sticking point would be the engines, which I presume are made in Russia.

They can't immediately, but they have all the technology and they should be able soon also to produce new D-18T engines.

They really don't have a huge number of An-124s and if they get the PD-35 engine going I don't think it makes sense to even bother making more An-124s.

I would say it would be more in their interests to get the Il-106 flying and operational and then the Slon type would be next with four of said new engines.

Making parts for the D-18TM means the An-124s they have can keep flying for quite some time now, but they really don't need a lot more of them.

The factories that would be making An-124s should be building prototype Il-106s for testing and development... they can make a few PD-35s for prototypes while development continues.

There were plans to restart production back in 2012, but $0.5B were needed then; if they can't afford it now, & w/o new engines, than they can't do it by default.

Making new parts for the engines means they take aircraft out of storage and get them up and running again so making new aircraft should be left until they run out of aircraft in storage.

If the PD-35s are ready in 5-6 years time then they could possibly go to making Il-106 aircraft and to making a Slon prototype for development and testing instead.

Russia can restart production of new An-124 in 3-4 years, in addition to repairing and bringing back in service mothballed An-124.

They could, but should they?

What sort of demand will there be and how many do they have in storage?

The new PD-35 means the An-124 does not make sense... an 80-90 ton payload transport with two PD-35s and a 170-180 ton payload transport with four PD-35s makes sense. A twin engined An-124 would probably have a payload capacity of 60-70 tons if the engines are only 24 ton thrust class engines.

Modifying An-124s to PD-35s would be problematic... might as well go with the new design instead (Il-106).

New An-22s with minimum redesign & off the shelf engines could be produced faster & for a lot le$$ than An-124s, Slons & Il-106.

An-22 are old design... if they were making more why would they retire the current aircraft?

They must have used up their airframe and engine lives.

Time for a new Russian type to replace them.

That would be Il-106 which is just waiting for its PD-35 engines.

Of course the Il-106 could use four 18 ton thrust late model PS90 engines in a first version to get it into service, and then when the PD-35 engines are ready it could revert to a twin jet plane.

Russia could also import/lease some Y-20s/Y-20-100Fs &/ buy back some PLAAF Il-76s, if need be. Besides, there'll be a dozen surplus A-400Ms after reduction in their orders, so some nations may sell their Il-76s to get them, or Russia may get them via 3rd countries before importing parts on the black market or producing her own parts, & fitting the engines developed for the cancelled An-70.

Russian airlines are suffering now because they sold out local designers and aircraft makers... don't think they will make the same mistake twice.

Plus the A-400M is a dog... and an expensive dog at that.

They just need someone to go through the production of the Il-476 and work out what the problems are and solve them... if they can't make Il-476s then how can they make anything?

The MTA is a smaller lighter Il-476 with two engines instead of four so setting up several factories to make Il-276s would make things much better... depending on demand they can switch between making either aircraft type depending on the demand at the time.

Smaller lighter aircraft are generally needed and produced in greater numbers and having factories that can make either means you could set up several new factories to make Il-276s but they could make a few prototypes and then go to serial production of Il-476s till the smaller aircraft is ready for serial production.

It could help boost production numbers of the larger type while the smaller types design is perfected and serialised and then it can shift to making the smaller aircraft.

Keep in mind that the Il-476 is used as the basis for the transport and the inflight refuelling aircraft as well as the new AWACS A-100 and perhaps a new upgraded airborne laser platform and likely several other types including perhaps a new version to test new jet engines etc etc.

Equally the Il-276 will be replacing the An-12 which was also used in a very broad range of roles including ejection seat testing and various EW and jamming roles, and potentially AWACS and inflight refuelling and MPA roles... perhaps even patrol aircraft and altitude bomber.

And then you have export potential for both types once they are in production at a sufficient rate... the An-12 and Il-76 were popular export items and a new BRICS family will need new modern types too.

It would almost make more sense to reconsider the An-70.

The main problem of the An-70 was the politic games of Country 404, which destroyed a very promising project.

I would say a simpler solution would be an Il-476 with An-70 engines and props to allow lower flight speeds.

I am not saying that Russia should resuscitate this but there were also several proposed alternative versions, like a smaller version with only 2 D-27 engines which could have been a good An-12 replacement and a stretched variant with either 4 propfan or 4 turbofan engines.

For which the Il-276 with two propfan engines would make more sense... perhaps reviewing the propfan engines they were developing for the Il-106 might be in order and perhaps those engines might be of use on a range of aircraft types including but not limited to amphibians.

Actually, if the Tu-330 is not chosen, I would really like to see something like a shorter An-70 powered by two turboprop or propfan as An-12 replacement.

With the Antonov lobby gone and the Tu-214 in serial production I would say the Tu-330 or some development of it should be a priority.

And I hope they keep the Antonov name.

Antonov is not part of the UAC, and their behaviour during the post cold war period... I wouldn't lift a finger to save their name.

Keep the An-124 designation and the An-2s, but as they disappear so does the name IMHO...

as a cheaper stopgap; they can free up many older Il-76s & An-12/72s for upgrades/conversions to tankers & AWACS.

Part of the reason they are not cranking out 50 Il-476s a year is because some of them are going to be Il-478 and A-100 types.

while it can lift 10T less, it's still better than 0 An-22/70s, & to free up/augment/replace some overworked Il-76s & An-12s, thus prolonging their life even more.

Old AN-12 and Il-76s don't need their lives prolonged. Replace them with new and scrap the old.

Fill them with explosives and remote control fly them into targets in Ukraine that need big booms.

If they were interested they likely would have bought the plans from the Ukraine.

I bet for a lot more than the Russians would ask for a retired An-22 with the plans.

An-22 are old design... if they were making more why would they retire the current aircraft?

they r not making them now, but if they did, it would be a new deeply modernized variant to replace the old, just like with the older An-8 & Il-76/86s that been retired & scrapped. As is, the An-22 can lift at least 3 tons > than the C-17, 4x > than the An-12, & 1.45x > than the Il-476. I'm afraid it will be like with all those An-12/26/72s that need replacements soon but have none, as they were never developed thanks to the USSR implosion & the end of the Cold War. The US, Europeans, Japanese & Chinese at roughly the same time developed their C-5M/130J/17III, A400M, C-2 & Y-9/20, respectively.

I would say a simpler solution would be an Il-476 with An-70 engines and props to allow lower flight speeds.

 I doubt that 4 of those engines will be enough to lift a heavier Il-476, at 88.5 tons empty vs. 66.22 tons empty.
I also doubt that if Il-106 comes out, they'll develop a 2 engine variant- it'll be too risky, in case 1-2 engine quit, 2-3 remaining engines will be enough to save a 4 engine plane.

AMCXXL wrote:
Y-20 is the Chinese modernized version of Il-76

Its a matter of opinion, but the overall design of Y-20 has far more in common with the A-400, the AN-70 and even the C-17.

The front section looks very much like the AN-70 an the rear end is a copy of the A-400.

Tsavo Lion wrote:

They are not struggling.

struggling or not, even if orders r not increased from the current figure, they'll be making them for at least a few more years, for their own needs; later export/upgrade orders may keep them busy for a few more years.

They should be able to build both An-124 and il-76 at the same time.

As far as I know, in Aviastar (Ulyanovsk) the il-76 are being built in the area previously dedicated to the Tu-204, not impacting at all the area previously dedicated to the Serial production of An-124.
The only doubt there would be availablity of trained personnel, but they are already recruiting more people and there is the time to recruit and train more.

As an example the assembly plant in Komsomolsk on Amur had serial production at the same time of both Su-35 and SSJ-100 without any issue.

As far as the Il-276 at the moment it is less than a paper plane and it is even less mature than the An-70.

Furthermore Russia already spent a lot of money in the An-70 development and should have all design data.

GarryB wrote:Antonov is not part of the UAC, and their behaviour during the post cold war period... I wouldn't lift a finger to save their name.

Keep the An-124 designation and the An-2s, but as they disappear so does the name IMHO...

In 3 years Kiev will be a Russian city or will be a desert and country 404 will not exist anymore.

That behaviour was due to the political games of country 404, who exploited the name of Oleg Antonov, all the soviet accomplishment and also Russian money.
That will not be a problem anymore in 2027.

Antonov can be part of UAC with main design bureau in Moscow, Ulyanovsk or Novosibirsk instead of Kiev.

The assembly plants will be completely detached from the design buros, as it was in soviet times so we will not speak anymore of Antonov plants, but of Kiev aircraft plant and Kharkov aircraft plant (which will be probably already completely destroyed due to military operations and the thievery and sabotage from banderites).

As an example An-22 were anyway built in Tashkent and not in Kiev.

Kiev aircraft plant can be rebuilt later and initially be used for maintenance and overhaul of airplanes.

Production in Kiev can be planned after all other Russian plant have been modernised, and brand new plants have been built in Saratov and in Novorossia.

AMCXXL wrote:

Y-20 is basically a Il-76

Y-20 vs. Il-76MD-90A

length: 47 vs.47
wingspan: 50 vs 50
MTOW: 220 t. vs. 210
payload: 66 t vs 62
m.speed: M 0,75 vs 0,8

The silhouette is similar except for the nose, which looks more modern and aerodynamic, probably copied of one Antonov
An-70 has 40 meters length x 44 wingspan, only 140 t. MTOW

For that reason I said that the Y-20 is basically a copied enlarged An-70 with jet engines instead of propfans (actually a love child between An-70 and C-17, but the only similar part to the C-17 is the tail, the fuselage is more similar to the An-70).
Antonov engineers were also responsible for most of its design, probably also for the wings.

They should be able to build both An-124 and il-76 at the same time.

The capacity to make new An-124s should be directed to make new planes and not old ones...

As far as the Il-276 at the moment it is less than a paper plane and it is even less mature than the An-70.

But it was suggested because the bonus of commonality with an existing type means it wont start from scratch and should be able to be put into production rather quickly.

Even more so if they do to it what they did to the Il-212 and have above wing mounted engines so rough airfield use combined with jet flight speed and altitude would make it a rather good replacement for the An-12.

Factories that make Il-476s could also be modified to make Il-276s and vice versa which gives a versatility that other types would not.

Furthermore Russia already spent a lot of money in the An-70 development and should have all design data.

It was a VDV project who wanted it because its lower flight speed would allow more compact drop groups.

An Il-476 with the An-70s engines could probably do the same without a completely new aircraft type.

The An-70 was rather too big to replace the An-12 and at 47 ton payload capacity could carry more than early model Il-76 aircraft.

That behaviour was due to the political games of country 404, who exploited the name of Oleg Antonov, all the soviet accomplishment and also Russian money.
That will not be a problem anymore in 2027.

There is no one named Antonov to continue the work.

Production in Kiev can be planned after all other Russian plant have been modernised, and brand new plants have been built in Saratov and in Novorossia.

I would give Bartini a plant before I gave Antonov one.

GarryB wrote:

They should be able to build both An-124 and il-76 at the same time.

The capacity to make new An-124s should be directed to make new planes and not old ones...

The il-76 are a much older design than the An-124, introduced 12 years earlier than the Ruslan.
I know that current version il-76 has been modernised, but it has less improvement potential than the An-124.

Furthermore they still have all equipment and tooling for the An-124 production in Ulyanovsk. Something for a new model will need to be created first, instead.

And from what I have seen of the Slon, it looks like a slightly enlarged An-124 with modern engines. It would still require a lot of testing and additional studies to allow it to enter service, while the An-124 has been already tested certified.

With the capitulation of country 404 coming in the near future Russia will also obtain full ownership of all ex Soviet IP belonging to the enterprises that got stranded in that fake country after 1991.

As far as the Il-76, it was fundamental to restart production because no other plane was available for production and even if previous production of the il-76 was abroad, Russia owned both the aircraft design and the engines, but I still see it as a stopgap to be produced until a newer design will be available ( possibly to enter service after 2035).

GarryB wrote:

As far as the Il-276 at the moment it is less than a paper plane and it is even less mature than the An-70.

But it was suggested because the bonus of commonality with an existing type means it wont start from scratch and should be able to be put into production rather quickly.

Even more so if they do to it what they did to the Il-212 and have above wing mounted engines so rough airfield use combined with jet flight speed and altitude would make it a rather good replacement for the An-12.

Factories that make Il-476s could also be modified to make Il-276s and vice versa which gives a versatility that other types would not.

I do not like the il-276 and the base design of the il-76 is anyway old.
Already on paper the il-214 or Il-276 had much worse performances in comparison with aircraft of similar size and engine thrust.

It would be at this point more sensible to use something newer.
Even the base design of the An-70 in both smaller twin engine and larger 4 engine configuration would be a better option.

GarryB wrote:

Furthermore Russia already spent a lot of money in the An-70 development and should have all design data.

It was a VDV project who wanted it because its lower flight speed would allow more compact drop groups.

An Il-476 with the An-70s engines could probably do the same without a completely new aircraft type.

The An-70 was rather too big to replace the An-12 and at 47 ton payload capacity could carry more than early model Il-76 aircraft.

For this reason I would like to consider a shortened twin engine version of the An-70 to replace the An-12 and the larger 4 engine one to be used in a similar niche as the Il-76.

As far as the engines it could be either the PD-14 or a new PD-8 S turboprop or propfan.

GarryB wrote:

That behaviour was due to the political games of country 404, who exploited the name of Oleg Antonov, all the soviet accomplishment and also Russian money.
That will not be a problem anymore in 2027.

There is no one named Antonov to continue the work.

Ilyushin, Yakovlev and Tupulev are also dead since many years.

GarryB wrote:

Production in Kiev can be planned after all other Russian plant have been modernised, and brand new plants have been built in Saratov and in Novorossia.

I would give Bartini a plant before I gave Antonov one.

I meant design buro, not production plant. The production plants should be like in soviet time, independent from the design buros.
But yes, I would really like to see some new Bartini planes. One of my dream would be to see in the future some project as Russian-italian joint venture.

That is unfortunately as unlikely as my hope to have Italy exit EU and start a union state with Greece.

And I am not saying to produce Antonov Planes in Kiev or Kharkov. Even if Russia would want to produce An-70 variants it should do it in other plants, like Aviator in Samara or brand new ones to be built in Saratov or in Donbass.

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:I know that current version il-76 has been modernised, but it has less improvement potential than the An-124. Furthermore they still have all equipment and tooling for the An-124 production in Ulyanovsk. Something for a new model will need to be created first, instead.

The Il-76MD/476s can be stretched to the Il-76F size to add to their value, compensating for the shortage of these planes; the An-124s returned to service from storage would be enough to increase their total numbers for the duration of the war.
After it's over, they'll still need to produce many other types civil & mil. aircraft, plus parts for the existing An-124s, Il-76/78s, & A-50/100s, so I doubt it'll be feasable to produce new An-124s in the absence of export orders & before all those other planes r produced in needed quantities.
By then, there may be a heavy flying wing design variants with better performances than An-124, Slon & Il-106. So, time will tell!

The il-76 are a much older design than the An-124, introduced 12 years earlier than the Ruslan.

That is right but Il-76 class aircraft are needed in large numbers and are needed now to replace old model transports but also old model AWACS and inflight refueling and other types including flying labs for testing new aircraft engines and also for EW jamming and other roles.

There is no other aircraft design that could replace the Il-76 design without a long delay that would be any better than the Il-476... so it makes sense to make Il-476s and also look at Il-276s which use the same design to fill the role of the An-12.

I know that current version il-76 has been modernised, but it has less improvement potential than the An-124.

Il-476 will replace the Il-76 and the Il-78 and the A-50 and a few other types, and a reduced size model can replace all the huge number of An-12 aircraft types they have in service too.

Making brand new An-124s just replaces old An-124s and now they will be using An-124s where previously they were using An-22s, which is a downgrade in terms of costs with smaller payloads.

Furthermore they still have all equipment and tooling for the An-124 production in Ulyanovsk. Something for a new model will need to be created first, instead.

You don't make things because you still have the tooling and equipment to make it... you make what you need and they need new aircraft to replace their cold war period aircraft... the entire reason for being of the PD-35 was to allow a two engine replacement of the An-22 to be built and for a four engined replacement of the An-124 to be built.

The PD-35 is the wrong size for the An-124... two engines would not be powerful enough and four engines would be too powerful.

Engines take a very long time to develop so you have a lot of time and money and planning going into each engine and the aircraft that will be designed to use those engines.

There is no reason to make more An-124s until all the aircraft in storage have been taken out and put into service... that is what they can do at Ulyanovsk over the next 3-4 years... upgrade and overhaul those aircraft in storage... they will need all the foreign and Ukrainian parts removed and replaced and new Russian parts fitted so when they go back into service they will be useful and safe... and over those few years they can build a prototype Il-106... perhaps with four PS-90 18 ton thrust engines to start with, or with two experimental hand built PD-35s for testing... with testing taking place the can refine the design and get to a serial model and then shift from upgrading in storage An-124s and maintaining the fleet of An-124s to production of Il-106s.

The combination of An-124s and Il-106s should be fine for the next 10 years or so and then Slon with four PD-35s... which will be a mature aircraft engine by then can be started will the remaining Il-106s are made and then production can shift to Slons, including a model with an H tail to allow outsized cargoes to be carried on its back for the space industry.

And from what I have seen of the Slon, it looks like a slightly enlarged An-124 with modern engines. It would still require a lot of testing and additional studies to allow it to enter service, while the An-124 has been already tested certified.

As you say, the Slon is not a delta wing supersonic fighter... it will be a slightly bigger An-124 but in a different weight payload class with the significant increase in engine power in the 170-180 ton payload weight class.

With the capitulation of country 404 coming in the near future Russia will also obtain full ownership of all ex Soviet IP belonging to the enterprises that got stranded in that fake country after 1991.

That doesn't matter... are they going to start making Zenit rockets too?

How about restarting production of the An-2?

The An-12?

Why look backwards when there are options moving forward?

As far as the Il-76, it was fundamental to restart production because no other plane was available for production and even if previous production of the il-76 was abroad, Russia owned both the aircraft design and the engines, but I still see it as a stopgap to be produced until a newer design will be available ( possibly to enter service after 2035).

There are not plans for the design of an Il-76 replacement that I know of. Conversely there are replacement designs for An-12, An-22, and An-124... so when should they wait until before they start working on replacements?

I would say in the case of the An-12 now would be good... with both the Tu-330 and Il-276 being solid options moving forward... I would say both are different enough to enable both options to move forward at the same time.

I do not like the il-276 and the base design of the il-76 is anyway old.
Already on paper the il-214 or Il-276 had much worse performances in comparison with aircraft of similar size and engine thrust.

Good enough to replace An-12s. Besides they have not even made them yet so if they wanted they could put more powerful engines on these aircraft and mount them for upper surface blowing like on the An-72 and Il-212 to improve performance in takeoff and landing.

It would be at this point more sensible to use something newer.
Even the base design of the An-70 in both smaller twin engine and larger 4 engine configuration would be a better option.

Listen to yourself!!!! You say scaling down the Il-476 to the Il-276 is too old and risky and low performance and then you suggest a plane that never completed development and never entered serial production would be good to scale down as a better option?

Part of the advantage of scaling down a design is that the wings and engines and fuselages are already in production... you just use less engines and make the wings and fuselage smaller... but the An-70 is not in production anywhere in Russia.

At least with the Il-276 they can use an existing production chain to make two or three prototypes for testing and then revert back to making in demand Il-476s and other versions.

For this reason I would like to consider a shortened twin engine version of the An-70 to replace the An-12 and the larger 4 engine one to be used in a similar niche as the Il-76.

So a completely different aircraft into production to satisfy the VDV who probably only wants 100 aircraft or so, and also a shrunk down version to replace the An-12?

Why not put the An-70 engines on an Il-476 and shrink the Il-476 down to an Il-276 size for An-12 replacement... the production lines are already making Il-476s so putting different engines on them wont be a big deal.

Adding 100 extra planes to the production order for An-70 replacements would be enough to warrant making an extra factory or two which would also increase production capacity to make the Il-276s as well, and for export potential means they will have a good production base for the aircraft.

Ilyushin, Yakovlev and Tupulev are also dead since many years.

But their design bureaus remain intact as departments in UAC as functioning aircraft design organisations.

Antonov split in a dozen directions and no longer exists and there is no real reason to revive it because all their tasks have been shared out to other departments. Any personnel would be better served being sent to those departments to help them get through their workload.

One of my dream would be to see in the future some project as Russian-italian joint venture.

Experience of the Yak-130 seems to suggest it is not a great idea from the Russian perspective.

It seems that Italy got an aircraft design for about 80 million dollars with the rights to sell it to countries that hate Russia.

Not sure that was the best deal for Russia really.

Even if Russia would want to produce An-70 variants it should do it in other plants,

Anyone pushing the An-70 as a good idea now will be pushing number twos up a very very steep hill...

The aircraft likely still appeals to the VDV, but anyone else will just see it as the thing that stopped the Il-476 from being developed 15-20 years ago.

They will be getting new materials and new super computers for design and of course as the new engines become available their options for new aircraft designs will only increase.