The PD-35 aircraft engine demonstrator sample has passed the first stage of testing, 10.23.2024.
The prototype of the PD-35 aircraft engine - technology demonstrator - has successfully completed the first stage of testing. This was reported to TASS by one of the enterprises participating in the engine development.
“The engine demonstrated stable operation in accordance with the specified parameters and is being prepared for the next stages of testing,” the company noted.
The development of the PD-35 engine began in the summer of 2016 at two plants: Perm's Aviadvigatel and Rybinsk's Saturn (both are part of the United Engine Corporation). It is assumed that the PD-35, unlike its previous modification, the PD-14, will have a thrust of 16 tons more (up to 35 tons). The Russian aviation industry needs the PD-35 engine to create new wide-body aircraft.
https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/163835/#cut
GarryB, psg, xeno, kvs, GunshipDemocracy, LMFS and lancelot like this post
This is a great success. Although the AL 51 is probably more complex. It's important to remember that only four countries in the world produce their own aircraft engines. Maybe five, including China.
https://rostec.ru/media/news/rostekh-izgotovil-vtoroy-industrialnyy-dvigatel-novogo-pokoleniya-al-41st-25-dlya-gazovoy-otrasli/#start The power plant is demonstrated for the first time at the St. Petersburg International Gas Forum The United Engine Corporation of the Rostec State Corporation has completed the assembly of the second prototype of the new-generation industrial gas turbine engine AL-41ST-25 for the gas industry. By the end of the year, the unit will undergo bench tests at the Ufa plant of the United Engine Corporation. The power plant is being demonstrated for the first time at the St. Petersburg International Gas Forum.
AL-41ST-25 was developed by designers of the Lyulka Design Bureau and manufactured at the Ufa enterprise UEC-UMPO using modern technologies. The engine is a key element of gas pumping units. Equipment of this level has not been produced in Russia before. Among its advantages are quick installation and commissioning due to its compact size, lower weight compared to analogues and an electronic engine control unit. The product is distinguished by low emissions at the level of Russian and international environmental standards. The predicted resource of the power plant is 120 thousand hours with the possibility of increasing to 150 thousand.
"UEC specialists have manufactured two prototypes of the first industrial gas turbine engine of the new generation AL-41ST-25. They were created in partnership with Gazprom to replace imported equipment. The engine has high technical and economic characteristics and meets world standards in its power class. Currently, UEC is implementing a comprehensive investment program for the technical re-equipment of enterprises. In the long term, this will meet the growing needs of the gas industry for modern domestic gas turbine engines, including the AL-41ST-25," said UEC CEO Vadim Badekha.
By the end of the year, after bench testing at the UEC-UMPO enterprise, the AL-41ST-25 engine will be sent to the compressor station for comprehensive testing and pilot operation as part of a gas pumping unit.
The second prototype of the AL-41ST-25 engine created by UEC is demonstrated for the first time at the exhibition "Import Substitution in the Gas Industry", which is being held as part of the St. Petersburg International Gas Forum. The UEC stand presents a model of the industrial engine in section and an interactive complex for familiarization with the engine design, its units and systems.
This video, which includes a part about the PD-35 engines mentions that it does not make sense to put them on the An-124 or Il-96-400M aircraft, and that these engines will be used in new heavy lift aircraft and new widebody airliners with new design and technology to maximise the improvements the new engines offer.
It mentions the An-124s with DT-18M engines could continue service till 2050 if required, but with the new engines that new aircraft types make sense now.
The PD-35 once available could have many uses. It can be used for gas pumping. It could be used as a high power turbine for naval ships. It can be used for large transport aircraft.
With two engines you could replace the Il-76 with an aircraft similar to the Japanese Kawasaki C-2. And with four engines you could replace the Soviet An-225.
With two engines you could make an Airbus A350 replacement.
The PD 35 will be one of Russia's greatest successes in terms of aircraft engines. Although the AL 51 is more advanced ?- the PD 35 may have more applications.
I still think Russia has way too much duplication of resources on engine development and production.
They now have the NK-36, NK-25, Izdeliye RF, D-18T, and the PD-35 at roughly the same power level. That is five engines from three companies (Kuznetsov, Ural Turbine Works, and Aviadvigatel). This is just horrible.
The most technologically advanced of all of them would be the PD-35 once it is available.
They should just finish development of the PAK DA and replace the older bombers with it.
Arrow wrote:PAK DA will not have modified engines from Tu 160? In tactical aviation everything in the future will be based on AL51. MiG 31 successor as well.
PAK DA is to use the Izdeliye RF also made by Kuznetsov. Some people claim it is based on the design of the Kuznetsov competitor to the Aviavigatel PS-90 engine, the NK-56. But it could also be a whole new engine.
lancelot wrote:I still think Russia has way too much duplication of resources on engine development and production.
First, you can't compare old and new designs. Refitting completely different engine to existing airframe is tedious task and may lead Boeing 737 MAX disaster. Cost benefit ratio needs to be affordable to do that. Second, different applications requires totally different parameters to be optimized. You are comparing static powerplant to flying engine. First one does not care how fat it is and propably does not require significant thrust adjusting neither. It operates always fairly constant air pressure and in still air. Latter one needs to operate still and flowing air and altitudes from 0m to 14 km. It needs to be light and silent.
F35 and NASAAM are my favourite examples what happens when one size fits all ideology has been used too much. The F35 one does not fly well, does not carry much internal ordinance, is not protected from ground fire and certainly is not cheap. It was meant to replace air superiority aircraft, land attack aircraft, carrier based aircraft, being SEAD aircraft, etc. How well it handles any of those? NASAAM uses AIM missile as an interceptor. It may be adequate for aircraft but certainly lacks kinetic performance required for ballistic targets, because it was not even designed to be able to shoot down those kind of object. If it could do that I would call it bad engineering where system is over specified and therefore more complex and expensive it supposed to be.
GarryB, Big_Gazza and GunshipDemocracy like this post
lancelot wrote:I still think Russia has way too much duplication of resources on engine development and production.
They now have the NK-36, NK-25, Izdeliye RF, D-18T, and the PD-35 at roughly the same power level. That is five engines from three companies (Kuznetsov, Ural Turbine Works, and Aviadvigatel). This is just horrible.
The most technologically advanced of all of them would be the PD-35 once it is available.
They should just finish development of the PAK DA and replace the older bombers with it.
NK-32 and NK-25 are already existing and fit to a specific bomber airplane. You can adapt the core engine to another aircraft, but it will cost significantly in terms of time and money if it has a completely different installation. It was considered a few years ago to make an engine for the An-124 based on the core of the NK-32, but in order to keep the same fan sizes and installations (to avoid needing to remake also a part of aircraft testing) the planned performances were worse than the old D-18T.
As far as NK-25 of the Tu-22M, yes it is in the same thrust range as the NK-32 of the Tu-160 but since there are probably no plans to build new Tu-22M, there is no point in spending a lot of money and testing to adapt the NK-32 to it. They just need spare parts replacements and possibly some spare engines.
Also, the PD-35 is optimised for subsonic flight, while the NK-32 needs to be capable of efficient enough subsonic flight, but also to be able to fly at mach2.
Possibly a new version of it could share some of the core with the PD-35 (or at least the technology improvements and some design solutions), but they have also a different set up (3 shafts for the NK-32 (like the rolls Royce trent engines and the D-18T vs 2 shafts for the PD-35 (like GE engines and PS-90)).
As far as the civilian passenger size, for the Airbus A350 there are two engine version there, one with the Trent XWB 84k (38 tons of takeoff thrust) and the Trent XWB 97K (44 tons of takeoff thrust). They have several similarities but practically are different engines. It is better for Russia to concentrate first on the engine for an aircraft of Airbus A330/ Boeing 787 size, requiring about 77000 pounds (circa 35 tons) of takeoff thrust. This would be equivalent of a 2 engine derivative of the il-96-400 or of the C-929.
Further development can come later
And finally, concerning the D-18T, it is one of the few engines in the 23-25 tons takeoff thrust range (others are the American GE CF6 and the Rolls -Royce Trent 500 (which production stopped in 2012) of the Airbus A340).
Restarting production of the D-18T will make it immediately available for An-124, without having to wait for development of a next generation engine of that thrust size based on the PD-35 technology and subsequent tests (including many aircraft tests).
After they will have the basis covered, they will be able to work on something more modern, but it is not always possible to skip the present (or the not so recent past) to go for the next technology, especially if you are not able to produce anymore what you need right now and you can't or do not want to import a foreign alternative).
As far as the izdelie RF of the PAK DA I do not have a clue about it. It could also be a modern derivative of the NK-32 optimised for subsonic flight and with nacelle and powerplant made specifically for a flying wing body.
Of course in an ideal world you do not need to recreate what you had already in the past (because you lost half of the civilian aircraft engine industry and a lot of the supply chain), but aiming only to the future without consolidating present and past technologies is dangerous, also because in aerospace most projects run late.
Russian New Generation Jet Engine to Be Shown for First Time at Airshow China - Rostec, 11.08.2024.
MOSCOW (Sputnik) - The JSC United Engine Corporation will show a new generation engine for tactical aircraft at the Airshow China 2024 exhibition for the first time, Russian state-owned defense corporation Rostec said on Friday.
"The United Engine Corporation of the Rostec State Corporation will present the latest developments for aviation, some of which have not been demonstrated even in Russia. The international premiere of the Airshow China exhibition will be a new generation engine for tactical aircraft. Also, for the first time in China, the latest modification of the AL-31FN engine family will be demonstrated," the statement read.
A full-size showpiece of the latest engine will be demonstrated at the exhibition. The new unit, according to the state corporation, significantly surpasses its predecessors in terms of resource, fuel consumption and thrust, which actually makes it a fifth-generation engine.
For the first time abroad, the improved AL-31FN engine of the fifth series will be demonstrated, the use of which will significantly expand the aircraft's capabilities in altitude and flight range. In addition, the United Engine Corporation will show a mock-up of the SM-100 engine for promising drones and combat training aircraft.
"Rostec United Engine Corporation is one of the world leaders in the development, production and maintenance of gas turbine engines. We offer our strategic partners the best solutions that not only increase combat effectiveness, but also reduce the cost of the engine life cycle," the press service of the corporation said.
The International Airshow China 2024 will be held on November 12-17 in Zhuhai.
I am more interested on on the SM-100. I hope that there will be also soon a low bypass derivative of the SM-100. It was shown in a presentation as the engine for both large drones and regional jets (like the Tu-324).
In theory such engine should be a sort of next generation AI-22 (engine of choice for the Tu-324), which was planned to be partially produced in Kazan (cold part, i.e. fan, LP compressor and LP turbine).
It I am not mistaken the SM-100 is a derivative/evolution of the AI-222 installed on the Yak-130 (which is itself a low bypass derivative of the AI-22).
With two engines you could replace the Il-76 with an aircraft similar to the Japanese Kawasaki C-2.
In the video below they talk about scaling the power levels from about PD-25 through to PD-44 with a PD-38 suggested for twin engined large aircraft like the Il-96M modification... presumably a twin engined Slon or Il-106 might use the more powerful engine types, while in service An-124s could have PD-25s replace their current engines.
The PD 35 will be one of Russia's greatest successes in terms of aircraft engines.
It looks like a solid engine that should be low maintenance and fuel efficient...
They now have the NK-36, NK-25, Izdeliye RF, D-18T, and the PD-35 at roughly the same power level. That is five engines from three companies (Kuznetsov, Ural Turbine Works, and Aviadvigatel). This is just horrible.
Having alternatives at a time when nothing is 100% certain is a good thing, but over time they can adapt to fewer types and engine families, so the D-18T will be replaced by a PD-25 for instance, and other engines can be replaced by engines in the PD family.
Engine companies can merge, but you can have companies specialising in different fields... there is plenty of room for specialisation without too much duplication or redundancy.
Have to agree that the NK-25 and NK-32 are so similar and are used by aircraft from one design Bureau, so there is little excuse for the different engines being developed and supported and maintained with so little performance difference.
Raising other engines from the dead as a stopgap like the engines for the An-2 and An-124 make sense to keep the aircraft running as new engines are developed to replace them.
PAK DA will not have modified engines from Tu 160? In tactical aviation everything in the future will be based on AL51. MiG 31 successor as well.
Saturn would like that, but the jet engine used in the Mach 2.4 Su-57 is not the same as an engine needed for Mach-4.2 cruise for long periods of time.
Using the same engine for both is like using the same engine in a motor bike and an aircraft carrier.
First, you can't compare old and new designs. Refitting completely different engine to existing airframe is tedious task and may lead Boeing 737 MAX disaster. Cost benefit ratio needs to be affordable to do that.
The difference here is that the new engines are a family using the latest technology to make them easy to maintain and support, powerful and fuel efficient.
Right now old engines need upgrades to keep them useful in the aircraft that currently use them but eventually as the PD family matures then new engines in the family will be applied to existing aircraft types.
To get the best from the PD-35 engine it just makes sense to develop new aircraft designs, but a lot of the existing aircraft would benefit from new engines too, so for instance PD-12 and PD-14 can be used on Il-476 and Il-276 and amphibious aircraft like the A-40, while the PD-8 can be used on Be-200s and also Il-212s, while the PD-25 would be good to replace the D-18TMs they are working on for the An-124s, while PD-35s or even PD-38s might be useful on Il-106 or twin engined Slon aircraft types and also on four engined Slons with H tails for An-225 replacement while the normal tail Slon might have four PD-35s in the 180 ton payload class role.
The future is looking bright for Russia aerospace.
Also, the PD-35 is optimised for subsonic flight, while the NK-32 needs to be capable of efficient enough subsonic flight, but also to be able to fly at mach2.
A NK-32 in a Tu-160M2 would benefit from improvements as applied to the Al-51, but the PAK DA would probably benefit from having a PD-35 or even PD-38 high bypass subsonic only engine...
Restarting production of the D-18T will make it immediately available for An-124, without having to wait for development of a next generation engine of that thrust size based on the PD-35 technology and subsequent tests (including many aircraft tests).
True, but eventually replacing it with a PD-25 should be the ultimate goal.
Video of PD-35, has been tested to 35 tons thrust...
Sources report this is actually the AL-41 / AL-51 hybrid. Which makes much more sense to bring to an international fair, and specially with the LTS in mind.
BTW what is the latest interpretation of the photo below? Is it a development version of the izd 30/AL-51, or is it a testbed for testing of a new TVC arrangement? I always found it a little hard to believe that images would be circulated of Russias new top secret 5G fighter engine...
Big_Gazza wrote:Does that mean that it was this hybrid that has been seen testing on the Su-57 (T-50) development prototypes?
It is understood that the engine tested on the Su-57 was the actual izd. 30. But it contains too sensitive technology to be marketed.
On the other hand, the Russians probably perceive the demands for a more advanced engine than AL-31 in the market and probably don't want to leave it to the Chinese, who are making steady progress in the field too. So they applied new technologies coming from their 5th gen research into the existing AL-31 family. They are masters of this kind of optimization, which on top of bringing new life to existing products, de-risk upcoming ones...
Big_Gazza wrote:BTW what is the latest interpretation of the photo below? Is it a development version of the izd 30/AL-51, or is it a testbed for testing of a new TVC arrangement? I always found it a little hard to believe that images would be circulated of Russias new top secret 5G fighter engine...
This is a true 3D TVC proposal from Salyut, nothing to do with the izd. 30
GarryB, Big_Gazza, Rodion_Romanovic and lancelot like this post
, who are making steady progress in the field too. So they applied new technologies coming from their 5th gen research into the existing AL-31 family. wrote:
The question is what progress have the Chinese made in terms of aircraft engines? For a long time they had big problems, but recently they seem to have achieved a breakthrough? How far behind the Russians are they?
Arrow wrote:The question is what progress have the Chinese made in terms of aircraft engines? For a long time they had big problems, but recently they seem to have achieved a breakthrough? How far behind the Russians are they?
Depends on what you are talking about. The Chinese at this point have a better machine tools and electronics industry than Russia. But they still seem to be a little behind in terms of material technology and they have way less experience with engine design.
Their industry is still scaling up as well. So they still have less infrastructure for jet engine building than the West. And probably less than Russia as well.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Arrow
Although the AL 51 is probably more complex. It's important to remember that only four countries in the world produce their own aircraft engines. Maybe five, including China. 
