Russian Civil Aviation: News #4

Hopefully it is simple to service in the field and easy to operate and maintain... two of the reasons the An-2 has stayed in service this long was its performance, but also low cost operations and simple design that allowed simple repairs and maintenance to be done in the field by the users.

A version with a nice big sliding door could be used for parachute jumps too.

The United States miscalculated with the Russian project MS-21, May 15, 2021.

An attempt by the United States to use sanctions to prevent the creation of the MC-21 airliner, which surpasses American and European competitors, has failed. In two years, Russia was able to replace composite materials from the United States and Japan, which were banned. Now Russia has not only patented technologies for creating a "black" wing, but also domestic materials for its manufacture. How did the United States unwittingly help Russia?

“The Russian composite wing for the MS-21 has arrived at the Irkutsk Aviation Plant. After its installation and installation of all systems, the aircraft will be ready for the start of flight tests. We expect that the MS-21 with the Russian wing will take to the skies by the end of this year, ”said the head of the Ministry of Industry and Trade Denis Manturov.

This means that Russia was able to bypass the obstacles that the United States was putting in place. Two years ago, US sanctions stripped Russia of composite materials from the United States and Japan that were used to create the wing of the MC-21 aircraft. This is the first newest airliner in Russia "from scratch", and not a Soviet reserve, which will surpass the competitors of Boeing and Airbus in its basic characteristics. The sanctions story jeopardized this ambitious project.

Why do you even need a composite or "black" wing? The fact is that it gives the MC-21 better flight characteristics - more speed and less fuel consumption - compared to the A320neo and Boieng 737 MAX competitors.

“The use of strong and lightweight composite materials made it possible to develop a high aspect ratio wing and improve the aerodynamics of the aircraft simultaneously with an increase in the fuselage diameter. The wide passenger cabin provides increased comfort for the crew and passengers, and reduces the turnaround time of the aircraft at the airport due to accelerated embarkation and disembarkation, ”says a representative of Irkut.

“The only drawback is that a composite wing is more complicated technically and more expensive to manufacture. But the advantages that the plane gets outweigh ", - says the head of Avia.ru Roman Gusarov.

The uniqueness of the composite wing for the MS-21 is that Russia has created and patented a new technology for its production. There is no such technology anywhere in the world. This is a purely Russian know-how. “For the manufacture of the caisson (power base of the wing), an innovative technology of vacuum infusion, patented in Russia, was applied,” the Irkut representative said.

“This is the first time we've decided to use less energy-intensive technology. A traditional wing is baked from individual elements at high temperatures. Russia, on the other hand, has created an infusion technology, according to which panels are produced immediately to the length of the entire wing and without high temperatures. This creates a significant advantage in production costs, ”explains Gusarov. As a result, the Russian MS-21 costs less than Western competitors.

The technology is Russian, but the materials were originally foreign. The Americans took advantage of this.

“I think for some time the Americans simply did not believe that we would be able to solve such an ambitious task as the creation of the MS-21. And when they believed it, they imposed sanctions. They saw us as a growing competitor", Gusarov is sure.

Why did Russia initially use composite materials from the United States and Japan? Composites were already being produced in Russia at that time, but the quality of the material and the stability of its characteristics are extremely important for the aircraft. Russian manufacturers could not boast of such a thing, and suitable materials were found abroad.

The introduction of sanctions clearly indicates that the United States is really afraid that Russia is getting its own superliner with the latest technologies that the Americans do not have. However, their attempt to harm the project only benefited him. In two years Russia has created its own high-quality composite materials without deviations from the standards.

“Leading chemists and technologists of Russia take part in the development and production of domestic composites. Among them are scientists and specialists from Moscow State University and Rosatom enterprises (in particular, Umatex - Approx. VZGLYAD), ”the Irkut representative points out.

Thus, now Russia not only possesses technologies for the production of a composite wing, but also domestic materials for its manufacture. There remains one more problem to be solved - to establish large-scale production of these materials (carbon fiber and epoxy resin as a connecting link), says Gusarov.

The first flight of the MC-21 with a composite wing made of domestic composites is no longer so important, because this wing is no different from the previous one from foreign materials. Its design contains exactly the same characteristics that are contained in the terms of reference, says Gusarov. And the aircraft will not need to undergo certification again (both in Russia and in Europe), it will only be necessary to certify a new composite material made in Russia. In exactly the same way, Russia is certifying its own PD-12 engine for the MS-21 instead of the American engine, and not the entire plane from scratch.

Testing in laboratories is the same for a wing made of foreign or domestic composites. “I've been to these laboratories. First, carbon fiber is tested for a variety of characteristics: tensile, stretching, and so on. Then Flight MC-21 with a composite wing made of domestic composites - epoxy resin. Next, small plates are baked, which are also tested for fracture, breakdown, tension, deformation. When this prototype meets the required parameters, they move on to creating a full-fledged large wing, ”says the head of Avia.ru. And the tests still do not stop there - TsAGI is conducting a complex of tests in order to understand the resource of the wing.

The creation by Russia, first of its own PD-12 engine, and now of a composite wing using its own technology from domestic materials, is a huge undertaking. In fact, Russia has substituted import for two main parts of the newest MC-21 liner, without which the project cannot exist.

“This plane is doomed to fly. In principle, there may be new American sanctions. But now they can only postpone, but not stop, the start of deliveries of these aircraft, ”concludes Gusarov.

“In terms of electronics, we are quite technologically advanced. If desired and necessary, it will be possible to resolve the issue of complete import substitution of the element base, and navigation systems too. Combat aviation flies with its own navigation, ”the industry expert emphasized.

Most likely, the United States will try to delay the start of deliveries of the MS-21 with new sanctions. After all, every year the delay in its release means an increase in the sales of the American aircraft corporation. The scale of production between Russia and Boeing is incomparable: we are going to produce 70 of these aircraft a year against the production of more than 600 airliners in the USA. However, if together 70 Boeing airlines buy 70 Russian MS-21s, the Americans will lose at least $ 7 billion, says Gusarov. If earlier queues were lined up for new aircraft, then the pandemic has changed the situation. Demand for new liners has dropped sharply, which means more competition in the market. When the United States loses the competition for economic reasons, other methods of maintaining dominance often come into play.

Text: Olga Samofalova

https://m.vz.ru/economy/2021/5/15/1099240.html

"Safety, availability, versatility": what will be the new Russian aircraft to replace the legendary An-2.
May 16, 2021.

In the coming months, the Russian light multipurpose aircraft LMS-901 "Baikal", which is being created to replace the An-2, is to make its first flight. This was announced in an exclusive interview with RT by the chief designer of the company "Baikal Engineering" Vadim Demin. According to him, the car will become a reliable, easy-to-maintain and affordable vehicle, designed primarily for operation in the Far East. In addition to sales to airlines and government agencies of the Russian Federation, the developer expects to export new items to the countries of the CIS, Asia and Africa. As Demin notes, in terms of a number of key characteristics, the LMS-901 will confidently surpass its Western counterparts - the American single-engine Cessna 208 and Quest Kodiak 100 aircraft, as well as the Swiss Pilatus PC-6.

By the end of 2021, the first copy of the Russian light multipurpose aircraft LMS-901 "Baikal", designed to carry nine passengers and cargo up to 2 tons, should take off.

The construction of a prototype aircraft was launched on the basis of the Branch Special Design Bureau for Experimental Aircraft Building and the Department of Aircraft Manufacturing Technology of the Moscow Aviation Institute. To date, a glider of "Baikal" has been manufactured, the on-board systems and assemblies are being installed.

LMS-901 in the coming years should replace the legendary An-2 (maize).

In many modifications, this Soviet machine has been in service for seven decades. Due to its high reliability, unpretentiousness, maintainability in the field, cheapness and ease of maintenance, the aircraft gained immense popularity in the post-Soviet space, in Eastern Europe and China.

In 1960-2002, the An-2 was produced in Poland. After the cessation of production, the intellectual rights to the Soviet aircraft were purchased by Airbus Military, a military transport division of the European concern Airbus.

According to the Association of Aircraft Fuel Supply Organizations of Civil Aviation of the Russian Federation, the An-2 fleet is steadily decreasing every year. In 2020, about 1,000 units remained in Russia. Of these, about 300 aircraft had airworthiness certificates, and over 700 aircraft were in disrepair, although they were listed in the register.

Experts predict that in seven to ten years the operational resource of the An-2 family will actually be exhausted. In this regard, the task of replacing the corn plant with Baikal was set in advance at the highest state level.

The LMS-901 project is mainly financed from the funds of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation. The main requirement for the car is to comply with the cost per flight hour limit of 30 thousand rubles. If this criterion is met, then "Baikal" should become an inexpensive and widely demanded vehicle in Russia and abroad.

Vadim Demin, chief designer of Baikal Engineering, spoke about the design features of the LMS-901 and the prospects for this project in an interview with RT.

- Vadim Yurievich, next year there will be an anniversary date - the first flight of the legendary An-2. Everyone knows the secret of his popularity. Why should Russia create a new aircraft? Why can't we just start mass production of the slightly modernized An-2, having bought, if necessary, the intellectual rights from Airbus ?

- In exceptional cases, it is, of course, possible to modernize the An-2, but if we want to systematically develop small aircraft, it does not make economic sense. It is impossible to endlessly carry out restoration work and extend the flight life of maize workers.

It is unacceptable to pull with the replacement of the An-2. A little more, and Russia will face risks for the transport connectivity of remote regions, it will lose part of its agricultural aviation fleet, and the FBU Avialesokhrana and the Ministry of Emergency Situations, whose services are quite actively using the An-2, will face difficulties. Therefore, the deployment of mass production of such a machine as the LMS-901 can be called a timely and uncontested solution to problems.

- What shortcomings, in your opinion, does the An-2 have as a small aircraft and are they taken into account in "Baikal"?

- It is important to understand that the An-2 was created for operation in the regions of a country destroyed after the war, devoid of asphalt roads and hard-surfaced airfields. It was a kind of luck, able to rise and land on almost any flat area, up to a cornfield.

In addition, until the end of the 1950s, most of the population of the USSR lived in rural areas and the An-2, of course, was created primarily so that the inhabitants of villages and villages could move and perform various household work.

Since then, of course, a lot has changed. Our country and the world exist in a completely different socio-economic order, therefore "Baikal" takes into account all modern trends, including the peculiarities of the market for transportation by local airlines.

Moreover, our aircraft can be called a continuation of the glorious history of the An-2. It contains essentially the same principles: safety, accessibility, versatility, the ability to operate in small towns and villages with unpaved runways.

- How would you assess the potential demand for Baikal? It’s probably too early to talk about this, but does Baikal have any export prospects?

- We estimate the capacity of the Russian market at 170-200 aircraft until 2030. At the moment, we have “soft” contracts for ten aircraft, and for initial sales we see a clear prospect of assembling more than 100 aircraft. We expect that Baikal will be purchased primarily by the air carriers of the Far East and the Arctic, which operate the An-2.

Specifically, these are the unified Far Eastern airline Aurora, Polar Airlines, the Naryan-Mar United Air Squadron, the 2nd Arkhangelsk United Squadron and Aeroservice LLC.

At the same time, we are well aware that the capacity of the Russian market will not be enough to recoup investments in Baikal. As the demand within the country is met, we will enter the markets of the republics of the former USSR and some countries of Asia and Africa.

With a favorable development of events, we hope to occupy up to 5% of the global market in this segment. In total, by 2030, at least 100 "Baikals" can be exported.

- On the pages of specialized publications devoted to the development of aviation, one can find the opinion that there is no wide sales market for the LMS-901 and from a commercial point of view the project is not very expedient. How would you comment on such a statement?

- In my opinion (and not only I think so), it is wrong to consider a small aircraft as a separate product. It is part of a very extensive infrastructure and economic system.

As the foreign experience shows, the development of local and regional aviation brings a positive multiplier effect. The point is that an increase in transport accessibility leads to an increase in the volume of air transportation, an increase in commercial and economic activity in rural areas and regions.

Naturally, before the start of the development of Baikal, the dynamics of aircraft sales in this segment was taken into account. For understanding: in 2007, our future competitors delivered 86 cars to customers, in the crisis year of 2009 - 126. Then the export-import sinusoid fell and then rose again, but even in the worst years, leading foreign manufacturers sold more than 100 cars in our segment. This is a completely normal value.

- Who do you mean by competitors?

- These are American single-engine aircraft Cessna 208 and Quest Kodiak 100, Swiss Pilatus PC-6. Baikal will surpass them in terms of the volume of commercial load and efficiency. For example, LMS-901 is capable of lifting 2 tons into the air, Cessna 208 - 1.5 tons, Quest Kodiak 100 - 1.6 tons, Pilatus PC-6 - 1.2 tons.

The cost of a flight hour also compares favorably in favor of the LMS-901. It will have it within 30 thousand rubles. For the Cessna 208 in terms of rubles, this figure is 78 thousand, for the Quest Kodiak 100 - 72 thousand, for the Pilatus PC-7 - 89 thousand. As a result, the market price of our production car will be about 30-50% lower than that of the above aircraft.

For its segment, "Baikal" has a decent cruising speed - up to 300 km / h. As we expect, the maximum range of the aircraft will reach 3 thousand km (with a payload of 2 tons - 1.5 thousand km). Fuel consumption will be 0.43 kg / km, the capacity of the main fuel tank will be about 1.5 thousand liters, engine power will be 800 liters. from.

At first, "Baikal" will fly on the American General Electric power unit, but within about three years the aircraft will receive the Russian VK-800SM. This will greatly reduce the risks for customers. The airlines that will acquire Baikal will not depend on external suppliers.

- Thanks to what technical solutions did you manage to bring down the price of the plane so much?

- In order to meet the standard of 30 thousand rubles per one flight hour, we abandoned the idea of ​​equipping the aircraft with a twin-engine engine. It would ideally fit "Baikal", but then the cost of a flight hour would be completely different. By the way, competing western small aircraft in this dimension also fly on single-engine engines.

It is important to understand that any product (in our case, the aviation industry) is always a kind of compromise. To achieve it, some properties inevitably have to be sacrificed. All over the world, aircraft are designed for specific requirements and from certain points of view, of course, may seem far from ideal.

For example, now in aviation they are trying to use composite materials more often. They have a lot of unconditional advantages regarding the rigidity of the structure and ease of production - it is very convenient that the number of components is reduced by tens and hundreds of times.

But composite materials are expensive and do not have sufficient operational adaptability, require careful treatment, which is difficult to ensure when flying from poorly prepared airfields.

The easiest way to repair a car is made of riveted aluminum alloy sheets. We have come to this very option. It is a cheap, lightweight, affordable and maintainable material. Although "Baikal" was not completely without composites - we made of them the aileron, flap, rudder, that is, elements that are practically invulnerable to stones and where the rigidity of the structure is especially needed.

- Could you disclose other forecast characteristics of Baikal? First of all, are you interested in the distance for takeoff and landing and the aircraft's ability to perform tasks in harsh climatic conditions?

- LMS-901, in fact, is being created for operation in regions with underdeveloped infrastructure and difficult geographic conditions, so Baikal will be safe, affordable, versatile, maintainable in the field, like the An-2. But at the same time it will have more comfort and better cruising performance. The take-off distance from unpaved strips will be slightly longer than that of the An-2, but no more than 250 m, but it will allow the aircraft to operate on the same sites, and the maximum cruising speed will be one and a half times higher than that of the An-2.

Moreover, our aircraft will be much more comfortable in flight than the An-2. The big disadvantage of the corn plant is the bumpiness. The load per square meter of the Baikal wing is significantly higher, which significantly reduces this effect.

The comfort of passengers when boarding an airplane of this type is an indicator of the pilot's skill, the characteristics of the car play a secondary role here. The main thing for the pilot is to choose the optimal horizontal and vertical speeds. At "Baikal" with a normal take-off weight, the landing speed should be about 85-90 km / h, which makes it possible to safely and comfortably land on the ground, including the possibility of a “pick-up” landing.

Continuing the theme of comfort: in "Baikal" we sacrificed a little the size of the cabin - it is smaller than that of the An-2. A Soviet plane has a ceiling height of 1.8 m, ours - 1.65 m.We could save passengers from having to bend down, but then a speed of 300 km / h, which significantly reduces the flight time, would be unattainable. The Cessna 208 has a cabin height of 1.5 m in general, so there is nothing unusual in the decision we made.

- What avionics will be installed on Baikal?

-The onboard equipment will be Russian. The central computer and the software in it are our development. We collect the rest from the enterprises of the radio-electronic industry. Moreover, the flight and navigation equipment will meet all modern requirements. This is what it is unacceptable to save on.

The basic version of "Baikal" will be without an autopilot. By the way, he is not always needed. The forest protection, our potential customer, will hardly need an autopilot, I think. On the passenger version of the LMS-901, of course, the autopilot must be installed.

- Vadim Yuryevich, what are your plans for testing the LMS-901 prototype? When to expect the first flight and completion of certification?

- The Baikal will make its first flight this year, and flight certification will be completed in 2023. At the same time, as we plan, deliveries to the airline will begin.

https://russian.rt.com/russia/article/862394-an-2-samolyot-baikal-lms-901

A positive opinion was issued on the technical design of the PD-8 engine
17.05.2021, 16:56 303

The Central Institute of Aviation Engine Building named after P. I. Baranov agreed on the terms of reference and issued a positive opinion on the technical design of the PD-8 turbojet twin-circuit engine. Further, the engine must pass a mock-up commission, tests, after which CIAM specialists will take part in the development of the certification basis, the press service of the institute reported.

A separate area of work is the qualification of new materials that will be used in the PD-8 design, for which, by order of the UEC, CIAM specialists, together with VIAM and industry enterprises, will conduct the necessary research.

In addition, issues related to the requirements of environmental regulations will have to be resolved. Since 2023, new requirements for noise and emissions of aircraft engines are being introduced, so when creating the PD-8, special attention is paid to meeting these requirements. The complex of works in this direction will be carried out jointly by CIAM, TsAGI and UEC enterprises.

Currently, in cooperation with the United Engine Corporation, design and experimental studies are being conducted to select the design "face" of the engine being created, a list of its main parts has been agreed, preparations are being made for testing the PD-8 gas generator on high-altitude stands, and the scope and content of future certification works are being coordinated. In the future, a series of tests and fine-tuning will allow you to confirm the engine life and issue a conclusion for the first flight.

On April 13, UEC announced the completion of manufacturing of the main components and systems of experimental gas generators of the new domestic PD-8 engine: a high-pressure compressor, a combustion chamber, and a high-pressure turbine. The next stage of work will be the assembly of the gas generator.

According to Yuri Shmotin, Deputy General Director and General Designer of UEC JSC, advanced technological processes and modern equipment are used in the production of parts and assemblies of the PD-8 gas generator, including the formation of the main engine parts in an additive way.

The PD-8 engine is expected to be used on SSJ-New civil regional aircraft and Be-200ChS amphibious aircraft.

https://aviation21.ru/na-texnicheskij-proekt-dvigatelya-pd-8-vydano-polozhitelnoe-zaklyuchenie/

Russia has expressed interest in SST recently. It had the tu 144 and the Sukhoi Gulfstream concept in the 90's.

People are saying that this is evidence that SST is not doable. IMO that is hogwash. There was always something fishy about this Arion supersonic company. The company was founded in 2004 and they never really put their foot forward. There is some rumors about fraud.

IMO this is just better for Boom Supersonic. More resources can go to it.

And now there's basically nobody doing a SST business jet. The Boom sst is an airliner. This gives an opening to Russia.


Aerion Supersonic shuts down, ending plans to build silent high speed business jets

Aerion Supersonic, the Nevada-based company that planned to build business jets capable of silently flying nearly twice as fast as commercial aircraft, is shutting down, the company confirmed to CNBC on Friday.

“In the current financial environment, it has proven hugely challenging to close on the scheduled and necessary large new capital requirements” to begin production of its AS2 supersonic jet, the company said in a statement.

“Aerion Corporation is now taking the appropriate steps in consideration of this ongoing financial environment,” the company said.

Florida Today first reported the company’s abrupt closure.

Aerion aimed to fly its first AS2 jet by 2024, with the goal of beginning commercial services by 2026. The company developed a patented technology it calls “boomless cruise,” which it said would allow AS2 to fly without creating a sonic boom – an issue that plagued the supersonic Concorde jets of the past.

The AS2 was priced at $120 million per jet. Aerion CEO Tom Vice said at a UBS conference in January 2020 that he expected it would cost the company about $4 billion to develop AS2, with $1 billion having been spent at the time to develop an engine.

SSTs were dropped because of damage to the ozone layer and simple economics. The former issue is not a joke. NASA funded a
lot of atmospheric science research to figure out the chemical impacts of SST emissions at their higher cruising altitude. The Concorde
was not shut down because it was a boutique operation that was not some "fleet of SSTs" dominating the skies. It folded all on its
own since it was too expensive to operate.

I do not see either issue having been resolved. So all this chatter about SSTs smells like speculative BS to me.

When concord and the Tu-144 entered use and the US didn't have an american equivalent it made laws banning supersonic flight over land because of noise pollution and that totally destroyed sales and limited supersonic flight routes to over ocean routes from Europe to the US and back mostly.

The Concord was making money but the crash made it unprofitable... they didn't sell enough tickets to cover potential costs so they stopped it all together.
Russia is large enough and empty enough to make supersonic flights from one side to the other useful and sensible, it would really open up the far east to the european part of the country.

kvs wrote:SSTs were dropped because of damage to the ozone layer and simple economics.    The former issue is not a joke.   NASA funded a
lot of atmospheric science research to figure out the chemical impacts of SST emissions at their higher cruising altitude.    The Concorde
was not shut down because it was a boutique operation that was not some "fleet of SSTs" dominating the skies.   It folded all on its
own since it was too expensive to operate.

I do not see either issue having been resolved.   So all this chatter about SSTs smells like speculative BS to me.

Im not trying to sell you on SST but it was all more complicated than that.

The Concorde put in a full 27 year career. They didn't fly it for 27 years to save face. It started making money in the mid 80's. (yes. they got the development cost for free. but actual operations were profitable)

After years of losses and a $2.8-billion government development cost that has been almost completely written off, financial winds have turned in the plane’s favor. The Concorde brought a $17.3-million profit to British Airways last year and a profit of $8.8 million to Air France in 1984, the most recent year for which figures were available.

British Airways didn’t record profits from the Corcorde until 1982, and Air France until 1983.

The combined fleet of 14 Concordes has carried more than a million passengers over 90 million miles. They have flown into 85 cities, although they now fly only the profitable routes of Paris-New York, London-New York and London-Washington-Miami. British Airways also makes money on Concorde charter flights.

″We have turned a white elephant into our national flagship,″ says Capt. Brian Walpole, general manager of British Airways Concorde division.


https://apnews.com/article/fa1e281d544267a8afe77afceaf3f03f

Then along came 911 and the Iraq war. 911 forced the grounding and installing of the firewall between the cockpit and passengers. They did that. Then there was the rift between the US and France + Europe during the Iraq war. The Concorde got caught up in the boycott bullshit.

Then along came Airbus's big new project, the A380 Super Jumbo. And the 2003 Concorde crash.  Airbus believed the hub and spoke system would win out. Big planes would fly between main hub airports. And smaller planes would distribute ppl to their destination. Boeing wagered that the point to point system would win out. The Concorde was a point to point aircraft. Airbus was just not interested in continuing the Concorde program even though British airways was. BA redid all the interiors in the Concorde after 911. So Airbus started marking up the maintenance costs of the Concorde to kill it. And they succeeded.

Then point to point won out and the A380 became a failure and the rest is history.

Aerodynamic drag starts to fall again after you pass the sound barrier. So the economic dividend is there. What is utter ridiculous and stupid is hypersonic projects. Those are ridiculous pipedreams and make supersonic look sane. Because it is.

GarryB wrote:When concord and the Tu-144 entered use and the US didn't have an american equivalent it made laws banning supersonic flight over land because of noise pollution and that totally destroyed sales and limited supersonic flight routes to over ocean routes from Europe to the US and back mostly.

The Concord was making money but the crash made it unprofitable... they didn't sell enough tickets to cover potential costs so they stopped it all together.
Russia is large enough and empty enough to make supersonic flights from one side to the other useful and sensible, it would really open up the far east to the european part of the country.

I got some of the details posted above but yes.

Speaking of questionable economics and technical risk ,every billionaire and their dog is pissing around with rockets and space. Bezos, Musk, even the S7 airlines CEO. That seems like a crowded market to me. And yet there's basically one company going into supersonic transport. Im not saying Russia should stop its space program. Far from it. But they should have the same attitude about SST. The payoff if you could make SST work is high. Certainly more than space rockets.

Just imagine the angst in Washington if supersonic flights were running Moscow to Beijing etc.

The SST argument using Concorde misses a show stopper detail. It got customers because it was the one and only boutique supersonic
carrier. If it was one among many, then it would not have made any money.

JohninMK wrote:Just imagine the angst in Washington if supersonic flights were running Moscow to Beijing etc.

If they really want to try supersonic again they should keep is small

PapaDragon wrote:

JohninMK wrote:Just imagine the angst in Washington if supersonic flights were running Moscow to Beijing etc.

If they really want to try supersonic again they should keep is small

Boom is making a small airliner. They need todays technology to make the Concorde 20% cheaper. Then they can make money.

But a business jet would be easier economically. You just have to sell airframes. There is so many more billionaires out there than there was. Time is money

With ramjet technology a mach 2-3 plane should not be that hard to make and should be reasonably affordable for a certain group of customers, the fuel burn increase is significant but with a good ramjet design wont actually be that excessive and by travelling two to three times faster the overall fuel burn wont actually be a lot higher but arriving at the destination much quicker.

Some sort of supercruise design could be an alternative first step too where flight time is halved but the costs are not huge.

Some sort of flying wing design where the passengers are in the wing and have much more space yet the aircraft itself is not a high drag platform...

^ You don't have to invent any new technology just to get over the sound barrier and get into that sweet spot of low drag ss travel. With carbon fiber , you can area rule the shape. Just as Boom is doing. Far more advanced computer controlled intakes , no heavy drop nose mechanism, and 2021 engine technology. The math works. You can get the 20% needed to make it pay for itself.

The Concorde used afterburn just to get to ss. But the rest of the flight was supercruise. The tu144 used afterburn the whole time which is why it failed. Too noisy and expensive 

But for business jets , you don't even need to run that close of a line.

Going faster than the Concorde with new ideas will come later. But first we just gotta get back to where we were.

The area ruling reduces the supersonic boom to a flat thud rather than a crackling bang from something like a F-15 too.

People in this thread trotted out the argument that Russia does not have a big enough market domestically to even justify the MS-21 let alone a two
engine IL-96. But somehow this is not an issue for SSTs. I believe Concorde ticket prices for a cross-Atlantic flight were $10,000. So pretty much
business jets are where this segment is "viable". Just how many business jets could be sold in Russia? A handful perhaps. That cannot sustain any
SST production. An SST resurrection would require a mass market aircraft designed to carry many passengers and not a few executives or people who
can afford $10,000 tickets.

The Concorde was produced between 1965 and 1979. Even if it was retired in 2003, it was a dead industry as of 1979. I would not call that a viable
aircraft. The economics for this mode of transport are not there. I hear about new tech making them cheaper to operate. But in order to make them
viable, they need usage volume. This means affordable tickets. With enough volume the production line will not die and there can be innovation down
the line.

What is the maximum cruise altitude for a plane. Would it be possible to maybe boost the plane to very high speeds, zoom climb to where there is almost no atmosphere, coast with no power and drag for a few thousand miles as the plane gradually sinks back to the atmosphere, and then control rentry angle using thrusters...restart engines and land?

mnztr wrote:What is the maximum cruise altitude for a plane. Would it be possible to maybe boost the plane to very high speeds, zoom climb to where there is almost no atmosphere, coast with no power and drag for a few thousand miles as the plane gradually sinks back to the atmosphere, and then control rentry angle using thrusters...restart engines and land?

Sorry but you cannot coast with almost no power, unless you plan to use some sort of hybrid airship concept.

I mean, I like them and they should be really efficient, but we are talking of speeds of about 100km/h, not really something earth shattering.

Thinking instead of efficient traditional planes at high altitude, the first that comes into my mind is the U2.

The Lockheed U2 was able to fly at an altitude of about  21000m (70000feet), about twice as much as a modern commercial airliner, but at lower speed than an airliner.


The SR71 could fly is even higher ( 80000 feet (about 24000 m) and at high speed (more than 3 times the speed of sound) but it was definitely not what you would call a cheap and fuel efficient aircraft.


If you go above that altitude the air would be even more rarefied, making the functioning of a air breathing engine more difficult (much less thrust).

If you wanted to go higher you need s rocket engine.

There are now some concept studies of hybrid air-breathing rocket engines like SABRE, I believe that the aim is cheaper flights into low earth orbits
(E.g.engine for a reusable single-stage-to-orbit spaceplane) .
Where cheaper means cheaper than current launch vehicles/ carrier rockets like Soyuz or Ariane, so nothing to be compared to passenger flights.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SABRE_(rocket_engine)

There is also a proposal for a hypersonic passenger jet to be developed in the next 25 years using that technology, but it is only a concept.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_Engines_LAPCAT_A2

To do instead what you want to do you should go on a ballistic orbit (and for that you need very high accelerations and an extreme amount of energy to be provided in the first parts of the flight, but if you are instead in an orbit that is naturally re-entering  the lower atmosphere you also need then a way to decelerate from extreme speed ( if you have not already killed most of the passengers in the first part of the flight).

The SR-71 was shaped like a lifting body since the low density air kills off the lifting efficiency of regular wings. The U-2 was flying
at the maximum altitude that its specially designed wings could allow. For flight above 30 km one needs a rocket plane which includes
scramjets. These modes of transport must of necessity be fast to get lift and to feed enough oxygen into the engines if they are scramjets.
The air density falls off exponentially with an e-folding depth of 7 km above the tropopause. That is a severe restriction.

mnztr wrote:What is the maximum cruise altitude for a plane. Would it be possible to maybe boost the plane to very high speeds, zoom climb to where there is almost no atmosphere, coast with no power and drag for a few thousand miles as the plane gradually sinks back to the atmosphere, and then control rentry angle using thrusters...restart engines and land?

Rocket travel and hypersonics really are pipedreams that put supersonic into context. Any old TU-22 Russian bomber can go supersonic.

The Concorde used afterburn just to get to ss. But the rest of the flight was supercruise. The tu144 used afterburn the whole time which is why it failed. Too noisy and expensive

The US hired the Tu-144 after the cold war to experiment... they replaced the original engines with the NK-32 engines of the Blackjack to give it the same dry supercruise performance of the Concorde... in fact it flew faster still but didn't need AB.

The point is that a simple ramjet engine could do the job better than any turbofan or turbojet, so a design where a turbojet is used to get airborne and to land, and ramjet to fly supersonically would be the ideal setup... the turbojet needs to be reliable but does not need to be very fuel efficient or wonderful because most of the flight it wont be doing anything.

My understanding is that much of Concords business was business class as they already paid a significant fraction of 10K for international travel so getting there faster makes sense.

Air travel will take a while to recover so new propulsion options can be played with till then.

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:

Sorry but you cannot coast with almost no power, unless you plan to use some sort of hybrid airship concept.

Why not if you are out of the atmosphere? Satellites are coasting for millions of miles. If you burn the bulk of your fuel to exit the amosphere, then coast, you may be able to achieved super/hyper sonic travel with a similar efficency as a subsonic airliner.

With UAC showing a SST engine on the test bed, it is clear that Russia is more serious about this than we thought.

From 2019

During Vladimir Putin’s tour of the Gulf countries earlier this autumn, Moscow made efforts to lure wealthy Arabs into ambitious aviation projects, most notably the next-gen supersonic business jet (SSBJ). Such an aircraft would accommodate 16 to 19 travelers and cruise at speeds of 1,090 to 1,620 knots.

The Russian president touched on the theme when talking to the King Salman of Saudi Arabia and Crown Prince Mohammed of Abu Dhabi while letting ministers discuss the matter in detail during sessions of inter-government commissions that were held in his presence.

Talking to journalists after the ninth session of the Russo-Emirati inter-government commission held on October 15 in Abu Dhabi, Denis Manturov, the minister for industry and trade said, “Russia is interested in cooperation with the Gulf monarchies on the supersonic passenger jet…since they are pre-positioned to be customers for such an aircraft.” Earlier, Russian officials said the focus of a sales campaign on the future supersonic jet would be placed on Southeast Asia and the Middle East, the two geographic areas “where the factors of time, distances, and traffic intensity allow for supersonic travel.”

“As for the potential market, this geographic area [the Gulf] looks like among the main ones that we are interested in,” Manturov said. During a question and answer session, he added: “As per investments, yes, they can help us materialize such a project.” His ministry has already injected Rouble 1.4 billion ($21.8 million) into the research and development effort headed by TsAGI (the Russian Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute, near Moscow) in cooperation with six other scientific research establishments.

Advanced technology is the key to this project, the minister stressed. Without that, the SSBJ would be very costly, “much more than existing subsonic jets.” Rough estimates render a deliverable SSBJ to be twice as expensive as subsonic business jets of similar seating capacity. Last year, the aforementioned ministry forecast that, at a unit cost between $100- and $120 million, the solvent demand for next-gen supersonic transports would come to 30 in the inner market, and “many more” outside the country.

Answering further questions on the SSBJ, Manturov said that “a demonstrator” shall be ready in 2023, so as to enable the creation of “a real aircraft” in 2027. The technology demonstrator will be smaller, serving to test key technologies and design solutions developed for a full-size supersonic transport.
Middle East Contributions

The minister further said that Moscow is ready to render assistance to Emirati companies in developing their own competencies in the aerospace domain. “Do we need [foreign] investments? Yes, we do! In turn, we can help them [in the UAE] develop their competence. This is not going to be a kind of global competence that would enable them to offer a turn-key solution worldwide…And yet, it might enable them to move forward.”

One of the areas where the Emirates can provide an industrial contribution to the future SSBJ and the MC-21 next-gen narrowbody jetliner is airframe parts made of advanced materials, since “they already have a superb plant for composites,” said Manturov.

A wide application of polymeric composites and metal-composite structures promises to reduce the SSBJ’s structural weight, and thus reduce the intensity of the sonic boom. Russian designers are set to use modern heat-resistant materials, including polymeric ones with carbon threads. These are lighter than aluminum, yet stiffer than steel.

The Russians are also considering a new kind of force-bearing structure, one that is more reminiscent of bionic structures such as birds’ skeletons, than the classic solutions applied to aircraft worldwide. Academic Sergei Chernyshev, the head of science at TsAGI, told journalists: “We offer a net-like structure, with variable cells. These are smaller in area with higher aerodynamic pressure, such as that on the wing, and larger in the tail and nose sections of the fuselage.” This is a big departure from the Tupolev Tu-144 first-generation supersonic transport that flew 50 years ago and saw limited passenger service. “The Tu-144 is a legend and an interesting page in TsAGi’s history. We commenced studies into supersonic transports even before the Tu-144 launch, and have never stopped working on the theme since then. Today, we do this work with other priorities and standards in mind. As part of the ongoing effort, we work on some technical issues related to tough ecological requirements,” said Chernyshev.

Earlier this fall, TsAGI demonstrated a mockup of the force-bearing structure for the forward section of an SSBJ airframe. The main structural members are made of composite materials, while outer and inner skins are made of “advanced non-metallic materials.” TsAGI makes a special point that the mockup employs parts made by 3D printing. It further notes that the mockup represents “a hybrid metal-and-composite forward section of the airframe” and “features a non-conventional force-bearing structure with implementation of modern engineering decisions arising from bionic principles.” Such structures are also applicable to prospective long- and medium-haul passenger jets.

Another exhibit is described as “a multi-walled composite panel of integral nature.” It consists of two outer skins, longitudinal walls, and lightweight filling. This exhibit is “a specimen for production” as “an element in force-bearing structure for high-loaded sections of the airframe.” Apart from stiffness and strength, such elements provide for high resistance to impact, good thermal insulation, and noise reduction qualities, as required for supersonic jets, Chernyshev noted.