Il-112V/Il-212 light military transport

miketheterrible wrote:

That isn't how it works.  The certification of EASA doesn't happen right off the bat.  It will happen once serial production starts, not prototypes.

http://www.rusaviainsider.com/mc-21-narrowbody-sport-russian-pd-14-engines-2019/

EASA certification of the PD-14 has already been launched, and is expected to be completed by the time the powerplant enters series production. As reported earlier, Russian certification of the PD-14-powered MC-21 is slated for 2021, whereas the baseline version, fitted with PW1400G powerplants, will be certified before the end of 2019.

That was my entire point, it is not in service and nothing new has been completed.

Vladimir79 wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:

That isn't how it works.  The certification of EASA doesn't happen right off the bat.  It will happen once serial production starts, not prototypes.

http://www.rusaviainsider.com/mc-21-narrowbody-sport-russian-pd-14-engines-2019/

EASA certification of the PD-14 has already been launched, and is expected to be completed by the time the powerplant enters series production. As reported earlier, Russian certification of the PD-14-powered MC-21 is slated for 2021, whereas the baseline version, fitted with PW1400G powerplants, will be certified before the end of 2019.

That was my entire point, it is not in service and nothing new has been completed.  

So you expect them to pull multiple engines out of thier rear?  You are aware that this was late last year, correct?  It even addresses this in the article I linked.

Home » Air Transport » MC-21 narrowbody to sport Russian PD-14 engines from 2019
MC-21 narrowbody to sport Russian PD-14 engines from 2019
Posted on March 8th, 2018 by Tatyana Volodina in Air Transport, Russia, Testing, Trending

The PD-14 is one of the two engine options for the MC-21
UEC - Perm Motors has assembled 13 test engines by now (UEC)
The Aviadvigatel PD-14-powered version of Russia’s new-generation Irkut MC-21 narrowbody is scheduled to be rolled out in Q2 2019 following system checks and tests of the engine’s compatibility with the aircraft, Sergey Popov, managing director of UEC – Perm Engines, has announced.

Now this may have been pushed back due to waiting on Rosatom's composite material.

Edit:

http://www.rusaviainsider.com/pd-14-powered-mc-21-airliner-fly-late-2019/

The engine producer is currently finishing the final assembly of the pilot batch of PD-14 turbofans (serial numbers 100-14/15/16) intended for flight testing on the MC-21, and is planning to deliver them to Irkut before the end of this year. The project is nevertheless several months behind schedule, which initially had its first flight pencilled in for the second quarter of next year, but this has now been shifted to the final quarter, with the exact date still to be announced by Irkut. In the meantime, UEC-Perm Motors is assembling engines number 100-17 and 18, scheduled to enter the testing programme in 2020. “It is practically the first time in Russia that an engine is being delivered as an integrated powerplant, which includes air inlet, cowling doors and thrust reverser,” Durnovtsev emphasises.

miketheterrible wrote:

So you expect them to pull multiple engines out of thier rear?

After thirty years I expect at least one new generation to be in service for years now. The D-30 was a reverse engineering of the JT8D, since then they have made CFM56 and now LEAP. The PS-90A is having more thrust but proving less reliable than the D-30s ordered by China.

The PD-14 is one of the two engine options for the MC-21

Who would order it with PD-14 when P&W is an option? They dropped over a billion dollars in development just to kill it off themselves.

Well, they sat idle because of ease of access, now they have no choice.  I agree that it was stupid decision.

As for who would buy it? Well, it's about 1% more efficient than competitor so that means little. But big one are people who don't want some alternative.  Believe it or not, Iran was ready to order hundreds of Russian regional jets but of course it couldn't cause of Western parts. That is what sparked the all Russian SSJ-100 which will use PD-14.  I believe there are other companies from other nations too that are interested. Venezuela will be one of them. Same with Burma, Bangladesh and others.

Allowing the planes to also is Western engines allows other nations to have an option too.[/quote]

1% more efficient compared to what? It is 2.5% less efficient than the PW1400G offered for the MC-21.  Fuel savings is the least of worries when compared to down time for maintenance issues.  That is why P&W lost out to CFM, their engines are far more reliable.

miketheterrible wrote:Well, they sat idle because of ease of access, now they have no choice.  I agree that it was stupid decision.

As for who would buy it? Well, it's about 1% more efficient than competitor so that means little. But big one are people who don't want some alternative.  Believe it or not, Iran was ready to order hundreds of Russian regional jets but of course it couldn't cause of Western parts. That is what sparked the all Russian SSJ-100 which will use PD-14.  I believe there are other companies from other nations too that are interested. Venezuela will be one of them. Same with Burma, Bangladesh and others.

Allowing the planes to also is Western engines allows other nations to have an option too.

1% more efficient compared to what? It is 2.5% less efficient than the PW1400G offered for the MC-21.  Fuel savings is the least of worries when compared to down time for maintenance issues.  That is why P&W lost out to CFM, their engines are far more reliable.

People should give Russia some slack for actually trying to integrate into the world economy. Calling not having 100% domestic
production for everything as "stupid" is rather silly. No country that is not a pauper hermit state does this. But NATO, the
pack of bloody hyenas that wants to rule the world, decided to sabotage Russia for daring to be independent and not a vassal.
And now Russia is showing them a lesson in humility. All the bloviating on this site about how Russia can't do this and can't do
that and my God has program delays of a few years is pure and utter BS. As if any country, take Haiti for example, can just
bootstrap itself into some arbitrary economic state of its desire on the drop of a hat. For most of the world and billions of
people, what Russia is achieving can only be dreamed of.

kvs wrote:People should give Russia some slack for actually trying to integrate into the world economy.   Calling not having 100% domestic
production for everything as "stupid" is rather silly.   No country that is not a pauper hermit state does this.    But NATO, the
pack of bloody hyenas that wants to rule the world, decided to sabotage Russia for daring to be independent and not a vassal.
And now Russia is showing them a lesson in humility.   All the bloviating on this site about how Russia can't do this and can't do
that and my God has program delays of a few years is pure and utter BS.   As if any country, take Haiti for example, can just
bootstrap itself into some arbitrary economic state of its desire on the drop of a hat.   For most of the world and billions of
people, what Russia is achieving can only be dreamed of.  

Just because the Soviet fell doesn't mean our aerospace industry should have fallen with it.  There used to be two dominant powers in aerospace, us and the Americans.  Now it is the Americans and France.  Why should France replace us as the number two in the world?  Sanctions this, sanctions that... there are other countries we could have tied up for funding with but never did.  There is a clear failure of leadership here and the heads of the UAC should roll for it.  

To compare us to Haiti....  

We had the infrastructure, the universities, the greatest minds, the material sciences, the brains.  The only thing it needed was funding that was wasted to corruption.  There is no good reason we should not be in the position of France right now.

Vladimir79 wrote:The D-30 was a reverse engineering of the JT8D,

I have never heard this claim before..
The D30 was designed to be in a certain thrust bracket, roughly the same as the JT8, but the engines themselves are different, with different internal architecture, different compressor stages, different turbine stages, different combustor design and numbers..etc etc

Vladimir79 wrote:

kvs wrote:People should give Russia some slack for actually trying to integrate into the world economy.   Calling not having 100% domestic
production for everything as "stupid" is rather silly.   No country that is not a pauper hermit state does this.    But NATO, the
pack of bloody hyenas that wants to rule the world, decided to sabotage Russia for daring to be independent and not a vassal.
And now Russia is showing them a lesson in humility.   All the bloviating on this site about how Russia can't do this and can't do
that and my God has program delays of a few years is pure and utter BS.   As if any country, take Haiti for example, can just
bootstrap itself into some arbitrary economic state of its desire on the drop of a hat.   For most of the world and billions of
people, what Russia is achieving can only be dreamed of.  

Just because the Soviet fell doesn't mean our aerospace industry should have fallen with it.  There used to be two dominant powers in aerospace, us and the Americans.  Now it is the Americans and France.  Why should France replace us as the number two in the world?  Sanctions this, sanctions that... there are other countries we could have tied up for funding with but never did.  There is a clear failure of leadership here and the heads of the UAC should roll for it.  

To compare us to Haiti....  

We had the infrastructure, the universities, the greatest minds, the material sciences, the brains.  The only thing it needed was funding that was wasted to corruption.  There is no good reason we should not be in the position of France right now.

I guess you must have missed the Yeltsin era depression that reduced Russia's GDP by over 50%. The USA experienced a 25% GDP contraction during the Great
Depression. The USA got out of the Great Depression hole thanks to WWII, when its GDP grew about 300% relative to its depression minimum:

https://apps.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2007/02%20February/0207_history_article.pdf

Where was Russia's WWII after 1999? You make the collective guilt attribution to Russia for failing to maintain a space program
as if money can be pulled out of Putin's rear. That is some sort of logic you have there. If you really want to attribute blame
for Russia failing to engage in a luxury economic activity, then blame Russian taxpayers. Tax avoidance rates in Russia during the
1990s and well into the 2000s exceeded anything seen in the USA at the worst point of the Great Depression by several times.
That is why the Soviet era 13% flat tax was maintained for personal incomes and resource exports became a major part of government
tax income. So it was the "we want to have our cake and eat it too" tax cheats who bear the direct blame for the collapse of
government funding for all government-funded sectors, including aerospace. That is of course in addition to a Super Depression
that did as much damage to the Russian economy as the Nazis during WWII.

I can't take any argument that omits the above show-stopper facts as being informed and valid. Everyone has an opinion, but
not everybody is qualified to pontificate on any given subject.

wilhelm wrote:
I have never heard this claim before..
The D30 was designed to be in a certain thrust bracket, roughly the same as the JT8, but the engines themselves are different, with different internal architecture, different compressor stages, different turbine stages, different combustor design and numbers..etc etc

It was impossible to copy exactly without the SCB that Pratt had invented which resulted in several more stages to take the heat off of the high pressure axial compressor. Coming to similar results with inferior material sciences was a wonder in itself but far less reliable.

Vladimir79 wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Well, they sat idle because of ease of access, now they have no choice.  I agree that it was stupid decision.

As for who would buy it? Well, it's about 1% more efficient than competitor so that means little. But big one are people who don't want some alternative.  Believe it or not, Iran was ready to order hundreds of Russian regional jets but of course it couldn't cause of Western parts. That is what sparked the all Russian SSJ-100 which will use PD-14.  I believe there are other companies from other nations too that are interested. Venezuela will be one of them. Same with Burma, Bangladesh and others.

Allowing the planes to also is Western engines allows other nations to have an option too.

1% more efficient compared to what? It is 2.5% less efficient than the PW1400G offered for the MC-21.  Fuel savings is the least of worries when compared to down time for maintenance issues.  That is why P&W lost out to CFM, their engines are far more reliable.

Compared to competition according to the developers.

kvs wrote:

Vladimir79 wrote:

kvs wrote:People should give Russia some slack for actually trying to integrate into the world economy.   Calling not having 100% domestic
production for everything as "stupid" is rather silly.   No country that is not a pauper hermit state does this.    But NATO, the
pack of bloody hyenas that wants to rule the world, decided to sabotage Russia for daring to be independent and not a vassal.
And now Russia is showing them a lesson in humility.   All the bloviating on this site about how Russia can't do this and can't do
that and my God has program delays of a few years is pure and utter BS.   As if any country, take Haiti for example, can just
bootstrap itself into some arbitrary economic state of its desire on the drop of a hat.   For most of the world and billions of
people, what Russia is achieving can only be dreamed of.  

Just because the Soviet fell doesn't mean our aerospace industry should have fallen with it.  There used to be two dominant powers in aerospace, us and the Americans.  Now it is the Americans and France.  Why should France replace us as the number two in the world?  Sanctions this, sanctions that... there are other countries we could have tied up for funding with but never did.  There is a clear failure of leadership here and the heads of the UAC should roll for it.  

To compare us to Haiti....  

We had the infrastructure, the universities, the greatest minds, the material sciences, the brains.  The only thing it needed was funding that was wasted to corruption.  There is no good reason we should not be in the position of France right now.

I guess you must have missed the Yeltsin era depression that reduced Russia's GDP by over 50%.   The USA experienced a 25% GDP contraction during the Great
Depression.   The USA got out of the Great Depression hole thanks to WWII, when its GDP grew about 300% relative to its depression minimum:

https://apps.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2007/02%20February/0207_history_article.pdf

Where was Russia's WWII after 1999?    You make the collective guilt attribution to Russia for failing to maintain a space program
as if money can be pulled out of Putin's rear.    That is some sort of logic you have there.    If you really want to attribute blame
for Russia failing to engage in a luxury economic activity, then blame Russian taxpayers.    Tax avoidance rates in Russia during the
1990s and well into the 2000s exceeded anything seen in the USA at the worst point of the Great Depression by several times.
That is why the Soviet era 13% flat tax was maintained for personal incomes and resource exports became a major part of government
tax income.   So it was the "we want to have our cake and eat it too" tax cheats who bear the direct blame for the collapse of
government funding for all government-funded sectors, including aerospace.   That is of course in addition to a Super Depression
that did as much damage to the Russian economy as the Nazis during WWII.

I can't take any argument that omits the above show-stopper facts as being informed and valid.   Everyone has an opinion, but
not everybody is qualified to pontificate on any given subject.

Exactly. The amount of theft coming from government down to every day people was atrocious. Only now they are actually prosecuting officials. People of the country contribute to the blame.

Recall Austin's article about how Aeroflot was bribed to not use the Il-96 and instead use the Boeing jets? That is one such example of a concept of theft.

exactly, the "long lead time" component of any aircraft … the engines
that's why the Russians if they had any sense (which they do)
will realise that to make more "efficient" gas turbines the core temperature has to increase …
and guess who are the masters of rocket engines and hi-temp combustion chambers ? ….

watch this space ….
the rocket engine guys …. are working for UEC now as consultants ….

I'm personally fascinated to see why these "masterminds" will build as the powerplant for the Mig-41 ….
it will be awesome ….

turboprops …. I suspect bore them …. but hey …. you've got to make a few quid on the side ….

GarryB wrote:Hey, they don't need to be turboprops... they could make something more exotic like a propfan...

They should have... boeing and airbus will very soon start new "futuristic" designs that will be far better than actual design with delta wings or double wings ...

Propfan reduces fuel consommation and are considered to be the next type of engine used on civilian aircarft.

Isos wrote:

GarryB wrote:Hey, they don't need to be turboprops... they could make something more exotic like a propfan...

They should have... boeing and airbus will very soon start new "futuristic" designs that will be far better than actual design with delta wings or double wings ...

Propfan reduces fuel consommation and are considered to be the next type of engine used on civilian aircarft.

Well, Russia has done its own research on very high bypass rate engines (NK-93), and the actual fan of the D-27 propfan engine (together with other parts) was designed and made by the Russian company Aerosila.

As I wrote above, I believe they could derive a very good modern propfan from the PD-12 turboshaft (together with aerosila own experience), given enough time and money. They have however so many other engine projects that have absolute priority, so it is possible that, for the next 4 or 5 years there will not be any substantial work on it (maybe only a very small future opportunities team working on a preliminary design)

As I wrote above, I believe they could derive a very good modern propfan from the PD-12 turboshaft (together with aerosila own experience),

It's with "if" and "could" that they will make anything.

Boeing and airbus are far away from any other competitor. If they want to sell anything they will need something new.

MS-21 has nothing better or extraordinary than airbus and boeing analogues as I see it.

Even russian companies won't be interested if they find better elsewhere.

SSJ 100 seems to be a disapointement in terms of operating cost while advertised as being cheap. MS-21 can have the same issue.

Isos wrote:

As I wrote above, I believe they could derive a very good modern propfan from the PD-12 turboshaft (together with aerosila own experience),

It's with "if" and "could" that they will make anything.

Boeing and airbus are far away from any other competitor. If they want to sell anything they will need something new.

MS-21 has nothing better or extraordinary than airbus and boeing analogues as I see it.

Even russian companies won't be interested if they find better elsewhere.

SSJ 100 seems to be a disapointement in terms of operating cost while advertised as being cheap. MS-21 can have the same issue.

MS-21 is a generation newer than A320 and 2 generations newer than A320. The modernised airbus and boeing are good aircrafts, but based on a 30 years old (A320) or 50 years old design.

Vladimir79 wrote:

wilhelm wrote:
I have never heard this claim before..
The D30 was designed to be in a certain thrust bracket, roughly the same as the JT8, but the engines themselves are different, with different internal architecture, different compressor stages, different turbine stages, different combustor design and numbers..etc etc

It was impossible to copy exactly without the SCB that Pratt had invented which resulted in several more stages to take the heat off of the high pressure axial compressor.  Coming to similar results with inferior material sciences was a wonder in itself but far less reliable.  

Hence why I have a problem with the term "reverse engineer".
Reverse engineer implies copying.
The two engines did not even have precisely or exactly the same size fan, let alone all the other changes previously mentioned.
There were a few engines designed at the time with similar bpr's of about 1.
Early turbofans, like the Conway, had its original bpr of 0.3 redesigned to 0.6 by the early 1960's but by this point, bpr's of 1 were being brought forth.
The D30 from everything I have seen was a development of the earlier D20, and was a follow on from a studied derivitive of that engine.
I have no doubt the JT8D was looked at, as any engineer would look at similar things for inspiratiin and ideas to use,  but "reverse engineered" or copied is not an accurate description in my opinion.

wilhelm wrote:

Hence why I have a problem with the term "reverse engineer".
Reverse engineer implies copying.
The two engines did not even have precisely or exactly the same size fan, let alone all the other changes previously mentioned.
There were a few engines designed at the time with similar bpr's of about 1.
Early turbofans, like the Conway, had its original bpr of 0.3 redesigned to 0.6 by the early 1960's but by this point, bpr's of 1 were being brought forth.
The D30 from everything I have seen was a development of the earlier D20, and was a follow on from a studied derivitive of that engine.
I have no doubt the JT8D was looked at, as any engineer would look at similar things for inspiratiin and ideas to use,  but "reverse engineered" or copied is not an accurate description in my opinion.

The WS-10 is a reverse engineered AL-31F, it is not a copy of it as they didn't have the material sciences to make the SCB which have left it as an unreliable POS. It is easy with the 3D printing now to copy something, but if you can't produce the materials it is made of then you are going to have to make major alterations to get anything close to working.

miketheterrible wrote:

Compared to competition according to the developers.

Without a reference point it is an empty statistic.

I guess you must have missed the Yeltsin era depression that reduced Russia's GDP by over 50%.   The USA experienced a 25% GDP contraction during the Great
Depression.   The USA got out of the Great Depression hole thanks to WWII, when its GDP grew about 300% relative to its depression minimum:

I actually lived through it. It did not stop the export of aircraft whose returns should have been re-invested into R&D. When Putin replaced him the price of oil spiked but still the investment was not made. His solution was to create the UAC but filled it with a bunch of faked PhDs as the legit PhDs left. Taking a job with a plagiarised dissertation is theft. It has turned the higher education system into a laughing stock and why Russians are running abroad to get educations. We used to have several universities in the top 100, now we only have one.

You seem to also lack the knowledge on this.

You are aware food court as example is counted for top 100 universities?

Yet majority the math majors, science and the like comes from Russia. The university students with majority of the gold medals are from russia.  And it was mentioned that all of the major holders of gold medals in US are not even Americans but from countries like India.

Why not talk to people who were part of US education system? Like my father (MIT)?  His answer is: it's a prestigious school only If you were already an engineer and looking to make contacts. Yale is essentially the same thing.  It was a member here who exposed the whole "rankings" bullshit. I guess If Russian universities flooded their schools with McDonalds, Subway and some expensive restaurants and only took in rich young kids (pay for it while Russian state covers University unless private) who already have a degree and a job in the field, then woohoo.  Only reason my dad got into MIT was because he himself was an engineer for radar technology and working on major projects for the US airforce.

And BTW, it seems some have derailed this conversation. I thought we were talking about Il-112V not about education ranking nonsense and self loathing?

Last comment from me: UAC was best idea, and it worked considerably well. Majority of the manufacturers of aircraft in Russia was in a very bad state. Now who owns UAC? Rostec. And they are highly profitable industry that turned around everything they touched that was doing bad into something profiting. See Kalashnikov as example.  They pushed for russianization of civil jets. They are responsible for NPO istock in making GaN and GaAS modules or getting ORION to produce it's own thermal matrices and SWIR tech. Something they were all importing before.

PapaDragon wrote:

Vladimir79 wrote:...We used to have several universities in the top 100, now we only have one.

And failed spectacularly at converting any of it into usable economy of anything even resembling financial improvement

That one university you have now in top 100 seems to be infinitely more profitable than all previous combined

I am constantly discombobulated when I see rose tinted glasses trough which some people view toilet bowl that USSR socioeconomic system was...

It seems now that most universities get contracts for R&D. It's a rather good investment and a good way to five universities funds. This has been common practice here for decades. Slowly disappearing but still a lot gets done by Universities.

miketheterrible wrote:You seem to also lack the knowledge on this.

You are aware food court as example is counted for top 100 universities?

Yet majority the math majors, science and the like comes from Russia. The university students with majority of the gold medals are from russia.  And it was mentioned that all of the major holders of gold medals in US are not even Americans but from countries like India.

Why not talk to people who were part of US education system? Like my father (MIT)?  His answer is: it's a prestigious school only If you were already an engineer and looking to make contacts. Yale is essentially the same thing.  It was a member here who exposed the whole "rankings" bullshit. I guess If Russian universities flooded their schools with McDonalds, Subway and some expensive restaurants and only took in rich young kids (pay for it while Russian state covers University unless private) who already have a degree and a job in the field, then woohoo.  Only reason my dad got into MIT was because he himself was an engineer for radar technology and working on major projects for the US airforce.

And BTW, it seems some have derailed this conversation. I thought we were talking about Il-112V not about education ranking nonsense and self loathing?

Last comment from me: UAC was best idea, and it worked considerably well. Majority of the manufacturers of aircraft in Russia was in a very bad state. Now who owns UAC? Rostec. And they are highly profitable industry that turned around everything they touched that was doing bad into something profiting. See Kalashnikov as example.  They pushed for russianization of civil jets. They are responsible for NPO istock in making GaN and GaAS modules or getting ORION to produce it's own thermal matrices and SWIR tech.  Something they were all importing before.

I don't know what rankings you are looking at but the one that is the international standard doesn't have Food Court on it.

If Russian universities checked to see if their doctoral candidates plagiarised their dissertations it would have made all the difference. I bet your father didn't plagiarise his dissertation nor could he have gotten away with it if he tried.

The current state of the Il-112V is a symptom of the problems discussed here. That is on topic enough for me and I make the final decision.

The stated goals of UAC were to have 1 trillion rouble revenue, 50% being civil aviation sales and greater than 10% operating profit along with promising timely after sales service. It has failed at EVERYTHING. Revenue is only 400 billion, civil sales have fallen to less than 10%, operating profit is only 4.8% and after sales service hardly exists.