https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/rus ... -products/

"Russia doesn’t exactly have a sterling track record of aviation successes in commercial airliners. See the site https://www.rbth.com

Included on the list are:
1. The AN-2 single engine/fabric covered biplane/crop duster–first produced in 1947
2. Il-18 turboprop–looks like a Lockheed Electra from the 50s/60s
3. Il-62–4 aft-mounted engines, like a Jetstar–from 1963
4. The Yak-40 30-40-seat trijet from the early 60s.
5. The TU-144 Supersonic airliner–dubbed “Concordski”. Only 2 were built. While not a commercial success, NASA used one for research purposes.
6.TU-154–Most produced airliner in Russia, with 1026 units–though only one remains in service.
7. IL-86–an attempt at a wide-body aircraft to challenge the 747. 106 built.
8. IL-96–didn’t enter commercial service, but one does serve as the Russian “Air Force One.”
9. SSJ-100–an attempt for design of a regional airliner. Outside of Russia, Mexico is the only foreign operator, with 22.
10. MC-21–latest attempt at airliner production. First flight in 2017–production not yet started.

Not exactly a sterling record of commercial successes! (Much like Russian-built automobiles!) I don’t think the rest of the worlds airframers have much to fear from Russia’s withdrawal from non-Russian manufacturers."

More than one factual error here: Two that I notice right away: The Il-96 did enter service, and more than 2 Tu-144s were built. I'm sure there are others.

144, more than two built. 16 or 17, flew for a few years on passenger flights, then canceled passenger flights and ended up doing mail runs, NASA along with a few other aerospace companies did lease one with engines fitted from a TU 160 to do high speed tests.
IL 62, I'd compare that more to a VC 10 than a Lockheed Jetstar.
IL 96 did enter service with a few Russian carriers. IL 96 300 most with Aeroflot, IL 96 T cargo version, IL 96 400 stretched Passenger version, no airline takers but the Russian Government has a few in their fleet.
SSJ City Jet did operate a few of them, unsure if they are still flying in their fleet.
154, plenty still in service mostly with Government fleets.

phlswaflyer wrote:

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/russia-swearing-off-boeing-airbus-products/

"Russia doesn’t exactly have a sterling track record of aviation successes in commercial airliners. See the site https://www.rbth.com

Included on the list are:
1. The AN-2 single engine/fabric covered biplane/crop duster–first produced in 1947
2. Il-18 turboprop–looks like a Lockheed Electra from the 50s/60s
3. Il-62–4 aft-mounted engines, like a Jetstar–from 1963
4. The Yak-40 30-40-seat trijet from the early 60s.
5. The TU-144 Supersonic airliner–dubbed “Concordski”. Only 2 were built. While not a commercial success, NASA used one for research purposes.
6.TU-154–Most produced airliner in Russia, with 1026 units–though only one remains in service.
7. IL-86–an attempt at a wide-body aircraft to challenge the 747. 106 built.
8. IL-96–didn’t enter commercial service, but one does serve as the Russian “Air Force One.”
9. SSJ-100–an attempt for design of a regional airliner. Outside of Russia, Mexico is the only foreign operator, with 22.
10. MC-21–latest attempt at airliner production. First flight in 2017–production not yet started.

Not exactly a sterling record of commercial successes! (Much like Russian-built automobiles!) I don’t think the rest of the worlds airframers have much to fear from Russia’s withdrawal from non-Russian manufacturers."

Their track record isn’t great but it also isn’t as dismal as the quote you have here. Aeroflot didn’t fly western aircraft until 1992; before that time it was Soviet aircraft.

There are also some inaccuracies — the Il-96 did enter commercial service, and it still flies with Cubana. There are also a few missing aircraft, such as the Yak-42, Tu-114 and -134, and An-24, which still flies. Many of these aircraft have been in service quite a long time, too.

phlswaflyer wrote:

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/russia-swearing-off-boeing-airbus-products/

"Russia doesn’t exactly have a sterling track record of aviation successes in commercial airliners. See the site https://www.rbth.com

Included on the list are:
1. The AN-2 single engine/fabric covered biplane/crop duster–first produced in 1947
2. Il-18 turboprop–looks like a Lockheed Electra from the 50s/60s
3. Il-62–4 aft-mounted engines, like a Jetstar–from 1963
4. The Yak-40 30-40-seat trijet from the early 60s.
5. The TU-144 Supersonic airliner–dubbed “Concordski”. Only 2 were built. While not a commercial success, NASA used one for research purposes.
6.TU-154–Most produced airliner in Russia, with 1026 units–though only one remains in service.
7. IL-86–an attempt at a wide-body aircraft to challenge the 747. 106 built.
8. IL-96–didn’t enter commercial service, but one does serve as the Russian “Air Force One.”
9. SSJ-100–an attempt for design of a regional airliner. Outside of Russia, Mexico is the only foreign operator, with 22.
10. MC-21–latest attempt at airliner production. First flight in 2017–production not yet started.

Not exactly a sterling record of commercial successes! (Much like Russian-built automobiles!) I don’t think the rest of the worlds airframers have much to fear from Russia’s withdrawal from non-Russian manufacturers."

Your list is very biased and sometimes wrong:
1. An-2 was not far off as far as airframe technology in its days (the Lockheed Constellation also had fabric-covered stabilizers);
2. Il-18 was on-par with some of its peers of the days (L-188);
3. Il-62 is closer to the VC-10 than the JetStar, is contemporary to the former and was more successful;
4. I'll give you the Yak-30; but there was no other regional jets that size at the time, right?
5. Tu-144 was produced in 16 examples (not 2), including the Tu-144LL used by NASA (RA-77114);
6. Tu-154 was a successful aircraft as you mentioned;
7. Il-86 was Russia's first widebody aircraft, not that successful indeed;
8. Il-96 DID enter commercial services (Aeroflot used it from 1992-93 until 2012, Cubana de Aviacion is using them);
9. SSJ-100 was operated outside of Russia by Interjet (Mexico), Sky Aviation (Indonesia) and CityJet (Ireland);
10. No comment...

He left out the TU-134 that was produced in several models. According to google 834 were produced. As for the Yak 40 I would say it was worlds first regional airliner and could be used to airfields lacking infrastructure.

The topic post is a mess...

A quick question on the 834 is that only the commercial aircraft or does it include Tu-134'S that were designed for military or government operations?

This is such a poor article, laughably so. The factual errors are far too much to the point it damages the larger point which is largely true. Russia needs non-western aircraft and its own industry, for a myriad of reasons, has been woefully uncompetitive. That’s a major issue for Russia in the coming years.

However, one can make that point without bizarre false statements that cheapen the article to the point of ridiculousness.

I mean didnt the An-2 sell about 20,000 units and was renowned for its ability to never stall?

phlswaflyer wrote:

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/russia-swearing-off-boeing-airbus-products/

"Russia doesn’t exactly have a sterling track record of aviation successes in commercial airliners. See the site https://www.rbth.com

Included on the list are:
1. The AN-2 single engine/fabric covered biplane/crop duster–first produced in 1947
2. Il-18 turboprop–looks like a Lockheed Electra from the 50s/60s
3. Il-62–4 aft-mounted engines, like a Jetstar–from 1963
4. The Yak-40 30-40-seat trijet from the early 60s.
5. The TU-144 Supersonic airliner–dubbed “Concordski”. Only 2 were built. While not a commercial success, NASA used one for research purposes.
6.TU-154–Most produced airliner in Russia, with 1026 units–though only one remains in service.
7. IL-86–an attempt at a wide-body aircraft to challenge the 747. 106 built.
8. IL-96–didn’t enter commercial service, but one does serve as the Russian “Air Force One.”
9. SSJ-100–an attempt for design of a regional airliner. Outside of Russia, Mexico is the only foreign operator, with 22.
10. MC-21–latest attempt at airliner production. First flight in 2017–production not yet started.

Not exactly a sterling record of commercial successes! (Much like Russian-built automobiles!) I don’t think the rest of the worlds airframers have much to fear from Russia’s withdrawal from non-Russian manufacturers."

When you post stuff like this you should do a better job outlining what's sourced vs. what's your "opinion." I wonder how informed you may be on the Western-built aircraft if you know so little about "Russian" aircraft. I hope you know that Antonov is not a Russian design. I'm glad others pointed to all your errors - intentional or not.

SEU wrote:

I mean didnt the An-2 sell about 20,000 units and was renowned for its ability to never stall?

Produced from 1947 until 2001. Not too bad either…

Antaras wrote:

The topic post is a mess...

Well, hmmm, how should I say….. ….. …. yes, sorry to say.

The IL-96 is in commercial operation today sooooo....

One or two flying for CU. Are there any other carriers flying the IL 96-300 on regularly scheduled flights? Russian government has some for government flights

Just to be fair to AvWeb and the author of the linked article...the excerpt above is a "cut and paste" from the comments section.

I feel like OP’s errors in his original post have misguided the discussion here. I do wonder how long it will take for the Russians to completely replace their fleet with Russian aircraft.

ILikeTrains wrote:

I feel like OP’s errors in his original post have misguided the discussion here. I do wonder how long it will take for the Russians to completely replace their fleet with Russian aircraft.

That will depend entirely on how quickly they can reverse engineer the advanced avionics and engines in the Airbus and Boeing planes they nationalized.

We can go back and fort ad infinitum debating whether the legacy Soviet airliners were any good or not, but the overall picture is clear as daylight: Against the contemporary “western” alternatives, Soviet commercial airlines have severely underperformed in all but a few cases, and have never reached parity.

The Russian aviation industry could be dictated to build new aircraft for Russian airlines, but it’s fair to say they’ll soon fall foul of the same restrictions their auto industry does: Lack of parts and components due to sanctions. On the automative side this has forced Lada to dust of an old 90s model, and offer it without ABS, traction control, airbags, air conditioning or even a radio. In aviation terms, at best this might mean they may be able to rejig the Tu-204 to be produced without Western avionics (which was introduced decades ago), but they’re pretty much stuffed when it comes to producing anything even remotely resembling something “modern”.

The reason for that is there is no industry in Russia to produce all the advanced hydraulic, pneumatic, electric, fuel, flight control and environmental systems, which are all fundamental elements of a modern and efficient airliner. And that’s before we even touch on the subject of engines.

Summary: Russian airlines will be relegated to operating aircraft with technology of 1980s vintage. Knock yourselves out guys, but brace for the inevitable.

A quick google search and you’d find out they built 16 TU-144’s.

btfarrwm wrote:

ILikeTrains wrote:

I feel like OP’s errors in his original post have misguided the discussion here. I do wonder how long it will take for the Russians to completely replace their fleet with Russian aircraft.

That will depend entirely on how quickly they can reverse engineer the advanced avionics and engines in the Airbus and Boeing planes they nationalized.

Given that the 97% Russian MC-21 is scheduled to be in production as of late 2024 (at least that's the current estimate from Irkut), one can wonder if the fleet will be replaced by 2030. The current aim is to have 80% replaced by 2030. However, they also expect a production rate of 72 Russian MC-21s in 2029, or to put it in comparison, almost the same production rate as Airbus intend for the NEO. My guess that by the time Irkut is ready with its Russian MC-21 an be able to have a high production rate, many of the sanctions have been lifted as the war is over. Then again, nobody knows.

B777LRF wrote:

And that’s before we even touch on the subject of engines.

I doubt the PD-14 is '80s tech, though it most likeliy not be as good as a PW engine.

Russia will not be able to ramp up aircraft production before peace terms are negotiated. Res the later, I have not idea.

B777LRF wrote:

Summary: Russian airlines will be relegated to operating aircraft with technology of 1980s vintage. Knock yourselves out guys, but brace for the inevitable.

And for how long did certain US carriers use 'vintage' aircraft (think DC9's etc) when those said aircraft were capable of doing the necessary job? At the end of the day, in the circumstances, that's all Russia really needs and not the a.net fantasy of needing the latest equipment.

The head of Russia’s biggest aerospace company says his country’s airlines will likely never fly Airbus or Boeing designs after the airliners it appropriated from lease companies and those owned by Russian companies are no longer flyable. “Boeing and Airbus aircraft, which are unlikely ever to be delivered to Russia again, will be replaced by Russian-made passenger aircraft,” Sergey Chemezov, general director of state-owned Rostec,

Quote from the linked article.

So either it is a commercially driven quote or it is because of the political context given it is a state-owned company. Either way, I don't think we need to give this a lot of thought. Russia might see a regime change and things will look entirely different. So let's see how this quote will age in let's say 5years.

Didn't the TU-204 receive EASA certification?

It's really not a bad aircraft. Attach a more efficient powerplant, I have no idea if Russia has one of those and it could fill a gap.

After stealing several hundred planes I can't imagine that anyone is going to lease or finance any Boeing or Airbus aircraft to them anyway even if the sanctions issue resolves.

B777LRF wrote:

We can go back and fort ad infinitum debating whether the legacy Soviet airliners were any good or not, but the overall picture is clear as daylight: Against the contemporary “western” alternatives, Soviet commercial airlines have severely underperformed in all but a few cases, and have never reached parity.

The Russian aviation industry could be dictated to build new aircraft for Russian airlines, but it’s fair to say they’ll soon fall foul of the same restrictions their auto industry does: Lack of parts and components due to sanctions. On the automative side this has forced Lada to dust of an old 90s model, and offer it without ABS, traction control, airbags, air conditioning or even a radio. In aviation terms, at best this might mean they may be able to rejig the Tu-204 to be produced without Western avionics (which was introduced decades ago), but they’re pretty much stuffed when it comes to producing anything even remotely resembling something “modern”.

The reason for that is there is no industry in Russia to produce all the advanced hydraulic, pneumatic, electric, fuel, flight control and environmental systems, which are all fundamental elements of a modern and efficient airliner. And that’s before we even touch on the subject of engines.

Summary: Russian airlines will be relegated to operating aircraft with technology of 1980s vintage. Knock yourselves out guys, but brace for the inevitable.

The 757, 767, and A320 CEO families were all introduced in the '80s.

Aside from the Aeroflot A350's and maybe some NEO engines (were there any in Russia?), the western Russian fleet is primarily early 80s-late 90s introduced types types as well.

But, there *is* the Superjet...

Must be planning to replace with paper airplanes.

phlswaflyer wrote:

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/russia-swearing-off-boeing-airbus-products/

"Russia doesn’t exactly have a sterling track record of aviation successes in commercial airliners. See the site https://www.rbth.com

Included on the list are:
1. The AN-2 single engine/fabric covered biplane/crop duster–first produced in 1947
2. Il-18 turboprop–looks like a Lockheed Electra from the 50s/60s
3. Il-62–4 aft-mounted engines, like a Jetstar–from 1963
4. The Yak-40 30-40-seat trijet from the early 60s.
5. The TU-144 Supersonic airliner–dubbed “Concordski”. Only 2 were built. While not a commercial success, NASA used one for research purposes.
6.TU-154–Most produced airliner in Russia, with 1026 units–though only one remains in service.
7. IL-86–an attempt at a wide-body aircraft to challenge the 747. 106 built.
8. IL-96–didn’t enter commercial service, but one does serve as the Russian “Air Force One.”
9. SSJ-100–an attempt for design of a regional airliner. Outside of Russia, Mexico is the only foreign operator, with 22.
10. MC-21–latest attempt at airliner production. First flight in 2017–production not yet started.

Not exactly a sterling record of commercial successes! (Much like Russian-built automobiles!) I don’t think the rest of the worlds airframers have much to fear from Russia’s withdrawal from non-Russian manufacturers."

Actually there were 16 built. 1 crashed at Paris Air Show. Short time for passenger most were used to haul mail & cargo inside the Soviet union till they retired & I believe leased one to NASA.

phlswaflyer wrote:

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/russia-swearing-off-boeing-airbus-products/

"Russia doesn’t exactly have a sterling track record of aviation successes in commercial airliners. See the site https://www.rbth.com

Included on the list are:
1. The AN-2 single engine/fabric covered biplane/crop duster–first produced in 1947
2. Il-18 turboprop–looks like a Lockheed Electra from the 50s/60s
3. Il-62–4 aft-mounted engines, like a Jetstar–from 1963
4. The Yak-40 30-40-seat trijet from the early 60s.
5. The TU-144 Supersonic airliner–dubbed “Concordski”. Only 2 were built. While not a commercial success, NASA used one for research purposes.
6.TU-154–Most produced airliner in Russia, with 1026 units–though only one remains in service.
7. IL-86–an attempt at a wide-body aircraft to challenge the 747. 106 built.
8. IL-96–didn’t enter commercial service, but one does serve as the Russian “Air Force One.”
9. SSJ-100–an attempt for design of a regional airliner. Outside of Russia, Mexico is the only foreign operator, with 22.
10. MC-21–latest attempt at airliner production. First flight in 2017–production not yet started.

Not exactly a sterling record of commercial successes! (Much like Russian-built automobiles!) I don’t think the rest of the worlds airframers have much to fear from Russia’s withdrawal from non-Russian manufacturers."

If the Russians don't want to buy western airplanes? Then they shouldn't or feel they have to. they build airliners. and no matter what anybody thinks about them? I haven't seen them just fall out of the Air either. Aeroflot used to park on the Gate next to us at SFO on the old international terminal which now is American's terminal So I got to look at the IL-62 and the IL96 up close. they didn't leak any more than any other airplane and other than the extra Noise on takeoff? they always climbed out so I cannot speak Ill of them whether I liked them or not. What I did notice? they had a whole Gang of people in the cockpit and some FINE looking flight attendants. they used the same fuel as we used, and other than their tires being a metric size and that strange ground stabilizer on the IL-62, It was neither Better or worse, juast different. Nothing stranger than the French Caravelle-12 I got a chance to work on or the German HFB-320 Hansa Jet, or the or the French SN-601 Corvette I also got to work on, So all of them were different. Not any worse or Better. just different. If they no longetr want to buy or fly US built equipment? then that's up to them! We won't go boo-hoo over it

WkndWanderer wrote:

After stealing several hundred planes I can't imagine that anyone is going to lease or finance any Boeing or Airbus aircraft to them anyway even if the sanctions issue resolves.

I doubt that. If one day Russia is open for business again, business will be done.

strfyr51 wrote:

phlswaflyer wrote:

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/russia-swearing-off-boeing-airbus-products/

"Russia doesn’t exactly have a sterling track record of aviation successes in commercial airliners. See the site https://www.rbth.com

Included on the list are:
1. The AN-2 single engine/fabric covered biplane/crop duster–first produced in 1947
2. Il-18 turboprop–looks like a Lockheed Electra from the 50s/60s
3. Il-62–4 aft-mounted engines, like a Jetstar–from 1963
4. The Yak-40 30-40-seat trijet from the early 60s.
5. The TU-144 Supersonic airliner–dubbed “Concordski”. Only 2 were built. While not a commercial success, NASA used one for research purposes.
6.TU-154–Most produced airliner in Russia, with 1026 units–though only one remains in service.
7. IL-86–an attempt at a wide-body aircraft to challenge the 747. 106 built.
8. IL-96–didn’t enter commercial service, but one does serve as the Russian “Air Force One.”
9. SSJ-100–an attempt for design of a regional airliner. Outside of Russia, Mexico is the only foreign operator, with 22.
10. MC-21–latest attempt at airliner production. First flight in 2017–production not yet started.

Not exactly a sterling record of commercial successes! (Much like Russian-built automobiles!) I don’t think the rest of the worlds airframers have much to fear from Russia’s withdrawal from non-Russian manufacturers."

If the Russians don't want to buy western airplanes? Then they shouldn't or feel they have to. they build airliners. and no matter what anybody thinks about them? I haven't seen them just fall out of the Air either. Aeroflot used to park on the Gate next to us at SFO on the old international terminal which now is American's terminal So I got to look at the IL-62 and the IL96 up close. they didn't leak any more than any other airplane and other than the extra Noise on takeoff? they always climbed out so I cannot speak Ill of them whether I liked them or not. What I did notice? they had a whole Gang of people in the cockpit and some FINE looking flight attendants. they used the same fuel as we used, and other than their tires being a metric size and that strange ground stabilizer on the IL-62, It was neither Better or worse, juast different. Nothing stranger than the French Caravelle-12 I got a chance to work on or the German HFB-320 Hansa Jet, or the or the French SN-601 Corvette I also got to work on, So all of them were different. Not any worse or Better. just different. If they no longetr want to buy or fly US built equipment? then that's up to them! We won't go boo-hoo over it

The Russians can no longer build aircraft at a high production rate.

When some aircraft types are barely crawling by, producing less than a dozen air frames a year, that says a lot about the state of the Russian aviation industry today.

If (huge if) Boom's Overture ever gets off the ground (literally) will Russia respond with a Tu-144 2.0?

Whats left. Boeing and Airbus are the two largest makers of airliners that are known worldwide in service with just about every airline. No Russian or Chinese planes in the fleets of most major airlines.

SEU wrote:

I mean didnt the An-2 sell about 20,000 units and was renowned for its ability to never stall?

Not to mention its amazing ability to fly from Nome AK to somewhere in Siberia near a penal colony (with monsters from another dimension) without the need to refuel...

LJ wrote:

btfarrwm wrote:

ILikeTrains wrote:

I feel like OP’s errors in his original post have misguided the discussion here. I do wonder how long it will take for the Russians to completely replace their fleet with Russian aircraft.

That will depend entirely on how quickly they can reverse engineer the advanced avionics and engines in the Airbus and Boeing planes they nationalized.

Given that the 97% Russian MC-21 is scheduled to be in production as of late 2024 (at least that's the current estimate from Irkut), one can wonder if the fleet will be replaced by 2030. The current aim is to have 80% replaced by 2030. However, they also expect a production rate of 72 Russian MC-21s in 2029, or to put it in comparison, almost the same production rate as Airbus intend for the NEO. My guess that by the time Irkut is ready with its Russian MC-21 an be able to have a high production rate, many of the sanctions have been lifted as the war is over. Then again, nobody knows.

B777LRF wrote:

And that’s before we even touch on the subject of engines.

I doubt the PD-14 is '80s tech, though it most likeliy not be as good as a PW engine.

One thing though… 72 MC-21s per year is the rate of production for Airbus on the NEO in just one month. The Russians simply do not have the raw production capability here to even meet their own domestic needs, let alone anyone else’s.

phlswaflyer wrote:

7. IL-86–an attempt at a wide-body aircraft to challenge the 747. 106 built.

The Il-86 was never meant to challenge the 747. Their attempt was to build a domestic airliner somewhat mirroring the Airbus A300. Indeed, the aircraft was explicitly called "Airbus" in initial Russian documents in the late 60s, A design to increase capacity on Domestic and Regional-international trunk routes. If the Russian engine technology was advanced enough, it would have been built as a Twin rather than a Quad.

8. IL-96–didn’t enter commercial service, but one does serve as the Russian “Air Force One.”

Il-96 DID enter commercial service. I flew on them from DEL-SVO and much much later on MAD-HAV route. Apart from the lack of overhead baggage bins and the weird Cinema Theater ambience onboard, it was actually a nice aircraft. the Il-96 was a shrink from the -86 to gain range. the -400 variant being proposed will bring back the original fuselage capacity of 350-370 seats and make it competetive.

9. SSJ-100–an attempt for design of a regional airliner. Outside of Russia, Mexico is the only foreign operator, with 22.

Why judge the success or failure of an aircraft based on its ability to compete with Embraer/Boeing/Airbus? That was not the main objective when they built the airliner. As a regional airliner for the Russian market and its satellite states, the SSJ100 is indeed a success and a huge upgrade to the Tu134 they replaced. When seen in this context, the SSJ100 is indeed a success.

Which is why I think many people in the West are misreading the effect of Sanctions on Russian Aviation. Look at it from the other side - For the last 3 decades, local Russian Aviation manufacturing and design bureaus have suffered because most of Russian airlines have switched to Airbus or Boeing. Now by closing that door, We have given the Russians no choice except to rebuild their tattered aviation industrial base. Also important to remember, that Russia is not Iraq or India. The Russians have a strong base in place and a rich history of commercially successful aircraft going back 8 decades. They just need to revitalise the sector with some investment and ofcourse orders. In that sense, these sanctions are a huge opportunity for the Russians! The Il-96 (300) was not a bad aircraft for the time in the 90s. However it arrived at the same time as the Soviet Union collapse. Russian airlines could now buy cool and snazzy Western airliners which most of them did leading to orders drying up. Ditto for other aircraft like An-158, Tu-334 and Ilyushin-114.

The Russians have a buffer of 2 or max 3 years before the spares for their fleet of Western Aircraft dries out. This is assuming that they start grounding some of their planes to keep others flying. The Il-96-300 and 400 can be subbed in as an interim replacement for International widebody role while MS-21 and SSJ100 with Russian engines can form the basis to take over the domestic flying. This can happen, but production capacity will have to be beefed up.

I read somewhere that Ilyushin has the capacity to build 10 Il-96 in one year at peak production rates. That will not be enough for the task. Even a company as corrupt and inefficient as Boeing makes 20+ 787s a MONTH! Going forward, Russia will have to significantly ramp up capacity and 2-place orders with Russian manufacturers to justify their investment in Production capacity.

BOTH have to happen NOW.

In the long run, Russia will have to design a Widebody twin. They dont have to better the A350/B777. At the very least, they only need to match the performance figures of the 77W. Ditto for the MS-21 in the narrowbody segment - As long as they can match the A320ceo with Russian engines and subsystems, they will be just fine.

The PD-14 and PD-8 engines are the big hope for the future allowing them to NEO their respective aircraft to keep them competitive for the 2030-2050 period. After that, well who knows!

BawliBooch wrote:

phlswaflyer wrote:

7. IL-86–an attempt at a wide-body aircraft to challenge the 747. 106 built.

The Il-86 was never meant to challenge the 747. Their attempt was to build a domestic airliner somewhat mirroring the Airbus A300. Indeed, the aircraft was explicitly called "Airbus" in initial Russian documents in the late 60s, A design to increase capacity on Domestic and Regional-international trunk routes. If the Russian engine technology was advanced enough, it would have been built as a Twin rather than a Quad.

8. IL-96–didn’t enter commercial service, but one does serve as the Russian “Air Force One.”

Il-96 DID enter commercial service. I flew on them from DEL-SVO and much much later on MAD-HAV route. Apart from the lack of overhead baggage bins and the weird Cinema Theater ambience onboard, it was actually a nice aircraft. the Il-96 was a shrink from the -86 to gain range. the -400 variant being proposed will bring back the original fuselage capacity of 350-370 seats and make it competetive.

9. SSJ-100–an attempt for design of a regional airliner. Outside of Russia, Mexico is the only foreign operator, with 22.

Why judge the success or failure of an aircraft based on its ability to compete with Embraer/Boeing/Airbus? That was not the main objective when they built the airliner. As a regional airliner for the Russian market and its satellite states, the SSJ100 is indeed a success and a huge upgrade to the Tu134 they replaced. When seen in this context, the SSJ100 is indeed a success.

Which is why I think many people in the West are misreading the effect of Sanctions on Russian Aviation. Look at it from the other side - For the last 3 decades, local Russian Aviation manufacturing and design bureaus have suffered because most of Russian airlines have switched to Airbus or Boeing. Now by closing that door, We have given the Russians no choice except to rebuild their tattered aviation industrial base. Also important to remember, that Russia is not Iraq or India. The Russians have a strong base in place and a rich history of commercially successful aircraft going back 8 decades. They just need to revitalise the sector with some investment and ofcourse orders. In that sense, these sanctions are a huge opportunity for the Russians! The Il-96 (300) was not a bad aircraft for the time in the 90s. However it arrived at the same time as the Soviet Union collapse. Russian airlines could now buy cool and snazzy Western airliners which most of them did leading to orders drying up. Ditto for other aircraft like An-158, Tu-334 and Ilyushin-114.

The Russians have a buffer of 2 or max 3 years before the spares for their fleet of Western Aircraft dries out. This is assuming that they start grounding some of their planes to keep others flying. The Il-96-300 and 400 can be subbed in as an interim replacement for International widebody role while MS-21 and SSJ100 with Russian engines can form the basis to take over the domestic flying. This can happen, but production capacity will have to be beefed up.

I read somewhere that Ilyushin has the capacity to build 10 Il-96 in one year at peak production rates. That will not be enough for the task. Even a company as corrupt and inefficient as Boeing makes 20+ 787s a MONTH! Going forward, Russia will have to significantly ramp up capacity and 2-place orders with Russian manufacturers to justify their investment in Production capacity.

BOTH have to happen NOW.

In the long run, Russia will have to design a Widebody twin. They dont have to better the A350/B777. At the very least, they only need to match the performance figures of the 77W. Ditto for the MS-21 in the narrowbody segment - As long as they can match the A320ceo with Russian engines and subsystems, they will be just fine.

The PD-14 and PD-8 engines are the big hope for the future allowing them to NEO their respective aircraft to keep them competitive for the 2030-2050 period. After that, well who knows!

I imagine the Tu-204 would also help in the larger NB segment (A321 CEO and 757).

BawliBooch wrote:

phlswaflyer wrote:

7. IL-86–an attempt at a wide-body aircraft to challenge the 747. 106 built.

The Il-86 was never meant to challenge the 747. Their attempt was to build a domestic airliner somewhat mirroring the Airbus A300. Indeed, the aircraft was explicitly called "Airbus" in initial Russian documents in the late 60s, A design to increase capacity on Domestic and Regional-international trunk routes. If the Russian engine technology was advanced enough, it would have been built as a Twin rather than a Quad.

8. IL-96–didn’t enter commercial service, but one does serve as the Russian “Air Force One.”

Il-96 DID enter commercial service. I flew on them from DEL-SVO and much much later on MAD-HAV route. Apart from the lack of overhead baggage bins and the weird Cinema Theater ambience onboard, it was actually a nice aircraft. the Il-96 was a shrink from the -86 to gain range. the -400 variant being proposed will bring back the original fuselage capacity of 350-370 seats and make it competetive.

9. SSJ-100–an attempt for design of a regional airliner. Outside of Russia, Mexico is the only foreign operator, with 22.

Why judge the success or failure of an aircraft based on its ability to compete with Embraer/Boeing/Airbus? That was not the main objective when they built the airliner. As a regional airliner for the Russian market and its satellite states, the SSJ100 is indeed a success and a huge upgrade to the Tu134 they replaced. When seen in this context, the SSJ100 is indeed a success.

Which is why I think many people in the West are misreading the effect of Sanctions on Russian Aviation. Look at it from the other side - For the last 3 decades, local Russian Aviation manufacturing and design bureaus have suffered because most of Russian airlines have switched to Airbus or Boeing. Now by closing that door, We have given the Russians no choice except to rebuild their tattered aviation industrial base. Also important to remember, that Russia is not Iraq or India. The Russians have a strong base in place and a rich history of commercially successful aircraft going back 8 decades. They just need to revitalise the sector with some investment and ofcourse orders. In that sense, these sanctions are a huge opportunity for the Russians! The Il-96 (300) was not a bad aircraft for the time in the 90s. However it arrived at the same time as the Soviet Union collapse. Russian airlines could now buy cool and snazzy Western airliners which most of them did leading to orders drying up. Ditto for other aircraft like An-158, Tu-334 and Ilyushin-114.

The Russians have a buffer of 2 or max 3 years before the spares for their fleet of Western Aircraft dries out. This is assuming that they start grounding some of their planes to keep others flying. The Il-96-300 and 400 can be subbed in as an interim replacement for International widebody role while MS-21 and SSJ100 with Russian engines can form the basis to take over the domestic flying. This can happen, but production capacity will have to be beefed up.

I read somewhere that Ilyushin has the capacity to build 10 Il-96 in one year at peak production rates. That will not be enough for the task. Even a company as corrupt and inefficient as Boeing makes 20+ 787s a MONTH! Going forward, Russia will have to significantly ramp up capacity and 2-place orders with Russian manufacturers to justify their investment in Production capacity.

BOTH have to happen NOW.

In the long run, Russia will have to design a Widebody twin. They dont have to better the A350/B777. At the very least, they only need to match the performance figures of the 77W. Ditto for the MS-21 in the narrowbody segment - As long as they can match the A320ceo with Russian engines and subsystems, they will be just fine.

The PD-14 and PD-8 engines are the big hope for the future allowing them to NEO their respective aircraft to keep them competitive for the 2030-2050 period. After that, well who knows!

The Russians are heavily reliant on Western machine tools and access to Western computer chips to produce aircraft.

With the Russians now cut off from both, their ability to mass produce any complex aircraft is now severely limited. And no, Russia's domestic ability to produce both is almost non-existent, and China is not an alternative source for both because the Chinese don't produce them at the technological level to even match Western suppliers.

It's worth recalling that Russia no longer has access to whatever is left of Antonov, being that Antonov is / was a Ukranian company.

btfarrwm wrote:

Just to be fair to AvWeb and the author of the linked article...the excerpt above is a "cut and paste" from the comments section.

Finally, someone read the article and realized that....people don't do their due diligence.

Western sanctions rather made this decision for the Russians, didn't they? Ongoing software and electronics support leave Russians (and Iranians, and whomever) vulnerable to renewed sanctions, so even if sanctions were lifted and they were to get hardware they couldn't be confident of flying aircraft for their cycle life.

Enough money and time will yield a Russian passenger aircraft industry cranking out aircraft (autocrats and oligarchs will make it so), even if those aircraft may not be safety- and efficiency-competitive with the best Western aircraft.

Aeroflot didn't need Airbus or Boeing aircraft in it's glory days, 5,000+ aircraft...

'From its inception to the early 1990s, Aeroflot was the flag carrier and a state-owned enterprise of the Soviet Union (USSR). During this time, Aeroflot grew its fleet to over five thousand domestically made aircraft and expanded to operate a domestic and international flight network of over three thousand destinations throughout the Soviet Union and the globe, making the airline the largest in the world at the time.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot

Russia simply does not have the money, experienced engineers or infrastructure to go back to their glory days when they were designing and building everything from biplanes to SST's. Heck, even trying to replace the basic An-2 has become an ordeal.

http://afterburner.com.pl/in-search-of- ... t-century/

Russia has stolen trillions of dollars worth of Seattle Tubes and Toulouse Tubes. Shirtless Vlad and his cronies have tossed international air regs out the window. I hope Boeing/Airbus?Embraer/Bombardier/ATR and the like never ever give business to that country again. What they have done will not be forgotten and no one will risk it.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerosp ... 022-03-31/

So they can go right back to their Antonovs, Sukhois and Tupolevs - even these have western components (Superjet). I gather MC21 also uses Rockwell Collins avionics and other western companies provide other bits of it.

So they will have to Russify these to 100%. Theyve got the engines thats not an issue.

From a technical standpoint they build solid planes. I flew as a pax extensively on TU154, IL62 and IL96 in the 90s and it was a hoot. The IL96 for example we entered through a massive door on the lower belly. This place was pretty much a garage. There was a huge spare wheel in there, tools bolted down. Very rough and ready - and functional.

As always its the Russian people who will be at risk. Who knows how many of their western tubes are flying now with expired/unauthorized/used parts? How long can this go on? Specially the engines. They have A320neos, the CFM LEAPS and PW geared fans are complex things , what are they doing for parts for those? Likely removing them, scanning them with lasers and then CNC milliing their own replacements....?

CALTECH wrote:

Aeroflot didn't need Airbus or Boeing aircraft in it's glory days, 5,000+ aircraft...

'From its inception to the early 1990s, Aeroflot was the flag carrier and a state-owned enterprise of the Soviet Union (USSR). During this time, Aeroflot grew its fleet to over five thousand domestically made aircraft and expanded to operate a domestic and international flight network of over three thousand destinations throughout the Soviet Union and the globe, making the airline the largest in the world at the time.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot

Its “glory days” when minor inconveniences like having to make a profit didn’t matter? Soviet Aeroflot was nothing but a plaything of the politburo.

I think the Russians face a couple of problems that no-one has mentioned: firstly, the war in Ukraine will end eventually, but unless Russia wins I think they will end up paying huge sums of money in war reparations to rebuild Ukraine - probably everything that is frozen in accounts around the world and then some, so they probably aren't going to be flush with cash, particularly if western Europe can wean themselves off much of the current use of Russian gas and oil, which will leave a big hole in their revenue stream even if sanctions are lifted.

Secondly, yes, they can produce their own planes, but will those planes be certified for use in the west? Even if they meet airworthiness standards, they may still fail on noise and emissions criteria.

B777LRF wrote:

We can go back and fort ad infinitum debating whether the legacy Soviet airliners were any good or not, but the overall picture is clear as daylight: Against the contemporary “western” alternatives, Soviet commercial airlines have severely underperformed in all but a few cases, and have never reached parity.

The Russian aviation industry could be dictated to build new aircraft for Russian airlines, but it’s fair to say they’ll soon fall foul of the same restrictions their auto industry does: Lack of parts and components due to sanctions. On the automative side this has forced Lada to dust of an old 90s model, and offer it without ABS, traction control, airbags, air conditioning or even a radio. In aviation terms, at best this might mean they may be able to rejig the Tu-204 to be produced without Western avionics (which was introduced decades ago), but they’re pretty much stuffed when it comes to producing anything even remotely resembling something “modern”.

The reason for that is there is no industry in Russia to produce all the advanced hydraulic, pneumatic, electric, fuel, flight control and environmental systems, which are all fundamental elements of a modern and efficient airliner. And that’s before we even touch on the subject of engines.

Summary: Russian airlines will be relegated to operating aircraft with technology of 1980s vintage. Knock yourselves out guys, but brace for the inevitable.

wait just a minute! If all those things you mentioned are missing from Russia's capabilities? Then who the hell built the Russian fighters and Bombers? from the IL-18 "May" to the Backfire Bomber? All those many airplanes required all the things you claim Russia can't Build. And? The West didn't build them!. Igor Sikorski was Russian wasn't he? I'm not defending Russia but if they don't want US or western equipment? well the can have at it! What they can't seem to do? Is build Western compliant equipment to compete with Airbus nor Boeing. And? Since both Airbus and Boeing are powered by GE, Snecma Rolls or Pratt? although they can build engines. Themselves like the PS-90. I have no idea what the reliability of their engines are but I have seen them and seen them up close. and they didn't appear to be all that bad.

Spacepope wrote:

LJ wrote:

btfarrwm wrote:

That will depend entirely on how quickly they can reverse engineer the advanced avionics and engines in the Airbus and Boeing planes they nationalized.

Given that the 97% Russian MC-21 is scheduled to be in production as of late 2024 (at least that's the current estimate from Irkut), one can wonder if the fleet will be replaced by 2030. The current aim is to have 80% replaced by 2030. However, they also expect a production rate of 72 Russian MC-21s in 2029, or to put it in comparison, almost the same production rate as Airbus intend for the NEO. My guess that by the time Irkut is ready with its Russian MC-21 an be able to have a high production rate, many of the sanctions have been lifted as the war is over. Then again, nobody knows.

B777LRF wrote:

And that’s before we even touch on the subject of engines.

I doubt the PD-14 is '80s tech, though it most likeliy not be as good as a PW engine.

One thing though… 72 MC-21s per year is the rate of production for Airbus on the NEO in just one month. The Russians simply do not have the raw production capability here to even meet their own domestic needs, let alone anyone else’s.

Well? If they don't want western built airplanes? Then they'll have to step that up won't they? I'm sure Vlad has a plan for that too!

They will simply reverse engineer the planes they seized.