West increases pressure on the project of the Russian ship MS-21

Most recently, we told on the proposal of the head of the FAS, Igor Artemyev, to “destroy state corporations”, which supposedly should lead to “better competition”. The author of the lines then doubted that by becoming private, Rosatom, Rostec, Rusnano and other holdings would be able to effectively resist Western multinational corporations, primarily American ones, behind which Washington is behind. In less than a few days, life has put everything in its place.

Readers of the "Reporter" were divided in their assessments of this publication. Most of the readers reacted negatively to the very idea of ​​privatizing the country's leading technological enterprises, but comments of an openly liberal sense were also made. A fragment of one of them, concerning the prospects of the domestic aviation industry after possible privatization in competition with the American Boeing, we quote:

The history of Boeing is completely private, without the slightest share of the state, has 100 years of development, many ups and downs, including downs due to the "participation" of the US parliament (in 1934). And in Russia there will be no sense until the state ceases to "participate" in business development.

For reference, Boeing has two main divisions: the civilian Boeing Commercial Airplanes and the military-space Integrated Defense Systems. The corporation is one of the pillars of the American defense industry. The WTO during the investigation found that since 1992 Boeing received from the US government "hidden subsidies" in the amount of $ 29 billion. Grants received from the Pentagon and NASA went, including, to the design of civilian liners, the development of new components and composite materials. In addition, the corporation received serious tax benefits, and the export tax rate was reduced for it.

The main competitor of Boeing, the European holding Airbus, which has a military unit Airbus Military, is exactly the same. The World Trade Organization has identified $ 18 billion in assistance to an aircraft manufacturer in the form of loans with an interest rate set below the market level. In addition, Airbus received financial assistance from a number of EU states, the so-called launch aid, "for the launch of new models" in the amount of several billion dollars.

Such is the whole “effective private business”, de facto sitting tightly on the neck of the state. But this is not enough, Washington and Brussels are standing behind lobbying these TNCs, directly lobbying their interests. Now we will tell how Western corporations, with the help of their authorities, resolve issues with competitors.

In particular, Russia has developed its own medium-range airliner MS-21. The plane is objectively good and promising, quite on par with American and European counterparts. That is why he immediately began to put sticks in the wheels. Yes, how.

At first, The US Treasury banned the supply to Russia of composite materials necessary for the manufacture of its wings. Thus, the launch dates of the liner were disrupted and seriously shifted.

Secondly, now the project of creating a domestic aircraft engine PD-14 came under attack. These power plants will need to be installed on liners instead of the American Pratt & Whitney PW1400G. At the request of the United States, the top manager of the UAC, Alexander Korshunov, was arrested in Italy the day before. The Russian man oversaw the PD-14 project and organized consultations with foreign experts, among whom were former and current employees of GE Aviation, the Italian division of the American corporation General Electric. Quite normal business practice has been called industrial espionage.

So then compete in the world market, with its “invisible hand”, with Western multinationals and their curators in Washington and Brussels. Sincerely mistaken liberals, if any, have to get rid of dangerous illusions.
Used photos: http://www.irkut.com/
Ctrl Enter

Noticed oshЫbku Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter


Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.
I have an account? Sign in

  1. Valentine Offline
    Valentine (Valentin) 8 September 2019 09: 40
    • 7
    • 2
    And what, our "tops" forgot how in the late eighties of the last century, our "partners" almost cut off the production of our wide-body airliners IL-86-96, which were recognized by the whole "aviation community" of the West and the USA as being too gluttonous too noisy, too environmentally harmful, and then the USSR stopped releasing and modernizing them. And all this for the sake of the corporations there, and they know their own business how to crank up such scams. And Trump simply confirms his election promises - by any means, up to the use of military force, to raise his economy to heavenly heights, and they will go to any meanness and provocation so that they are “ahead of the rest” in all spheres of their activity.
    1. Screw Offline
      Screw (Gennady) 8 September 2019 15: 46
      • 3
      • 2
      And they certainly did not fly to the moon. “Fedya” proved that even today it’s problematic to fly to the ISS to some machine.
      1. Natan bruk Offline
        Natan bruk (Natan Bruk) 8 September 2019 17: 10
        • 2
        • 8
        Right And the Soviet "Lunokhod" on the moon has never been, everyone lied to us. And in general - the Earth is flat, and no one has ever flown into space, this is a worldwide conspiracy.
    2. NordUral Offline
      NordUral (Eugene) 8 September 2019 20: 46
      • 5
      • 1
      The whole problem is not in Trump, but in "our" leaders.
  2. Sergey Latyshev Offline
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 8 September 2019 16: 38
    • 3
    • 1
    What did you want? Sweetie?
    They are crushing each other, and here they are also Rogozin, and cheers-logos are helping with might and main.
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. Yuri 5347 Offline
    Yuri 5347 (Yuri) 9 September 2019 10: 34
    • 4
    • 0
    This is a well-known fact for educated people - there is no wild capitalism with unlimited competition in the West, or rather, competition has limits, and the state is the regulator of the economy.
  5. A.Lex Offline
    A.Lex (Secret information) 9 September 2019 15: 42
    • 1
    • 0
    The most interesting thing is that the majority of home-grown, so-called “liberals” are not really such. Let's put an end to this question finally:
    1. Liberal - from Latin. liberalis - relating to freedom. This is where the contradictions immediately come with the modern interpretation of the current "liberals." They recognize ONLY their freedom. And for others, restrictions must be introduced.
    2. Liberal economy - freedom of choice of labor and employment. This is the original interpretation. ... In fact, this is just an ideological stamp, and nothing more. You will ask why? And here's why - this strategy was invented by the British and Americans in order to make it easier to eliminate competitors. You are offered a "liberal economy" to "privatize" YOUR enterprises and sectors of the economy. At the same time, YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED IN THEIR markets (because everything has been divided there for a long time, and the invasion of strangers is a declaration of war).
    So the ideology of the “liberal economy” (in Russia - the “free hand of the market”, so to speak) is a FALSE from beginning to end !!! And in the USSR-bought this lie.
    Among other things, one should not forget about another aspect - the climatic conditions for the development of the economy of Russia and the West. And ... GREED !!!
    In all other respects, I completely agree with the author - both in this article and in the previous one.
  6. DPN Offline
    DPN (DPN) 9 September 2019 20: 53
    • 1
    • 0
    And rightly so, we, it seems, studied poorly at school. They clearly said that there is competition between countries in the world, and having become adult uncles and aunts, they began to believe the capitalists - in their peacefulness and so on. Does this plane need Russians or the West? If for the Russians, then we must do, and not whine, about some kind of pressure. In Russia, distances of 11000 km, no country has any more, which means that our country needs aircraft. In the USSR they understood this, therefore they had their own planes, and now they are just a whimper about the sanctions of the West. Do we have a COUNTRY or an almshouse?
  7. Killlock Offline
    Killlock (Sergei) 10 September 2019 06: 11
    • 1
    • 0
    I would like to know since when the MS-21 became our domestic all?

    Superjet-100 was created at a company that did not design any aircraft.
    MS-21 was created at a company that did not design a single aircraft (Irkut).

    Superjet-100 killed Tu-334, Tu-414, MS-21 killed the finished Tu-204SM.

    Superjet-100 - total expenses, including the senseless salvation of the GSS $ 4,5 billion + airline losses. There was no news about import substitution, but it was not, although this is the only way to make the Superjet-100 inexpensive to maintain.
    MS-21 - the cost increased from 125 to 438 billion rubles. Given that about 21 aircraft will be produced in all, the MS-400 is more than 1 billion rubles per aircraft.

    Superjet-100 80% of imported components, including 23% from the USA. One of the main suppliers is Safran, the same one due to which the Superjet is largely unprofitable.
    MS-21 60% of imports, and these 60% are unified with the Bombardier CS series. (For those who do not understand, the MS-21 is a clone of the bombardier). One of the main suppliers is the same Safran.

    MS-21 was supposed to fly in 2016, will fly in 2020-2021, and sanctions have nothing to do with it.

    The black wing is made of imported composites, although our composites are and have even been tested.

    240 PW1400 engines were ordered at about $ 16 million per unit, although the PD-14 is half the price. In addition, it is known that PW has significant problems with reliability, well, just like CaM146.

    Conclusion: the funds invested in MS-21 will never pay off, the MS-21 itself is a continuation of the Superjet-100, both in ideology and in the rate of import. He, like Superjet-100, has nothing to do with domestic developments.
    1. Marzhecki Offline
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 10 September 2019 11: 13
      • 1
      • 0
      You're right. But obviously no one is going to deal with the Tu-334 and Tu-204SM. It is clear who and why made the Superjet and MS-21 so.
      But the process of import substitution seems to have begun. It is better to have your own unprofitable aircraft than not to have any at all.
      As for the MC-21, as a Bombardier clone, a good clone of a successful aircraft is not so bad in the current situation, provided that the key components are localized in Russia.