Russia will have to overcome an alarming problem by releasing a new Il-96-400M

February 18 2021 37

The current uncertainty surrounding commercial aviation due to the COVID-19 pandemic complicates the development of new aircraft. In the foreseeable future, the number of passengers is unlikely to return to the previous level, so the profitability of large airliners raises concerns, writes the British edition of Simple Flying.

Nevertheless, PJSC Ilyushin Aviation Complex is moving towards an important milestone in the creation of its 370-seat wide-body airliner, known as the Il-96-400M. This aircraft is a four-engine wide-body low-wing turbofan with a vertical single-fin tail and engine placement under a swept wing.

The Russians claim that this version of the aircraft will offer enhanced capabilities compared to the existing Il-96-300 "due to the lengthening of the fuselage and more powerful PS-90A1 engines." Apparently, the new aircraft will have a three-seater cockpit, like the previous version of the liner.

According to AeroTime, the Il-96-400M, which is due to make its first test flight at the end of 2021, is only one of two wide-body aircraft being developed by the Russians. The second is the joint Russian-Chinese CR929, the first prototype of which is promised to be assembled this year.

A potentially troubling problem that the Russians will have to overcome in order to commission the IL-96-400M is the current lack of customers. And this is despite the fact that in 2016 the Russian government invested 2,4 billion rubles ($ 30 million) in the development of the Il-96-400M. But this plane still has no orders.

This is due to the fact that competitors of the Il-96-400M, such as the Airbus A350-1000 and Boeing 777-9, have only two engines each, which makes them more economical... In addition, the Il-96-400M has a lower payload and flight range. With four engines, it will be difficult for him to compete. Nevertheless, the Russians are determined to pursue a project with a highly uncertain future.

Rosteh

Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

VK Zen Telegram

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

123

+13

18 February 2021 15: 03

In other words - Russians, well, don't build planes, we ourselves have few clients.
The first planes will go to government agencies. Now the main thing is to restore production, and there the new PD-35 will arrive in time, they will make it with 2 engines. Aircraft demand will rebound. Vaccination is in progress.
1. ioan-e
  
  +5
  
  18 February 2021 16: 05
  
  Absolutely agree! Moreover, the Britons will never build a plane on their own! Only in cooperation.
2. Ibuprofen
  
  -4
  
  19 February 2021 20: 15
  
  Quote: 123
  and there the new PD-35 will arrive in time, they will make it with 2 engines.
  
  In order to make a twin-engine aircraft, the Il-96 needs to be altered by 99%. Only the doorknobs will remain from the old.
  So this fuss with the Il-96 is only to keep the Voronezh plant in trousers so that the president does not have to buy a French plane with English engines for himself.
  1. 123
    
    +3
    
    19 February 2021 20: 45
    
    In order to make a twin-engine aircraft, the Il-96 needs to be altered by 99%. Only the doorknobs will remain from the old.
    
    Do you, as an expert, state this, or just want to grumble?
    
    So this fuss with the Il-96 is only to keep the Voronezh plant in trousers so that the president does not have to buy a French plane with English engines for himself.
    
    Why then a new engine? Just?
3. whitebeard
  
  -2
  
  19 February 2021 22: 26
  
  To do this, you need the engine itself, PD-35 has yet to be done. Yes, and on Ilu himself, a lot needs to be finalized. It is necessary to recalculate the wing for composite and 2 engines, it is necessary to completely renew the interior, remove the middle central landing gear, and completely change the aviation system. As a result, only the fuselage will remain from the previous aircraft. It's easier to design a new one. And for 96-400 only there will be demand, that of state structures, but it is very small and in no way will pay off the resumption of its production
  1. 123
    
    +6
    
    19 February 2021 23: 58
    
    Done right, the engine still needs to be done. By that time, production will be running. If we wait for a new engine and then start the plane we will lose another 5 years. All that you have listed can be done for earlier. In addition to the wing, it is not clear why you need to remove the 4th rack. Do you think they just put it there? Salon and avionics will make new ones anyway.
    A new one may be simpler, but in any case more expensive. The demand for wide body aircraft is not so great. In 2017 (before any viruses), demand was estimated at about 370 aircraft per year. Boeing has about 50% of its production capacity underutilized. I think Airbus is not doing better.
    https://uacrussia.ru/upload/iblock/9f3/9f381b3b71c64fc49e94e91076549c2d.pdf
    
    It will be difficult to break into the market with a new aircraft. Competitors will push back, dump, crush and shit. The Chinese will not take Il, they want their own (joint). You can count on Russian companies and who, under all sorts of sanctions, or simply don't want to get involved with the Americans or Europeans. Like Iran, and so on little things.
    In general, this is a compromise dictated by pragmatism, they cover their own needs, eliminate dependence, preserve production. And there it will be seen.
    1. whitebeard
      
      -1
      
      21 August 2021 15: 17
      
      Well, then it is necessary to resume production when all modern components and components are ready for this, and not to build a couple of new boards for state structures "to support production." For this very support, it will be much better if IL concentrates resources on the deepest modernization of the 96th, possibly also together with Great China, because the market for the Boeing-777 dimension (namely, 96 belongs to it, CR-929 is one step less) is really small , like the CR-929th, we will not be able to get into "one mug", and it makes no sense when there are opportunities for cooperation with partners more reliable than the Americans.
      As for the B-pillar, this is a rudiment from the Ila-86go, which, in turn, was necessary at that time for Soviet airports with insufficiently strong lanes for such giants.Now there is no problem with this, and this rack is only extra weight and volume
      1. 123
        
        0
        
        21 August 2021 18: 03
        
        Well, then it is necessary to resume production when all modern components and components are ready for this, and not to build a couple of new boards for state structures "to support production."
        
        Then there will be nothing to renew, you will have to recreate.
        
        For this very support, it will be much better if IL concentrates resources on the deepest modernization of the 96th, possibly also together with Great China, because the market for the Boeing-777 dimension (namely, 96 belongs to it, CR-929 is one step less) is really small , like the CR-929th, we will not be able to get into "one mug", and it makes no sense when there are opportunities for cooperation with partners more reliable than the Americans.
        
        I think Il himself is able to determine what he should focus on. Why do you need Chinese there? How will they help in modernization? They do not need silt, "reliable partners" are interested in technologies and especially the engine for the CR-929. We need planes now and not in 10-15 years.
        And tie at the same moan - we will not pull, we will not be able to. We pull and we can, the planes are being built, but in the corners they only whine. And you go cooperate with partners.
        
        As for the B-pillar, this is a rudiment from the Ila-86go, which, in turn, was necessary at that time for Soviet airports with insufficiently strong lanes for such giants.Now there is no problem with this, and this rack is only extra weight and volume
        
        It makes no sense to start reworking everything, it's easier to create a new plane. And this is CR-929. Do you want to do two at the same time?
  2. igor.igorev
    
    +2
    
    21 February 2021 12: 21
    
    Who told you that there will be no demand for the Il-96? Are you the owner of any a / c?
orange

+5

19 February 2021 11: 37

This is a big problem for Britain. This aircraft will be in demand on Russian airlines. In addition, it is important for the Russian aviation industry not to lose competence in the construction of wide-body aircraft. Having a well-established production of the Il-96 400 is an important trump card in difficult negotiations with the Chinese on the joint construction of a SHFDMS.
Seal

+6

19 February 2021 17: 57

4 engines instead of two - this is three times higher flight safety. And safety is worth a lot.
1. Ibuprofen
  
  -5
  
  19 February 2021 20: 04
  
  Try to prove it to Airbus. They have already riveted more than 400 units of the newest A350s in four years.
  
  In general, the Il96-400 can become the most reliable aircraft in the world, because in a single copy it will stand at the airfield fence. Naturally, not a single incident will occur on it.
  And the most economical, with zero fuel consumption.
  
  And you think reliability is wrong. More motors - more chance of a major failure such that a single motor failure leads to disaster.
  Twin-engine airplanes with non-critical failure of one engine fly no worse than a four-engine, and four-engine aircraft with two engine failure practically do not fly. And controlling a four-engined aircraft is more difficult.
  1. rsp951
    
    +3
    
    20 February 2021 14: 50
    
    It is necessary to rename "IbuProFen" to "Ibu ProFan". Read the statistics on engine failures, how many failures are 2 engines at once? Only if there is a lack of fuel or not. If 1 engine fails, the aircraft loses only 25% of its power, and not 50% as twin-engine ones.
  2. igor.igorev
    
    +2
    
    21 February 2021 12: 23
    
    What would you like? So we stop building airplanes? Do you like Watermelons and Boeings? Well, go for permanent residence in the EU or the USA. And our planes will fly in our country.
    1. Ibuprofen
      
      0
      
      24 March 2021 13: 51
      
      Don't tell me where to go, and I won't tell you hurtful words.
      Where should I leave my country? On the contrary, I want the country to flourish and prosper, producing, including progressive and modern technology.
      Your train of thought is Juche, North Korea. We will make our own all-cast iron locomotives. But you can master more dough.
      It is very strange that such a position is most often taken by half-impoverished pseudo-patriots, and not by the owners of palaces and yachts, who directly benefit from this state of affairs.
      
      Also, answer one question. You need to fly, well, let .... Moscow-Sochi. Two flights: on a twin-engine Airbus for 7 thousand rubles, and on an IL-96 for 15 thousand rubles. Which ticket will you buy?
      1. igor.igorev
        
        0
        
        26 March 2021 10: 02
        
        I'm embarrassed to ask, who are you by education? If not an engineer, then I see no reason to enter into a discussion with you.
        
        Ibuprofen
        
        0
        
        April 7 2021 20: 23
        
        Quite an engineer. I even have it written on my business card so that I don't forget. In two languages even. And even more than that, I work in the specialty in which I studied.
        And now another work has begun. If earlier there was a stupid rider on the technique that was given. And not my problem was how this technique drives. Now I am sitting on the ground, and my task is to make all the wheels turn in the right direction. And the most important thing is to do it with minimal costs, so as not to ruin the company. We are not a state office, and our money is not infinite. And we cannot steal.
        And such a feature in my work today. I work with modern domestic import-substituted equipment - including. And I know how it feels.
        
        igor.igorev
        
        0
        
        April 8 2021 13: 28
        
        Do you have anything to do with aviation? From your answer, I realized that you are infinitely far from her.
        
        Ibuprofen
        
        0
        
        April 16 2021 23: 33
        
        Quote: igor.igorev
        From your answer, I realized that you are infinitely far from it.
        
        On the latest news, it turns out that I am much closer than you.
        At least to modern realities. You may be more closely engaged in this topic, but you are stuck in the middle of the last century, in the era of the corn plant and the progressive Tu-154 aircraft.
        
        igor.igorev
        
        0
        
        April 19 2021 22: 47
        
        You are far from aviation and therefore do not understand that 2 engines on a Boeing or Watermelon are much more expensive than 4 PS-90s. Yes, our 4 engines in total will eat a little more than 2 imported ones, but given that they are much cheaper, the consumables for them are all Russian, they are produced in Russia, then this is all a huge plus.
        
        Ibuprofen
        
        0
        
        4 May 2021 02: 10
        
        They cannot be cheaper, they are several times more expensive. Their production is piecemeal, and for the sake of them it is necessary to maintain a whole plant. Now consider a plant that churns out a thousand engines a year.
        And the spare parts will be extremely expensive, and not even the price is a problem. They will be rare and will not be in warehouses, everything is on order with a delivery time of a couple of months. And the plane will wait a couple of months for a spare part? I understand that the SLO does not count money, they probably have so many spare parts that three planes can still be screwed out of them. But a commercial company won't do that.
        
        In general, the commercial operation of a superjet (a modern aircraft, not outdated !!!) showed the same factors - the aircraft turned out to be more expensive to operate than the larger A320
        
        igor.igorev
        
        0
        
        20 May 2021 15: 26
        
        In aviation, everything is piece, including airplanes. They are made exactly as many as there are orders. PS-90 engines are installed on both the Il-76 and Il-78, and they cost much less than the American or European ones.
        Do you have anything to do with aviation? Or only according to the manuals of the Anal fist?
        
        Ibuprofen
        
        0
        
        3 June 2021 09: 03
        
        Quote: igor.igorev
        Or only according to the manuals of the Anal fist
        
        And, well, everything, I understood with whom I communicate. I have no more questions, you can assume that you are right.
Viktor Ignatov

+5

19 February 2021 21: 29

The issue of the economic feasibility of the production and operation of the aircraft gives the country additional jobs in production and operation, ensures the development of a scientific school, and independence from sanctions. This is the development of regions, the mobility of labor resources, meeting the needs of the armed forces, etc. For the period of establishing their mass production, a state company is formed. Therefore, the feasibility of producing such equipment should be considered in a complex from scientific development to practical operation.
Robot Bobot

+3

19 February 2021 23: 48

When the production of ILs begins, we will simply sell Western machines at a reasonable price - that's all. This is exactly what was decided at the beginning of the launch of aircraft construction!
Vladimir Kargin

+4

20 February 2021 09: 45

The point is the prestige of the Great country, which is part of a limited club of 3 states (USA, Europe, Russia) that produce all types of aircraft, this club is even smaller than the club of nuclear and space states. And there will definitely be consumers, firstly, the president needs to update board number one, the government, the Ministry of Defense, on board, or maybe two, well, on long-distance flights within Russia, about ten will be scattered among the airlines, i.e. if two or three planes a year are already making success, and then Venezuela, Iran and North Korea)) will catch up. Don't forget about the cargo version. As for the joint project with China, it will be someone else's plane, the Chinese and the whole world will consider it Chinese, according to the country of assembly ((.
Igor Starodubtsev

+4

21 February 2021 02: 11

The British edition can write whatever it wants - not an authority.
If the leadership of our country really decided to restore the domestic civil aviation, then this is a very necessary and correct decision and here's why:
- firstly, Russia has eight time zones, the length from east to west is more than ten thousand kilometers. Having such dimensions, OUR COUNTRY needs domestic civil aviation like no other.
- secondly, the development of domestic civil aviation, and this is a science-intensive industry, will be a good start for the restoration of the national industry from RUIN.
- thirdly, our air carriers will be cheaper to own their cars than Boeing or Airbus, both in terms of the cost of the aircraft itself and their operation.
- fourthly, many related and intersectoral enterprises are always involved in the civil aircraft industry, and these are real jobs with good working conditions from a worker to an engineer, these are the incomes of the population and the budget of our country.
If you approach the solution of this crucial task for the country with the mind, then it is UNEVENSE !!!! as ZHIRIK would say, the national civil aircraft industry would become a LOCOMOTIVE for the economy of our country.
Igor Starodubtsev

+2

21 February 2021 02: 41

And I would also like to add. It is much better when they say IL-96 or Tu, Yak, An than some kind of super jet. Because this is our history, the history of our Russian aircraft industry, this is our FIRM, our MARK.
1. Igor Starodubtsev
  
  0
  
  21 February 2021 03: 06
  
  What's wrong, don't like what I'm writing?
  1. igor.igorev
    
    -1
    
    21 February 2021 12: 26
    
    Delirium because you write. Something is right, but a lot is wrong.
2. igor.igorev
  
  0
  
  21 February 2021 12: 26
  
  Why don't you like the Superjet? We received modern technologies there, which neither TU, nor Yak, nor IL had.
  And AN is a Ukrainian company that has nothing to do with Russia.
Vyacheslav Lozyuk

+5

22 February 2021 14: 01

Dear Sirs, due to the development of the Far East, the need for large-capacity aircraft will remain high. Count on all sorts of Boeings and Airbuses under the sanctions is a dead matter. You need to have your own reliable and roomy plane. Its serial production will ensure the development of technologies, the preservation of personnel potential and production base. the decision to manufacture IL - 96 at VAPO is only to be welcomed. It would not be a sin to return the Tu - 204 to the serial number. Knowledgeable people have a high opinion of this liner.
1. paster40
  
  +1
  
  23 February 2021 11: 21
  
  Tu-204 is a good liner. but it no longer meets modern requirements, and the Tu-204 line is replaced by the modern MS-21.
paster40

0

23 February 2021 11: 39

The Il-96-400 has not so many orders - no more than 10 units, and all of them are likely to go to government agencies, but having started mass production we have the opportunity to produce a wide-body long-range aircraft. The main efforts are now focused on the creation of the CR-929. With which Russia and China will be blown out not only to their market, but also to the world one. Which in the near future has a need for more than 1500 aircraft ...
Nik Kulinich

0

24 February 2021 13: 47

It's a big deal to keep production and develop technologies. Russia has its wings.
Chingachgook

+1

25 February 2021 10: 00

If everything is so simple, then why do we need a joint project with China "929"? China definitely needs it to get key technologies. We are only interested in C929 in a package with a part of the Chinese market. Neither IL 96 nor C929 will be profitable without this market.
Ibuprofen

0

April 16 2021 19: 28
Well, in general, that's it. What I was talking about in February. This was obvious from the very beginning to any adequate person.
So they will make two planes for the leader, and that's it.