Does it make sense to revive the production of Tu-114 passenger airliners?

49

It has become known about another postponement of the start of serial production of the promising medium-range passenger airliner MS-21, which clearly demonstrates a systemic crisis in the domestic civil aircraft industry. What will happen next?

Well, shall we wait?


We have regularly reported on the depressing situation in which the Russian aircraft manufacturing industry has found itself after decades of “reforms,” so the statement made the day before by Rostec CEO Chemezov about postponing the deadlines to 2026 did not cause much surprise:



We need to complete all certification tests. I hope we will complete all flights this year, there are a lot of flights. And starting next year there will be serial production.

In turn, we "hope" that everything will go well. But in case our hopes are not justified, we would like to talk about some alternative scenarios for the development of events, which may turn out to be the only alternative in the medium term.

What will Russians fly on in a few years if they fail to reach an agreement with Trump, the Western airliners in the fleet of air carriers exhaust their service life, and new domestic ones do not arrive to replace them due to the ongoing postponements of deadlines to the right? Is it really possible to switch to airships, as half-jokingly suggested the author of these lines?

Or are there other options that experts will turn up their noses at now, but in 3-4 years will be forced to admit that there are no real alternatives to them?

In addition to the shortage of professional personnel and other organizational difficulties, the main problems with import substitution of Western airliners are the refinement and establishment of serial production of domestic power plants PD-14 for the MS-21 and PD-8 for the Superjet, as well as the replacement of foreign components, the share of which in the first aircraft-"designer" initially reached 50%, and in the second - no less than 75%.

Sorry, but this is not a joke, and this story can really drag on for quite a long time. Therefore, if the task is to start producing those aircraft that can really take to the skies and fly, it makes sense to use Soviet experience and Soviet Technology, adapting them to modern realities. And here we are not even talking about the Tu-214 or Tu-334, which are considered obsolete.

From the screw?


Oddly enough, our country still produces one aircraft power plant that has no competitors in the world in some respects. This is the NK-12 turboprop engine, based on the design of the world's first serial gas turbine unit of the German company Junkers Motorenbau, which the USSR received as a trophy following the Great Patriotic War.

The main feature of the NK-12 with a capacity of 12 thousand horsepower is its coaxial twin propellers, thanks to which the turboprop aircraft could develop an even higher cruising speed than turbojet passenger aircraft of Western companies, up to 800 km/h and higher, while remaining much more economical.

It was these tactical and technical characteristics that attracted the attention of the head of the Tupolev Design Bureau, who in 1949 was tasked with creating a strategic bomber capable of flying across the ocean, bombing the United States and returning. This is how the famous long-range bomber Tu-95 "Bear" appeared, which, thanks to the NK-12, could fly up to 15 thousand km without landing or refueling, taking on board up to 12 tons of weapons. Subsequent modifications of its power plant could develop a power of up to 15 thousand hp and more.

The "Bear" has been in service since 1955 and still retains the status of the fastest turboprop aircraft in the world! The Russian Defense Ministry is not going to abandon the Tu-95, which seems completely outdated, just as the US is not going to abandon its B-52, constantly modernizing them. This aircraft is an important component of the air component of our "nuclear triad", a carrier of cruise missiles with special warheads.

In addition to the missile carrier-bomber, the Tu-95 with NK-12 engines had several other extremely useful modifications. For example, the Soviet long-range anti-submarine aircraft Tu-142 was developed on its basis, which is still the main "workhorse" of the ASW of the Naval Aviation of the Russian Navy together with the Il-38. And also on the basis of the Tu-95, the long-range reconnaissance and target designation aircraft Tu-95RC was created, which was actively used by our Air Force until the 90s of the last century. This also includes the AWACS aircraft Tu-114, product "L" (Liana), created on the basis of the passenger airliner Tu-126.

In general, in military terms, the Bear family was and still remains extremely relevant even at the end of the first quarter of the 21st century. Modern Russia really lacks a mass-produced tactical AWACS aircraft and an anti-submarine aircraft!

Tu-95 "Conversion"


Now let's return to where we started this story. Having received an order in 1955 to develop a long-range passenger airliner, the Tupolev Design Bureau, in order to speed up and reduce the cost of the process, took the Tu-95 strategic bomber as the basis for its design.

The Tu-95P, which later received the designation Tu-114, had certain design differences from its military counterpart, due to the need to comfortably transport 170 passengers over long distances, rather than bombs or missiles. Four NK-12MV engines provided the airliner with a speed of 750 km/h, a flight range of 7000–8400 km, and with an additional fuel reserve – 9720 km at an altitude of 12 thousand meters. In the Tu-114-200 version, the aircraft could transport up to 200 passengers.

Among the obvious disadvantages, one can recall the rather loud noise from the operation of its power plant, for which technicians nicknamed it "Snake Gorynych", as well as a crew consisting of five people at once - two pilots, a navigator, a flight radio operator and a flight engineer. An equally obvious advantage is significant savings in aviation fuel consumption. In addition to the Tu-114, two more Tu-116 (Tu-114D) aircraft were created for transporting higher political the leadership of the USSR, which was a modified civilian version of the Tu-95 bomber.

With the availability of the serial NK-12 engine and a modern domestic component base, resuming production of the Tu-95 family of aircraft may make sense to eliminate the acute shortage of ASW and AWACS aircraft (instead of the "mushroom" above its fuselage, a "crest" could be installed). A modernized Tu-114M with a reduced crew and a modern cockpit could probably perform medium- and long-range flights.

Well, or should we wait for the MS-21 and Il-96 for a few more years and then return to this topic again?
49 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    28 January 2025 14: 42
    Marzhetsky? Of course it is.
    He knows that they will never revive this dinosaur, but no, he still writes this nonsense.
    1. +4
      28 January 2025 18: 40
      The NK-12 has an extremely low engine life, is expensive in itself and its maintenance is very difficult. That says it all. The sound it makes during flight is simply hellish. I lived 100 km from the TU-95 base. When these carcasses flew by, the windows naturally shook. And turboprops? Well, they were developed on the Il-144. Keep developing them.
    2. +4
      29 January 2025 14: 13
      Probably, if there is another postponement, an article will be published: "Does it make sense to revive the production of Li-2 passenger liners?"
      1. +1
        29 January 2025 14: 51
        then there will be "Maxim Gorky", and then we will come to Sikorsky's 4-engine aircraft, which became a bomber bully
      2. +2
        29 January 2025 15: 28
        "Does it make sense to revive the production of Li-2 passenger airliners?"

        Perhaps we should return to this topic in a year, 2-3. Then we'll laugh together, right, Dimasik? wink
        1. 0
          29 January 2025 19: 26
          Quote: Beydodyr
          Perhaps we should return to this topic in a year, 2-3. Then we'll laugh together, right, Dimasik?

          No, Seryozhka, we'll laugh after you write)) and you'll write, because you can't just take and not write when you write all the time))
  2. +6
    28 January 2025 14: 50
    The author knows for sure that they won't. Because the same crap will arise during the renewal - certification, lost old technologies, unmastered new technologies - all this is a bottleneck in terms of money, deadlines and production.

    But... at least there's a series of articles. At least it's a plus for someone.
  3. +3
    28 January 2025 14: 52
    IL-96-400M - already "on the wing", testing is underway... Everything has its time. As for the revival of the Tu-114 - this is unlikely...
  4. The comment was deleted.
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. vBR
    +1
    28 January 2025 16: 57
    In principle, the idea is correct - there is no replacement for special aircraft and missile carriers. And the new Il-118 would go to civil aviation. In general, I am for the development of turboprop successors to the Tu-20/95 and Il-18. By the way, the undeniable advantage of such aircraft for anti-submarine warfare and early warning systems is their wild range and equally wild time in the air, as well as their low speed.
  7. +1
    28 January 2025 17: 40
    At least no bird will cause an accident in an aircraft equipped with turboprop engines.
  8. 0
    28 January 2025 18: 49
    An interesting idea from the Author of the Article - regarding the use of serially produced, already proven in decades of operation, reliable turbo-propeller power units NK-12! good
    Indeed, passenger and special aircraft could be built on their basis! Yes Including the "traditional design", with four and two NK-12, a kind of unified "line of airliners" in terms of power plants, cabin and other design elements, equipment!
    And according to the "flying wing" scheme with pusher propellers, the range would be excellent, and if the antenna is integrated into the "winged" body itself, then the aerodynamic drag from it would be minimal.
    With new avionics, digital electronics and new materials (widespread introduction of titanium and high-strength light aluminum alloys, hydrocarbon composites), "calculated" not on logarithmic rulers and "Felixes", very rational, economical and "flying" devices could be obtained "at the output" - I can directly "see them in 3D (in some ways similar to the American "flying wings" of aircraft designer Norton)", in my mind's eye, right now! Yes
    And there is no point in even bothering with the "renovation" of the Tu-114, it is, in many ways (like the turbojet Tu-104) a forced, palliative design of the Tupolev Design Bureau, "for the urgent need of the day", which is why it "came down from the skies" so quickly! request
    Even in the Soviet Union, I was in the Tu-114 on the parking lot, in the passenger cabin and in the cockpit, I sat in the seats of all the crew members and at all the controls, as the commander of the left and right pilots, I looked into all its "droplets", I even climbed up the high spare ladder built into the niche of the nose landing gear into the cockpit smile - I really liked and still like this giant airliner (if I survive until the end of the war and my house doesn’t burn down, then the idea is to build “from scratch” coaxial “propeller-motor groups” of suitable dimensions and power, and, with them, a scale flying model of the Tu-114, and for it to fly, of course, with the powerful sound of the working NK-12). winked
    Much better aircraft on a modern "material and technical base" will be obtained if we do not "get hung up on stereotypes" and rethink the accumulated domestic and foreign experience of world aviation and, in general, aircraft manufacturing!
    But only if we approach this issue thoroughly and thoughtfully, in a state-like manner, without allowing swindlers like the cosmically incompetent "trampoline journalist" and "cretinous designers" who easily allowed the "design overweight" of the Il-112 cargo plane to be as much as 5 tons!
    Revive(including propaganda and agitation "for aviation" - "youth - on the plane!"wink , aircraft modeling clubs for schoolchildren and students, flying clubs, glider and parachute sports sections, and even just in city parks, under the strict auspices of local authorities and the "state mining and industrial supervision" to build and competently operate widely available parachute towers - there will be a ton of people willing, and metallurgists will receive orders for rolled metal from "quiet steels") there is a need for planned state training of aircraft construction specialists at all levels, from design engineers and production workers to assembly workers, to prepare the flight and technical personnel in advance, to do the entire infrastructure "smartly", and to command, organize and manage all this should be knowledgeable specialists, and not to give it over "to the mercy" of random "their" Chubais, "reformers-optimizers" and other stupid self-interested "rich kids, effective managers", then there will be some sense, because nothing will come of the Kremlin's "good wishes" alone (and will only backfire, in the Chernomyrdin style - "we wanted the best, but it turned out as always" and "we had such high hopes, but we were deceived again - time and gigantic sums of public money were wasted in vain and the guilty embezzlers, "quietly" changing their first and last names, ran off to Israel, "which does not give away its own")! Yes
  9. 0
    29 January 2025 07: 55
    clever, but the main thing for capitalism is profit, and the Tu 95 is economical. KEPS is needed
  10. +1
    29 January 2025 08: 51
    And if you install 8 engines, you can even surpass Airbuses in terms of capacity.
    1. +3
      31 January 2025 14: 35
      If you install 16 engines (8 in each direction), then you can make a flight there and back at the same time!
  11. 0
    29 January 2025 10: 41
    It has turned out to be impossible to make civil aircraft in our country for now. Those who are assigned to do so can only master the budgets and write explanations that, together with the division of the mastered money, will satisfy everyone. Specialists are driven away so that money is not spent on all sorts of nonsense, like manufacturing aircraft. The irresponsibility and impunity of Putin's management in all its glory.
  12. +3
    29 January 2025 12: 14
    It has become known that the start date has been postponed to the right again

    Just a joke. Why write about aviation all the time? Masochism?
  13. +1
    29 January 2025 12: 23
    For the basis of the AWACS, the most successful option is the Il-18.
  14. 0
    29 January 2025 13: 58
    the local old men have gone completely crazy laughing, I understand that in your youth the grass was greener and the girls were prettier (and in mine too), but when I remember my last flight on an Il-18 I shudder, after the flight my head splits for at least half a day from the roar of the propellers...
    1. 0
      29 January 2025 16: 55
      Offer. A-100 started in 2000, now it's 2025 and where is it? The Americans and Japanese have "Orion" flying and they don't complain about their heads, and this is an analogue.
      1. 0
        29 January 2025 17: 07
        Are you sure they don't complain?
      2. 0
        29 January 2025 20: 16
        Quote: vlad127490
        Offer.

        No problem))) Here you go:
        1. I suggest to start by posting on the site crazy articles from a person who is not on friendly terms with technology, logic or common sense at all. So that there are no holy wars.
        2. Regarding the A-100, questions are not for the manufacturers of the aircraft itself, but for the manufacturers of the filling and the customer himself, because often he wants everything at once, but it doesn’t work out.
        3. The Americans have already flown, they replaced it a long time ago and replaced it with a more modern aircraft. The Japanese will be next. But you have to understand that this aircraft was produced MASSIVELY and for a LONG time. Unlike the individual aircraft, the Il-114 was an extremely successful machine. And NO, it is NOT AN ANALOGUE. Please at least take the time to superficially familiarize yourself with the topic before writing NONSENSE.
        4. The aircraft industry, those who actually build planes, have something to do and they are doing it, they have no time for your fantastically stupid desires. That is why we will continue to fine-tune the SSJ-100, MS-21 and Tu-204/214 for serial production. And after putting the engines into production, they will probably work on new models. Although... Here, in addition to passenger aviation, hundreds of aircraft are needed for military transport, naval aviation and others.
        And for dessert. The AN-148 was produced in Voronezh, i.e. theoretically, everything is already there for it: documents and equipment (if they haven't been hacked) and people. Only the engine, which is the Ukrainian D-436, is missing, but the PD-8 is simply ideal in its place both in terms of weight and dimensions and in terms of thrust. And this is the REAL topic, to restore the production of the AN-148. And not the nonsense with the TU-114.
        1. 0
          29 January 2025 20: 22
          By the way, the topic with An-148 is very real and interesting.....
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. 0
              29 January 2025 21: 48
              Well, it's not the first time, let him have fun bully
        2. 0
          29 January 2025 22: 38
          Nobody argues with you. All articles of this kind appear due to the lack of domestic aircraft, empty slogans and statements by officials. The A-100 project is an AWACS, I have not written about the aircraft itself. The MS-21, which is highly anticipated, according to officials, will be on the air in 2030. You can want a lot of things, but without industry you will not fly or go far.
    2. +1
      29 January 2025 17: 18
      Airplanes need to be built for the country, and free headache pills should be issued for passengers. By the way, my head was fine. It's all individual, but in principle it's not difficult to issue pills for individuals.
  15. 0
    29 January 2025 15: 14
    There is a time-tested means for restoring mass transportation of citizens. Moreover, it does not require any testing or certification, or anything at all except the passenger's desire. The state has allowed citizens to collect deadwood, so you break off a stick-rope, whizz on your ass with a twig, and fly to whatever bright distances you need. By the way, a stick-rope will replace the auto industry, and it can also be a digging stick. So it's a complete profit for the state, and the money for the aviation and auto industries can be taken abroad. In general, we urgently need to write to Tereshkova.
  16. +2
    29 January 2025 17: 47
    If these engines could be produced now, they would have been building “new Ruslan-Anteys” a long time ago.
    But when a guy writes about the "revival" of the Tu-114, you immediately understand that he either simply has nothing to do, or his appointment with a specialist doctor was cancelled.
  17. +1
    29 January 2025 17: 50
    Quote: vlad127490
    Offer. A-100 started in 2000, now it's 2025 and where is it? The Americans and Japanese have "Orion" flying and they don't complain about their heads, and this is an analogue.

    The A100 is not an analogue of the P3 developed in the late 60s. By the way, Americans They have been actively replaced by P15s in the last 7 years.
    But it is true that work on the A100 stalled in 2015. That is why everyone is now being told that the A50U is no worse...
    1. 0
      29 January 2025 22: 59
      I wrote about Il-18, Il-38, their analogue "Orion". The Chinese make similar ones and do not complain.
  18. -1
    29 January 2025 20: 56
    I read with surprise both the author and the commentators.... the fact is that there IS a domestic import-substituted and certified serially produced reliable modern aircraft, .......... Tu214, that's it! we are expanding production, transferring to several plants, both the plane and the RC and the passenger one..... but why did they decide to release only two in 4 from a paltry 2025 planes a year? (and one in 2024), there are not enough workshops and hangars... betrayal of bureaucrats? and there is also the IL 76 (can be converted into a passenger one) IL 96, if we are going to revive the old ones then the IL62 long-haul
    1. 0
      29 January 2025 21: 50
      and there is also an IL 76 (can be converted into a passenger one)

      - it is impossible
      1. -2
        29 January 2025 22: 31
        why not?

        All Il-76 cabins are sealed, which makes it possible to transport 145 (225 in the double-deck version) soldiers with personal weapons or to provide for the release of 126 paratroopers.

        that is, 226 passengers is quite possible
        it's a bit heavy but if you have absolutely nothing to fly on then you can
        1. -2
          29 January 2025 22: 52
          although of course why? if there is a Tu214, and the Il-76 is already being built, it is needed as a cargo plane
        2. 0
          30 January 2025 07: 46
          It's funny, it's about the same as riding in the back of a covered truck instead of a tourist bus...
  19. 0
    30 January 2025 05: 36
    Quote: JD1979
    Quote: vlad127490
    Offer.

    No problem))) Here you go:
    1. I suggest to start by posting on the site crazy articles from a person who is not on friendly terms with technology, logic or common sense at all. So that there are no holy wars.
    2. Regarding the A-100, questions are not for the manufacturers of the aircraft itself, but for the manufacturers of the filling and the customer himself, because often he wants everything at once, but it doesn’t work out.
    3. The Americans have already flown, they replaced it a long time ago and replaced it with a more modern aircraft. The Japanese will be next. But you have to understand that this aircraft was produced MASSIVELY and for a LONG time. Unlike the individual aircraft, the Il-114 was an extremely successful machine. And NO, it is NOT AN ANALOGUE. Please at least take the time to superficially familiarize yourself with the topic before writing NONSENSE.
    4. The aircraft industry, those who actually build planes, have something to do and they are doing it, they have no time for your fantastically stupid desires. That is why we will continue to fine-tune the SSJ-100, MS-21 and Tu-204/214 for serial production. And after putting the engines into production, they will probably work on new models. Although... Here, in addition to passenger aviation, hundreds of aircraft are needed for military transport, naval aviation and others.
    And for dessert. The AN-148 was produced in Voronezh, i.e. theoretically, everything is already there for it: documents and equipment (if they haven't been hacked) and people. Only the engine, which is the Ukrainian D-436, is missing, but the PD-8 is simply ideal in its place both in terms of weight and dimensions and in terms of thrust. And this is the REAL topic, to restore the production of the AN-148. And not the nonsense with the TU-114.

    The intellectual rights to the An148 belong to another state
    1. 0
      30 January 2025 07: 49
      The intellectual property rights to the An148 belong to another state

      - let's call it MS-841, for example, or another TVS-something or other...
      1. 0
        30 January 2025 17: 49
        So what? Will Khottabych develop an engine for you on a carpet plane and bring it to you? Riveting a fuselage is not a tricky business. There are no engines for either the MS21, or the Il114, or the SSZh new. In the series in the country today there is one old PS90A (2), for which there is a queue
  20. 0
    30 January 2025 05: 42
    Quote: vladimir1155
    why not?

    All Il-76 cabins are sealed, which makes it possible to transport 145 (225 in the double-deck version) soldiers with personal weapons or to provide for the release of 126 paratroopers.

    that is, 226 passengers is quite possible
    it's a bit heavy but if you have absolutely nothing to fly on then you can

    Once upon a time, someone wrote about a "double-decker Il-1" on April 76st. And off it went.
    But it is impossible because the cabin diameter does not allow it. They will be there, with their legs half-bent, looking for their seat in the cabin...
    1. -2
      1 February 2025 12: 56
      Quote: AC130 Ganship
      "double-decker Il76". And off we go.
      But it is impossible because the cabin diameter does not allow it. They will be there, with their legs half-bent, looking for their seat in the cabin...

      "square" dimensions height 3.40, however the fuselage is round and in the center for passage the dimensions will already be 4 meters, therefore a double-deck is quite possible, however the Tu 214 is more convenient due to its lower weight and economy, the truck naturally has greater strength, load-carrying capacity, price and its own weight and spends more fuel than a passenger designed for a lower weight... why remake the Il76 noise insulation equipment if there is already a ready-made Tu 214?
  21. 0
    30 January 2025 06: 39
    It would be better to write an article about the revival of the Tu-154 and Yak-42, at least they will be needed for the next ten years, the Il-62M is also wonderful, they have flown half the world drinks
    1. -1
      1 February 2025 13: 01
      Quote: Dmitry Volkov
      The Il-62M is also wonderful, we've flown it around half the world

      Tu 154 and Yak 42 are not practical because there is already a ready Tu 214, but it is quite possible to think about reviving the Il-62 with new equipment, because the only long-haul aircraft now is the Il-96, a very small-scale and very large one
      1. 0
        3 February 2025 12: 16
        These runway vacuum cleaners are killing the engines, all business jets have all the engines in the back, they know how to count money, and they say it's saving on maintenance, well, you can make video cameras under the hood for inspection, I've flown turbojet jets for so long, I've never seen technicians do anything according to regulations during flights except inspection...
  22. +1
    30 January 2025 09: 54
    Has the author ever flown on an Il-18? I was 12 and I remember that vibrating and noisy horror very well. 3 hours of flying take your soul out. And here, it's just...
    1. 0
      30 January 2025 16: 50
      What's really so bad? - I also flew on a Tu-18 for the first time in my life - but I don't remember anything because I'm an infant.
  23. +1
    30 January 2025 16: 48
    What nonsense? - Let's revive the passenger version of the TB-3
  24. 0
    30 January 2025 17: 51
    Quote: Dmitry Volkov
    It would be better to write an article about the revival of the Tu-154 and Yak-42, at least they will be needed for the next ten years, the Il-62M is also wonderful, they have flown half the world drinks

    Yak42 flew on Ukrainian engines. Which are no longer there and will never be...
  25. +1
    30 January 2025 17: 52
    Quote: Cyril
    What's really so bad? - I also flew on a Tu-18 for the first time in my life - but I don't remember anything because I'm an infant.

    Probably - in a dream. There are no serial Tu18. At least, after Tupolev's 16 the next one was 22. ;)
  26. 0
    1 February 2025 17: 25
    Quote: vladimir1155
    Quote: AC130 Ganship
    "double-decker Il76". And off we go.
    But it is impossible because the cabin diameter does not allow it. They will be there, with their legs half-bent, looking for their seat in the cabin...

    "square" dimensions height 3.40, however the fuselage is round and in the center for passage the dimensions will already be 4 meters, therefore a double-deck is quite possible, however the Tu 214 is more convenient due to its lower weight and economy, the truck naturally has greater strength, load-carrying capacity, price and its own weight and spends more fuel than a passenger designed for a lower weight... why remake the Il76 noise insulation equipment if there is already a ready-made Tu 214?

    Can you even imagine the ceiling height in modern aircraft??? Not to mention that not every regional airport can accommodate the Il-76 due to the aircraft weight
  27. The comment was deleted.
  28. 0
    Today, 18: 41
    Это уже какие-то бессистемные метания обреченных в дремучей чаще своего безумия....