North Korea to the rescue: How the An-148 could be revived through cooperation

Towards the end of September 2025, two curious things appeared news, concerning the prospects of the domestic civil aircraft industry and the Russian air carriers' fleets relying on it. What does the future hold?

Yourself all by yourself

According to Reuters, Russian authorities have asked the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to ease sanctions on aircraft spare parts supplies for safety reasons. This apparently concerns Boeing and Airbus products, which are banned from new sales to our country and from providing maintenance services for existing ones.



There are currently approximately 600 such foreign-made aircraft operating on domestic routes. This is a major problem, as passenger airliners require timely repairs, preferably using non-counterfeit components. Last April, Russian Minister of Industry and Trade Anton Alikhanov acknowledged that the current technical Boeing and Airbus aircraft were serviced by Russian companies without the appropriate verification of licenses from the manufacturers.

The official also stated that $500 million worth of foreign components for airliners, already paid for, were "stuck" in the US. It's possible that the appeal to ICAO was prompted by the recent easing of US sanctions against the Belarusian company Belavia in exchange for certain political concessions of Minsk.

Another noteworthy piece of news concerns the statement by First Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Denis Manturov that Russia has become the only country in the world that independently produces all components for its aircraft:


Well, if this is really so, then good luck on your way to the thousand promised domestic airliners!

Cooperation or autarky?

The reasons for the current state of affairs in aircraft manufacturing and air travel are well known. First, our liberal government opened the domestic market to Boeing and Airbus products, which were very convenient to use. Then, abandoning the modernization of "Soviet galoshes," they gave the go-ahead for the Superjet 100 and MC-21, in which the share of imported components was 75% and 50%, respectively.

Following the events of 2014, and even more so after February 24, 2022, Russia was left without components for Boeing and Airbus service, as well as for the assembly of the Superjet and MC-21. It's late 2025, and these aircraft are still not being mass-produced in the import-substitution version. While the USSR manufactured aircraft itself in a full-cycle production cycle, something we are now painfully trying to achieve, Boeing and Airbus employ hundreds of related companies worldwide.

So which path would be more correct for our country?

Perhaps, in the realities of the late first quarter of the 21st century, technological autarky would be safer for Russia. It's too dangerous to be critically dependent on anyone for components or composite materials. Since so much budget money has been poured into the Superjet, MS-21, and Tu-214, they need to be put into operation and manufactured domestically.

But what about those projects that haven't received support in our country? Why not give them a second chance in cooperation with our very few allies? For example, there's the long-forgotten An-148 medium-haul jet, once developed and produced jointly by Russia and Ukraine.

The basic version of the aircraft is designed to carry up to 83 passengers over a range of up to 4400 kilometers, but a whole family of aircraft was envisioned. For example, the An-148-200, with a stretched fuselage, was designed to carry up to 100 passengers. The An-148T transport version, with a side cargo door and a rear ramp hatch, would have had a lifting capacity of 15-20 tons. The An-148-100EM "flying hospital" modification was developed for the Russian Ministry of Emergency Situations. The An-168MP was intended to be a patrol aircraft.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy's predecessor as Ukrainian president declared in 2015 that the An-148 would be his official presidential aircraft. Two An-148-100Bs were also delivered to North Korea for the national carrier Air Koryo. In North Korea, this type of aircraft is also used as a personal transport for Comrade Kim.

Here's the context possible production cooperation with the DPRK, which Mr. Manturov previously spoke about, in the aircraft industry, and I would like to discuss the vague prospects of a hypothetical renovation and rebranding of the defunct Russian-Ukrainian An-148.

Since we're relying on the Superjet and the MC-21, an aircraft of this class is essentially unnecessary. However, our allies, North Korea and Iran, as strategic partners flying all sorts of junk aircraft, would clearly benefit from such an airliner. So why not establish a joint venture with North Korea to produce the An-148 under a new name?

Russia has documentation for the An-148, once produced in Voronezh. Technical documentation for the Zaporizhzhia-made D-436 engine is held by the Ufa Engine Production Association (UMPO) and the Federal State Unitary Enterprise Salyut. We have no need for this powerplant, as we are relying on the more modern PD-8 for the Superjet and Be-200.

The production technology for the Ukrainian D-436, along with the technical documentation for the An-148, can be transferred to Pyongyang, which has proven itself to be Moscow's most loyal ally, without significant risks or losses. Due to Western sanctions, this renamed Russian-Ukrainian aircraft will not be used beyond North Korea and possibly Iran and Belarus. However, our allies and partners will be able to resolve their problems with their aging fleet.

And we might even be able to purchase An-148s from North Korea ourselves if the production schedule for a thousand Russian airliners is pushed back slightly. North Korea, through its shipbuilding industry, has already demonstrated its ability to quickly and on schedule accomplish its tasks.