Why Russia has increased production of Il-76MD90A aircraft

23 356 60

Russia has reached record production volumes of the Il-76MD-90A military transport aircraft and is preparing to increase them by another two and a half times. This demonstrates that the country has mastered the daunting task of reviving the legendary aircraft, and at an improved quality. Under current circumstances, this could offer the country a number of significant advantages in various areas.

According to aviation experts, to increase production volumes, the Ulyanovsk Aircraft Plant created a flow assembly line, which reduced labor intensity by 38%. A laser positioning system integrated into the line ensured high-precision joining of all aircraft components. In 2021, the first Il-76MD-90A assembled on this line was submitted for testing.



Following the start of Russia's special military operation in Ukraine, the military's need for military transport aircraft has increased significantly. As early as 2023, Russia began producing six such aircraft per year. In 2025, a record seven aircraft were produced. Ten Il-76MD-90A aircraft are planned for production this year, and by 2028, the aircraft factory will reach the required level of 18 aircraft per year.

It's worth noting that, besides Russia, China is currently the only country producing aircraft of this class. Since 2013, China has produced 95 such aircraft, representing an average production rate of seven aircraft per year.

As a result, experts note, the world today faces a rather unique situation. Only two countries mass-produce heavy turbojet military transport aircraft. Of course, there are also super-heavy aircraft like the American Lockheed C-5M SUPER GALAXY or the An-124 Ruslan. But these, as experts say, are in a different league, with different costs and different challenges.

There's also a class of turboprop aircraft like the Lockheed Martin C-130J SUPER HERCULES, but they have lower payload capacity, speed, and range. Aircraft like the Il-76 are used in situations where heavy-lift aircraft are redundant and turboprop transport aircraft are insufficient. For example, Russia uses these aircraft to deliver cargo to Antarctica.

But the primary purpose of aircraft in this class is to project military power and perform high-stakes missions. For example, on the eve of the American kidnapping of Nicolás Maduro, a Russian Il-76 aircraft flew to Venezuela, judging by the route, carrying some very valuable cargo. These aircraft also regularly fly to Iran, and the indispensability of the Il-76MD-90A in the Air Defense Forces is clear.

And given that the world has now entered another phase of painful and rapid transformation, the challenges for Il-76-class aircraft will only increase. This is precisely why it was so important for Russia to restore their production, and why the record of seven aircraft per year, with the potential to increase to 18, is truly a good goal. news.

60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +6
    24 January 2026 19: 59
    Well done. I hope nothing goes wrong and the planned quantity is produced.
    1. -11
      24 January 2026 21: 42
      ...is preparing to increase it by another two and a half times

      ...and no way up to three pieces?
      1. +1
        24 January 2026 23: 09
        Quote: Jackie
        ...and no way up to three pieces?

        Have you tried to read the article?

        Russia began producing six of these aircraft per year as early as 2023. A record seven aircraft were produced in 2025. Ten Il-76MD-90A aircraft are planned for production this year, and by 2028, the aircraft plant will reach the required level of 18 aircraft per year.
        1. -2
          25 January 2026 10: 17
          There's one caveat. The plan was to begin producing 10-12 aircraft per year by 2025.
          1. +4
            25 January 2026 10: 48
            Quote: Arkady007
            The plan was to establish production of 10-12 aircraft per year by 2025.

            There was. And the fact that it fell through is bad. But whatever one may say, the process is ongoing, and if there are no further delays, this niche in aviation can be considered largely closed.
          2. 0
            25 January 2026 19: 12
            At the end of December, the Russian Aerospace Forces received their sixth Il-76MD-90A military transport aircraft, built in 2024 at the Aviastar aircraft plant in Ulyanovsk. Previously, the plan was to reach a production rate of at least 12 aircraft per year by 2024.

            https://aviation21.ru/shest-tyazhyolyx-voenno-transportnyx-samolyotov-il-76md-90a-poluchili-vks-rossii-v-2024-godu/?highlight=%D0%98%D0%BB-76%D0%9C%D0%94-90%D0%90
            The plan was to get 12 back in 2024. What achievements?
            In the information age, it is impossible to hide false promises.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  2. -14
    24 January 2026 20: 20
    Considering the speed at which the LBS is moving today, the question arises: why do we need military transport aviation at all today?! To transport generals?
    1. -3
      25 January 2026 11: 20
      I see.
      It's much easier to give a minus than to answer a difficult question.
      1. +4
        25 January 2026 15: 41
        Quote: prior
        I see.
        It's much easier to give a minus than to answer a difficult question.

        I didn't give it a minus, but to call it a "difficult question", what is it for? military transport aviation, limiting the feasibility of "transporting generals" - puzzles the "framework of thinking" of the commentator belay .
    2. -7
      25 January 2026 11: 25
      Hello, the natives don't seem to like us, they take everything literally...
      To paraphrase Marshak: multiply, divide... "and the answer is two earthmovers (airplanes) and two thirds."
    3. +4
      25 January 2026 11: 44
      Well, your American friends don't refuse transport planes and are quite actively transporting all sorts of equipment to Rzeszow for the independent country))) Maybe the Russian Federation will have to transport something similar to, say, Cuba)))
      You remind me of some of those guys who work from manuals. One of them recently vehemently asserted that zircons, daggers, and other hazelnuts are all nonsense, unsustainable, and a waste of money. He said it's the era of drones, which solve everything. However, when I asked him how, my dear fellow, you plan to deliver the SBCs to Spain or the UK—drones, perhaps?—he didn't respond.
      1. -6
        25 January 2026 12: 00
        Well, what can I say.
        Military transport aviation and transportation for the sale of military-industrial complex products are two different things.
        How much military cargo for the SVO is currently being delivered by the Military Transport Aviation?
        I wasn't questioning the need for transport aviation in general. I was asking about its relevance in today's environment.
        I'll add more especially for you.
        What's the current need for airborne troops in the SVO? Have many been airdropped?
        And the need for prepared assaults is undeniable.
        The SVO is definitely making changes to the composition and requirements for all branches of the military.
        And VTA is no exception.
        I won't even comment on the nonsense about my American "friends".
        1. +6
          25 January 2026 12: 25
          The question arises: why do we even need military transport aviation today?! To transport generals?

          How come you didn't question the need for military transport aviation? Those were your words, weren't they?
          And landing operations, successfully, were carried out during the Second World War. I'm talking about Gostomel, of course.
          Another thing is that, for a number of reasons, we did not receive from it the dividends that we could have.
          But this does not mean that in the future, during the SVO, landing operations will not be carried out.
          That's the first thing. And secondly, military transport aviation is capable of solving other tasks as well. Back in 23, S. Shoigu, the Russian Defense Ministry's deputy, noted:

          "Military transport aviation pilots perform equally important tasks in the special operations zone, delivering cargo and personnel around the clock."

          Major General Lipovoy echoes him.

          Speaking about the transport missions of army aviation, Lipovoy noted the delivery of supplies, weapons, ammunition, food supplies, and medicines to the Soviet military zone. The Hero of Russia also mentioned the important function of evacuating the wounded and transporting them to the hospital.

          It's a shame they don't know that one armchair expert decided that transport aviation is not needed.
          1. -6
            25 January 2026 13: 19
            That is, you still claim that military transport aviation is indispensable for delivering cargo to the LBS, which has shifted by 50-100 km over the past 4 years.
            We sing songs to the stubbornness of the stubborn.
            How many Kuznetsov-class aircraft carriers do you think our Navy needs?
            1. +2
              25 January 2026 15: 47
              It's possible without military transport aircraft, but it's faster with them. And in cases like evacuating the wounded, it's a matter of life and death.
              Regarding Kuznetsov, I believe there's no particular need for it at the moment. Firstly, the aircraft carrier is already old, and there are no escort ships for it to project force anywhere in the country. And the Russian Navy is by no means the Soviet Navy. However, the Russian Navy is capable of deploying SSBNs and protecting its coastline (including the Northern Sea Route), in coordination with other branches of the Russian Armed Forces. And we can't allow a strike group closer than 1000-1500 km to our coast without posing a mortal risk to it, using Oniks, Kinzhal, multipurpose submarines, and TU-22m3 submarines.
              1. -1
                26 January 2026 08: 32
                in cases such as the evacuation of the wounded

                Sorry, but this is already air ambulance.
                And please don't forget that the AN-76 is also used to put out fires.
                1. +1
                  26 January 2026 13: 58
                  I won't apologize))) Because this is a direct function of the Il-76MD90A

                  In addition, in the cargo cabin of the aircraft can be installed equipment that allows:
                  transport up to 114 wounded and medical personnel;
                  carry out intensive therapy until 20 is seriously injured;

                  https://topwar.ru/29617-il-76md-90a-ili-izdelie-476.html?ysclid=mkv1v78h8597673719
        2. +2
          25 January 2026 20: 25
          Don't forget about Russia's size; the army is a very complex mechanism that must constantly be able to quickly move equipment and personnel. Your arguments are simply unfounded.
    4. +5
      25 January 2026 12: 49
      LBS and MTA are different spheres. The classic use of MTA is in Syria and Afghanistan, when troops are located far from supply lines. Since they've begun actively developing Il-1 aircraft, it means they're preparing for just such scenarios.
      1. -2
        26 January 2026 16: 35
        What did Syria give to Russia?
        What did Afghanistan give to the Soviet Union?
        What are we doing there?
        1. +1
          29 January 2026 22: 17
          You've gone off topic; the operational transfer of troops is the main task of the Military Transport Aviation.
          1. -1
            30 January 2026 08: 46
            I didn't go anywhere. Answer for yourself: where is the need today for the rapid transfer of troops using air power? What part of the front will you be late to today without air power?
            Today's airborne assault means loss of life. The front has been at a standstill for years. How much progress have we made near Kherson?
            Transporting ammunition and shells to the front by plane. Isn't that a bit expensive?
            Do you think there's no need to rethink the use of transport aviation? I have a different opinion.
  3. -5
    24 January 2026 21: 13
    Now, the local experts, represented by traitors and other Polar Bears and Volkovs, will respond to you "professionally" (as they like to do) ingratiating themselves with the Skaklamm. And enjoying themselves.
  4. -8
    24 January 2026 21: 39
    It should be noted that the Russian Federation still has a substantial Soviet reserve of "Galoshes" in the form of the IL-76...
    1. -3
      25 January 2026 11: 30
      ...I remember flying to Sochi, a big and good airliner
  5. +6
    24 January 2026 22: 55
    Well, that's great if that's true! I thought we only made one a year, if we made one at all, like in civil aviation! That we only fly Soviet-era Il-1s and constantly repair them. And then there's such wonderful news!
  6. -5
    24 January 2026 22: 56
    They don't say how many Il-76s Russia needs. What are the goals, what will it carry? It sounds more like a pipe dream, like we'll sell it abroad. Someone's really itching for a living.
    We're producing the Il-76 because there's nothing else. It's just bragging rights.
    The Il-76 is a Soviet aircraft, and the USSR has been gone for 35 years.
    1. -2
      24 January 2026 23: 17
      Quote: vlad127490
      The Il-76 is a Soviet aircraft, and the USSR has been gone for 35 years.

      How annoying you are with your "USSR... and it's gone..."
      Yes, the original Il-76 was made in the USSR, that's a fact. But the fact is that modern aircraft are as different from what was available back then as a modern telephone is from what was available back then. Yes, the USSR made a good aircraft for its time, but progress has advanced since then, and the equipment that equipped the first Il-76s is no longer manufactured.
      1. +3
        25 January 2026 06: 08
        Quote: Dart2027
        How annoying you are with your "USSR... and it's gone..."
        Yes, the original version of the Il-76 was made in the USSR, that's a fact. But it's also a fact that modern aircraft are as different from what was then as a modern telephone is from what was then.

        It's like the USSR built a house, you moved in, did a renovation called "EURO" using European materials, the Uzbeks did the renovation, bought the overwhelming majority of imported furniture and appliances, and then told the USSR to go to hell. Bingo!
        1. -6
          25 January 2026 06: 57
          Quote: Valera75
          It's like the USSR built a house, you moved in and did renovations called EURO using European materials.

          That is, there is nothing to argue with regarding the fact that this is a fundamentally different aircraft.
          As for the "repairs," it was the Russian princes and tsars who spent centuries creating an empire, and the communists "built the greatest state" thanks to their efforts, which were not enough to last even a century.
          1. 0
            25 January 2026 07: 03
            Quote: Dart2027
            That is, there is nothing to argue with regarding the fact that this is a fundamentally different aircraft.

            What's different about it? A Chinese monitor? The USSR wouldn't have collapsed if it had been Soviet.

            due to their efforts, which would not last a century

            The empire also collapsed, just like the USSR. Well, Russia is only 30 years old, so don't rush things. What's happening isn't guaranteed to outlive both of them, and what it built, like the USSR and the Russian empire, isn't even close to being achieved.
            1. -2
              25 January 2026 07: 09
              Quote: Valera75
              What's different about it?

              All the filling.

              Quote: Valera75
              The USSR would not have collapsed if it had been Soviet.

              So what? Did the plane's designers destroy it?

              Quote: Valera75
              The empire also collapsed just like the USSR.

              The truth lasted an order of magnitude longer and without such shame.
              1. 0
                25 January 2026 08: 18
                Quote: Dart2027

                The truth lasted much longer and without such shame.

                Are Soviet designers to blame for the collapse of the USSR?

                All the filling.

                Have you personally seen this filling? Is it all made in Russia: semiconductors, processors, monitors, and memory?
                1. +1
                  25 January 2026 09: 24
                  Quote: Valera75
                  Are Soviet designers to blame for the collapse of the USSR?

                  So I ask - is this the designers' problem?

                  Quote: Valera75
                  Have you seen this filling in person? It's all made in Russia.

                  I don't know about the equipment, but it's a fact that no one produces equipment from that era anymore. So yes, the plane is essentially new.

                  Quote: Valera75
                  semiconductors and processors, monitors and memory?

                  Well, if you compare the office equipment made in the USSR with what was made abroad... Well, it was domestic... But in terms of functionality...
                  1. +1
                    25 January 2026 13: 05
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    Well, if you compare the office equipment that was made in the USSR with what was made abroad... Well, it was domestic... But in terms of functionality

                    Well, there was a lag, but the USSR built this plane from scratch, and everything about it was original. If the corrupt elite hadn't sold out the Soviet Union, they would have surpassed Airbus and Boeing in engines. A long time ago, I watched a crime show where they told how, in the 1990s, they ruined an aircraft engine plant using shell companies. It should have already begun producing engines better than Western ones, but alas. The global giants were so afraid of Soviet galoshes that they destroyed our plant, even though they destroyed the entire country. So much for the galoshes they're foisting on us. When I see them, I curse and hate them. Because under a president who hasn't changed a thing for 25 years, his entourage only knows how to steal. And when they build based on Soviet designs or modernize Soviet-era products, they apparently get as mad as the devil from incense when they hear about the USSR. And remember Stalin? They'll start burning like ghouls in sunlight. The polyethylene race is incapable of anything else.
                    1. -2
                      25 January 2026 14: 08
                      Quote: Valera75
                      Well, there was a lag, so the USSR built this plane from scratch and everything in it was its own.

                      And? I think I already wrote

                      Quote: Dart2027
                      Yes, the USSR made a good airplane for that time.

                      And, yes, I know that there was something of its own there.

                      Quote: Valera75
                      How they destroyed an aircraft engine plant in the 1990s through shell companies. It should have already started producing engines better than Western ones, but alas,

                      There's a lot to cover in the program, but given the role of microelectronics in any modern product and how wonderful it was back then (yes, I know the USSR did everything its own way, but the jokes about "it's made of vacuum tubes" unfortunately didn't come out of nowhere), stories about super-engines are highly dubious. Products of this level are the pinnacle of a technological chain involving hundreds of contractors and subcontractors; the factory essentially carries out the final assembly.

                      Quote: Valera75
                      Here you have these galoshes that they force on us so much that when I see them I curse and hate them.

                      Yes Yes Yes...

                      Yes, my dears, yes. No need to debate. The fact is that what we produced, and no need to wave your hands, was not needed by anyone, because no one bought our galoshes, except for the Africans, who had to walk on the hot sand. That's the whole point.
                      We had a defense industry - cool, strong, and we are still proud of it. We are grateful to our grandfathers and our fathers for creating such a defense industry after the Great Patriotic War.
                      Voice from the audience:
                      - And the first satellite.
                      V. V. Putin:
                      - Both the first satellite and the first man in space are our common pride, these are the achievements of the Soviet regime, of which we are all proud. These are nationwide achievements.
                      But consumer goods... Zhirinovsky has already said this. Where were they? There were none. Let's not lie to each other and the people. The people know what was and what was not.

                      And there were no sausage trains, no shortages, and no connections. No need to make up stories.

                      Quote: Valera75
                      although the whole country was destroyed there

                      The fact that the communist utopia failed is not the problem of other states, it is the problem of communism.

                      Quote: Valera75
                      Because with a president who has been in office for 25 years, his entourage only knows how to steal.

                      They didn't steal in the USSR. But where did it all come from?
                      1. 0
                        26 January 2026 09: 08
                        Quote: Dart2027
                        The fact that the communist utopia failed is not the problem of other states, it is the problem of communism.

                        Don't say hop until you've jumped. It's already clear what's going on and how the country is being robbed of HUNDREDS of billions.

                        Because no one bought our galoshes except the Africans who had to walk on hot sand. That's the whole point.

                        Did you hear it from TV? laughing Then why did the entire West chase after Soviet engineers and electronics specialists, and why did they experience such leaps in achievement when they emigrated in the late 80s and early 90s?
                        I watched a documentary, back in the 1980s, and there was a robot there, and it was walking. True, the controls were located nearby, in the form of two boxes, each about 50 meters by 50 meters, but back then, other Western TVs and equipment were similar in size. So, this robot walked and moved, while your non-Soviet one took two steps in 1925 and fell. This is after 40 years, since we ran away from galoshes.

                        And there were no sausage trains, no shortages, and no connections. No need to make up stories.

                        You didn't quote me above, but I don't understand what I just quoted, so don't ask me questions. Back then, there were artificial shortages of many things, and I'm not discussing sausage or when things were better. Communists aren't my friends, and I lived in the Soviet Union, but I wasn't even a Komsomol member; I was even expelled from the Pioneers. So, I'm not a fanatic, by the way. I'm talking about people.

                        The fact that the communist utopia failed is not the problem of other states, it is the problem of communism.

                        agree

                        Because with a president who has been in office for 25 years, his entourage only knows how to steal.

                        So, in your words, this isn't the West's doing, and so on, but the current government's fault? Is it the same? The fact that in 25 years, they haven't created anything of their own except a few concepts. Right, by your logic, no one interferes with the government except itself?
                        Those who do not remember or try in every possible way to humiliate, forget, or throw mud at their past, regardless of whether it was forced upon them or whether it was their wild desire, have no future.
                      2. -1
                        26 January 2026 19: 32
                        Quote: Valera75
                        Don't say gop until you jump over.

                        We've already jumped over that. Incidentally, even Lenin, when introducing the New Economic Policy, essentially admitted that Marx's theories didn't work. And there was theft in the USSR, too.

                        Quote: Valera75
                        Then why did the entire West chase after Soviet engineers and electronics specialists, and why did they experience such leaps in achievement when they emigrated in the late 80s and early 90s?

                        Note that I didn't say that. You yourself said that when they left the USSR, they immediately started producing results. But what about in the USSR itself? So it turns out it's a systemic problem.

                        Quote: Valera75
                        The fact that in 25 years they haven’t created anything of their own except for a few concepts.

                        Watch "Made in Our Country." And yes, I know they steal now. Just like they've always stolen everywhere.
                      3. 0
                        1 February 2026 05: 10
                        Quote: Dart2027
                        Check out "Made in Us"

                        Yes, I watched a video about three years ago of disassembling our laptops, headphones, and power tools—practically everything there is foreign. You just have to rub the "Made in Russia" label with your sleeve and everything will become clear.
                        As for the USSR, let's take a 25-year period.
                        After 45, a quarter of the USSR's territory was literally a scorched earth. 27 million people died, and countless more later died from wounds and diseases. And how many children, with broken lives and psyches, stood at machines in the open fields of a factory evacuated from the western part of the country, struggling with all the logistics, but still managed to build a roof over their heads and produce goods. The first man in space, nuclear weapons, the Buran shuttle, which landed completely on autopilot before GPS, satellite and cellular communications, or the internet existed today. They successfully harnessed hypersonic technology, the "Cold" program, the X-90 missile, and the meteorite in 1970.
                        What's ours and made here is truly ours and made here, not a lie wrapped in a pretty package. I'm not underestimating the talent of our scientists and engineers in any way; I just don't like it when talking heads lie. If it weren't for the Soviet school system, even this pittance wouldn't exist.
                      4. -1
                        1 February 2026 06: 45
                        Quote: Valera75
                        Yes, I watched a video about three years ago of disassembling our laptops, headphones, and power tools—practically everything there is foreign. You just have to rub the "Made in Russia" label with your sleeve and everything will become clear.

                        An old manual. If something isn't made here, but purchased, that's what it says.

                        Quote: Valera75
                        The first human in space, nuclear weapons, the Buran shuttle, which landed completely on autopilot before GPS, satellite and cellular communications, or the internet existed. They successfully harnessed hypersonic technology, the Kholod program, the X-90 missile, and the Meteorite in 1970.

                        Yes, my dears, yes. No need to debate. The fact is that what we produced, and no need to wave your hands, was not needed by anyone, because no one bought our galoshes, except for the Africans, who had to walk on the hot sand. That's the whole point.
                        We had a defense industry - cool, strong, and we are still proud of it. We are grateful to our grandfathers and our fathers for creating such a defense industry after the Great Patriotic War.
                        Voice from the audience:
                        - And the first satellite.
                        V. V. Putin:
                        - Both the first satellite and the first man in space are our common pride, these are the achievements of the Soviet regime, of which we are all proud. These are nationwide achievements.
                        But consumer goods... Zhirinovsky has already said this. Where were they? There were none. Let's not lie to each other and the people. The people know what was and what was not.
                      5. -1
                        1 February 2026 09: 15
                        An old manual. If something isn't made here, but purchased, that's what it says.

                        that's exactly what they're lying about
                        By the way, this information isn't from shady bloggers. A very good friend of mine repairs smartphones and computers on the side. We started it together in 2005, but I just gave it up in 12 when my eyesight started deteriorating. So, the manuals aren't about that.

                        But consumer goods... Zhirinovsky already said this

                        I won't quote everything. I understand where you're going with this, quoting who knows who, but I could just as easily name an old manual. Back then, there were natural products on the shelves. I was born in 75, so I know what I'm talking about.
                        So your breakthroughs and erasure of the past are just a matter of erasing Made in China, except in very, very rare cases. It's like with import substitution and cheeses: all the equipment in the cheese factory is imported, as are all the starters and even the milk, which is reconstituted from Argentine and some other bourgeois powder. But they proudly call our cheeses import substitution. Cut off the supply of equipment, starters, and milk powder, and that's the end of the story.
                        Everything is clear with you. Good luck!
                      6. -1
                        1 February 2026 10: 00
                        Quote: Valera75
                        By the way, this information isn't from shady bloggers. A very good friend of mine repairs smartphones and computers on the side. We started it together in 2005.

                        Well, I've been a defense engineer for 20 years. So fairy tales won't fly. And by the way, everyone knows we don't produce smartphones here.

                        Quote: Valera75
                        I was born in 75 and I know what I'm talking about.

                        I was born in the 70s, so I know what I'm talking about. As for supplies, since when did the USSR start buying grain? And when were the oil and gas pipelines to Europe built?
                      7. 0
                        1 February 2026 10: 50
                        Quote: Dart2027
                        Well, I've been a defense engineer for 20 years. So fairy tales won't fly. And by the way, everyone knows we don't produce smartphones here.

                        I don't understand what you're getting at. If you work in defense, you know that in the USSR, everything was their own. There's no denying that we needed to overcome stagnation. But they were self-sufficient.

                        And when were oil and gas pipelines to Europe built there?

                        In the USSR. So what? If you can do everything yourself and have everything yourself, you can afford it. But lying for 20 years about how everything is awesome and there's no equivalent, with massive import substitution since '14, only to find out there's nothing, the redhead has been hogging everyone at the top for years, and semiconductors are great, but we shut down the project after we've spent the money—that's trash.
                        The SVO revealed everything about defense. Communications, concepts, and 5-10 prototypes, as well as modern communications, which we don't have, and everything we have is imported.
                        I listed a lot of Soviet things for you, but you told me nothing Russian, nothing purely Russian.
                        So now, good luck for sure!
                      8. 0
                        1 February 2026 12: 34
                        Quote: Valera75
                        I don't understand what you're getting at. If you work in the defense industry, you know that in the USSR everything was their own and everything else.

                        There was. And some of it was very good. But back in college, I remember a professor telling me how happy they were to receive new computers instead of "theirs." And there are plenty of similar examples.

                        Quote: Valera75
                        I listed a lot of Soviet things for you, but you told me nothing Russian, nothing purely Russian.

                        Then let's remember that everything Soviet was created on the basis of the Russian Empire, so there was nothing purely Soviet.
    2. +4
      25 January 2026 00: 40
      Quote: vlad127490
      Il-76 is a Soviet aircraft,

      All that remains of the Soviet Il-76 is its name, and even then, it has been modified. The fuselage, wings, engines, and even the equipment on the Il-76MD-90A differ from those produced in the USSR.
    3. -1
      25 January 2026 04: 38
      Quote: vlad127490
      They don't say how many Il-76s are needed in the Russian Federation.

      They won't tell you... because they don't know. Do you think there were any calculations?
      Your question is valid. The first step is to verify the objectives, and the military will tell you how many of each are needed. This plane was saved. It's a good plane. The factory has organized production very well. The Ministry of Defense's plan is to blame the company if any problems arise in the future due to a lack of objectives.
    4. +4
      25 January 2026 10: 24
      Completely unfounded conclusions.
      If the IL-76 (the basis) had not been in demand, no one would have copied and operated it.
      China built a similar one (copied it), but they use our own engines (they have their own, but they have a short service life).
      The new Il is a completely different aircraft in terms of load capacity, fuel consumption and avionics, and has different engines.
      Why reinvent the wheel when there is a new one that meets the demands of the times.
  7. -5
    25 January 2026 06: 02
    But the primary purpose of aircraft in this class is to project military power and perform high-stakes missions. For example, on the eve of the American kidnapping of Nicolás Maduro, a Russian Il-76 aircraft flew to Venezuela, and judging by the route, it was carrying some very valuable cargo. Regular flights of these aircraft to Iran are observed, and the indispensability of the Il-76MD-90A in the Air Defense Forces is obvious.

    Russia needs these types of aircraft to transport valuable cargo to those the Americans kidnapped (Venezuela), seized their country through proxies (Assad), and then Iran. Building aircraft for these purposes is a pretty poor idea.
    1. 0
      25 January 2026 23: 06
      Valery, don't write such absurd nonsense, it's funny to read your nonsense.
  8. +4
    25 January 2026 06: 33
    Quote: Piramidon
    Quote: vlad127490
    Il-76 is a Soviet aircraft,

    All that remains of the Soviet Il-76 is its name, and even then, it has been modified. The fuselage, wings, engines, and even the equipment on the Il-76MD-90A differ from those produced in the USSR.

    The fuselage diameter remained the same as the Soviet Il-76. The PS-90 also appeared on Soviet Il-76s. The change in wing design is the only difference from the Tashkent-produced Il-76.
    In fact, the transfer of production to Ulyanovsk, like the last car of a departing train in the dying aviation industry, was a hurried move. However, the potential of the Chinese equivalent, developed after the failure to deliver hundreds of Il-76s to China, is higher: after all, a new fuselage is a new fuselage with the ability to adequately transport oversized cargo.

    The author forgot to mention the American and European C-17 and A-400, hundreds of which have been produced and which are already flying in a number of countries instead of the Il-76.
    1. +2
      25 January 2026 10: 30
      1. There are places where the C-17 and A-400 refuse to fly, but the Il-76 flies.
      2. Every airplane has its own niche, just like cars. Why compare the body of a Gazelle with that of a Vesta?
      3. When and where did the PS-90 appear on the Soviet Il-76?
    2. 0
      25 January 2026 23: 17
      Pavel, it's immediately obvious you're out of touch. The PS-90 didn't even exist in Soviet times. All of the aircraft's systems, including the wing, engines, avionics, hydraulics, landing gear, and many others, were created anew and bear no direct resemblance to the aircraft systems installed on the TAPOCH during Soviet times.
  9. -3
    25 January 2026 09: 04
    Having saved on tank biathlons, was there enough money to build military transport aircraft?
  10. 0
    25 January 2026 12: 45
    Quote: Arkady007
    1. There are places where the C-17 and A-400 refuse to fly, but the Il-76 flies.
    3. When and where did the PS-90 appear on the Soviet Il-76?

    The author mentioned the C-5 and An-124. Then he should have remembered the C-17 and A-400M, which are displacing the Il-76 in India and Kazakhstan.
    Yes, the planes are a slightly different class, but so what? There are many users who regularly land on unpaved runways,
    Therefore, the author's thesis that "Only two countries mass-produce heavy turbojet military transport aircraft" is deceitful.
    There are 3 or 4 of them, depending on how you count.
    As for the Il-76 with PS-90, this concerns the re-motorization of Soviet Il-76s in Tashkent, including for the Volga-Dnepr.
    Re-engining existing aircraft (Il-76TD-90VD): This involves installing new PS-90A-76 engines on existing Il-76s of older production. This work was carried out, among other things, at the Tashkent Aircraft Plant (TAPOiCh) for commercial carriers such as Volga-Dnepr Airlines. The aircraft is designated Il-76TD-90 or Il-76TD-90VD (if the modification is carried out according to Volga-Dnepr Airlines' requirements).
  11. +1
    25 January 2026 13: 10
    It's worth noting that, besides Russia, China is currently the only country producing aircraft of this class. Since 2013, China has produced 95 such aircraft, representing an average production rate of seven aircraft per year.

    China doesn't just manufacture airplanes. During Putin's presidency, its population has grown more than Russia's current population—by almost 150,000,000 people.
    We have a group of old men who are squeezing the life out of people for their own gain...
  12. 0
    25 January 2026 19: 16
    Mathematics is an exact science. If you produce one unit one year and two the next, you can confidently report to your superiors a 100% annual increase in production.
    And if from 0 to 1, then it’s infinity ;)
    It's clear as day that transport aircraft are needed. The ones flying now were made in the 70s. And the An-12s were made in the 60s. They're already 60 years old.
  13. 0
    26 January 2026 02: 10
    It's strange that the author, having mentioned the old C5 and An124, suddenly completely forgot about the C17, of which almost 280 were produced. Which, by the way, can "park itself in a hall" when parked.
    And then there's the European A400, which can also carry 37 tons of cargo and fly almost as fast and over the same distance as the Il-76.
    It's not like he's there either.
    And I'll say more. I wouldn't be surprised if Americans Little by little, in 10-15 years, they'll start replacing their C17s with something new. After all, the Il-76's contemporary, the C141, was completely decommissioned in 2006. Technology doesn't stand still. Only Rogozin Sr. once dreamed of an Il-476, which he proudly talked about on idiot-box.
  14. -1
    27 January 2026 12: 50
    Quote: sgrabik
    Pavel, it's immediately obvious you're out of touch. The PS-90 didn't even exist in Soviet times. All of the aircraft's systems, including the wing, engines, avionics, hydraulics, landing gear, and many others, were created anew and bear no direct resemblance to the aircraft systems installed on the TAPOCH during Soviet times.

    It's a pity you don't have access to Google.
    The PS-90A is a Soviet/Russian turbofan engine developed by the Aviadvigatel Design Bureau in the 1980s; it was the final design of aircraft designer P. A. Solovyov, after whom the engine is named: PS – Pavel Solovyov.
    1. -1
      29 January 2026 22: 24
      No need to be clever, you'd better find out when this engine was certified and launched into serial production; we're talking about different things.
      1. 0
        30 January 2026 10: 35
        I'd better quote you:

        PS-90 didn't even exist in Soviet times...

        Nevertheless, the Il-96 took off in 1988, and the Tu-204 in 1989. So it’s not just a hint...