Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The potential for joint Russian-Chinese collaboration

Collapse
X
Collapse
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • JSR
    JSR
    Rank 5 Registered User
    • Aug 2011
    • 4976

    #41
    Originally posted by Deino View Post


    Pardon if you feel offended, but JSR JSR's poats are rarely coreect. So why should a dated and never successful design be better than a brand new one basen on latesttechnologies?
    to develop the Il-96 is nothing but a waste ... it will never be more successful in mind of the lastest Western airliners and only for a handful of special mission birxs fur Russia?
    IL96M is digitally created from ground up with latest avionics and will be in production for long time. its flying speed and altitude will not be any different than airline built with composite materials with far lower acquisition cost and much less engineering resources needed in modification. your criteria of success measurement is simply wrong. and I don't want to teach the right criteria.

    Comment

    • Deino
      Rank 5 Registered User
      • Jan 2000
      • 4225

      #42
      Originally posted by JSR View Post
      IL96M is digitally created from ground up with latest avionics and will be in production for long time. its flying speed and altitude will not be any different than airline built with composite materials with far lower acquisition cost and much less engineering resources needed in modification. your criteria of success measurement is simply wrong. and I don't want to teach the right criteria.
      Yes, it will be as economic and sales wise successful as the R-77 will reach a 800km range as you claimed. It will be built at best in a few examples as an aid to keep Ilyushin at work ... otherwise in mind of range, fuel consumption and efficiency it will fall short behind any other modern airliner like the 777x, the 787, A350 and soon the CR929 ... but if you think your criteria are the right ones, you must be correct even if noone agrees with you.
      ...

      He was my North, my South, my East and West,
      My working week and my Sunday rest,
      My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
      I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

      The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
      Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
      Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
      For nothing now can ever come to any good.
      -------------------------------------------------
      W.H.Auden (1945)

      Comment

      • wilhelm
        Rank 5 Registered User
        • Dec 2004
        • 1658

        #43
        The Boeing 767 first flew almost 40 years ago, and flew 7 years before the first Il-96.
        It is still in production for military purposes.
        As such, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with Russia choosing an updated Il-96 for military or govermental service, particularly seeing as it is wholly Russian manufactured. From a security point of view, it makes sense.
        It also makes sense keeping the manufacturing facility alive, and technicians employed.

        edit: for interests sake, there is commonality on SOME of the fuselage manufacturing components stretching all the way through the decades through the Boeing 707, 727, 737, and 757... particularly the upper fuselage lobe.
        Last edited by wilhelm; 29th July 2019, 17:35.

        Comment

        • XB-70
          Rank 4 Registered User
          • May 2018
          • 350

          #44
          It also makes sense keeping the manufacturing facility alive, and technicians employed.
          That's where the real need is. Keep the talent proficient while they finish the necessary R&D for next gen designs. That's also why the new Il-96 is only a slight upgrade, just enough to do this task.

          But the next gen designs will almost certainly be more CR929 based. And it's not like they can't make a fully Russianized variant at will. CRAIC's main design center is in Moscow - the Russians are going to have all the data.

          Comment

          • Deino
            Rank 5 Registered User
            • Jan 2000
            • 4225

            #45
            Originally posted by wilhelm View Post
            The Boeing 767 first flew almost 40 years ago, and flew 7 years before the first Il-96.
            It is still in production for military purposes.
            As such, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with Russia choosing an updated Il-96 for military or govermental service, particularly seeing as it is wholly Russian manufactured. From a security point of view, it makes sense.
            It also makes sense keeping the manufacturing facility alive, and technicians employed.

            edit: for interests sake, there is commonality on SOME of the fuselage manufacturing components stretching all the way through the decades through the Boeing 707, 727, 737, and 757... particularly the upper fuselage lobe.
            Thanks for that post and again... an Il-96 based design might indeed - as I noted - be successful in these special roles, but - and here specificly to this topic Sino-Russian cooperation - why should a 40 year old refurbished design be economically and as such in this cooperation be more successful than a brand new design, that is just under development?

            To think, CHINA would give up the CR929 and step in into further developing this dated design is absurd ...
            ...

            He was my North, my South, my East and West,
            My working week and my Sunday rest,
            My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
            I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

            The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
            Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
            Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
            For nothing now can ever come to any good.
            -------------------------------------------------
            W.H.Auden (1945)

            Comment

            • LMFS
              Rank 4 Registered User
              • Feb 2018
              • 519

              #46
              Originally posted by Deino View Post


              Pardon if you feel offended, but JSR JSR's poats are rarely coreect. So why should a dated and never successful design be better than a brand new one basen on latesttechnologies?
              to develop the Il-96 is nothing but a waste ... it will never be more successful in mind of the lastest Western airliners and only for a handful of special mission birxs fur Russia?
              No problem, I just think it is better that we respect each other, it costs nothing and really helps a lot to keep the forum healthy.

              As a matter of fact, the Russian government is developing the Il-96 further. First to cover the local wide body market, which is currently and outrageously serving to flush money to the same countries that are applying siege warfare to Russia. This makes no sense at all, having as they have a very good design whose only problem is not being current in regards of systems, cabin design and motorization. These are all relatively minor issues for a country with the know how and the low cost, highly capable industrial base Russia has. They will stretch the fuselage by ca. 10 m, improving the economics of its operation and serving as a stop-gap measure to avoid this huge loss of money. It is still to be seen if the CR929 will substitute it or not, since the whole fuselage will be built in China and probably setting up a new line for it, when the Il-96 can be already manufactured in Russia, is not cheap or even contractually possible. So to say, Chinese need the CR929, Russia not so much and participated because they would make good business with it. As said, in the medium term the Il-96 can receive 4 x PD-14 if they deem it convenient or further down the road be turned into twin engine plane with the PD-35.

              Comment

              • JSR
                JSR
                Rank 5 Registered User
                • Aug 2011
                • 4976

                #47
                Originally posted by Deino View Post

                Yes, it will be as economic and sales wise successful as the R-77 will reach a 800km range as you claimed
                Boeing and Airbus need huge government support and multinational supply chain before they become economical viable some where 500 plane per model assuming high production rates.
                . It will be built at best in a few examples as an aid to keep Ilyushin at work
                is IL-476 build in few example. that is simultaneously developed transport, tanker and AWACS. so why you think IL-96M will be fewer.
                ... otherwise in mind of range, fuel consumption and efficiency
                current IL96 can go upto 10,000km. engine acq cost will be cheap as it will be shared with mass produced transports and smaller short to medium haul jets. there will be no need oversize engine development over short term..
                it will fall short behind any other modern airliner like the 777x, the 787, A350
                . past is not indicator of future. the more Russia independent in aviation. it can apply non market approaches. low interest rates will not save.
                and soon the CR929 ... but if you think your criteria are the right ones, you must be correct even if noone agrees with you.
                CR929 is not soon. even CR919 is a decade away before it can even make first 50 planes. that assuming US does not sanction it and Chinese run out of money.
                your pretty much clueless about aviation projects and certainly don't know anything about advancement in various technologies otherwise you wont bring R-77 example.



                Comment

                • Vans
                  Rank 5 Registered User
                  • Oct 2015
                  • 155

                  #48
                  Il-96 based AWACS and Tanker would be more cost efficient than the Il-76 based one in terms of operations.
                  Since the CR projects will probably take at least another decade. Il-96 could work now.

                  but a smaller AWACS (like a balanced beam radar used by Australia) and an MPA type aircraft.. the MC-21 could definitely work and is flying now.

                  Comment

                  • Deino
                    Rank 5 Registered User
                    • Jan 2000
                    • 4225

                    #49
                    Originally posted by Vans View Post
                    Il-96 based AWACS and Tanker would be more cost efficient than the Il-76 based one in terms of operations.
                    Since the CR projects will probably take at least another decade. Il-96 could work now.

                    but a smaller AWACS (like a balanced beam radar used by Australia) and an MPA type aircraft.. the MC-21 could definitely work and is flying now.

                    Agreed, but it will be a limited market only and IMO more aimed for the RuAF but not the PLAAF... and for the MC-21, China has its own C919, so for any special mission birds I don't expect China to buy the MC-21.

                    Again, if this topic is on any Sino-Russian cooperation I won't tangle any chances of these proposals to be used by the RuAF.
                    ...

                    He was my North, my South, my East and West,
                    My working week and my Sunday rest,
                    My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
                    I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

                    The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
                    Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
                    Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
                    For nothing now can ever come to any good.
                    -------------------------------------------------
                    W.H.Auden (1945)

                    Comment

                    • J-20
                      Rank 4 Registered User
                      • Jan 2018
                      • 255

                      #50
                      Originally posted by Deino View Post


                      Agreed, but it will be a limited market only and IMO more aimed for the RuAF but not the PLAAF... and for the MC-21, China has its own C919, so for any special mission birds I don't expect China to buy the MC-21.

                      Again, if this topic is on any Sino-Russian cooperation I won't tangle any chances of these proposals to be used by the RuAF.
                      nah billy bobby. C919 is chock full of western parts. any military jet based off of it will be finger licking good by Monsieur Trump

                      Comment

                      • Deino
                        Rank 5 Registered User
                        • Jan 2000
                        • 4225

                        #51
                        Originally posted by J-20 View Post

                        nah billy bobby. C919 is chock full of western parts. any military jet based off of it will be finger licking good by Monsieur Trump
                        Which besides the engines? ... and also:

                        1. Do you really think the PLAAF will intriduce the MS-21 when the C919 is ready?

                        2. Mr. Trump won't last forever... thank god.
                        ...

                        He was my North, my South, my East and West,
                        My working week and my Sunday rest,
                        My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
                        I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

                        The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
                        Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
                        Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
                        For nothing now can ever come to any good.
                        -------------------------------------------------
                        W.H.Auden (1945)

                        Comment

                        • XB-70
                          Rank 4 Registered User
                          • May 2018
                          • 350

                          #52
                          J-20 is actually right about the C919....the weather radar is from Rockwell Collins, APU and landing gear is from Honeywell, etc. It is a long way from being a safe platform to base a military program on. Even when the CJ-1000 engines are ready it still might not be suited for the PLAAF. The engine's shaft is made by GKN Aerospace, and MTU is involved in making the engine as well.

                          That said, I agree that China likely won't procure MS-21 for military purposes. At the start I said that possible areas for military aerospace cooperation are CR929 derivatives, the heavy lift helicopter they are talking about making, and little else.

                          Comment

                          • Multirole
                            Rank 5 Registered User
                            • Jan 2000
                            • 903

                            #53
                            What are the chances of a Il-96 based MPA. MC-21 as an MPA might not offer sufficient range for countries without forward bases. I would estimate its combat radius to be 1/3 that of the Tu-142. Where as the Il-96 based MPA would have comparable range. Not to mention 4 engines are always better over water.
                            pb::

                            Comment

                            • JSR
                              JSR
                              Rank 5 Registered User
                              • Aug 2011
                              • 4976

                              #54
                              Originally posted by Deino View Post

                              Which besides the engines? ... and also

                              1. Do you really think the PLAAF will intriduce the MS-21 when the C919 is ready?
                              when is C919 ready?
                              PLAAF still flying D30 powered aircraft. MS21 and C919 not same capability from start.Go to Irkut website. MS21 can fly directly Moscow-Valdivostok. And that not even the bigger 400 version.there is simply more flexibility in MS21 design. C919 is more comparable to ARJ21 type project.
                              2. Mr. Trump won't last forever... thank god.
                              There is enough momentum behind policies that it will continue.

                              Comment

                              • JSR
                                JSR
                                Rank 5 Registered User
                                • Aug 2011
                                • 4976

                                #55
                                Originally posted by Multirole View Post
                                What are the chances of a Il-96 based MPA. MC-21 as an MPA might not offer sufficient range for countries without forward bases. I would estimate its combat radius to be 1/3 that of the Tu-142. Where as the Il-96 based MPA would have comparable range. Not to mention 4 engines are always better over water.
                                IL96M engines are 10% more powerfull and more fuel efficient than IL96. Special mission Tu-204 about 10.5k range. IL96M with 24k range feasible. Faster training with two sets of crew. higher cruising speed.
                                https://weaponews.com/news/30351-the...f-defence.html

                                Comment

                                • Deino
                                  Rank 5 Registered User
                                  • Jan 2000
                                  • 4225

                                  #56
                                  Originally posted by JSR View Post

                                  IL96M engines are 10% more powerfull and more fuel efficient than IL96. Special mission Tu-204 about 10.5k range. IL96M with 24k range feasible. Faster training with two sets of crew. higher cruising speed.
                                  https://weaponews.com/news/30351-the...f-defence.html
                                  Would you do us a favour and stop posting BS until the Il96M reaches indeed a range of 24k km, the R-77 reaches 800km, until the RuN has ist next generation carrier fleet, the PAK-DA operational and maybe even the Su-57 in comparable numbers, that would justify to call it operational?

                                  Otherwise the amount of BS you post is barely readable ... I'm really not sure, what you smoke or consume nor why such an amount of deliberately posted false information, fake and BS is allowed here, in nearly each and every other Forum it would be called trolling.

                                  ...

                                  He was my North, my South, my East and West,
                                  My working week and my Sunday rest,
                                  My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
                                  I thought that love would last forever; I was wrong.

                                  The stars are not wanted now; put out every one:
                                  Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
                                  Pour away the ocean and sweep up the woods:
                                  For nothing now can ever come to any good.
                                  -------------------------------------------------
                                  W.H.Auden (1945)

                                  Comment

                                  • J-20
                                    Rank 4 Registered User
                                    • Jan 2018
                                    • 255

                                    #57
                                    Originally posted by XB-70 View Post
                                    J-20 is actually right about the C919....the weather radar is from Rockwell Collins, APU and landing gear is from Honeywell, etc. It is a long way from being a safe platform to base a military program on. Even when the CJ-1000 engines are ready it still might not be suited for the PLAAF. The engine's shaft is made by GKN Aerospace, and MTU is involved in making the engine as well.

                                    That said, I agree that China likely won't procure MS-21 for military purposes. At the start I said that possible areas for military aerospace cooperation are CR929 derivatives, the heavy lift helicopter they are talking about making, and little else.
                                    I agree. always trust the information from users here named after aircraft. J-20, XB-70, Phantom II, Trident.. and not people named after food.

                                    and yeah it won't be likely purely because China needs to let go of its nationalisms which is preventing them from thinking strategically.

                                    let go of your nationalisms bruh

                                    Comment

                                    • Multirole
                                      Rank 5 Registered User
                                      • Jan 2000
                                      • 903

                                      #58
                                      Originally posted by Deino View Post
                                      Would you do us a favour and stop posting BS until the Il96M reaches indeed a range of 24k km, the R-77 reaches 800km, until the RuN has ist next generation carrier fleet, the PAK-DA operational and maybe even the Su-57 in comparable numbers, that would justify to call it operational?
                                      That is indeed unrealistic. I cant see why anyone would need a MPA with more than 15,000 km range. If you need more than that IFR is optional. Being a wide body is also unnecessary and we dont know anything about the Il-96s low altitude capability, even though general trend is moving away from this niche. Though theoretically possible, there is no large Il-96 fleet to leverage advantage, which is the main reason anyone would base it on an airliner.

                                      I would still say optimally they would prefer to develop a specialized CR919 variant as that has prospects for mass production, or perhaps a dedicated all altitude design like a super sized Kawasaki P-1.
                                      pb::

                                      Comment

                                      • wilhelm
                                        Rank 5 Registered User
                                        • Dec 2004
                                        • 1658

                                        #59
                                        Il-96 is massive overkill for the MPA role.
                                        it weighs in at around 270t fully loaded.
                                        To put that into context, it is 50 tons heavier than a B-52 bomber, and more than 3 times the weight of a Nimrod.
                                        A twin engine, such as a Tu-204, Superjet, or an MC-21, or one of the new Russian twin transport aircraft in the pipeline makes better economic sense.

                                        On co operation, China has developed its aviation industry massively, but there are core competencies that Russia still has that are as good, and in some cases better, than anything in the world.
                                        For example...engines..large helicopters..etc
                                        In these fields, co operation will continue.
                                        Co-operation will i think grow in the civil aviation market, and I suspect in space too.
                                        Last edited by wilhelm; 1st August 2019, 00:40.

                                        Comment

                                        • Vans
                                          Rank 5 Registered User
                                          • Oct 2015
                                          • 155

                                          #60
                                          almost all MPA aircraft thus far use a small airliner for the role. P-3 was the 707, P-8 is the 737. Japanese P-1 is 737 sized. the Atlantique is even smaller.

                                          Comment

                                          Unconfigured Ad Widget

                                          Collapse

                                           

                                          Working...
                                          X