Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
IL-96-400M - the future Russian flagship
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 вер 2018
- Ilyushin IL-96-400M is the Russian flagship airliner modernization program. The project includes the development of the plane with increased capacity, improved flight and economic performance targeted to return of the model to the commercial air transportation market.
Thank you for watching!
Subscribe to the channel, comment, like!
If you want to support Skyships and our work, welcome to our Patreon. We will create some special content for you there: / skyships
Our Facebook: / skyshipscom
Our Instagram: / skyships_world
I love watching videos of Russian airliners because as a Westerner, I’m too used to seeing Boeing and Airbus designs. You begin to appreciate the small details that make the Russian aircraft different. Small nuances in the shape and configurations.
I miss the older days of flying the 60s-90s had interesting Designs everything looks so similar now.
im with you. i feel the same way.
Me too
I don't think you'll be seeing many Boeings from now on...
@@HC-cb4yp Certainly not if Boeing continues on their present trajectory. Boeing has shown, in times past, an adaptable nature and a willingness to change to meet new challenges. Let's hope they display the characteristics that have made them great in the past going forward.
Thank you for making such great content about Russian aviation in English!
He has a tendency to do this I enjoy Russian aviation but Boeing always tops all and Airbus will always copy everyone and stay in the dumps of European failures
@@AviTheWolf airbus is by far the best aviation company
@Bruno Kunda how about a md11??????? Thats pretty nice...
@@Marco-wz3ffBEST AT STEALING MD12 IDEAS
Russians couldn't invent fire if you gave them a whole book of matches.
I realize that twin engines are more efficient. But I much prefer the look of quad engine airliners to twins (especially big twins like the 777).
I do too, though I start to strongly prefer twins over quads the smaller the aircraft gets. In example, I LOVE how the Embraer's look with their oversized almost bubble looking engines haha
planes have gotten uglier over the years if you think about it.
we had Concorde, then 747, and now 737max...
@@livethefuture2492 I never understand what people see as beautiful on the 747. Its just a cargo plane with seats on it. Airbus A350 is the real beauty to me.
@I'm Out Sory but for me a "classic beauty" is somethig like the Douglas Dc-3 or DC-4. I believe that most people who catalog the 747 as "Queen of the skyes" are mostly americans who believe that they do the best thing in the world in every single category.
@@jo53ha I'd wager it is a good majority Americans with that mentality, yes. I as a Oregonian have never seen the visual appeal of them myself, however. Obviously looks are not important and should play no real role in an airline choosing their aircraft as it simply is illogical and impractical, but, alas, I digress.
This Il-96-400 should be the latest Russian future wide body passenger jetliner. I love those Russian airplanes and like your video because you make an excellent coverage aircraft history which why I’m very interesting about aviation and I love to fly airplanes.
Il-96 400M with PD35 engines. It's going to be an eye opener.
...and 5 years later, we're still waiting. The Russian air industry is a joke.
Seriam motores Kuznetsov ou Soloviev de fabricação russa.
What I know is that the Ilyushin design bureau is studying a re-engine fit, which will make the Il-96-400 a two engined wide-body, as there are *no* customers for the variant because it’s a quad-jet! For me it’s awesome! And I wish to see some new costumers, especially for the two engined variant! Greetings from Saudi Arabia 🇸🇦😁✋
I wish Russian aviation well. The competition is fierce. Russian engineers are clearly capable, but, there seems to be the problem of not cooperating with western engineers, success is questionable. Western companies will not be sleeping.. Nevertheless, good luck fellow aviation pioneers.
I don't think they'll need to collaborate with "western" companies and engineers at all. No one needs to collaborate nor work with those already deep in experience and success to find their own. It's simply far more difficult, and requires far more imagination and open-mindedness to find ways to fix problems and reduce the pricing on the projects and their planes once finished and being used. I applaud Russia's aerospace manufacturers for their dedication and undying determination to figure stuff out on their own. I think the problem for them is they are emphasizing their past projects as a focus too much. They haven't found that happy balance they need yet.
@EpiDemic117 Regional airlines in Russia especially like S7, Ural, Utair, Rossiya, Pobeda, etc
Nicely said Bill. Competition is healthy and such all the best
Yeah they gotta find a niche. Hopefully the MC-21 excels at something and it can find a niche
@Star Trek Theory Every comment you make is totally antithetical to the _Star Trek_ ethos. Why do you even watch the show?
10 years ago, I flew with Atlant Soyuz in their Il-86 (close enough). It's very impressive, especially when you board soviet-style, i.e. by the ramp in the lower fuselage.
A terrific looking aircraft and one I wish I could fly on someday. Makes a nice change from Western aircraft.
Are you insane? All of Russian aircrafts were commercial failure, and many of them do not meet basic safety requirements. I was working for aviation company in Russia, believe me, all who was able to escape that North-West Korea, already did it
@@yuricherkasov You guys should have stayed Soviet Union.
@@yuricherkasov Да ли се твој коментар одноcи и на Антонов?
@@yuricherkasov I feel kind of bad for the Russian aircraft engineers, especially in the Soviet era. How do you design a plane that will be a commercial success in a country where the vast majority of people can't afford airline tickets? That opens up a whole new argument, but just looking at the engineers, it seems like there were in a pretty futile position.
Pallas Cat I trust that you have more first hand experience than me. But just look at the condition which they operated in. I would imagine any western aeroplane would have given up long before they did.
I love the IL-96. I wish it was more viable for other customers around the world. I hope Ilyushin can remedy the efficiency issues and give her a new lease on life.
They cannot remedy it, its a heavy old design, very inefficient design. Only way would be to lighten the airframe and make it a twin. But that will mean too much work. The MC21 is where the money should go and the upcoming heavy airliner project with China (CR929) if it ever happens will be a good one.
Thanks for all the detail. Background issues are much more absorbing than in-flight recordings and cockpit videos of countless safe landings.
I think it is unfortunate the IL-96 is caught in sanctions and funding issues. The aircraft has proven itself as a superbly safe airliner. And I think too much is made of it's four engine configuration. If we think well outside the box; the IL-96 could become a great option for smaller regional airports. Bypassing busy hubs for direct overseas flights. The dash-100 model already had a 2600 meter runway ability. If you substituted RB211-535E-4 in the 43,000 lb. thrust class; you would have a very quiet aircraft with UN-parrelled short field ability for a genuine wide-body aircraft. Add in a modern glass cockpit and you would have a niche market winner.
4 Engine passenger jets are basically dead now 😢
I tend to think that is true... oh dear
@@opus_workshop:You are right about everything... except that airline crew (both flight crew and cabin crew) are getting LESS AND LESS WAGES and the cost of flying is going down and down... so ... perhaps things are not all that bad for travellers... not so good for me! I think flying is VERY GOOD VALUE. Imagine if you took a taxi or an Uber that far :-)
How
Very large Airliners are basically dead.
@Rafael Suprayogi both are dying, 747 still has used as a cargo plane, nobody is buying the a380
Congratulations and thanks for such an enlightening video.
Just a linguistic remark:
What seems to be a _'C'_ in the МС‑21 is actually an _'S'_ for the former is written in Cyrillic Alphabet.
МС‑21 stands for _'Магистральный Самолёт 21 века'_ which transliterates _'Magistralny Samolyot 21 veka'_ and translates as _'Mainline Aircraft of the 21st century'._
In Latin-based Alphabets it should be written *_MS-21_* instead.
You forgot something very important... the author is Russian. So... he used the way, that Irkut company used to write on their promotional material. It sounds odd... and doesn’t make much sense on behalf of Irkut and UAC.
@@Polybibus Russian video authors may be wrong too. In all documents, it is referred to as MS-21.
Boy, you are very much precise in the comments. You really understand aircraft manufacturers and aircraft projects. Thansk for sharing! what a privilege
Sky is absolutely the most informed, interesting, and articulate narrator on UA-cam! Love these vids!
The engines look as if they are all low-bypass engines, until the 1993 version. The pods look identical to the 707.
They are turbojet non-bypass. Just like the old Boeing 707. All thrust comes from the exhaust end. Turbofan engines are bypass types. They are more fuel efficient. Because some of the thrust comes from the fan in the front, like a propeller.
Il-86 (old airplane, which is the predecessor and the basis for Il-96) had low-bypass turbofan Kuznetsov NK-86 (bypass ratio 1.15). All Il-96 have high-bypass turbofan engines from the start - Aviadvigatel PS-90 (bypass ratio 4.4), Pratt & Whitney PW2000 (bypass ratio 6.0), Pratt & Whitney PW2337 (bypass ratio 6.0). Soviet/Russian civil aviation stopped using simple turbojet engines in the mid-60s (look Tu-134 and Tu-154 which were the two main workhorses of Aeroflot in the 70's and 80's).
Big modern huge High Bypass Turbofans get 80% or more of their thrust from the huge fan. Its more like a Turboshaft engine of a helicopter or turboprop, where the shaft is used to do rotational work...in this case, drive the ducted fan...rather than attain all thrust from the small turbine core as a turbojet does.
@@kosmosyche The Soviets were a little behind in turbofan engine technology compared to the West when the Il-86 was developed. That's why turbojets were used instead. The underwing pod design was also somewhat controversial in the USSR at the time due to its association with Western airliners. But it was a very reliable albeit inefficient airliner that only experienced a few incidents with (I think) only one involving any deaths.
@@icemachine79 Dude, do you even read? What turbojets were used instead and where? What models exactly are you talking about, because neither Il-86 nor Il-96 ever used turbojets. I clearly wrote what engines each of them used, they were always turbofans with differrent bypass ratios, you can check it in wikipedia or any other source, if you don't believe me. I repeat again, the Soviets stopped using turbojets in civilian aviation in the late 60's.
Meanwhile US/EU astronauts fly in Il 76 when they are training Zero Gravity in Moscow...they fly in TU 134( Kosmos airlines) when they go to Baikonour...fly in Soyuz Rockets..fly inside ISS which have been made almost 80% in Russia....Russian tech are good..Russian comercial development and maintenance are bad!...
Their biggest problem is after market support. Spares are hard to get and maintenance expertise is something they dont share.
They even used the yak 141 to build the f35.
@@samiaburas1163 Yakovlev Yak 141 and F-35 are just a case of great minds think alike although the Yak 141 may be the basis of the Su 75 or it may be another case of great minds think alike
You rock! Thanks for these videos on the exotic airplanes we don't see in the West.
I love the il 96 especially the Cockpit with its flight engineer
I love the looks of the IL-96. I hope it does well in the current climate. Reminds me of the A340. Even the center main landing gear.
Totally different plane, strange comparison
Love learning more about Russian planes! Thank you for the channel and the great aircraft it informs us of!
Love the body lines, on these Russian jets. My first exposure to them, was when I was a kid. I had a small plastic, IL-62 model. Still have it☺️. That captivated me into finding out, what kind of plane it was. Red flags go up for me, as in the fourth, center seating arrangement, on the IL-96-300. In a crash scenario, that configuration may hamper people, possibly trying to exit the aircraft, in a concise manner.
Oh, and that profound statement @13:38, "The CR-929, will be assembled in China. Everything is assembled, in China". Yeah, all you have to do is, go out and buy something, and you'll see🙄!!!
Looks like a 707, that is a compliment.
Outstanding, as usual. Thank you.
I would love to see IL 96 with two engines.
kingsofserbiangameplay 162 we are never going to get new quad engine jets from Boeing or Airbus again, so I like that they have kept with 4
Exactly. With 2 engines it would compete well with the 787
787? lol. is il already made from Fiber composite components? dont think so. and not with comfort from what the actually planes have.
How about saying the same about the A380 you pessimist and envious fool.
kingsofserbiangameplay 162 I like 4 engine not 2 .
Airbus took the 340 out of production in favor of the 380, I believe that the IL-96 with some engine upgrades will fill the void. It's priced much lower than an Boeing 777 or Airbus 340 (when it was in production).
Thanks for the great video. Unlike current IL-96 modifications, a modification with two engines would certainly attract a lot of attention. Complemented with government support, a twin-engine IL-96 can be quite successful.
A lot of the two-engine/four-engine debate will come down to one thing: reliability (which subtends maintainability in its arc). If the engine design can be made reliable enough, two somewhat larger engines should be a better choice than four smaller.
I always find the spacing of twin engines these days to be a bit wide - wouldn't that put the thrust line a bit far from center in the event of an engine failure?
Very good and interesting video production. Regarding the IL-96-400M, the design doesn't make sense unless the Russian military requires a homegrown aircraft with four engine redundancy.
The IL-96 appears to be using low bypass turbofans. Low bypass turbofans are less powerful than high bypass turbofans, and turbojets.
While I have some doubts a 4-engine version could succeed on the marked the potential twin-engine one with the composite wings talked about could perhaps find a market. Either way I hope they succeed and the same goes for the Chinese joint project, more competition is healthy for the market.
You were right a 4 engine widebody is just not it
Amazingly informative video, very very interesting thanks.
00:35 that is a powerful car
In Soviet Russia car drives you)
it is pilot car!! it is not pulling this airplane!!! :_D
It'sa RRRRussia carrr.
lol
GAZ-24 Volga
Outstanding analysis. I love the IL-96, but, unfortunately, I think it's time may have passed. Like the Lockheed Tristar, a beautiful, well designed airplane that just couldn't find a market.
I've been in aviation all my life in Texas, and I love sky's videos, and the insight to the Russian aviation industry. Lets face it, when it comes to fighters, the Russians have that sowed up with some of the best in the air. And now there airliners look to be just as good as there fighters. Can you imagine what American and Russia can accomplish together? Just Imagine where we would both be if the money wasted on the cold war had been put into an effort like this. American got a serious wake up calla few years ago in Russian rocket engine technology. You guys were years ahead of us on those closed cycle engines. Keep up the good work Sky, you have many friends over here in the US. I'm proud to be one of them.
Да, я согласен полностью 🤝 Но эта чёртова политика разьединяет нас всех особенно сегодня. Надеюсь и верю, что наступит то время, когда мы будем осваивать космическое пространство не делить людей на русских или американцев или каких-либо других национальностей. И не зависимо от расовой пренадлежности
Nice performance.
Nice flight with IL96.
Best looking airliner out there
I would love to see a twin engined IL-96
SurprisedSammich photoshop
It can happen soon - when they start to produce the new Russian engine PD-35
As a person who was born in the early 60's & raised in the US all my life, I have always been impressed by the superiority of Russian areo space technology - From Sputnik to Soyouz. In my humble opinion, It'll only be a matter of time before Russian airliner technology exceeds that of the "west".
It might exceed but it will be always behind competition.
by that time I think we'll be traveling by teleportation...
Seriously ?
Sky, your videos keep getting better and better
The 3 landing gear is a must for Russians to land on less then ideal runways. Russian planes will never compete with boing or airbus. Not because they aren't good enough, but because the free market is not so free
@Brilliant that's more to do with lack of maintaining a fleet. Not built quality.
@Brilliant yes as I said maintenance was a big issue. And have you actually flown in a Russian made passenger plane? I have and yet my worst experience was on a delta airline flight. Lmao that was a piece of garbage.
@Brilliant in my personal experience of planes , the biggest difference was the sound level inside the cabin. I think you could call it "creature comfort ". The tu 154 was so rattle and loud inside I questioned if we will make it lmao. Where's the 747 was like a cadillac. Then again. One was operated by Malev the other British Air. Yes "standards " is a good word. One is good enough, the other quality. But not effects reliability
Did you ever sit and ride in a car that never got mechanically maintained properly, and the owner claims that its a great car that he never spent money on. its the same thing, everything needs maintenance. don't matter who makes it
@@mmangumry exactly my point. No matter what it is , without maintenance it will fall apart
Be very careful about having Chinese manufactured components. Through a deal we had with CNAC / CAAC they built the first 25 noses for the MD-95. Absolute garbage and they tried to hide errors. I had a nightly phone conference with them and it was next to impossible to have them produce any quality. We once had them build a pressure bulkhead. We scraped it as non salvageable. A simple doubler for empanage join was over their heads. We went through all this to attain mining rights in China (rare earth). Nose 26 on was produced by Hyundai Heavy Industries in Korea. These guys were fantastic and made a quality article.
Tom Joseph was this in the 90s? I think nowadays they are getting a lot better. Like a lot...
@@WorldEagleKW Yes it was. I left BCAG/MDC at the end of 2001. I also remember at one of the Paris Airshows, China had a joint booth with MBB of Germany. On display they had a scale mockup of our MD-91 UHB modification. We had built a demonstrator but fuel became cheaper and it was cancelled. I am not sure how they stole the technology from us.
@@tomjoseph1444 If they could steal the blueprints for the Trident 2 missile system then they can steal non military secrets from anywhere.
Non Ducor Duco typical over-arrogant Chinese person.
I recall visiting MAKS in 2001, going aboard the IL-96 with the Collins cockpit. IL-96T was the cargo version which received U.S. FAA certification under FAR-25, however the bilateral agreement limits heavy Russian aircraft to the Cargo market to this day. More work needs to be done in order to expand the Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement to recognize Russian passenger airliners, helicopters, engines, etc. In those days I was meeting people such as Alexander Rubtsov (seen in film), Gennadi Novozhilov, Nikolai Talikov and other leaders in Russian aviation. Long story also involves Tupolev, Beriev ANTK, Rosoboronexport, and a bunch of helicopter people.
I flew with IL-96-400 in 2001. BKK-SVO-BKK. It was different. The one I flew was using the Perm PS-90 Engines. I felt more vibration compare to A-340 (Also 4 engines) And certainly little bit more noisy. The toilet was pretty strange (Very low)
I saw one in the airport I worked in 2011. Bit suprising, as this is in Greenland. Beautiful plane.
Well done on an outstanding production on this aircraft. I find all your videos informative, astute and very well put together. Keep up the great work! Thanks.
Thanks a lot for this excellent video. Having said that if it was up to me to decide the future of the IL-96-400, I would wait until the PD-35 engine was ready as well as the avionics of the CR-929 and then release the IL-96-400x
CR-929 has the option of Chinese and Western avionics, while engines can have Russian, Chinese or Western (American, German, French and British) aircraft engines
By the time all those technology can be incorporated onto a plane the size of -400X, CR-939 will be ready.
Peizxcv But you have to remember that, according to the video the CR-929 is similar to airbus a330 and Boeing 787 while the IL-96-400 is similar to Boeing 777 and airbus a350
FUZZY LOGIC Yes. But after 929 is finished Russia and China will scale up the tech for 939. When all those technology is ready and UAC can build -400X, 939 would be ready as well.
Peizxcv But if they scale up the 929 obtaining a stretched version, the 939, then it would not make sense to build the IL-96-400X
I love Sky's videos ❤
Il96 is aesthetically the most beautifull airliner
Amazing video. Cool aircraft
I like the 4 engines
Very educational. Good info.
...and five years later, we're still waiting.
il-96 whit the modern engine just like pd-14 or pd-18 transform to the exallant aircraft ofcurce whit a new and modern interior
It is quite simple. The engines must be increased to five. Or with tail mounted quad jets, nine.
or maybe just two, if economical viability is a consideration
Two more tail engines like S.H.I.E.L.D. Globemaster are enough for STOL.
I saw this plane at Belgrade airport few days ago !
Love your videos. Please make videos about antonov aircrafts also.
Ilyushin should just steal some GE 90s :))
If the il-96 is not equipped with normal thrust reversers on its engines, doesnt it need that additional bogie with its 4 extra main wheels in order to have more braking power?
An il-96 came into CYYZ a while ago and I got to walk around, and was extremely surprised to see it had full-size brakes - on its nosewheels!
I've flown a max weight B-727. It had a nose-wheel brakes as well.
I must say that Russian aircraft have a distinct look...and their lines are beautiful! I still think that the TU-154 is a beautiful airplane too!
Your knowledge of aircraft is impressive. Thank you!
10:49 you forget about a340
A340 was junk the day it was made. Only survived by massive government subsidy.
w8stral that’s every modern Boeing plane
@@columc dream on
w8stral has lol ok
I like ponies
LOL... they need 4 engines incase they have to fly on two as Russian engines aren't worth shit.
Daddy, why do they use 4 engines in the 21 century? Because only two of them will work for the whole flight!
LOL ....
@@jackmehoff2312 Will you say the same thing about a340
@@jackmehoff2312 there is nothing wrong with is engines. There are just no Russian only powerful enough ones. Buying American, which was planned in 90s, is not reliable due to political issues.
Noob Saibot Of course not... the A340 has better engines.
Jack mehoff - And, of course, the A340 uses four engines just for fun! You are such an idiot.
I really like your videos. Keep it up man
Four engine jetliners are obsolete but, I still would like to see this jet make a successful run in its current configuration. Especially, in the latest Aeroflot colors, I would like to have seen it parked amongst airliners around the world. A majestic airplane.
They have no choice under embargo..so it will do for Russian airliners that can no linger access Boeing and Airbus jets..
The russian aviation industry, while aiming at the commercial business, must understand the following: 2-engined, composite built-planes, is the rule. A composite-built plane means a lighter plane, meaning no need to be 4-engined. While 2-engined aircraft means a fleet less costly to operate. However, the most important of all: Fusion all russian aviation industries, focused on civilian commercial business, into 1. This happened in the US, where once upon a time, you could find at least 3 different manufacturers (Boeing, Lockheed, McDonell Douglas as the biggest). Now Boeing is the only one focused in the commercial business. In the case of the EU, it is Airbus, working as a conglomerate (because of the supply chain). Considering how difficult of today to compete in the commercial business, makes no sense to see Sukhoi building one type of airplane, then Ilyushin working on another kind of project, and finally UAC doing business with the chinese... Better create a conglomerate of russian aviation industries, focused on the commercial market, just like Airbus. We know the military business is another story, where all of them can still compete on their own terms (for the domestic and foreign markets). But considering how difficult is to compete in the world-stage, in the commercial business, that's the best course of action for the russian industry to be competitive.
I fully agree with Felipe here. There are just too many Russian aircraft industries competing for the same piece of the Russian airline business cake i.e mainly for Aeroflot, S7 Airlines, Rossiya Airlines, UTair Aviation and Ural Airlines. The Russian aircraft industry of Sukhoi, Illyushin, Yakovlev, Tupolev, Irkut Design, and United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) should combine into one or two main civilian aircraft manufacturers. This will be similar in concept and efficiency to the 3 American aircraft manufacturers merging into one.
@@carsten9168 Every aircraft producter is owned by UAC, so it is just a list of UAC branches.
Composite aircraft is not necessarily wayy lighter.
First of all, you need something to conect the wires and close the circuit for most electronics. If you would not have the metal structure or fuselage, you would need to carry aditional cables. And those things weigh a lot.
Second of all, you need something for lightning protection. Make a plane entirely out of composites without lightning protection, you will be blown out of the sky.
Fixing composites is also harder than fixing metal parts and not anybody can produce them.
So, metal and especially aluminum(alloyed) is still going to be around for quite some time.
That looks like a slavic A340.
I hope they make a new model of Il-96 with new generation engines, it would be awesome.
It would be cool to see in the future a new version with only 2 engines too.
yes!
As a former Rockwell-Collins engineer, it's cool to hear our name mentioned! But I have to point out that Il-96 receiving Rockwell-Collins cockpit in 1993 is technically incorrect, because the unit was still part of Rockwell International until 2001.
Alternately if you were to go by "where are they now", Rockwell-Collins doesn't exist anymore, either. The company was UTC Collins Aerospace in 2018, and is part of Raytheon right now...
Does it come in a quad 23mm autocannon ground attack configuration?
Awesome video. This Il-96X will be awesome too
Right now, UAC/Ilyushin prioritizes its partnership with China's AVIC/COMAC for the CR-929 aircraft.
1980s plane with winglet! Amazing engineering
Great clip, excellent information
The best air plane ✈️ in the world il 96 400 the best plane ✈️ of the future CR 929 su super jet tu 204 the world 🌎 best plane good luck Russia and China from 🇩🇿🇩🇿🇩🇿
I look forward to learning more about it on an upcoming episode of "Air Disasters."
Yep. Russia cant build engines...Except for the US military Atlas 2 rocket.
I'm screaming omg hahahaha
lol, youre mean
that's beyond evil
Dude... This plane has been in service since the 1990s and it's safety record is clean... I consider you doing your research before saying something like that
Marvelous aeronautical engineering!
Great video.☺️
As so often: Russian planes fail not due to the skills of the Russian engineers, but because the lack of a sufficient business model.
shaun king And it comes down to insufficient funding and politics. The U.S. and Europe will never let their duopoly be crumbled by the Russians.
Szabii[Editor] are you say AirBus shot down MH-17 with a missile over Ukraine to protect their market share?!
Russian airliners have always being dependent on government funding and most airlines that bought Russian/Soviet airliners beside Russia itself were Warsaw pact allies and therefore state owned. China is the most likely place an airliner industry could emerge to compete with Boeing and Airbus. Maybe further in the future India in collaboration with Japan, Korea or some other Asian collaboration could emerge. Even Boeing in the future may have to be satisfied with being a more equal partners in an international consortium.
How will Ilyushin be successful with the IL-96-400m when the last four engine plane to "make it" was the B747 introduced in the early 70? No other four engine plane since then has made money for the manufacturer.
A340 was a profitable venture.
@@9999AWC Really? If so, why were they discontinued after selling only 377 of them. At that sales volume, they couldn't have done much more than cover development costs. No, the A340 did not " make it" as a profitable four engine type for Airbus.
@@redlock4004 377 isnt a bad number
@@theblackhundreds7124 The A350 has orders for nearly 900 and the B787 orders for nearly 1400. At 377 they didn't make any money and that's the goal afterall.
Redlock You’re talking as if the A340 was a brand new plane. It wasn’t. It was reported on being profitable.
Meaning they didn’t spend that much making it, from whatever older model they improved.
377 seemed to be profitable.
Opp! And say goodbye to the CR929. "When UA-cam videos are out of date - Next on the 6 o'clock news!"
Very good! Excellent grasp of the details.
It needs two engines to compete and two man cockpit crew.
2 Engine & 2 pilots aircraft are better with fuel efficiencies.
Beautiful machine
Thanks. I like your thorough research and I hope you will make more videos about Russian airliners.
The problem with a lot of these pessimists here is that they, as always, are unable to think outside the box! Everything, to their mind, must only be, can only be the way Boeing and Airbus does stuff! To their mind, nothing else is possible! Sad! If I told them that even with 4 engines, A340-300 was 6% more economical than the mighty B777-200, would they believe?? smh. There is nothing inherently wrong with 4 engines if you can find a way to eliminate the issues which increase operational cost. This has been demonstrated in the business Jet category with Dassault 7X and 8X having trijets and still being superior and more economical than twin-engine competitors. I also gave an example of the A340 above. The Russian approach gives limitless globetrotting capabilities (No ETOPS limitation) while still providing superior field performance (because of 4 engines) and cost reductions because of lower component cost! (Western equipments are pricey!). On the short run, it would not match fuel economy but will make up for it in maintenance cost!! (Have you tried maintaining a RR Trent??). On the long run, the PD14 and PD18R engines hold incredible promise in economy and this will translate into superior economics and low maintenance! Yet, if you don't like it, you can stick to your western products! Nevertheless, there are many of us who appreciate a world where competition and a wide variety of options exist and thrive! Monopoly is ruining the world and nations are being gouged!! I applaud the Russians.
TheMidasMD thanks for pointing this out I agree there’s a lot of Boeing and Airbus sheeple around.
I like the lesser known companies: Embraer (Brazil), Tupolev (Russia). Bombardier (Canada)...lots of great plane builders. I love Lockheed Military planes.
How many Il 96’s does Aeroflot own???
How many Boeing and Airbus aircraft does Aeroflot own?
What has that got to do with anything? There were only 30 IL-96 ever built. The Russian aviation industry is just finally coming out from a decline due to Soviet collapse! They started their renaissance with Sukhoi SSJ100 and are now nearly finished with the MC-21. The final objective would be a modern widebody, of which the IL-96-400M would act as a stopgap measure. The lack of popularity of modern Russian planes has a lot less to do with engineering competence and a lot more to do with politics and finance! I hate to have to lecture but YT sometimes forces it.
+Rick Feith yes... Also, Saab was nice. Their Saab 2000 is a great plane! Bombardier belongs to Airbus now though :/
Thank you for keeping quad jets Russia
This for sure took a lot of research .. impressive!!!
Love seeing a quadjet still being produced. I wish Russia or some other country would produce a viable commercial airplane. I love Boeings but I'm sick of the duopoly they and Airbus have. Not that long ago you'd still see an odd MD11 or an MD 80. Now a 747 is kind of rare. The odd Cubana Tupolevs are thrilling lol. All day it's A320 variant or 737 variant or 777 or A330.
Japan, Russia and China will all be making a breakthrough in the 2020s. New airliners are on the horizon. Won't take down Airbus and Boeing, but will replace them for domestic use.
Good video. What about Tupolev?
Andrei Tupolev! One of the biggest aviation pioneers in history!!
They have the Tu-204. I hope a video is made about it.
upgrading the tu204 with the new russian engines is a far more sensible option. making it effectively a tu214 neo.
They're developing the MC-21 instead
Russia just have to bild a Antonov An-225 with 6 engine's and full it up with seat's, then you can fly from UK to US for 50 Dollar's. becorce there can sit 2000 people in the plaine, only the plaine will make people to come and pay for a trip, becorse it is the biggest plaine on earth.
@@MasaGuitar98 They are not thinking. They already did as far as I remember.
And it's not much to sell. The main parts of Antonov(aka engineers) were already working in Russia under russian contracts, so yeah, they are screwed
I wish this project every success.It would be a good thing to see a new player in the widebody market,and a resurgence in the Russian aircraft industry.
Not everybody wants or needs Airbus and Boeing products.
Excellent,informative review😎👍
Melvyn Cox I agree not everybody but they would have to prove if they wanna be the 3rd option in the market.
This is a beautiful plane
4 Engines!!!!! Future? I don't think so!!!
Ricardo Rojas 4 engines are better than 2. Try to think about it.
Everybody except you think otherwise. Given engine reliability nowadays that "1/4 engines down is just 25% thrust lost while 1/2 engines down is 50% thrust lost" is not relevant anymore. I love 4-engine planes but they have no future. Sadly.
Manh nguyen duc "1/4 engines down is just 25% thrust lost while 1/2 engines down is 50% thrust lost" is relevant to me. Try to think to Airbus lost in the Hudson due to a birdstrike.
And how often does that happen, in your humble opinion? Does such emergency landing happen more frequently to 2 engines than 4 engines? If yes, then is that percentage difference significant? Aviation is safer and safer, 2 engine planes have proved their worth.
Manh nguyen duc i dont'know how often it happens. I know that sometimes it happens, In that situation I would like to be in a 4 engines plane
The collapse of the Soviet Union made airliner production in Russia so difficult. There's just no money for it :(
That collapse set all the countries back 15-20 years. Only the politicians win.
The Soviet free education doesn't exist anymore. There are barley young people in the development sector, because education costs a lot of money.
EpiDemic117 Boeing is heavily subsidized by the government through overpriced military contract and actively promoted by US government to all allies
EpiDemic117 You do know NSA have been used to obtain Airbus technology and contract bidding price right?
EpiDemic117 If you don't see government stealing foreign technology and trade secrets as subsidized domestic industry, we are not talking on the same level. We are done here.
Скай, ты потрясающий.
Very in dept informational vdo's. New subscriber here!
This plane would not be competitive after this modernizations, sorry
Oh come on, it's cool
ScribCase Team yes ssh
Sad but true. This has no chance against a boeing 777
Agree
@@grafzeppelin7835, especially after the complete overhaul that the 777X has received.
It looks like an Airbus A340
il-86 was also a widebody long range airliner but it was outdated because the il-86 first flew in late 1970’s
Il-86 wasn't quite impresive to begin with
@@Kalashnikov413 yeah true because it was basically an russian version of the 707
Why not just buy older 747 engines
I think they want to make their own engines
They have received western style engines, so why not reverse engineer those and upscale them, it's not like they haven't done it before.
Because they're inefficient... hence the whole point of this video about modernization.
because sanctions
It's about national pride. Home made engine is necessary especially russia since theyre independent from western power.