What about it? The next generation bomber isn’t even designed yet, but its stating the obvious that KAPO will be responsible for building it.

It just occured to me that it may be possible that the numerous shots of the Tu-95MSM with the underwing hardpoints for the Kh-101s/102s may all be of the same aircraft – i.e. Red 317. It’s hard to tell on the old one, but it sort of looks like it.

How do we know the Su-27SM radar has been changed from the N001VP? That link didn’t really tell me anything, in particular, the source of the claim.

Assuming the Furke/ 9M96 combination is a failure – why not simply revert to the Stereguschy’s armament / sensor scheme? Instead of Kashtan, integrate Pantsir, BAM, you’re done.

I can’t think of a bigger money-sink than starting all over again.

Just what the Russian Navy needs – another series of ridiculously diverse classes all in service together, complicating maintenance and support unnecessarily.

I think, IMO, it was a very bad decition to go with the Borey design, why to bother with these small tubes and room?, the Delta series achieved something very impressive, to fit these big launchers in a relative small hull was a plus, not a ‘limit’.

The original Borey design – Project 935 – was to fit SS-NX-28 (Bark) SLBMs – these were upgraded versions of the Typhoon’s SS-N-20s. They were enormous. The design can fit larger missiles. The problem is a second redesign (Yury Dolgoruky was redesigned whilst being built to accomodate Bulava) would be too costly and take too much time.

Russians are still falling behind in the solid fuel propulsion, this won’t change, because they are not looking for new applications for this technology, the US space programs use heavily these king of rockets

SLBM requirements are not determined by whether you are falling behind in technology, they’re based on what you want to do with the missile and what best meets that requirement.

Liquid-fuelled missiles are inferior to solid-fuelled missiles – especially on submarines.

Don’t understand what is so wonderful in this new submarine, regarding payload, the delta was better, even smaller than the Borei, it needed more axiomatization, of course, i don’t see great advantages for the pump jet either, especially for a ship that will require low speed cruising, of course this could have something for the ‘shallow waters’ requirement, but i’m not sure.

In submarines, IIRC, you’ll generally find that the smaller a submarine is, all things being equal, the larger submarine will be quieter.

Is not there such option?, is the russian navy considering to produce upgraded Deltas, and cancel the Borei?

Absolutely not. There are already two other Boreys being built and a fourth one is going to be laid down soon- the fourth will be a modernized Project 955 (955M/ 955U?).

True, but there are plenty of other sensible programmes Ilyushin and Tupolev could be given money for, an Il-96 tanker or a Tu-204 MPA, for example. Why pay them for stuff like the Il-476 and Il-112 though, where Ukrainian equivalents are further along and more useful?

Il-476 is simply a “fourth generation” Il-76, hence the name. It shouldn’t take much work at all.

In fact, I’m not even sure whether Il-76MD-90 and Il-476 are two separate things.

And there’s also the problem of putting the majority of the VTA’s fleet in fickle Ukrainian hands. I think the backbone of the VTA is far too important to hand over to Ukraine – even if the An-70 (which I assume is what you’re referring to) was a viable Il-76MD replacement.

The Il-112 has been dead for a long time. The only talk now is whether they will buy some to simply use as trainers for transport pilots.

What that article seems to be saying was that if Il-112V was to be purchased, then it should be purchased not for Military Transport Aviation, but for other armed services / the Defense Ministry.

Oh well, whatever.

Also, the MTA requirement was never for 18 tons. The initial design for the Il-214 pitched to India was for a 15 ton transport. Only when the Antonov arrived on the scene did the numbers change to developing a 18-20 ton MTA. Without the funny accounting they’d have no rationale for keeping the Il-214/MTA project going.

What Antonov are we talking about now?

Here’s what I don’t understand:-

* Il-76MD fleet: is modernization to Il-76MD-90 going to take place? Il-476 to replace the fleet in the longer term?
* An-124: new aircraft being built
* An-70: 40 ordered. What role are these going to meet?
* Il-214/ MTA: for replacement of An-12BP?

Well I just read they cancelled the IL-112V Light Transport Development , MOD has refused it finance it any more.

What? So, what’s the plan, to use the An-26 forever, because they obviously have been blessed by pagan Gods to have unlimited service life, or some such?