That has the Naval ensign on the side..and grey paint…so the Lamprey naval helicopter rather?
And the full naval “МА ВМФ РОССИИ” spelled out across the tail boom, as if it were an actual in-service item. Odd, really. Previous Kamov mock-ups have had the typical star roundels and all, but they’ve been sporting in-house camos (one of which I detest the RuAF for not catching on to) and everything, and no hint of any “official-ness”. That airframe, whatever it is, simply looks unusually “official” so to speak.
The roundel used on the mock-up of the NH-90
Reminds me of the EF2000 prototype.

Well, as far as they are an invaded country at war….
Antonov had no facilities in the Crimea, nor in the war-torn areas of the “Donbass” (the Kharkov factory is directly north, but it was screwed up even before any fighting had taken place). But if anything, hostilities tend to be rather rewarding for companies in the defense sector, and indeed the Ukrainian armed forces have seen a surge in acquisitions… It’s just been overpriced stuff from abroad (more on that aspect below), while their own producers haven’t gotten many (if any) orders (except president Poroshenko’s own shipyard in Nikolayev that is, which is part of an ongoing corruption scandal).
Really, it’s just the usual Ukrainian mismanagement of things, plus a general economic downturn. The graph above shows that the following chief dynamics are at play:
1. The collapse of the USSR, which led to a huge downturn in all industrial spheres all over the former union, so no news there.
2. Various economic crises, and the one 1998 was terrible all across the board for the CIS states (Russia was no better off there, and similarly dark figures can be seen in Russian industries that year and in the immediate aftermath). Same happened to Ukraine in 2014-2015, in the wake of the most recent revolution, not as severe overall but pretty bad regardless. Russia itself felt that too, but by proxy, in a different way (the sanctions and all of that).
3. Whether they’re under a “Russia-leaning” or “Western-leaning” government at the time. With Russia as one of the biggest trading partners overall, and the by far biggest international customer of these particular things (mainly a legacy from the Soviet era, as many key subcontractors in the defense industry were moved to Ukraine within the USSR for strategic reasons and happened to remain there in independent Ukraine post-collapse*), Russo-Ukrainian relations have been a very important factor for how Ukrainian heavy industry’s been faring. Each time a “pro-Western” government is couped-in to counter actually democratically elected others (Orange revolution in 2004-2005, Maidan revolution in 2014…), the new guys in charge are dead set on severing relations (it’s part of the deal they have with their backers), and this industry suffers as a result. The current Western-leaning government has additionally ditched domestic producers for “unknown” reasons, in favor of far pricier foreign alternatives… Even recent contracts for RPG-7-type launchers were awarded to companies in the West (!), and to make matters even worse these were deemed far inferior to the domestically produced ditto by the guys fielding them… There’s tons of that stuff, but hey, it’s business.
* Motor Sich is a notable exception, it was proper Ukrainian from the beginning and not some kind of USSR-era strategic (or charity) relocation from Russia like Antonov etc.
Antonov production in Ukraine, which mainly occurred at their Kiev plant (formerly known as Aviant):
(from Ukrainian wikipedia: Державне підприємство «Антонов»)
Obviously, production has been slow-paced ever since the golden days, but they were still in business… Until 2015, where the above statistics simply end. Not a single aircraft has been built since, from what I can find (last confirmed delivery June 2015). They have been doing repairs and such, though, and about 10 aircraft from old, cancelled orders remain at the Kiev plant in various states of (in)completion. The somewhat smaller Kharkov plant ceased operations in 2014, with three unfinished An-72/74’s remaining on the factory floor (Kharkov is included in the above graph, it’s not only Kiev).
https://www.epravda.com.ua/publicati…/08/21/639792/
https://www.vestifinance.ru/articles/99707
They had big hopes for the Saudi deal but it ultimately fell through as you mentioned, and the one main, by far most reliable customer they ever had, Russia now produces and services all the Antonovs it needs domestically. Production is mainly at VASO, where they’ve averaged about 5 An-148/158’s a year since 2010 (annual reports), some (still?) An-140 production occurs in Samara, and of course the Aviastar-SP factory in Ulyanovsk services the heavy Antonov fleet (both RuAF and the Volga-Dnepr civilian freighter which is HQ-ed there too), and has two An-124’s under construction.
But even if they produce them too and in fact in larger numbers than Ukraine itself, Russia is in the process of weaning itself from Antonovs, pretty much only because of the hijinks in Kiev five years ago and all the ramifications of that (plus all kinds of sanctions and counter-sanctions and all that), and it really does seem like this is bound to spell the end of the Antonov legacy. No new (Ukrainian) planes for five years, deals that go nowhere, company liquidations, endless restructurings and stuff going on, CEO’s resigning and so on and so forth.
My bet is that the remainder of the mother company will be bought up by the Chinese or something for pocket change, and perhaps the “brand” will live on in some form after that, but it just wont be the same. Don’t wanna go all political about it, but since Oleg Antonov was Russian and the whole thing started in Russia, if it can’t live on in Ukraine the name should go back there. Hell, even the famous Ruslan and Mriya team was mainly Russian, headed by chief engineer Tolmachyov whom I wrote a little obituary to last year when he passed away in Ulyanovsk, where he worked for the aforementioned Volga-Dnepr.
That’s just a month away, so. But open display so soon after all this secrecy and stuff? Not even the T-50 which has been around for 9 years has been shown as a static display yet, not even the first rather featureless ones, I mean.
Could it be that they’re just talking about the old mockup?
Does anybody have a TerraServer account? Their imagery tends to get updated about once a week for a given location… Unfortunately the free trial membership is severely restricted.
Well, I checked it out myself. Indeed, the satellite imagery is available on TerraServer and is timestamped April 18th, so earlier than Putin’s visit.

Do note that there are two smaller drones parked to the left of the Okhotnik too. Orion is the top one, I guess, going by the size and the seemingly grey color. The white one closest to Okhotnik is too small to be Altius though.
Hard to tell with the limited resolution, but it looks like it’s covered in RAM, with an F-22-esque blotchy camo to boot. Quite unlike the dark drab one (in primer only, I guess) that was being hauled around in Novosibirsk.
Likewise, I think the two massive pitot tubes are absent.
Oh well, the way the ordnance is presented next to it definitely hints of a display setup, so I would wager that the shot is from Putin’s visit last week. Does anybody have a TerraServer account? Their imagery tends to get updated about once a week for a given location… Unfortunately the free trial membership is severely restricted.
“Hiiii! Go on now, wave to the nice man in the supersonic nuclear bomber!”

Pointless discussion, really. Reminds me of what was discussed in November last year, that I commented on here:
https://forum.keypublishing.com/foru…15#post3840415
Incidentally, I mentioned the very same X-31 high alpha landing that was referenced by Peregrinefalcon above.
That time, the whole discussion arose because of a silly statement on TV regarding unaided carrier landings. This time around, the very same discussion has cropped up due to a silly slide that somebody dug up.
So, basically, yes, the Su-35 and Su-57 are, like their peers elsewhere, technically capable of making some ridiculously short landings, but it is also unrealistic/silly to assume that this “capability” could be put into regular practice.
Three liveries.

The existing procurement schedule had 16 machines over that period (10 years from 2018). The program has matured enough, and overall costs have shrunk, to accommodate for the procurement of 76 machines over the same period, instead.
As TR1 says, that the numbers would be revised upwards was expected, really. Everyone with some know-how/insight kept saying this even way back, but that didn’t stop dozens of magazines/journals/news sites having a field day with the earlier figures, drawing crazy conclusions and so on.
The exact same thing can be applied to the T-14 programme. There were tons and tons of headlines all over the place about how Russia apparently can only afford a few odd tanks here and there (ten or so, according to the headlines of the day), and that the whole thing was just an epic failure about to fizzle out… But in Russia things just kept on going as expected and a few months later the first 200 or so were ordered, with more to come.
First pre-serial (?) Mi-38T test flight, on a very windy winter’s day in Kazan:
So, half a year later – serial Mi-38T… Vividly green pixel camo, looks odd.



Apparently, the Russian President is in Akhtubinsk right now, so something’s up. When he arrived, six (!) T-50’s were escorting the Il-96…

It was not. That was the whole point. Technology demonstrator is also part of the program, even though it tends to be only vaguely similar to eventual operational aircraft.
The T-50 that flew in 2010 certainly wasn’t a Su-57 either, but a T-50 (duh).
The “technology demonstrators” preceding the T-50 prototype were perhaps the Su-37 and Su-47, to varying degrees. But still, not quite. For instance, while TVC and certain avionics were present in the former, and an internal weapons bay on the latter, neither had anything even remotely like the sensor setup seen on the T-50, nor did they dabble much in relevant shaping or materials or whatever (the Su-47 had interesting composite structures, but not of the type relevant to the later T-50)
In some way, the T-50’s have indeed been “technology demonstrators”… Consider the above, plus the fact that they’ve changed quite a lot over the years, different iterations if you will, and then extant airframes have been additionally modified, rather extensively too, over all this time as well.
Indeed, the development has been highly nonlinear. And now, at least two prototypes have been entirely repurposed, and one of them now serves another aircraft program, and is like… A technology demonstrator there, instead…
Russian hasn’t built a Major Surface Combatant (Destroyer or Larger) since before the collapse of the former Soviet Union.
Some just don’t get that Russia is no longer the Super Power of the Soviet Era any longer.
Eight new 4000+ ton multipurpose frigates (pr 11356M and 22350)… Two 6000+ ton amphibious assault ships etc… In the past 10 years.
But most effort has indeed been put in smaller vessels, chiefly a vast amount of unproportionally heavily armed (long-range cruise missiles) stealthy corvettes and missile boats (20+ built in the past 10 years, out of which the Buyans are the most numerous, followed by Karakurts and Steregushchiys), and to keep the SSBN forces in shape for that nuclear triad stuff (Borei…)