Aviaindustry Farnborought special

Raj Kumar Singh:

FGFA will be a joint product

Superjet goes through its paces

Operator’s Verdict:

Rossiya shares its An-148 experience

©AIRCRAFT INDUSTRY • 2010 Magazine of the Union of Aviation Industrialists CONTENT News russian industry news ��������������������������������������� 2 corporate Business Unit Integration ���������������������������������� 8 Aerocomposite spreads its carbon wings ��� 16 tribune PROSPECTS for INDO-RUSSIAN COOPERATION ���� 24 new projects MS-21: Russia’s leap into the 21st century ��� 28 markets Decisive time for UAC ����������������������������������������� 36 MOSCOW ON WEAPONS MARKET ������������������������� 44 commercial aviation Superjet goes through its paces �������������������� 46 Tu-214: a master of many trades ������������������� 52 Leasing solution for Russian jetliners ��������� 60 airline customers AN-148 proves worthy of Airline service ������ 64 SHARING EXPERIENCE �������������������������������������������� 68 special aviation An eye in the Indian sky ������������������������������������� 72 Tu-214 Goes ON ���������������������������������������������������� 78 pilots A Pilot’s Passion �������������������������������������������������� 82 partners Airbus and EADS in Russia ��������������������������������� 84 BRAHMOS: a STORY of SUCCESS �������������������������� 88 customer support supporting an-148 ��������������������������������������������� 92 airshow India Aviation 2010 ��������������������������������������������� 96 photo report FIRE FIGHTING HELICOPTERS in ACtION ���������������� 98 Production & Design: Evgeny Semenov, Daria Minaeva, Yaroslav Pashutin Editors and staff writers: Konstantin Lantratov, Vladimir Karnozov Contributors: Konstantin Makienko, Roman Gusarov, Alexey Sinitsky, Maxim Pyadushkin Photos: Vladimir Karnozov, Konstantin Lantratov, Roman Gusarov, Fedor Borisov Cover Photo: Katsuhiko Tokunaga via SuperJet International FGFA prototype: Courtesy of Sukhoi An-148 framed picture: Vladimir Karnozov Union of Aviation Industry of Russia 101000, Moscow, Ulanskiy Pereulok 22, building 1 Tel.: +7 (495) 926 1420 Fax: +7 (495) 926 1421

Dear reader, Welcome to this special issue of Aircraft Industry magazine, prepared by the Union of Aviation Industrialists for the 2010 Farnborough International Airshow.

Inside, you will find news and analysis covering individual enterprises that are members of our voluntary association, along with the contractors, partners and customers for Russian aerospace products.

Rather than limiting the scope of our publication, we decided to discuss aviation-related topics in a wider context.

Russia has become a part of the international community, and today is an important player in the world arena. Consequently, the country’s aviation industry is now seeking its role in the global division of labor – both in competition and cooperation with other countries, and in international alliances engaged in aircraft construction.

We have much to be proud of from our heritage: the entire world knows the names of Nikolay Zhukovsky, Andrey Tupolev, Sergey Ilyushin, Artem Mikoyan, Pavel Sukhoi, Alexander Yakovlev, Mikhail Mil, Nikolay Kamov and other outstanding Russian designers, engineers and scientists. Looking to the future, we have much to work on, as the Russian Federation’s President and Government have given us the task of making it to the top of global aviation industry.

I hope that the Aircraft Industry magazine will contribute to this cause by helping its audience stay on top of key developments in Russian and international aircraft production, air transportation, and military aviation – in short, for every aspect of this industry. Our goal also is to spotlight the extremely exciting activities of our sector’s men and women, who today are responsible for realizing the dream of flying faster, higher and farther.

Alexey Fedorov President, Union of Aviation Industrialists, and President, Chairman of the Executive Board, United Aircraft Corporation

News

russian industry news UAC reports its financial results for 2009

UAC Annual General Shareholders Meeting The United Aircraft Corporation’s (UAC) Annual General Shareholders Meeting, which was held on June 30, 2010, approved the 2009 Annual Report and financial statements based on fiscal year results calculated under Russian accounting standards. The corporation reported that unaudited consolidated revenue in 2009 increased by 18.1 Repayment of the bank loans by UAC and its subsidiaries (million rubles): Legal entity United Aircraft Corporation Irkut Corporation NAZ Sokol Beriev Taganrogskaya Aviatsiya VASO Tupolev

Bank debt as of March 1, 2010

Amount of bank loans repayment

Bank debt as of March 29, 2010

17,102

9,302

7,800

35,405

4,861

30,544

5,565 1,158

1,627 1,158

3,938 0

799

538

261

1,825 402

450 402

1,375 0

2 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

percent compared to the previous year, and amounted to about 114 billion rubles. Gross profit reached 1.03 billion rubles, while net loss amounted to 20.83 billion rubles.

UAC’s consolidated debt was reduced by 13 percent yearover-year, and totaled 157 billion rubles in 2009 – a result of government financial aid to Russian aircraft manufacturing companies.

Sales of military aircraft in 2009 increased by 19.6 percent and amounted to approximately 86.0 billion rubles. Commercial aircraft sales of in 2009 grew by 8.7 percent and reached 12.5 billion rubles. Research and development work financed by the Russian government and commercial customers increased by 18.3 percent. Total revenue from research and development (R&D) in 2009 amounted to 15.5 billion rubles. In 2009, exports volumes remained unchanged at about 69.0 billion rubles compared to 68.9 billion rubles in 2008. Domestic sales of aircraft and R&D services showed significant growth – increasing by 63.0 percent and reaching 45.0 billion rubles.

UAC plans to prepare consolidated financial statement for 2009 under IFRS standards. The shareholders also decided not to provide remuneration to members of the Board of Directors and the Audit Committee, as well as not paying dividends for the year 2009.

Bank debt reduced by UAC On March 29, 2010, the United Aircraft Corporation announced the one-off reduction of its consolidated financial debt by 18.3 billion rubles. Repayment of bank loans completed the first phase of the UAC’s program to settle the financial deficit approved by the Board of Directors.

Following the receipt of government support measures, UAC has paid down 9.3 billion rubles of its debt to Sberbank and converted another 9 billion rubles of the external debt of its subsidiaries into the long-term zero-interest shareholder’s loans, bringing the consolidated external debt down to 126.5 billion rubles as of today.

Earlier, on March 23, 2010, Vnesheconombank introduced 21 billion rubles into the UAC capital under the decision of the Russian government. This enabled the repayment of bank loans for UAC and its subsidiaries in the amount of 18.3 billion rubles. Another 2.7 billion rubles are reserved to repay UAC’s Eurobonds due in July 2010.

nEws

Eugeny Ryabov (vASO) and vikramjit Chopra (vayu) in the cockpit of An-148

indian airlines sign for the an-148 At the India Aviation 2010 exhibition – held in hyderabad during March 2010 – UAC signed protocols and preliminary agreements with two undisclosed Indian airlines for deliveries of Antonov An-148 regional passenger jets. These agreements are soon to be converted into firm contracts, and include a total of eight orders and 11 options. In addition, the local carriers expressed intent in purchasing 10 An-148 aircraft in the cargo version.

At India Aviation 2010, UAC joined with the Ukraine’s Antonov in displaying an An-148-100 assembled in Russia at the voronezh-based vASO aviation plant. This aircraft subsequently was delivered to the GTK Rossiya air carrier, joining two aircraft of this type already operated by the airline.

The hyderabad exhibition demonstrated a keen interest in Russian aircraft from the Indian air transport community.

UAC representatives held negotiations with dozens of Indian companies willing to purchase Russian airplanes, which also could include services for their maintenance, overhaul and other support.

Taking into account the high interest expressed by local carriers in the An-148 aircraft family, UAC and Antonov have decided to launch its type certificate validation procedure with the Indian aviation authorities. The An-148-100 was certified by Russia’s Aviation Register of the Interstate Aviation Committee in February 2007. It validation in India will be carried out in accordance with the Russo-Indian bilateral aviation safety agreements, and is expected to be completed by the end of 2010. An-148 deliveries to the Indian customers would start in the first quarter of 2011.

The need of the Indian carriers for modern aircraft in the An-148 size category is estimated at about 200 units over the next 15 years. If these estimates prove valid, Russia and India may considerably expand their cooperation in the sphere of joint aircraft production. This could allow the involvement of more local enterprises – both in the public and private sectors – including manufacturers of aircraft and their components, companies specializing in maintenance and repair, and firms offering various services to aircraft operators and passengers.

russian and German aerospace manufacturers to boost cooperation Russian and German aerospace industries strengthened their cooperation with the memorandum signed in june 2010 at ILA Berlin Air Show by Alexey Fedorov, head of UAC and the President of the Union of Aviation Industrialists of Russia (UAI), and Thomas Enders, head of Airbus and President of the German Aerospace Industries Association (BDLI). With this document both industrial alliances aim to deepen the production and organizational ties between the aerospace industries of the two countries, including activities in the field of airworthiness and air safety regulations. In addition, the memorandum calls for an expansion of the dialog between Russian and German aerospace companies. “This agreement is an important step for the integration between Russian aircraft manufacturers into the international aerospace industry,” Fedorov said. he added that UAI’s closer ties with other

farnBOrOuGH sPEciaL aircraft inDustry 3

news

national aerospace associations will allow the Russian industry to manufacture its products under internationals standards and rules.

A similar memorandum with UAI and the Aerospace and Defence Industries Association of Europe was signed in November 2009.

Russia’s fifth generation fighter continues flight trials The Russian Air Force plans to receive its initial Sukhoi T-50 fifth-generation fighters in 2012-2016. This could involve a pre-production batch of six to 10 aircraft, according to comments in June from Vladimir Popovkin, Russia’s Deputy Defense Minister on Armaments. The production of this batch will be launched in 2012 after

the new fighter receives preliminary approval from the military. Most of the trials should be completed by 2015, while series production is to start in 2016. In the first phase, the Air Force may order more than 50 aircraft, Popovkin said.

The T-50 design was selected in 2002 to fulfill the Russian Air Force’s PAK FA (Perspectivny Aviatzionny Kompleks Frontovoy Aviatzii, or Future Tactical Aviation Aircraft System) requirement. This new aircraft is intended to replace Russian Air Force Su-27 fighters. The T-50 is clearly designed for stealth, with its chined forward fuselage, planform edge alignment, internal weapons bays and small vertical tails. According to Sukhoi, the aircraft’s fuselage is made 30 percent from composites, while its shape and special coating will allow the T-50 to demonstrate an unprecedented small radar cross section in the radar, optical and infrared ranges.

4 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

The first T-50 prototype made its maiden flight in January 2010. By mid-June, the aircraft had performed 16 flights. The second prototype is expected to join the test program this year, while the 3rd and 4th aircraft will be ready in 2011. “The task for the first two aircraft is to test aerodynamics, stability and controllability, while the 3rd and 4th aircraft will be fitted with onboard equipment required by the customer,” explained Sukhoi head Mikhail Pogosyan, adding that aircraft subsystems such as the AESA radar are being developed simultaneously.

The UAC Board of Directors approves production plans for 2010-2012 On March 2, 2010, Alexey Fedorov, the President and Chairman of the UAC`s Executive Board reported to the Board of Directors the aircraft production results in 2009, along with plans for 2010-2012.

Despite the impact of the global financial crisis, UAC delivered 95 aircraft in 2009 to customers in Russia and abroad. Most of the deliveries were within the defense sector: 83 new aircraft and aircraft assembly kits. The Russian Defense Ministry received approximately 40 fighters and training aircraft. A total of 27 aircraft and 18 assembly kits were delivered to the export market, including Algeria, India and Malaysia. Another 45 military aircraft underwent repairs or upgrades at UAC’s enterprises.

In 2010, UAC plans to deliver about 120 aircraft and perform more than 40 aircraft repairs and upgrades. The corporation’s production plans through 2012 call for an annual increase in aircraft production by more than 20 percent. By 2012, the production output should reach 200 aircraft, while at the same time the number of aircraft repairs and upgrades will be reduced.

The Board of Directors also approved UAC’s budget report for 2009 and the corporation’s budget for 2010.

The UAC Board of Directors' meeting

news

Red Wings' Tu-204

stakes in UAC. In 2010-2012, the corporation will focus on creating three business units: Combat Aircraft, Commercial Aircraft and Special Aircraft.

Changes in the UAC top management reflecting the evolving corporate structure were approved by the UAC Board of Directors in November 2009. Oleg Demchenko, President and Chairman of the Executive Board at Irkut Corporation, was appointed a Senior Vice President for Commercial Avia-

UAC reports its commercial deliveries for 2009 In 2009, UAC production facilities manufactured 17 commercial aircraft, of which 13 were handed over to customers compared to the nine aircraft delivered a year ago. Deliveries in 2009 included four Ilyushin Il-96 widebodies, along with four Tupolev Tu-204 and three Tu-214 single aisle aircraft, plus two Antonov An-148 regional jets. Although the corporation had to shift the first deliveries of Sukhoi Superjet 100 Commercial aircraft deliveries in 2009: Aircraft type Il-96

Tu-204

Tu-214 An-148

Quantity 1 3 2 1 1 2 1 2

Customer GTK Rossiya Airlines Polet Airlines Red Wings Cubana de Aviacion Air Koryo Air department of the President’s administration Transaero GTK Rossiya Airlines

regional aircraft into 2010, three prototypes were rolled out and took part in the flight test and the aircraft certification campaign last year. Additionally, this regional jet made its international debut at the Paris Air Show in June 2009.

Sergey Ivanov and Alexey Fedorov tion. Alexander Bobryshev, President of Tupolev, took the post of Vice-President for Strategic and Special Aviation, while Mikhail Pogosyan, UAC first Vice-President for program coordination (and also a General Director – General Designer at Sukhoi and RSK MiG), will lead UAC – Combat Aircraft.

The board of directors also defined the conditions for the Samara-based Aviacor aviation plant to be included in the UAC group of companies. Aviacor will focus on series production of the Antonov An-140 regional turboprop, and is to manufacture parts for the An-148 regional jet and Ilyushin Il-112 tactical airlifter.

The An-148 enters revenue passenger service UAC aims at corporate restructuring An additional share issue at the end of 2009 enabled UAC to offer these shares to the shareholders of UAC membercompanies in exchange for their stakes in those enterprises.

As many of the shareholders accepted the offer, the number of UAC shareholders has increased to some 800. According to Alexey Fedorov, UAC’s President and Chairman of the Executive Board, this is a good indicator that the corporation has become a true public company. Further steps will be taken to encourage private shareholders to consolidate their

On December 24, 2009, the An-148 regional jet operated

by GTK Rossiya airline performed its first commercial flight, carrying passengers from the airline’s main hub at St. Petersburg Pulkovo airport to Moscow’s Domodedovo airport. This aircraft represents a new generation of regional jets built in Russia at Voronezh plant (VASO), a member of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC).

At press conference organized for the aircraft’s milestone arrival at Moscow, Vladimir Smolko, General Director UAC – Civil Aircraft Division said: “Today is a very important day for

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 5

family of new regional jets will include baseline model for 75 passengers in a single-class cabin, along with a stretchedfuselage version with 99 seats, and a cargo variant. UAC’s plans for the immediate future call for adding a version with English-language cockpit in order to further expand the An148’s market opportunities. UAC also offers a modern system of technical and logistics support based on world-class best practices and experience to ease the aircraft’s entry-intoservice. In 2010, UAC will invest 400 million rubles to set up a spare parts depot, while another 600 million rubles will be spent on a training center.

An-148 me and my colleagues, with whom I began working on the An-148 project four years ago. Our efforts have led to this opening of revenue service. It provides further evidence that the United Aircraft Corporation is not only capable of building experimental flying vehicles, but also commercial airplanes that help both aircraft manufacturers and our airline customers make money.” He mentioned that the firm order book for the An-148 stands at 50 aircraft, and a further 70 orders are being negotiated. In 2010, UAC plans to deliver the aircraft to the special air detachment serving the President of the Russian Federation, as well as to Voronezh-based Polyet airline.

An-148 is developed by Ukraine’s Antonov Design Bureau and assembled in Russia at the VASO facility in Voronezh. The Sukhoi T-50 prototype

6 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

UAC President congratulates the participants of PAK FA program with maiden flight On February 29, 2010, Russia’s fifth generation combat aircraft – Sukhoi T-50 prototype developed to meet the requirements of the Air Force’s PAK FA program, made its first flight in Komsomolsk-on-Amur. Congratulating the participants of PAK FA program, the UAC President and Chairman of Executive Board Alexey Fedorov said: “First flight of the prototype of the fifth generation combat aircraft that took place from the KnAAPO factory aerodrome brings evidence that today the history of the world aviation is being written in Russia: in Komsomosk-on-Amur, Moscow, Novosibirsk, Rybinsk, Ufa, Ramenskoye, Zhukovsky and other cities where the design houses and aviation plants involved in the program, their partners and suppliers are located.

nEws

Since the times of Mikhail Lomonosov, Aleksander Mozhaisky and Nikolay Zhukovsky, who laid the foundation of aeronautics in this country, Russia has been at the edge of progress in aeronautic technologies and development of aircraft.

The 47-minutes long flight opens a new horizon for the Russian aviation for the rest of the XXI century and, hopefully, even further. Successful start of the next-generation aircraft ’s flight trials stimulate us for new achievements and sparks up our desire to create.

Let me congratulate all participants of the next-generation combat aircraft program and all those who facilitate the project with its hard work, experience and knowledge.”

the Ps-90a2 receives its type certificate In December 2009, the new PS-90A2 engine received its Russian type certificate under the AP-33 aviation standards, harmonized with FAR Part 33 and jAR33. This powerplant will equip the modernized Tupolev Tu-204SM narrow-body commercial airliner.

The PS-90A2 is a twin-spool turbofan engine with high bypass ratio, and incorporates extensive noise suppression measures. It is a further evolution of the PS-90A series, with improved performance to meet the world’s highest standards. The PS-90A2 and PS-90A are interchangeable. Compared to the current production version, the PS-90A2 has lifecycle cost decreased by 35 percent with a simultaneous increase in reliability by 50-100%.

This newer version’s eco-friendly parameters – including noise and emission levels – meet stringent standards that ICAO and other international organizations are planning to impose in future. The PS-90A2 will enable airlines to operate Tu-204 aircraft under ETOPS, including 180-minute stretches of long-haul flights over water. The PS-90A2 requires two times less man-hours in operation than the PS-90A. The improved engine is less susceptible to fire hazards after the replacement of certain older fuel system elements with newer, pneumatically-operated systems.

The PS-90A2 has been selected for the Tu-204SM narrowbody medium-haul airliner. This aircraft is being developed

by United Aircraft Corporation under the state-funded program entitled: “Improvement of the Tu-204-300, significant modernization of the Tu-204 (Tu-204SM), increase in reliability and operational performance, use of achievements in upgrading Tu-204/214 fleet, improvement of systems and subassemblies of Tu-204/214 family aircraft.”

The project is in accordance with the Federal program: “Development of Russian civil aviation in 20022010 and up to 2015.” UAC was awarded the respective contract in December 2008 by the Ministry of Industry and Trade. Certification of the new aircraft is expected in 2011. Backlog for this jetliner is 20 aircraft, including five ordered by launch customer Iran Airtour via Ilyushin Finance Co. leasing company (a member of UAC). At the MAKS’2009 air show, Ilyushin Finance and Atlant-Soyuz, the airline of the Moscow City Government, signed a contract for 15 Tu-204SM aircraft with deliveries in 2011-2012.

PS-90A2 turbofan

farnBOrOuGH sPEciaL aircraft inDustry 7

corporate

Business Unit Integration Pavel Nakhodkin One of Russia’s major holding companies, the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), will undergo large-scale restructuring in the 2010-2011 timeframe. The result will see three business units formed within UAC. These will be responsible for the development, production and operational support of military, commercial and special-purpose aircraft. One result of this integration effort is expected to be the phase-out of a number of old aircraft types and the introduction of new ones.

President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev and President, Chairman of the Executive Board, UAC, Alexey Fedorov in VASO workshop.

8 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

Count to three The procedure for establishing UAC’s business units was set in December 2009. According to UAC President Alexey Fedorov, who also heads the Union Aviation Industrialists, three business units will be formed within the corporation: UAC - Combat Aircraft, UAC - Commercial Aircraft, and UAC - Special Aircraft.

The establishment of these units as part of the UAC corporate restructuring program during 2010-2012 was approved at a session of the company’s board of directors in November 2009.

The creation of UAC - Combat Aircraft will be supervised by Mikhail Pogosyan, UAC’s First Vice President for Military Aviation and Program Coordination. Pogosyan combines his post with that of Sukhoi’s General Director and the MiG Corp’s General Director/General Designer. At present, UAC’s military aviation projects involve nine aircraft industry sites, which include four design bureaus and six production facilities.

The establishment of UAC - Commercial Aircraft will be supervised by Oleg Demchenko, UAC’s Senior Vice President for Commercial Aviation and the President of Irkut Corporation. The commercial unit currently consists of 10 companies, including three design bureaus and five production plants.

UAC - Special Aircraft brings together the resources of nine current companies, and will be supervised

by Alexander Bobryshev, UAC’s Senior Vice President for Strategic and Special Aviation, and President of the Tupolev Corporation.

The purpose of setting up these business units is the integration of the industry’s design and production potential to create advanced, internationally-competitive aircraft. The management of Irkut, Sukhoi and Tupolev have demonstrated their ability to successfully develop

corporate

Mikhail Pogosyan

However, that plan was heavily criticized by the relevant state agencies, primarily by the state law directorate of the Russian presidential administration. The main reason was a recent increase in the amount of state funding, which meant that UAC no longer needed to raise extra private investment to meet its short-term needs. The UAC establishment decree was correspondingly amended to bring the state share in the corporation up to “at least 75 percent of its authorized capital.” In that form, the document was signed by Vladimir Putin on 20 February 2006.

During the first phase of industry consolidation in October-November 2006, the corporation’s authorized capital was expanded mainly at the expense of state-owned shares in Russian aircraft manufacturing enterprises. Of all the non-government shareholders, only the private owners of Irkut were able – at the time – to transfer their shares into the authorized capital of the newly-created corpora-

large-scale projects. However, the tasks set by UAC are fairly ambitious: to capture five percent of the global commercial airliner market by 2015 and 10 percent by 2025, while also to retaining its current 12-15 percent share of the military aircraft market. The human resources and technical capacity of the three companies alone will not be enough to achieve these goals, which is why they are being reinforced with additional design bureaus and production facilities.

A truly united corporation UAC was set up by the government in partnership with private Russian aerospace business, primarily with the management of Irkut. The establishment of UAC was officially approved on February 22, 2005, at a session of the State Council board in the town of Zhukovsky outside Moscow, which was chaired by Russia’s President Vladimir Putin. A non-commercial partnership called United Aircraft Consortium was then set up to prepare the establishment of a managing company and consolidation of the country’s aerospace assets within UAC. The partnership drafted a plan for setting up the corporation. The first phase envisaged the creation of a private-public consortium and its managing company, whose 25.5 to 51 share percentages would be controlled by the state. The second phase was supposed to involve the establishment of a corporate structure in the form of a holding company, with a single share for all companies that would form part of it. To this end, it was planned that the existing federal state-owned aircraft manufacturing enterprises would be transformed into joint-stock companies, with 25.5 to 51 percent of shares in the corporation remaining in the government’s hands.

Oleg Demchenko Alexander Bobryshev

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 9

corporate

Target structure of the corporation

JSC UAC Commercial Aircraft (Irkut)

Combat Aircraft (Sukhoi)

Special Aircraft (Tupolev)

Design Resources

Design Resources

Design Resources

Ilyushin Design Bureau

Yakovlev Design Bureau

Production Facilities

Aviastar-SP

VASO

Airbus Freighter Conversion GmbH

Finance Leasing Company

Sukhoi Design Bureau

Mikoyan Design Bureau

Production Facilities KnAAPO

NAZ Sokol

NAPO

MIG Production Affiliates

SCAC

SuperJet International

Tupolev Design Bureau

Beriev Design Bureau

Production Facilities

IAZ KAPO

Taganrog Aviation

MTA Ltd

Ilyushin Finance Co

MiG-29KUB

10 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

Volga-Technoport

National Center of Aircraft Industry

AeroComposite

Gromov Flight Research Institute

tion. The government came to control 90.1 percent of the new entity, with 9.99 percent retained by private shareholders. The UAC authorized capital stood at 96.72 billion rubles ($3.52 billion at the November 2008 exchange rate).

The second phase of UAC creation, originally planned to be completed by 1 April 2007, was supposed to consist of transforming two federal state unitary enterprises – MiG and the Kazan KAPO plant – into joint-stock companies. The government handed its entire interest in these companies over to UAC. In addition, it was planned that state assets (which for various reasons had not been transferred to UAC during the first phase) would be handed over in the second phase.

Also, it was planned that UAC’s private owners would exchange their shares in the companies listed in the presidential decree of February 2006 for UAC shares.

However, the implementation of the second stage was delayed. The transformation of MiG and KAPO into joint-stock companies was not completed until 2008, with their shares handed over to UAC only in October 2009. Also, it was only in September-October 2009 that UAC issued an additional set of shares, which private shareholders in the corporation’s subsidiaries and affiliates could purchase in exchange for their own shares.

In the words of UAC President Alexey Fedorov: “In effect, we completed the process of accumulating all our assets only in late 2009. We could not have done it any faster for objective reasons. The process

corporate

Su-35 of turning MiG and KAPO into joint-stock companies turned out to be far more complicated than we had originally thought. Both of these companies had serious debts and, technically, could not join UAC without first going through a financial restructuring. Nevertheless, we have completed this work, and I see it as one of our biggest achievements of the past year.”

By that time, UAC had conducted three additional issuances of shares (in March and September 2008, and in August 2009) in the interests of the state, during which additional state-owned blocks of shares and budget funding went towards the corporation’s authorized capital. Finally, in late 2009 and early 2010, UAC’s authorized capital received more funds from the federal budget and an extra shot in the arm from Russia’s Vnesheconombank (Bank for Development and Foreign Economic Affairs). As a result, as of July 2010, UAC’s authorized capital stood at 174 billion rubles ($5.64 billion at the June 2010 exchange rate). The government’s share in it had dropped to 80.22 percent, Vnesheconombank’s share constituted 11.49 percent, and that of private shareholders was 8.29 percent.

In the future, UAC will continue to receive new assets. After they have been transformed into jointstock companies — and that process is now nearing completion — the Gromov Flight Research Institute and the Myasishchev design bureau will become fully controlled subsidiaries of the corporation. “The incorporation of Myasishchev into UAC may take place in 2010,” Fedorov notes. “That much can be expected judging by the process of its transformation into a joint-stock company, which currently is underway.

Myasishchev will become part of UAC – Special Aircraft.”

UAC - Military Aircraft Companies: Sukhoi Aviation Holding, Sukhoi Design Bureau, KnAAPO Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aircraft Production Association, NAPO Novosibirsk Aircraft Production Association, MiG Corp., Nizhny Novgorod Aircraft-Building Plant, Sukhoi Civil Aircraft, as well as their 46 subsidiaries and affiliates.

Operations: projects related to the development, preproduction, production and after-sales support of military aircraft in the front-line aviation segment.

Current projects: Su-27/30 (SM, M2, MK), Su-34, Su-35, MiG29, MiG-31, MiG-35, Yak-130 (the work done at Sokol), PAK FA fifth-generation fighter.

Non-core projects: Sukhoi Superjet 100 (whether or not the project will be handed over to UAC – Commercial Aircraft is to be decided after 2012).

Annual sales forecast by 2015: at least 150 billion rubles ($4.86 billion at the June 2010 exchange rate), with an average operating margin of at least 20 percent.

Development process: Until at least 2013-14, this business unit will operate in the form of two independent integrated entities, Sukhoi and MiG, joined by design bureaus and production plants that have traditionally been operating in the relevant areas. The parent company of UAC – Military Aircraft will provide consolidated planning, control and necessary coordination between Sukhoi and MiG, as well as centralized management for certain aspects such as marketing, finance and economics, procurement and after-sales support. It will also create conditions for unifying the management systems of the two companies. Sukhoi’s management system already has been chosen as a benchmark for this process, as it has proven its viability. The UAC – Military Aircraft parent company also will be dealing with the financial restructuring of debt-ridden assets. Sukhoi and MiG are expected to merge in the 2014 or 2015 timeframe, after they have balanced out their development levels.

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 11

corporate

In addition, UAC is in negotiations with the private owners of the Samara-based Aviacor factory about its joining the corporation. In November 2009, the UAC board of directors set the terms for Aviacor’s possible integration. “If the decision is taken and we agree with the current shareholders on such terms that will satisfy both sides, Aviacor will join UAC — Commercial Aircraft,” Fedorov said.

If Aviacor becomes a part of UAC, its main strategic tasks will be to organize series production of the Antonov An-140 turboprop and participate in the production of the Antonov An-148 and Ilyushin Il112. Looking forward, the plan is to use Aviacor as a basis for setting up a single spares part supply center for these aircraft types. In addition, the factory’s capacity could be used for the maintenance and servicing of UAC-produced aircraft.

Brave New World Having largely completed the consolidation of assets, UAC is now moving on to the next big stage, which involves forming its internal corporate structure. The main process ahead is to create the separate business units.

When the UAC concept was being developed, it was decided to shed the old management structure, under which each enterprise within the industry was a self-contained profit center. Instead, the new corporation was to be based on the concept of product-specific business units. The development of this structure envisaged the establishment and development of the UAC managing company as a capitalization center. In addition, this restructuring required a change in the forms of incorporation and corporate mechanisms of managing the companies that formed part of UAC in accordance with their roles and functions in the target structure.

Initially, the proposed structure was similar to that of Europeanbased EADS. It was planned to unite UAC assets into three subholding divisions: Civil Aviation, Military Aviation, and Transport & Special Aviation – each having a lead design bureau, a sales center, a central maintenance center and a number of assembly plants. In addition, it was proposed that the UAC structure would include global maintenance centers; component production groups with shared parts centTu-204-100C

12 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

UAC — Commercial Aircraft Companies: Irkut Corporation, Yakovlev Design Bureau, UAC – Civil Aircraft managing company, UAC – Transport Aircraft, Ilyushin Aviation Complex, VASO, Aviastar-SP, Tupolev units dealing with commercial aircraft projects, as well as their 31 subsidiaries and affiliates.

Operations: marketing of existing and future types of commercial and military transport aircraft.

Current projects: MS-21, An-140, An-148, Tu204, Il-76, Il-112, Il-96, An-124, MTA, Airbus A320 passenger-to-freighter conversion, and production of components for foreign customers.

Non-core projects: export supplies of Su30MKI/MKM/MKA fighters and Yak-130 combat trainers (the commercial success of these programs should ensure the financial viability of Irkut and the business unit as a whole, at least for as long as it takes to prepare the MS-21 project for market entry).

Annual sales forecast by 2015: at least 120 billion rubles ($3.89 billion at June 2010 exchange rates) with an average operating margin of at least 5 percent.

Development process: The business unit will be created in the form of a multi-faceted integrated entity comprising a corporate center, a single engineering center and several production branches.

Establishment of the business unit will consist in joint-stock companies joining the parent company, Irkut. Irkut has been selected for this role primarily due to its financial stability, good track record, and previous experience restructuring aircraft manufacturing companies, developing production facilities, managing costs, and building an efficient business.

corporate

Tu-95MS ers; testing, research and training centers; and design companies (including joint ventures).

“At the inception stage, we planned the establishment of three business units,” Fedorov explained.

“However, the three years that it took us to create the corporation has prompted us to review that original concept somewhat. At first we were planning to set up the units for civil, military, and transport aviation, but it turns out we were overly idealistic. Our transport aviation is not yet ready to branch out on its own – both in terms of both production capacity and its order book. The reason is very simple: all the new projects are in the process of getting started.

Production of the Il-476 is just being set up, and development work on the Il-112 light transport aircraft has barely started. The MTA medium transport aircraft project did not really get started until 2009. That is why we decided to set up the three business units in a somewhat different configuration. The structure of UAC – Military Aircraft will remain virtually unchanged. Civil and transport aviation will be united in a single business unit, UAC – Commercial Aircraft.

Strategic and special-purpose aviation will fall under a separate business unit, UAC – Special Aircraft.”

The main purpose of these specialized business units is to transform UAC into an aircraft manufacturing complex that would meet the best international practices. This will involve the creation of a market capitalization center, streamlined financing within the holding company, and improved liquidity. In addition, UAC management believes this will improve the effectiveness of decision-making and implementation across the corporation, thereby improving its overall manageability. At the same time, UAC’s production and technology model will improve, while its operational risks as a group of companies will reduce.

Restructuring and reorganization will be driven by the capitalization criteria. While the restructuring program will be run by the UAC parent company, the state will retain control over implementation of the corporation’s development strategy and priorities. Other important conditions for forming the business units include cutting restructuring costs and outsourcing non-core assets and functions.

The changeover program will consist of two phases. The first, to be implemented this year, will see a consolidation of the corporation’s core assets, and integration of managerial processes throughout its structure, with the use of corporate governance procedures. Also in 2010, it is planned to provide the business units with their individual development strategies, product range plans, supply chain models, technical development programs, financial models, financial and commodity flows – effectively consolidating financial resources and programs management. In parallel, the business units’ parent companies will be formed, together with associated project management systems, project teams, and facilities management systems; business UAC Engineering CenteR As part of consolidating its design resources, UAC – Commercial Aircraft is beginning to set up a single design center in Moscow. Located on the site of the Tupolev design bureau in central Moscow, this center will be working on all current and future projects in commercial aviation. After Tupolev had to severely cut its staff in the 1990s due to a chronic downturn in the Russian aircraft manufacturing industry, a considerable part of the company’s grounds became vacant. Once the buildings have been refurbished and a modern infrastructure installed, this territory can comfortably house engineers and designers of three design bureaus: Tupolev, Yakovlev and Ilyushin. The creation of a single design center will make it possible to introduce uniformity to the design technologies, methods and tools across the board, including equipment and software, and to switch over to single design standards. In the mid-2010s, the single design center will be moved to the National Aircraft Construction Center in the town of Zhukovsky just outside Moscow.

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 13

corporate

solidate assets, transfer shares, reorganize companies, establish new entities (spin off non-core assets, establish centers of excellence and joint ventures), and sell shares in non-core companies to third parties.

“We expect that the establishment of these business units, with a full transfer of assets, will take place throughout 2010 and 2011,” Fedorov explained. “Of course, one would want to do it all faster, but asset transfer is a very laborious process.

All the more so since most of our assets come from the state. This means that transferring them – even to our subsidiaries – equals asset divestment and requires a special government approval. Nevertheless, we already have handed control of the relevant assets over to Sukhoi, Irkut and Tupolev, which

Su-30MKI production processes will be regulated both within the separate business units and as part of the UAC – Business Units managing structure. Financial recovery programs for separate entities within the business units will be developed, and their implementation will commence. The ownership structure of UAC and its business units also will be transformed: a transfer of shares from UAC, between its subsidiaries and affiliates, will begin in parallel with their reorganization.

During the second phase, scheduled for 2011-12, the business units themselves should come into existence, receive the assets they are entitled to, and absorb the aircraft manufacturing companies assigned to them. The business unit-level development and production programs will start; the testing, fine-tuning and full-scale implementation of financial and commodity flows will take place, the development of centers of excellence will begin. Within the same timeframe, the financial restructuring of the companies forming part of the business units will be completed; design bureaus and production facilities will be reorganized; non-core assets will be spun off and surplus assets will be disposed of. The corporation will complete the tasks to conTu-22M3

14 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

UAC — Special Aircraft Companies: Tupolev section working on military projects, KAPO Kazan Aircraft Production Association, Taganrog Aviation, Beriev Aircraft Company, as well as four subsidiaries and affiliates of the business unit’s key companies.

Operations: development of strategic and amphibian aircraft, command & control aircraft, AEW&C and other special-purpose aircraft.

Current projects: Tu-22М3, Tu-95, Tu-160, PAK FA next-generation strategic bomber, special-purpose aircraft systems, Be-200.

Annual sales forecast for 2015: at least 20 billion rubles ($0.65 billion at the June 2010 exchange rate), with an average operating margin of 15 percent.

Development process: Special-purpose aircraft are produced in small series and sold in small numbers. Therefore, this business unit will have no other choice but to focus on government contracts. It will be formed by way of the secondary entities joining the core business, Tupolev, which was selected for this role due to its extensive experience developing strategic and special-purpose aircraft. Beriev and Taganrog Aviation will merge in 2010, and will then join UAC – Special Aircraft as a single entity.

Tu-160 will be the core companies for the future business units.”

The key UAV projects will be the responsibility of UAC – Military Aircraft. “I do not rule out the possibility of UAC – Special Aircraft taking on separate UAV segments too, since its lead company, Tupolev, has extensive experience, knowledge and advances in this area,” Fedorov offers. “UAC – Commercial Aircraft will also continue working in this field, because Irkut conducts independent work on light UAVs. However, the biggest and most complex UAV projects – strategic reconnaissance and unmanned combat aircraft systems – will be carried out by UAC – Military Aircraft. I think this work will benefit from the research and technical capabilities of both Sukhoi and MiG. It is quite possible that UAVs will be created by joint teams [of these two companies].”

The UAC management is not ruling out the possibility that, as separate assets are being incorporated into the three business units, some companies and products will be rebranded. Irkut, for example, is likely to be renamed after its business unit, UAC – Commercial Aircraft. By the same token, Ilyushin Aviation Complex was rebranded UAC – Transport Aircraft in August 2008.

Integration of individual assets into the business units is likely to result in the gradual demise of some Soviet-era aircraft brands. The Ilyushin brand is likely to be retained for projects related to military transport aviation, while Tupolev will probably be given a second lease on life by the UAC – Special Aicraft business unit. Irkut, for its part, will certainly face the choice of rebranding or keeping its established name. This choice is likely to present itself within the next year or two because the contract-signing process for Irkut’s flagship MS-21 project already is on its way. The prospective designation, which emerged during a government tender held back in the early 2000s, will hardly live long enough to see that aircraft hit the market.

UAC’s Capital Structure Vnesheconombank 11.45%

Private Shareholders 8.26%

Russian Federation 80.29%

IPO Prospects UAC’s next objective will be the establishment of a single-share company. This will enable the corporation to prepare for an IPO. According to UAC management, the corporation should be technically ready for an IPO by 2012. However, a relevant decision will depend on the situation in the stock market.

As Fedorov says: “Our strategy envisages three phases of UAC establishment. I would sum up the current phase as formation and resuscitation. At this stage we require very strong financial support from the state. This is what is happening, in effect: the state is financing UAC directly, transferring money into its authorized capital and through federal programs. However, we cannot live like this forever and the state cannot keep giving us financial support indefinitely. The next phase should be an IPO, and entering the public stock markets. At that stage, financing will be mixed: we expect state support to continue but equal in size our own funding and investments coming from other sources. An IPO is a necessary step on this way, because we want to raise money for investment in our new programs. That phase is expected to last from 2011 to 2015. Then we should enter a stage when state support will be very modest and we will be making most of the money we need by ourselves.”

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 15

corporate

Aerocomposite spreads its carbon wings Pavel Nakhodkin The Aerocomposite center, which has been set up with the participation of United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) and the Sukhoi company, is launching a project to manufacture composite parts for Russia’s future passenger airliners. Composites are seen as a key to increasing the global competitiveness of the country’s aviation systems. Aerocomposite is planning to open one production facility for composite wings, wingboxes and tail assemblies in the Ulyanovsk Region, while another is to be established in Kazan for high-lift devices.

The history of Russian composites Until recently, the use of composites in Russian commercial aircraft was quite limited. In the Tupolev Tu-204 medium-range airliner, composite parts amounted to just 14 percent of the airframe’s structural weight. According to the Ulyanovsk-based Aviastar-SP factory, which manufactures Tu-204s, the aircraft has composite high-

lift devices – flaps, ailerons, spoilers – along with composite elevators, the rudder, access doors, floor panels and interior panels.

Composites are being increasingly used in new Russian regional airliner designs. Composite parts account for some 12 percent of empty weight in the

Composites share in the combat and commercial aircraft design

16 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

corporate

Antonov An-148-100V airliner, produced by the Voronezh-based VASO plant. Almost all materials used in this aircraft are of Russian origin. Its spoilers, ailerons and flaps are made of carbon fiber. The radome, wing-to-body fairings, landing gear bays, and parts of the engine nacelles are made of fiberglass. The An148’s elevator and rudder are of integral structural design and are autoclaved in one piece, complete with the primary structure.

Russia’s all-new Sukhoi Superjet-100 regional aircraft, designed by Sukhoi Civil Aircraft and produced at Komsomolsk-on-Amur’s KnAAPO factory, also makes extensive use of composites. It has composite flaps, ailerons, spoilers, rudder and elevators, wingto-body fairings, interior components, radome and various panels and access doors. All these parts are also manufactured at VASO. The SSJ-100’s nacelles, which are manufactured by the French company Aircelle, also are partially composite.

“The share of composite parts may grow in the future as new SSJ-100 versions evolve, but composite materials require a thorough study and exhaustive testing before they can find their way onto the airframe,” explains Victor Subbotin, the Sukhoi deputy General Director for commercial programs. “There are unknowns with regard to the strength of composite structures and how they respond to different climatic conditions such exposure to temperature changes and humidity.”

VASO has set up a dedicated composites facility that unites the factory’s previously unrelated divisions: the composites shop and the unit-level assembly shop. The new facility also includes its own engineering department for a fully autonomous production cycle. The production facilities are being modernized: VASO has purchased a prepreg cutting machine and laser projectors. Next to be installed is a third multi-axis machining center.

All this serves to demonstrate that until now, the enterprises in Voronezh, Kazan and Ulyanovsk have only been competent enough to manufacture light- and medium-loaded secondary structures for passenger aircraft, such as panels, high-lift devices, fairings, radomes, etc. As composites become more durable and their heat resistance increases, they will eventually become suitable for heavyloaded primary structures – including the wing and the empennage.

Aerocomposite’s new technologies The Irkut MS-21 midsize airliner, and the next variant of the SSJ-100, are to become the first Russian passenger aircraft to incorporate a high percentage of composite structures – up to 3540 percent by weight. This percentage will chiefly be achieved through the use of composites in the wing, wingbox, tailplane, rudder, horizontal stabi-

lizer and elevator, as well as in wing flaps, spoilers, and ailerons. To successfully implement these plans, UAC and Sukhoi proposed in late 2008 to set up Russia’s first center of excellence for composite structures: Aerocomposite.

Aerocomposite’s mission is not only to produce, but to develop as well, primary composite parts for civilian aviation. For this reason, it incorporates design, production and technical facilities. The center’s operations will help advance the country’s development of highly efficient commercial and transport aircraft with composite primary structures.

Aerocomposite is working to create a national design, production and resource competence for developing composite wings for future commercial airliners – primarily the MS-21 and new versions of the SSJ-100. An important task in this respect is SARAS aircraft airframe's composite rear pressure bulk head

to optimize the wing structure, reducing first of all the assembly’s labor intensity – thus cutting the production costs through the creation of integral structures. Instead of individual parts, the assembly shop will receive ready-made assembly units. Aerocomposite’s work in this field is fairly innovative for Russia.

Boeing has built a composite wing for its 787, and Airbus is now developing an all-composite wing for the А350 XWB project. This reduces structural weight, but both the 787 and A350 wings are made of nearly the same parts as the traditional metal wing.

Their only differences are integral panels. But even then, the wing skins and stringers are manufactured in isolated processes and formed into a single structure afterwards. This is because Airbus and Boeing have designed their wings based on the principles applied to conventional metal wing structures. Therefore,

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 17

corporate

Materials used in Boeing 787 and Airbus A350 XWB airframes Type

Composites

Aluminum alloys

Titanium alloys

Steels

Other

Boeing 787

50%

20%

15%

10%

5%

Airbus A350 XWB

52%

20%

14%

7%

7%

Data provided by Airbus and Boeing neither company has achieved any significant reduction in assembly labor intensity.

Aerocomposite, for its part, plans to use a whole new approach in developing composite wings for the MS-21 and other anticipated aircraft types. “UAC is embracing new technology: as part of the MS-21 program, we are working to create a carbon fiber wing that could also be used in all subsequent commercial aircraft of the UAC model range,” UAC President Alexey Fedorov explained. “Apart from the MS-21, we will put carbon wings on the future SSJ-100based regional aircraft, and also on the short- to medium-range widebody airliners with seating capacities of 200 to 300 passengers.

This is an across-the-board project in that will not be restricted to the MS-21 program, but also will serve all of our future commercial aircraft. I do not rule out that carbon fiber wing parts will also be used in military transport aircraft, in particular in the MTA airlifter that we now are launching jointly with India.”

Aerocomposite is turning into a testing ground for the development and production entry of new composite technologies. Until now, production of quality composite parts has mainly relied on autoclave curing, in which prepregs are subjected to heat and pressure in an autoclave to achieve the required shape and strength. This techComputer view of a future plant on composite parts production

18 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

Composites in global aviation The global aircraft industry makes extensive use of production processes for composite structures, which considerably improve an aircraft’s operational parameters. Experience shows that using carbon fiber composites is one of the most effective ways to reduce the structural weight of an airframe. This is why the amount of composites in modern aircraft is steadily growing.

The Boeing 777, developed in the first half of the 1990s, had only nine percent of its overall weight made in composites. Essentially, the only composite parts in this jetliner are its floor panels and the rudder. In the Airbus A380, the share of GLARE (GLAss-REinforced fiber metal laminate) structures amounts to some 25 percent by weight. The aircraft has composites that are used in the wing, wingbox, empennage and doors.

In the all-new widebody Boeing 787, which first flew in December 2009, composites account for 50 percent of the structural weight. They will be used in similar, or more extensive, applications in Airbus’ new A350 XWB (see table).

corporate

nology evolved back in the 1970s, but it is still widely used by UAC, Boeing and Airbus alike.

However, as new, larger and more complex integral structures get developed, they are becoming increasingly difficult to cure in an autoclave.

This is why Aerocomposite – in an effort to increase the producibility and reduce the number of auxiliary processes – plans to abandon the cost- and labor-intensive autoclaving technique in favor of low-cost out-of-autoclave molding technology. The industry is only beginning to adopt such processes. Their advantage is elimination of the need for huge and expensive autoclaves, as structures are assembled from dry materials and then subjected to vacuum and pressure treatment, with the introduction of a resin. The structure is then cured in an oven, or with an electrically heated form. The process, therefore, contributes to significantly reducing the costs of tooling. There also are non-autoclaving processes in which the structure is pressed into a mold along with a resin.

The initial drawback of non-autoclaving methods was the resulting structures’ inferior strength when compared with autoclave curing. But as technology improves and the characteristics of resins become ever better, the strength of non-autoclaved com-

posite parts are considered increasingly equal to those produced in an autoclave.

Carbon wings from Ulyanovsk In 2009, Aerocomposite began its search for a location to be used in the production of composite wings, wingboxes and empennage.

Aerocomposite initially eyed the Novosibirsk-based NAPO plant as a potential venue. The list of candidate sites eventually expanded to six locations, including three UAC plants: Ulyanovsk-based Aviastar-

Aerocomposite On 30 December 2008, the UAC Board of Directors approved the corporation’s participation in setting up the Aerocomposite composites center. UAC contributed 48 percent to the center’s registered capital of 26 million rubles ($900,000 at December 2008 exchange rate). The rest came from the co-founders: the Sukhoi company (26 percent) and Progresstech Group (26 percent). The center’s head office is in Moscow.

Throughout 2010, the center will perform design functions. A decision on moving into the industrial phase will be made by the end of this year. The enterprise is being financed by means of direct contracts with customers. Aerocomposite’s annual revenue in 2010-13 is projected to reach 1-2 billion rubles ($35-70 million); as composite parts begin to be shipped to customers from 2014, the revenue is expected to reach 4-6 billion rubles ($140-200 million) annually.

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 19

cOrPOratE

An-148 under pressure testing (to check for air leaks).

Airframe's yellow-green elements are from aluminium, grey are composites SP, vASO in voronezh and KAPO in Kazan. All of them already had production divisions that were manufacturing composite high-lift devices, rudders, horizontal stabilizers and fairings. But most of the equipment and processes used by these enterprises remained at a technology level of the 1980s. It was only recently that vASO introduced advanced processes for the production of composite structures for the An-148 and SSj-100.

It was eventually decided to create a purpose-built production facility for composite wings, wingboxes and empennage. In late 2009, Aviastar-SP’s Block 1В was selected as the preferred

Premium Aerotec demonstrates capabilies of textile technologies at ILA-2010 20 aircraft inDustry farnBOrOuGH sPEciaL

location. “We spent quite a long time choosing the production site,” Fedorov says. “There was no tender. All we did was evaluate the project’s financial viability and processing efficiency, including the possibility of using the existing capacities and floor space of our enterprises for the purpose of reducing investment in the creation of this new facility.”

UAC, Aerocomposite and the Ulyanovsk Region government signed a cooperation agreement in February 2010. Under this document, Aerocomposite seeks to attract investment for the project and facilitate its commissioning no later than 2014. UAC, for tEnDEr tErms anD cOnDitiOns The list of Aerocomposite’s requirements for the tender among foreign engineering providers is fairly long. The winner must be an internationallyrenowned company with relevant experience in the automotive industry. It must have a sound financial standing, backed by appropriate financial institutions.

The company must submit a commercial proposal.

There also is a list of technical requirements: the winning candidate must not only supply the necessary equipment, but transfer corresponding technology and processes to Aerocomposite; supervise the installation and commissioning of the equipment; and supervise compliance with technological procedures during the first year of operation. In addition, it must have the liability coverage, including financial, for reaching the target labor intensity, power consumption and quality parameters specified in the contract.

cOrPOratE

its part, will help attract funds and provide organizational support. The regional government will ensure state support for the investment activities, and will grant Aerocomposite subsidies and tax breaks for the payback period of not more than 10 years from the day this facility is officially put on the list of Ulyanovsk Region’s priority investment projects.

Block 1В, currently owned by Aviastar-SP and located on the enterprise’s grounds, will be transferred to the registered capital of Aerocomposite and fenced off into a separate area. The facility will be an official affiliate of Aerocomposite in Ulyanovsk.

Simultaneously, Aerocomposite has started work to set up a second specialist enterprise for the production of composite high-lift devices. Several venues have been considered, including the Ulyanovsk, Lukhovitsy and Kazan aviation plants. The final choice was in favor of KAPO. After the locations for both facilities had been identified, Russian design institutes were invited to come up with reconstruction plans for the AviastarSP and KAPO shops that would house the composite production lines. A relevant tender was announced in late june. The bidders included the Moscow, Ulyanovsk and Kazan design institutes specializing in aviation plants.

Also the same time, a tender was announced among foreign companies for providing engineering services at both facilities. The bidders include BRÖTjE-Automation Gmbh, Comau France, ThyssenKrupp Krause Gmbh, Diamond Aircraft Industries Gmbh, Fischer Advanced Composite Components AG, and MAG Industrial Automation Systems.

The final choice of integrators for the Ulyanovsk and Kazan facilities must be made in September-October 2010.

The Ulyanovsk facility is planned to be deployed stage by stage. All potential contractors have been tasked to map out production for an annual output of 30, 70 and 100 sets of composite wings, wingboxes and empennage. Investment also will be evolved in steps. In the initial phase, equipment will be bought to ensure the annual production of 30 sets. This will then be augmented to accommodate an annual production rate of 70 sets, then 100. The facility’s actual capacity will depend on customer demand. The launch customer will be Irkut Corporation, developer of the MS-21 airliner. In OctoberNovember 2010, the first contractors will be selected for the initial production phase. Construction of the Ulyanovsk facility is scheduled to be completed in 2012. Investment in the project will amount to at least $250 million.

MATERIAL ISSUES “Creating a composite wing for future Russian aircraft is a complex task,” Fedorov says. “The most

HiGH-Lift DEvicEs frOm kazan In developing the Kazan facility’s project, Aerocomposite decided to create a multi-program enterprise. Apart from the MS-21 project, the facility from the outset will produce composite high-lift devices for the SSj-100 and its future variants. Aerocomposite currently is in talks with a potential investor: Fischer Composite, which intends to become a stockholder in the Kazan facility. In early April 2010, the parties signed a memorandum of understanding. Fischer Composite’s share in the facility may reach 49 percent. In exchange, the company is expected to secure contracts from Boeing and Airbus.

This is why the KAPO facility is aiming for an early international certification, and will incorporate the latest technologies in composites production. The facility also will be an affiliate of Aerocomposite. Its construction timeline coincides with that for the Ulyanovsk facility.

The Kazan enterprise is to produce its first composite parts in 2013. advanced materials must be used for a carbon wing to have a true edge over a metal one. No less crucial is prior experience of design and certification in this area. There are not so many companies in the world capable of designing composite structures and – what is especially important – having them certified to European and American standards.”

This is why, in parallel with the selection of engineering contractors, Aerocomposite is negotiating with international comComposite rear pressure bulk head of the A350 by Premium Aerotec

corporate

Ilyushin’s experiment In fact, Russian airframers did experiment with larger composite structures at various points in time. The Ilyushin Aviation Complex designed an all-composite fuselage for its Il-114 turboprop airliner.

The prototype fuselage was filament wound at the Khotkovo, Moscow Region-based Central Research Institute for Special Machinery (TsNIISM). This experiment was suspended, however, as it was impossible at the time to accurately assess and validate the service life of such a structure. UAC and TsNIISM are now working together to improve the relevant technology and competence.

Composites application structure

by Industries In absolute Volume Total volume 8.2 million ton Wind power 3%

Aviation 4% Ships 6%

Transport (including automobiles) 28%

Tubes and reservoirs 7%

Consumer Goods 9% Electrical Engineering and Electronics 16%

Construction 27%

Composites application structure

by Industries In Value Terms Total Value 58 billion Euro ($82 Billion)

Transport (including automobiles) 24%

Wind power 6% Aviation 21%

Construction 18% Ships 5% Electrical Engineering and Electronics 10%

Consumer Goods 10%

22 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

Tubes and reservoirs 3%

posites suppliers. “We have signed a number of documents with Cytec,” says Aerocomposite president Anatoly Gaydanovsky. “We signed a memorandum of understanding in early April, confirming our interest in several materials they are planning to supply to us for use in wings and high-lift devices. We also continue talks with Hexcel. They offered us a number of materials but we were not quite satisfied with their producibility.

Now Hexcel is improving these materials to meet our requirements.”

Aerocomposite already has signed several contracts for composites, including direct agreements with Diamond Aircraft, Cytec and Fisher Composite.

The contract with Premium Aerotec was concluded with the assistance of Diamond Aircraft.

Aerocomposite has been in similar talks with Russian composites suppliers, including the Composite Holding Company and the INUMiT Institute of New Carbon Materials and Technologies. These two enterprises are developing new composite materials.

Both submitted their proposals, but so far neither has managed to deliver the material properties required for the MS-21 project. “Many complex issues have to be solved in order to achieve this goal,” Aerocomposite’s Gaydanovsky explains. “One example is the development of high-level polyacrylic fibers.

Resins must also be addressed. I very much hope that Composite and INUMiT will create materials that will be used in our production. We hope that in the next few years they will have developed materials that could be used in secondary structures, and hopefully are to be capable of finally creating materials for our primary structures.” In the meantime, Aerocomposite will receive composite materials only from foreign suppliers.

The center has already begun work on composite structures for the MS-21. In October 2009 it signed a contract with Diamond Aircraft and Fisher Composite for the development of a prototype MS-21 composite wing. According to the program schedule, these companies are to submit their prototypes to Aerocomposite in October 2010 for testing. Before the end of the year, one of the prototypes is to be sent to TsAGI Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute for evaluation. It will be a 10-meter prototype truncated at the 16th rib. Aerocomposite’s current plan calls for building a full-scale MS-21 prototype wing in 2012, but a final decision will be made based on the prototype testing results. Further plans envisage production of the first sets of MS-21 wings, wingboxes and empennage in 2013. These sets will be used in static, fatigue and flight tests of the airframe. First flight of the MS-21 is set for 2014. There will be no interim aluminum-wing prototypes; the aircraft will fly with a carbon wing from the start.

Deliveries are to begin in 2016.

tribune

PROSPECTS for INDO-RUSSIAN COOPERATION Q/A session with Raj Kumar Singh, Secretary Defence Production, Ministry of Defense, Government of India

What are the main challenges for India, its defense industries and the armed forces in this century? How will India answer these challenges?

The Indian defense industry and armed forces have been continually adapting to the changing technological and security environment of the world in general, and with our neighbors in particular.

We face pretty much the same challenges as most other defense industries around the world: catering to the most technologically sophisticated requirements of our defense forces. With the large pool of technically-qualified human resources, we have constantly tried to achieve self reliance in defense production and to equip our forces with state-of-the-art weapons and platforms.

Raj Kumar Singh 24 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

Vladimir Karnozov

What are the main achievements of the Indian defense industry and its aviation sector?

We have a very robust and strong defense industrial base. We make our own warships, tanks, guns, fighter aircraft, and other arms and ammunition. Our defense industrial base is growing rapidly, and recently we permitted the private sector to enter the field of defense manufacturing. Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) has developed comprehensive capabilities in the design, development, testing, manufacture, repair and overhaul of helicopters, aero engines, avionics and aircraft accessories.

Since the 1950s, a number of trainers, fighters and helicopters have been designed and developed

by HAL. In addition, the manufacture of MiG series of aircraft under license from Russia enabled India to graduate into the manufacture of Sukhoi Su-30 aircraft under ToT. HAL’s development of the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA Tejas) and the Advanced Light Helicopter (ALH Dhruv) in cooperation with Indian R&D agencies and over 200 companies in the country indicates the synergy between research organizations and industry – which can result in state-ofthe-art products.

Since its birth in the middle of the past century, the Indian aerospace industry has amassed a great technological and manufacturing potential, thanks to considerable investments of the government into self-reliant military production. How can this potential be used in the civil sphere, specifically civil aviation? How can Russian industrial partners help India in developing civil sectors of the hightech economy?

The Indian government is providing considerable support to the Indian industry to enter into the field of aeronautics. Information technology and software companies also have acquired expertise in these areas by undertaking work packages related to aviation design and optimization problems. Such expertise can develop into mutually

tribune

beneficial relationships, and can be tapped for possible development of civil aviation projects in collaboration with Russian OEMs (original equipment manufacturers). The planned joint development of the Multirole Transport Aircraft (MTA) – an airlifter in the 20-metric ton category – with United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) as principal collaborator will strengthen India’s design and development capabilities for civil aircraft.

The private sector has been repeatedly encouraged by the Indian government officials to invest in defense-related production. What can the private sector add to the existing system? Will private business eventually take the lead in the sphere of Indian defense production?

It is our priority to develop our defense industrial base so that we can accommodate in-country production of the weapons and equipment required by our armed forces. In May 2001, the defense industry sector was opened up 100 percent for Indian private sector participation, with foreign direct investment of up to 26 percent. While the private sector is encouraged to enter defense production, capabilities in the governmental sector will continue to be maintained and modernized.

Defense Procurement Procedure (DPP) is coming in its third revision, starting with the updates in 2006, 2008 and now in 2010. What are the key principles of the DPP, along with its main goals?

HJT-36 Sitara is to be powered

by Russian engine NPO Saturn AL-55I The Defense Procurement Procedure clearly lays down the methodology to be followed in defense acquisitions. It promotes transparency and provides a level playing field for manufacturers who clearly know the rules of the game – which cannot be changed midway. The document has spells out clear procedures that encourage foreign OEMs to collaborate with Indian companies in the manufacture of products indigenously.

Military-industrial cooperation between India and Russia began in the early 1960s. Soon it will be approaching a 50-year mark.

What do you think were the most important elements that India has derived from this lasting cooperation?

The story of Indo-Russian defense cooperation is a saga of reliable friendship, mutual trust and support, which has helped India build the foundation for a robust defense industrial sector.

Su-30MKI

tribune

PAK FA will provide the platform for development of India's FGFA

How do you assess the current state of the military-industrial cooperation with India and Russia?

The Indo-Russian defense cooperation is – and has always been – strong, to the mutual benefit of both the countries and their people. I would like this co-operation to continue.

How will the Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) project of India and Russia be structured and executed?

The FGFA is joint development project in which we will have Indian and Russian designers and engineers working side-by-side from

the beginning until its completion. The FGFA will be manufactured will be a joint product whose intellectual property rights will be held fully and equally by both parties. This is undoubtedly the most complex technological partnership between our two great nations. At the end of this project, we expect our designers and engineers to achieve the capability to design and manufacture future aircraft on their own. The special feature of Indo-Russian partnership is that it also seeks to develop capabilities in India.

Indian navy officers with Russian test-pilots at MiG-29KUB deck fighter 26 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

tribune

The Multirole Transport Aircraft (MTA) project appears to be a difficult one to get off the ground – despite a good level of political support by both sides. What factors have hampered the MTA, and does this project still have a chance to succeed?

The inter-governmental agreement (IGA) for codevelopment of the MTA was concluded in November 2007. According to the IGA, the development was planned through a joint venture to be set up in India. Initially, the IGA included a provision for possible utilization of a portion of the Indian debt to Russia as part of its share in the MTA’s development. This clause was deleted in an IGA amendment signed in December 2009. Based on this amendment, the authorized organizations from the Russian side are the Federal enterprise “Rosoboronexport” and the joint stock company “United Aircraft Company (UAC) – Transport Aircraft” (UAC-TA).

The shareholder agreement, memorandum of association, articles of association and funding methodology were discussed during Russian team’s visit to India during December 2009. After signing the IGA, we were informed by the Russian participants that the process to obtain a formal approval from the Russian government for UACTA’s participation has been initiated. Furthermore, the Russians informed us that the methodology of funding needs to be reviewed in view of transfer of funds to UAC from Russia. These issues will be further discussed. Both parties have agreed to name the joint venture: “Multi Role Transport Aircraft Ltd.” a draft agreement for intellectual property rights has been handed over by India to Russia for study and further suggestions. Broad agreement has been reached on funding, authorized capital, the joint venture company’s management structure, etc. During a meeting of the IndoRussian Sub Group on Aviation in February 2010, a broad agreement was reached on shareholding structure.

The momentum given by both the Indian and Russian partners highlights the commitment of both the sides to this prestigious project. The procedural aspects, which needed to be fine-tuned before the project can be realized, have taken some time. However, this is a long-term project. The MTA is very much underway, and you will soon see tangible progress.

Defense Minister Arackaparambil Kurian Antony (center) and Raj Kumar Singh (to his left) at Russian stand during DefExpo'2010 ufacturing program in India. The familiarity of both sides with each other – along with a very strong will to succeed in realization of the project within the stipulated time schedules – helped in overcoming the initial difficulties by accommodating the viewpoints of both sides. The clarity in defining roles and responsibilities, as well as clarity in the commercial issues, helped in avoiding the usual pitfalls. Thus, these projects succeeded. We are ensuring similar due diligence in the MTA and FGFA to ensure success in these projects too.

Despite its exemplary success, BrahMos remains the only prominent joint venture project involving the Indian and Russian defense industries. Can the BrahMos success lead to other applications in collaborative aviation projects between our nations?

You will soon see a BrahMos-like joint venture coming into being for the MTA. I am positive that the BrahMos joint venture’s success will be replicated in other projects too, further strengthening our long-standing friendly ties with Russia.

Multirole Transport Aircraft

The Sukhoi Su-30MKI combat aircraft project, and that of the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile, are widely considered as success stories. Why do you think these particular programs progressed so well compared to many other attempts, which have proved less successful?

The Su-30MKI project took off as a logical culmination of the conclusion of the MiG-27M man-

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 27

new projects

MS-21: Russia’s leap into the 21st century Sergey Kakhovsky While a launch customer has yet to be signed, Russia’s MS-21 single-aisle long-range aircraft has an authorization to offer in place, with the first deliveries expected in 2016. This program’s commercial success is considered as the basis for a revival of Russia’s civil aircraft manufacturing and the future of the country’s aviation industry for decades to come.

Inception Back in 2002, the Russian Aviation and Space Agency announced a tender for a short- to medium-range aircraft to replace the “workhorse” of Russian civil aviation: the 164-seat Tupolev Tu-154M. The winner, announced in July 2003, was the MS-21 project proposed by the Yakovlev and Ilyushin design bureaus. These two were later joined by the Tupolev design bureau. Yakovlev was subsequently bought by Irkut Corporation, which became the MS-21 lead developer.

MS-21 is the Russian designation for the mainline aircraft of the 21st century. The MS-21 program was aimed at creating a family of short- and medium-range narrowbody airliners for the Russian and international commercial aviation markets. Its developers promised a step change in operating efficiency. The main task facing Yakovlev designers and their partners was a 15 percent cut in operating costs against existing equivalents: the Boeing 737NG and the Airbus А320.

To achieve this target, a number of innovative solutions were apMS-21 is the Russian acronym for Mainline airliner of the 21st century.

28 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

All illustrations are courtesy of Irkut.

plied to improve the MS-21’s performance. For one, the share of composites was dramatically increased, including an all-composite wing, resulting in a lower operating empty weight. Improved aerodynamic characteristics – in particular the use of a high-speed wing – made it possible to increase the aircraft’s cruising speed to above Mach 0.8 (over 870 km./hr.).

Initial powerplant options for the twin-engined aircraft were in the 11-13 metric ton range: Russia’s Aviadvigatel PS-90А-12/PS-12 and Ukraine’s Ivchenko AI-436Т12. Foreign equivalents, based on the IAE V2500-A/V2527-A5 and the CFMI CFM56-7B26, also were considered. The winning engine had to have a specific fuel consumption of not more than 0.5 kg./ kgf.×hr, and fuel efficiency of at least 17 g./pass. x km.

The MS-21 was to meet the FAA-25/CS-25 requirements for the airframe; the FAA-33/CS-33 require-

new projects

The MS-21 family will be able to meet future environmental requirements ment for the powerplant; ICAO Chapter 4 standards for noise; and FAA-34/CS-34 certification for emissions. The use of new-generation aircraft systems was planed.

The project originally called for three MS-21 models: the MS-21-100, with a seating capacity of 132; the MS-21-200 for 156 passengers; and the MS-21300 for 174, all in a single-class configuration. It was also planned to build a freighter, the MS-21K, with a payload capacity of 17 t, and the MS-21KP passenger/cargo combi. The McKinsey & Company consulting firm estimated in 2003 that 300-350 MS-21s could sell in the Russian domestic market.

Under the auspices of uac Meanwhile, November 2006 saw the establishment of United Aircraft Corporation (UAC). The integration of practically all of Russia’s aircraft manufacturing companies made it possible to focus efforts on projects that were of key importance for the country, including the MS-21. Following that – and throughout 2007 – the program was frequently discussed at meetings between UAC managers and the Russian president, prime minister and first deputy prime minister. The prospective competitive aircraft, in the capacity range most popular with the market, finally received not only state support but also budget funding.

In the estimates of UAC’s Fedorov, the MS-21 will cost $8 billion to make, including $3.5 billion to come

from the state budget. For the rest of these funds, UAC and Irkut are planning to the money raise in loans from state and private banks.

Fedorov says full-scale financing of “Russia’s most ambitious civil aviation project” began in 2008.

The MS-21 project was revised in summer 2007 to bring it in line with the latest developments: the share of composite materials would be brought up to 40 percent of total structural weight, with the all-composite wing, wingbox, empennage and some parts of the fuselage.

According to a demand forecast for the MS-21 released by Roland Berger Strategy Consultants in 2007, the total market for narrowbody aircraft in 2006-2025 would amount to 12,900 units. These would include 4,200 aircraft with a seating capacity of 125 to 150 passengers; 4,000 aircraft with a seating capacity of 150 to 175; and 1,800 aircraft with a 175 to 200-seat passenger capacity. Roland Berger suggested that the Russian aircraft manufacturing industry could claim 10-15 percent of the global market for long-range narrowbodies. The consultancy drew a diagram showing that a 125- to 130-seat ailiner with a maximum range of 4,000 km., a 150-seater with a range of 4,500 km., and a 175-180-seater with a range of 5,000 km would each meet 99 percent of demand in their respective capacity segments.

The family will include a 210-passenger MS-21-400 stretch. That variant began to be viewed as a replacement for the Tupolev Tu204/-214 family, manufactured in the 1990s and the 2000s.

These changes to the MS-21 project were made official in July 2007, when the Gate 1 milestone was passed with the approval of the project concept and business plan at a meeting of the UAC commission for civil aviation. Also at that time, the UAC executive board officially appointed Irkut as the MS-21 lead contractor. Following

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 29

nEw PrOJEcts

The MS-21 family will enable airlines to optimize their fleets both in terms of passenger capacity and through the availability of several variants for each model Gate 1, Irkut President Oleg Demchenko said that the total number of MS-21 aircraft to be produced might exceed 1,000. The figure was a good match for the Roland Berger forecast. Gate 2, the approval of the conceptual design, was scheduled for August 2008 and Gate 3, the approval of the preliminary design, for 2009.

From the outset, it was planned that the new aircraft would be developed in close cooperation with foreign suppliers. The main intrigue, of course, surrounded the engine. Following Gate 1, it was decided that the aircraft would have two engine options: airlines would be invited to choose between a foreign-made powerplant and a Russian product. Increasing the seating capacity to 210 passengers required a corresponding increase in engine thrust, from 11-13 tons to 13-15 tons. The Perm-based Aviadvigatel plant proposed a revised PD-14 engine. In 2008, the newly created United Engine Corporation (UEC) identified Aviadvigatel as the lead designer of the MS-21 engine. Other participants in the PD-14 project were the Rybinsk-based Saturn plant and Ukraine’s Motor Sich and Ivchenko Progress engine

houses. The Russian government has agreed to invest budget funds in the PD-14 development and production: $500 million in 2009-11, and a further $1.2 billion for its certification program through 2016. The funds will be allocated as part of the federal program to develop Russian civil aviation.

Under the program, Aviadvigatel will create a new engine family in the 9-18 ton thrust range. Estimates indicate that the whole PD-14 family will be 10-11 percent more efficient than the CFM56-5B2/5B6 and the v2524/2533 engines. Aviadvigatel plans to build a PD-14 demonstrator in 2011. fOrEiGn ParticiPatiOn By approving budget financing for the PD-14 engine, the state made Aviadvigatel into the first MS-21 supplier. Irkut intended to identify the second engine The MS-21-200 will accommodate 150 passengers in an all-economy configuration, at 32-inch seat pitch

new projects

supplier, and select other contractors, through an international tender. Before the tender was announced in August 2007, UAC President Fedorov named Pratt & Whitney and Rolls-Royce as possible engine suppliers. Both manufacturers confirmed their intention to take part in the bidding: Rolls-Royce was proposing its RB282 as the prototype of the MS-21’s engine, and Pratt & Whitney was planning to bid with the PW1000G. Later Fedorov also named CFM International among the participants in the tender. As for General Electric, he did not expect its participation since, according to him, “GE had its hands full with Boeing and Airbus orders”.

In August 2008 the MS-21 programm passed the Gate 2. In December same year, Irkut invited proposals from potential systems suppliers. On 20 August 2009 Irkut had released a list of first-tier suppliers for some of the MS-21 systems. At the same time, the company made public the supplier shortlists for the powerplant, avionics suite, and flight control system.

Talks on these three first-tier systems were to continue, with the selection of suppliers to be completed by the end of 2009. The final results of the tender were not announced until December 20, 2009. The MS-21 will be powered by a PW1400G geared turbofan derived from Pratt & Whitney’s PW1000G and its avionics will be supplied jointly by Avionika and Rockwell Collins (Irkut took responsibility for integration). For the flight control system, a joint proposal from Aviapribor, Goodrich AS and Rockwell Collins was accepted.

Foreign bidders were recommended to have a Russian partner to improve their chances of winning.

In effect, all the winning foreign suppliers – with exception of the engine manufacturers – had a Russian partner.

The drawing of the tender results coincided with the development of the MS-21 preliminary design, which was approved in February 2010. In November 2009 the preliminary design was vied and approved by the Ministry of Industry and Trade Commission. Gate 3 was therefore successfully passed. Together with the preliminary design, the program’s business plan and cost effectiveness were analyzed, and the projected market and marketing policy assessed. The budget and schedule for the next program phase also were approved.

Two months, later Irkut signed its first contract with a MS-21 system supplier. Under the contract, United Engine-Building Corporation was to participate in Pratt & Whitney’s work to develop and produce the PW1400G engine.

The MS-21 will be assembled at Irkut’s key production facility, the IAPO Irkutsk Aircraft Production Association. However, the production facility for MS21 composite wings to be built in Ulyanovsk will have an annual capacity of 100 wing sets (see “Aerocompsite spreads carbon wings”).

Fedorov says IAPO’s production capacities are currently about 50 percent ready to accommodate the MS-21 production launch. The remaining preparations are to be completed in 2011-12. The first flying prototype will be built in 2014. Certification of the baseline model may be completed in 2015-2016, to be followed by first deliveries.

In 2010, IAPO is to start preparation for manufacturing individual MS-21 components, as digital designs for them become available.

The MS-21 is to achieve a 12-15 percent reduction in direct operating costs compared with the best existing equivalents Through 2014, preproduction investment in IAPO’s MS-21 facilties will amount to some $600 million, according to Fedorov.

The MS-21 will be outfitted at the Aviastar-SP plant in Ulyanovsk.

According to Irkut’s Demchenko, a mechanism is being developed whereby MS-21s assembled in Irkutsk will be ferried to Ulyanovsk for interior fitting and painting before their delivery to customer. An after-sales servicing center for the MS-21 may also be set up in Ulyanovsk, Demchenko said.

Structural design The MS-21 family consists of three models, with the following passenger capacities in an all-economy configuration, at 32-inch seat pitch: • MS-21-200, seating 150, • MS-21-300, seating 181, • MS-21-400, seating 212.

The MS-21 family will enable airlines to optimize their fleets both in terms of passenger capacity and through the availability of several variants for each model, varying in range from basic to extended. For the MS-21-200/-300/-400 basic versions, the range is 3,500 km.; for the MS-21-200ER/-300ER, it is 5,000 km; and for the MS-21-400ER, the range extends to 5,500 km. Configurations can be changed to accommodate customer requirements at any point in their life cycle. In addition to the main versions, an MS-21200LR variant is being considered, with its range extended by an extra 1,500 km. from the ER model. Other possible products include freight and executive/corporate options. To minimize the airlines’ costs, cross-family commonality is envisaged for the powerplant,

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 31

new projects

MS-21 suppliers • Powerplant – Pratt & Whitney (USA) Also it could be possible to use perspective powerplant built by United Aircraft Corporation • Avionics – Avionika (Russia) and Rockwell Collins (USA) • Flight control system – Aviapribor (Russia), Goodrich AS (France) and Rockwell Collins (USA) • Landing gear – Gidromash (Russia) • Auxiliary power unit – Hamilton Sundstrand (USA) • Air conditioning system – NPO Nauka (Russia), together with Hamilton Sundstrand (USA) and the Hamilton Sundstrand – Nauka joint venture • Electrical system – ECE (France, part of France’s Zodiac Aerospace) and Hamilton Sundstrand (USA) • Interior – C&D (USA, part of France’s Zodiac Aerospace) • Fuel system – Intertechnique (France, part of France’s Zodiac Aerospace) • Oxygen system – Intertechnique (France, part of France’s Zodiac Aerospace) • Gas inerting system – Intertechnique (France, part of France’s Zodiac Aerospace) and Hamilton Sundstrand (USA) • Fire protection system – Kidde Technologies, a Hamilton Sundstrand company (USA) • Hydraulic system – Eaton (USA), with work on more than 50% of components to be outsorced to Russia’s PMZ Voskhod, Teploobmennik, Znamya, and Tekhpribor.

• Wing anti-ice system – Hamilton Sundstrand (USA) airframe, cockpit, systems, parts, maintenance processes and methods of operation.

The baseline family member is the MS-21-200. The MS-21-300 will differ in a stretched fuselage, whereas its wing and engine will be the same. The MS-21-400 model, apart from being a stretch, will have a greater wing area and higher engine thrust. It is planned that the first model to go into production will be the MS-21-200. Its maiden flight is scheduled for 2014, with a 2016 entry into service.

The MS-21’s avionics will be supplied jointly

by Avionika and Rockwell Collins

32 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

All three MS-21 models will have a fuselage everaged diameter of 4,090 mm, which is 200 mm more than the Boeing 737NG and 120 mm more than the Airbus А320 family. The MS-21-300 fuselage will have two additional plugs, measuring 3,420 and 2,160 mm in length. The MS-21-400 will incorporate two 5,500-mm plugs added to the MS-21-200 baseline fuselage.

A larger fuselage cross-section for the MS-21 made it possible to increase the level of passenger comfort and to reduce boarding times. A wide aisle at 22.5 in (572 mm) between 18 in-wide (457 mm) seats allows for a speedy boarding (the А320, for example, an aisle width of 480 mm). A variant with a narrower aisle (20 in, 508 mm) but wider seats (18.5 in, 470 mm) will be available. The MS-21 also offers larger overhead baggage bins, each designed to accommodate up to four standard suitcases (550×400×200 mm) plus additional small hand luggage.

The MS-21-200 cargo hold accommodates six standard LD3-45W containers. The MS-21-300 can carry eight LD3-45W containers, and the MS-21-400, 12 LD3-45W containers.

The optional fitting of a four-wheel bogie main landing gear enables operations from airfields with less rigid runway pavement.

The MS-21 structure makes a balanced use of aluminum alloys and composites, resulting in a lower weight combined with high reliability and relatively low airframe cost.

The aerodynamic characteristics have been considerably improved through the use of an allcomposite wing with new-generation supercritical airfoils, which also has a positive effect on fuel consumption. The two highly reliable fifth-generation turbofan engines ensure a 12% fuel saving as com-

The baseline family member is the MS-21-200 pared with powerplants of the previous generation.

The MS-21 family will be able to meet future environmental requirements. It has been established that the cumulative level of environmental noise will have a margin of at least 15 EPNdB on ICAO Chapter 4 requirements. Engine emissions should meet the CAEP 6 ICAO requirements with a margin of 50 percent. The MS-21 will generate 25 precent less СО2 emissions per passenger seat than other aircraft currently in service.

All the technical innovations applied to the MS-21 make it possible to achieve a 12-15 percent reduction in direct operating costs compared with the best existing equivalents.

The MS-21 should be an attractive option both for Russian and foreign airlines, based on its maximum economic efficiency, international certification in compliance with requirements of the AR MAK Aviation Register of the Interstate Aviation Committee, EASA, and FAA, together with customized logistics support and maintenance throughout the aircraft’s life cycle.

First contracts Now that the MS-21 preliminary design has been approved, the first firm orders are expected by the end of this year. Speaking at the St Petersburg Economic Forum in June 2010, Irkut’s Demchenko said: “A conract for 50 MS-21 aircraft is planned to be signed by the end of 2010.” For his part, UAC’s Fedorov, speaking at the 2010 ILA air show in Berlin on June 9, said that under the project’s business plan, some 50-70 MS-21 orders are expected to be in place by the first quarter of 2011. “This is what we need in order to launch the next phase of the project. If there are more, we shall only be glad,” he said.

Back when the project concept was devised, Irkut and UAC held preliminary consultations with major Russian airlines – Aeroflot, S7 and Transaero – as well as with a number of foreign companies.

The first orders for the MS-21 may come from both Russian and foreign customers. In May 2009, UAC and Irkut secured a commitment from the Russian Technologies corporation for up to 100

MS-21 aircraft for the Rosavia airline project. Later, Russian Technologies held tenders for the supply of 65 medium-range aircraft.

In May 2010 it was announced that the contract went to the Boeing 737NG. Moreover, instead of setting up the new airline, Russian Technologies will now hand all its relevant assets over to Aeroflot.

“We understand the choice of Boeing as the winner of the tender for the supply of passenger aircraft for Russian Technologies,” Fedorov said at the time. “The MS-21 will enter into service only in PW1400G engine The choice of Pratt & Whitney as the MS-21’s engine supplier was anticipated. The company began developing its PW8000 newgeneration engine back in 1998. At the first stage, the program envisaged an upgrade of the PW6000 model, with a replaced fan section and a gearing system. That work was conducted jointly with the German company MTU Aero Engines. After the first phase of rig tests, the engine was further tested on an Airbus A340-600: the first flight took place in October 2008 from Airbus’ Toulouse, France headquarters airport. On the strength of these flight tests, Pratt & Whitney announced that the PW1000G’s fuel consumption was 12-14 percentlower than that of its existing equivalents.

Not long before the MS-21 tender, Pratt & Whitney’s PW1000G engine was selected to power Japan’s Mitsubishi Regional Jet (the PW1215G/1217G version) and the Bombardier CSeries (the PW1521G/1524G version).

For the MS-21, the PW1000G engine had to be further enhanced, bringing its thrust from the 10 tons required for the CSeries and the MRJ up to a higher output of 14 tons. Yet the associated risks for the MS-21 program were lower than they would have been had a completely new egine design been selected. The 14-ton PW1400G engine will be based on the geared turbofan (GTF) technology. A gear system separates the engine fan from the low-pressure compressor and turbine, enabling the fan to rotate slower, while the lowpressure compressor and turbine operate at a high speed, delivering lower fuel consumption and noise and reducing maintenance costs.

Gear systems were used in engine manufacturing before, but Pratt & Whitney claims it has managed to create a compact and reliable design with improved efficiency, making the engine suitable for longrange aircraft. Pratt & Whitney predicts that the PW1400G will be more advanced than the PW1000G, since there is more time available for its development: the CSeries is due to go on sale in 2013; the MRJ, in 2014, whereas the MS-21 will not hit the market until 2016.

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 33

new projects

MS-21 specifications Model

MS-21-200

MS-21-300

MS-21-400

35.9

35.9

36.8

Dimensions Wing span, meters Length, meters

36.7

42.3

46.9

Height, meters

11.5

11.5

12.7

36.85

53.6

70.1

Cargo hold volume, sq. meters Powerplant Engine type

Turbofan

Number of engines

2 Weight

Maximum take-off weight, kg.

67,600

76,180

87,230

0.8

0.8

0.8

5,000

5,000

5,500

192 (16 + 176)

Performance Cruise speed, Mach Maximum range, km. (100% passenger load; single-class configuration, 32 in. seat pitch, passenger weight with baggage 100 kg.)

Seating capacity Seats in two-class layout (seat pitch 36 inch in business, 32 inch in economy)

130 (12 + 118)

159 (20 + 139)

Seats in single-class layout (32inch seat pitch)

150

181

212

Seats in dense seating layout (29 inch seat pitch)

168

203

230

Certification of the baseline model may be completed in 2015-2016

2016, whereas airlines need to upgrade their fleets now, they cannot wait for five years until the new Russian aircraft is built. That is why UAC never ruled out the possibility of preference being given to an alternative proposal in the MS-21 size category. However, the deal with Boeing will not affect the nature of UAC’s cooperation with Russian Technologies as regards to the MS-21. By the end of this year, we shall sign a revised agreement with the corporation, taking into account its new role in supplying aircraft for Aeroflot.”

Fedorov added that Russian Technologies will continue to support the MS-21 program, since it involved several companies forming part of the corporation itself.

MS-21 talks are continuing with other major Russian airlines, in particular Transaero. According to Fedorov: “UAC and Transaero currently are discussing a possible order. Transaero is interested in the MS-21. Naturally, we consider it a potential customer.” For her part, Transaero CEO Olga Pleshakova says: “The Russian aircraft manufacturing industry should be given another chance. But

34 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

we shall be working with Russian suppliers just like with any major supplier of leased foreign aircraft. If we receive a commercial proposal for the MS-21, we shall consider the prospects of this aircraft receiving a type certificate.”

UAC and Irkut also are aiming the MS-21 project at the Asia-Pacific market. On April 20, 2010, Irkut signed an agreement with the Malaysian company Ujit Sentosa on setting up the first regional center for promoting Russian civil aviation projects in Southeast Asia at in Kuala Lumpur. Speaking at the signing ceremony, Ujit Sentosa executive board Chairman Dato Mustaffa Abb demand for the Russian aircraft will be considerable, especially among low-fare carriers and several other airlines. These local airlines have branches in practically all developed ASEAN countries: in Vietnam, Thailand, Singapore, and Indonesia.

In June 2010, Malaysian media reported that UAC and Irkut had secured a commitment from the investment holding company Crecom Burj Bhd for 50 MS-21 aircraft. According to Crecom Burj Bhd Executive Director Mohamad Isa Abdullah, his company intends to spend $5 billion on the airliners. “In the future, the company intends lease out the MS-21s,” he said. “Several Southeast Asian airlines, whom I cannot name at this stage, have demonstrated an interest in the Russian airliner with a view to renewing their fleets.” Speaking at the ILA Berlin Air Show on June 9, Fedorov elaborated: “The commitment in question is not yet a firm order, but we plan to speed up work on this agreement and to sign a contract this year.” Fedorov added that the contract with Malaysia might become the first international order for the MS-21.

new projects

It is unlikely that the choice of Crecom Burj Bhd, a rather obscure company in the international aircraft market, will significantly boost the image of the MS-21 project. That is why such an agreement has not been given much publicity yet, either by the Russian or the Malaysian side. Most likely, it probably will be only in 2011-12 that serious contracts for the MS-21 can be expected from Russian airlines. As for major international carriers, they are unlikely to place orders for the aircraft until after it has received international certification. UAC and Irkut do not yet have enough clout in civil aircraft manufacturing to compare with Airbus or Boeing.

Therefore, until airlines have the opportunity to see all the advantages promised by the MS-21 developers, they will hardly line up for MS-21s in the manner they do for A320s and 737s. It is only after it has built customer trust that the Russian aircraft industry will be able to claim a share of the global market, even if it is only the 10-15 percent share forecast by Roland Berger.

With the launch of the MS-21 program, the Russian industry has put everything at stake. If this aircraft fails to become a commercial success, another chance to come up in the commercial aviation world will not present itself for a very long time, if ever. Indeed, if the expectations of the Russian government – which has invested considerable budget funds in the MS-21 project –, do not come true, it is unlikely that any other aircraft project will be given preferences of a similar scale.

MS-21 project landmarks • July 2003 – The Russian Aviation and Space Agency identifies Yakovlev’s and Ilyushin’s MS-21 project as the winner in its tender to develop a short- to medium-range passenger airliner. The MS-21 family includes seating capacities for 130, 150 and 180 passengers.

• July 2007 – The first phase (Gate 1) of the MS-21 program is completed. UAC appoints Irkut as the lead contractor.

• August 2008 – The MS-21 conceptual design is approved (Gate 2 phase).

• December 2008 – Irkut announces a tender to select MS-21 systems suppliers.

• May 2009 – UAC, Irkut receive a commitment from the Russian Technologies corporation for 100 MS-21 aircraft for the Rosavia airline project.

• August 2009 – Irkut announces the list of first-tier suppliers for some of MS-21 systems, and a shortlist of engine, avionics and flight control system suppliers.

• November 2009 ­– Approval of the preliminary design by the Russian Ministry of Industry and Trade.

• December 2009 – Irkut completes the selection of first-tier suppliers of the MS-21 program’s main systems.

• February 2010 – The MS-21 preliminary design (Gate 3 phase) is considered and approved.

• April 2010 – Irkut signs a contract with Pratt & Whitney for the supply of the PW1400G geared engine for the MS-21.

• June 2010 – The Crecom Burj Bhd investment holding company (Malaysia) places a $5-billion commitment for 50 MS-21 aircraft.

The first flying prototype will be built in 2014

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 35

markets

Decisive time for UAC Interview with Alexey Fedorov, President, Chairman of the Executive Board, United Aircraft Corporation.

Prepared for publication

by Vladimir Karnozov

How has restructuring of the Russian aircraft manufacturers been going?

Now, when the Farnborough International 2010 opens, we are deeply in the process of integrating and structuring the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC).

This process focuses on absorbing all assets of the Russian aerospace industry enterprises that develop and manufacture fixed wing aircraft. Figuratively speaking, by the previous year we had been collecting all the stones that had been thrown before. This year we actually commenced process of building up, within the Corporation, integrated structures specialized on specific directions. Earlier we announced that UAC will have three divisions. The first one will lead all the projects to do with combat aviation, second with commercial airliners and third with special mission aircraft. The Combat Aviation division has two pillars. These are the companies that have long been specializing in tactical aircraft for frontline air force units: Sukhoi and MiG. This division also includes design bureaus and production plants that worked closely with those two companies. The division for commercial aviation is based on Irkut and Ilyushin, and includes other design bureaus and production

MiG-29K with MiG-29SMT and Superjet 100 in the background 36 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

Su-35 plants associated with those companies. This division will be developing and producing aircraft for passenger and cargo transportation. The special aircraft division will be focusing on long range bombers, airborne early warning and control aircraft, and other aircraft for special missions that use baseline aircraft models as platforms. Amphibious aircraft are also in the scope of its activities. The key companies in that division are Tupolev and Beriev. We are planning to complete formation of our desired corporate structure in 2010-2011. Once the integration process is complete, the corporation, staring from 2012, will work basing on the firm foundations of these three divisions. Integrating Russian fixed wing aircraft manufacturers is quite a complicated process even if we for a moment limit it to asset management only.

It is rather difficult to merge all of these assets. But what is even more difficult is the process of putting together the teams of the managers who shall control those enterprises. It is quite a matter in itself. And it needs to be carefully addressed.

Su-30MKI (further), Hawk (center) and MiG-29N (closer)

Please tell us about your plans to rationalize UAC’s workforce. Have you started this process?

Yes, we have started. And as of this time UAC member enterprises employ about 100,000 people. Our target is to have some fifty thousand people by 2025.

This means almost twice the reduction. With that, the volume of sales should rise approximately five times. The key issue here is to increase the usage

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 37

markets

of our workforce. In plain words, one person should produce as much as ten times more than now. That commands a considerable increase in productivity.

How will you achieve such a huge rise?

All of our new aircraft models are designed using computeraided technologies. First of all, we master new technologies of aircraft design and development. This shall enable us to make effective use of brand-new, highly effective manufacturing equipment that is also based on digital technologies. We have already started the massive program for renovation of our manufacturing sites. High-output production tools are being purchased in increasing numbers. But this sort of equipment gives the highest effect only when modern digital technologies are used at all stages. In all areas of our activities (combat aircraft, freighters and passenger jets) we have “lead projects” that make intensive use of the most advanced technologies. In the case of combat aviation such as project is, surely, the PAK FA. The Multirole Transport Aircraft (MTA) plays similar role in the sphere of transport aviation. Major

38 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

programs in the passenger aviation are the Superjet 100 and MS-21. We master new technologies and try new organizing structure while carrying out the above-mentioned projects. It is exactly those cutting-edge technologies mentioned before, using which we aim at reaching that ten-times rise in productivity. Besides, we are implementing so called LEAN technologies, along with all sorts of other saving technologies. These should also help us increase productivity.

Are there potentially social problems that may arise from shrinking the workforce? Can it happen that some plants will close down?

We are not planning to close down any of our plants, but specializing a particular enterprise is something that is really necessary. Specialization of the plants means narrow focusing on certain type of production: making particular components or particular subassem-

markets

blies, doing some mechanical treatment of materials etc. We are also using outsourcing mechanism by taking a particular working operation and placing it with another company which is a narrow specialist in the given area. In some cases particular work will go outside of the United Aircraft Corporation’s structure to a particular specialist.

What is the current situation with the Sukhoi Superjet 100 program? When can we expect its entry into service?

We are planning deliveries to airline customers to commence by the year-end. The Superjet goes through its paces. Operable prototypes fly frequently; the number of accomplished flights is nearing seven hundred. The flight test program is now focused on critical regimes and modes, extending temporary limitations to the flight envelope.

Obviously, this project suffered some delays to the delivery timetable announced by Sukhoi Civil Aircraft in December 2005, when Aeroflot placed its order. What shall be blamed for this?

It is true that first deliveries slipped, but we have been working closely with airline customers. We continue talking to them on a regular basis and manage to find mutual understanding. Besides, the crisis helped us a little bit. Many airlines had drops in their passenger numbers. So they thought they do not actually need that many new aircraft immediately. Major problem was to get certification for the Powerjet SaM146 engine powering the Superjet. The SaM146 is a brand-new type of commercial aeroengine; and our engine makers believed they can do better than they actually could. Finally, the engine won EASA certification less than a month before the opening of Farnborough 2010. Although

Superjet 100 escorted by Su-35 and Su-30MKI somewhat late, it is a big achievement. That will enable us, the aircraft makers, to complete our part of the work on the certification.

When I was speaking about the terms of deliveries, I was quite sure in that, because of the progress we have recently had with the engine makers on their part of the certification process. One point to notice is that in our history we have never had such a close cooperation between the Russian engine makers and the foreign engine makers. The SaM146 is a particular project that actually does that sort of close cooperation. Anyway, all these issues mentioned above have produced an effect on the SSJ100 schedule. Developing the MS-21, we chose another way. There will be two types of engine, so there is always a choice of engine supplier. The first type is from Pratt&Whitney, a PurePower derivate. The second option is a Russian engine, the PD-14 from Russia’s United Engine Corporation. We will be doing certification of the aircraft judging by the state of readiness with each of those engine types. The suitable engines were selected

An-124 Ruslan escorted by Sukhoi fighters

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 39

markets

An-148 by means of an international tender. Pratt&Whitney came first in that competition. Besides, the governmental program for development of Russian civil aviation has the point on which this particular engine, the PD-14, is being developed. Pratt&Whitney knows that the PD-14 is being developed; our agreement with Pratt&Whitney is that certain amount of sales of the MS-21 aircraft will be with PW engines.

Please explain to our readers your sales strategy for the MS-21.

What’s new on that project?

At Farnborough air show the aviation public is invited to Irkut stand, where they can inspect a cabin mockup of the MS-21. It can give the show visitors some understanding of what this aircraft is going to be. We are working hard on that program. A critical design review

has been passed. Now we are proceeding with preparation of documentation for production. Selection of major vendors for onboard systems has been completed. By the time of Farnborough we shall complete selection of vendors. As of this time, that of Farnborough show opening, the aircraft is pretty much defined in terms of onboard systems. This fact shall enable us to shift from general talks with airlines about the aircraft to offering a defined product to them. We already have some interest expressed in our new aircraft from domestic and international carriers, including those from Europe, Asia and even North America. Some airlines from these geographic areas participated in the

MiG-29 40 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

markets

process of shaping MS-21 as part of its definition. According to our business plan, two thirds of the MS-21 sales shall be outside of Russia.

In economic terms, how will the MS-21 compare against new versions of the Boeing 737 or the Airbus A320 assuming they get new engines?

As of this time, neither Airbus nor Boeing has made their choice on a new engine for their narrow body jetliners. Therefore it is not possible for us to be correct in evaluation of our aircraft against their’s. Although it is difficult to draw a comparison, I believe our aircraft shall be better because it is a brand-new design. The whole of the aircraft, including its systems, is shaped with optimization to the parameters of the new engines. Although we cannot precisely measure our advantage right now, we are pretty sure the MS-21 will fare better.

What is the status of the Antonov-124 production restart?

We are considering restoration of the An-124 production. There are two key questions here. Who is going to be the launch customer? What is the volume of the launch order? Our understanding is that this project needs a good launch customer to get off ground. Launch customer who might come with a worthwhile order. The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) can serve in the role of that “good customer”.

The new Armament Procurement Program is being put together. This program will address the needs of the Russian Armed Forces. It will define equipment procurement plans for the next ten years. If the An-

Su-27

MS-21 FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 41

markets

124 gets included in the MoD procurement plans, it will kick off this project. Orders from commercial operators may supplement military orders. In terms numerical, an expected order from the MoD could be less than a combined order from commercial airlines. By the very nature of governmental orders, they are more secure and better funded. Therefore, in the capacity of a launch order, one from the government is of more value to us, the aircraft manufacturers. In our business plans, we actually anticipate that commercial operators may place orders that are numerically comparable to those of the military.

Obviously, there are technical and economical risks to do with the resumption of the An-124 production. We anticipate those risks to be largely carried by governmental customers.

Surely, we are counting on commercial airlines since the new version of the popular Ilyushin quad is equipped with better engines and advanced avionics. The new version complies to the ICAO Chapter 4 noise requirements and other strictest ecological standards. So, the Il-476 will be allowed to enter European airspace and land at European airports without restrictions. The airlines can do their business using this aircraft for cargo transportation. A handful of refurbished Il-76s are already in service with Volga-Dnepr and other freight specialists. These aircraft have no restrictions for flights into European airspace.

Is anything happening with Ilyushin-112 and Ilyushin-476?

Yes, there is something happening. We have completed preparation of manufacturing documentation for the Il-112. Production line at Voronezh-based VASO plant is being outfitted. Tooling is being purchased, made and installed. We are planning to complete first operable prototype next year. By the way, the Il-112 was developed from scratch on computer screens, using CAD/CAM technologies. Until recently, VASO has been loaded to capacity with setting up production line for the Antonov-148 aircraft and streamlining it. Starting from this year, the plant has been making real progress with installation of production tooling for the Il-112.

The Ilyushin-476 will go into production at Aviastar-SP plant in Ulianovsk.

First operable prototype is taking shape. Subassemblies, sections of fuselage and wing, are being manufactured. Maiden flight is set for 2011.

Since this aircraft is a further evolution of the baseline model, the Ilyushin-76, we do not expect flight tests to take a long time. Deliveries shall start in 2012. Negotiations with potential customers are ongoing, both inside and outside Russia. Much depends on the Armament Procurement Program mentioned before. If the MoD places a really big order for this aircraft model, then we will give respective project a higher priority.

The An-148 is now in airline service, and first operable An-158 is on display at Farnborough. Does everything go well?

The An-148 production is ramping up at VASO. Last year we delivered two airframes and added four in the first half of 2010. Our manufacturing plan for this year is seven airframes. We will deliver more next year, and then gradually rise annual production output to 24 aircraft. We believe that is a sufficient number to meet the solvent demand. That’s about production of the An148 in Russia. As per the An-158, it is a stretched version of the baseline An-148. Its production is planned to be set up in the Ukraine. The Ukrainians have their own manufacturing capacities to produce the An-158 locally. There is a plan to gradually increase production of that type to twelve airframes a year. If we sum up figures for the whole aircraft family, the combined production output shall come to 36 units per year.

That’s OK for our current estimation of the market and the solvent demand. If the market proves different, then we will address the issue again and adjust production rates. Production of the Antonov-148/158 family

Do you expect smaller freight companies place orders for this newer version of the Il-76?

42 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

Su-27 and Su-27UB on show aircraft has been developing in close industrial cooperation between enterprises of Russia and Ukraine.

There is a unitary system for component manufacturing. When shaping industrial model for this project, we have been trying to specialize each enterprise on certain type of production so as to achieve a higher manufacturing efficiency.

What’s new on the fifth generation fighter aircraft?

First operable prototype is undergoing preliminary flight tests. Their purpose is to prove advertized parameters of the aircraft. This work is being accomplished in close cooperation with the MoD. So far eve-

rything goes OK. But it is only a beginning of the long process that shall lead us to making this aircraft up to customer requirements. We are confident that we will cover all that way and achieve a positive result.

We are sure of that because the Russian aviation industry has amassed rich experience in making modern combat aircraft up to customer requirements. We are good at combat aircraft. This year two more operable prototypes will join the first one already flying. Entry into service is set for 2015-2016. The Russian Air Force has a requirement for 250-300 next-generation fighters, but that requirement will take time to be satisfied. Besides, similar numbers are requested by the Indian Air force. There is another name for export version, FGFA, which stands for Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft. I believe this airplane will make its own mark in the aviation history.

Pilots and high ranking members of the Russian delegation at Aero India 2009

markets

MOSCOW ON WEAPONS MARKET Konstantin Makienko Vladimir Karnozov Sergey Chemezov, General Director, Russian Technologies

Arms sales are an important part of the Russian export. It carries strategic importance. It helps the Kremlin build good relations with governments of other countries, and brings these nations into the Russian sphere of commercial relations, cooperation and other key areas.

Another important aspect is that such activity helps domestic manufacturers stay in the business and develop critical technologies. The largest Russian customers are India, China, Algeria, Vietnam, Venezuela and Syria. Although the worldwide economic crisis has an impact on arms sales, the overall business volume continues to grow despite the adverse economic environment. In 2009, Russian arms exports (in executed deliveries) totaled $8.5 billion – which was $150 million above the 2008 level, according to estimations by the Moscow-based Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST). According to Russian government officials, the 2009 order book volume reached $40 billion – up $7 billion up from the 2008 level. Military export from Russia is centralized. All sales of ready-to-use weapons (not counting some

44 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

minor items) go through Rosoboronexport, a government-run company responsible for military technical cooperation with foreigners. Separately, twenty one different Russian companies (all being original equipment makers or license-holders) have governmental permission to work directly with foreign customers, but their scope of activities is limited to spare parts, repair and overhaul, training and logistics – and none holds the right to supply weapons systems independently of Rosoboronexport. Two years ago, Rosoboronexport and more than 200 other companies were moved under control of the “Russian Technologies” state corporation – a huge structure established by the Kremlin to control state assets in the Russian military-industrial complex. On the surface, the shift of Rosoboronexport produced little effect. Perhaps the most evident change was that all Rosoboronexport representative offices outside Russia have been “re-branded,” becoming those of the Russian Technologies. This, however, does not bring much change to the everyday work. Employees continue to focus on sales and interaction with customers and end-users on technical support, modernization and upgrades, spare parts, training of personnel and logistics. The need to “change the façade” was caused by modifications in Russian law following establishment of Russian Technologies, and also was a measure to boost sales of high-tech civilian products abroad (which is one of the tasks set by the Kremlin).

In published statistics, Rosoboronexport states that its 2009 exports amounted to $7.4 billion, which is 10% more than the previous year. For new successes in the field of arms sales, Russian Technologies head Sergey Chemezov (the man who headed Rosoboronexport before receiving his new appointment) was decorated earlier this year with the Order of Friendship. “This is a testimony of the fact that the arms trade developed well so far,” commented Rosoboronexport general director Anatoly Isaikin. “We anticipate that arms trade volume this year will not be less than the previous one.” During the 2001-2009 timeframe, the volume of arms sales made through Rosoboronexport rose by 2.4 times, he added. Russia has military trade partners in 70 countries around the world. “Today, we offer not only ready-to-use systems, but also technologies, joint production of subcomponents – and sometimes even

Mi-28N sell licenses for local production of ready-to-use weapons.” At a press conference in February, Rosoboronexport officials said new contracts signed in 2009 exceed $34 billion, bringing the backlog to $21.5 billion. It is believed that the first figure is for deals signed and already approved by responsible governmental bodies (such as the Federal Agency for Military-Technical Cooperation) and put into force. The second is a total sum for upcoming deliveries of Russian-made weapons, not counting sales of property rights, licenses, documentation etc.

“These figure make us look to the future with optimism, as the order book promises high workloads for enterprises of the Russian military industrial complex,” Isaikin commented. In addition, he said that in 2009, the sum of newly-signed contracts amounted to $15 billion. “It doesn’t mean that all of this money will actually flow into Russia during the short term… as many contracts span several years.” In the past two years, the structure of Russian arms sales by types of weapons systems seems to have settled out. Once again, aviation is the undisputable leader, representing half of the grand total. Tactical jet fight-

ers (Sukhoi Su-27/30 and Mikoyan MiG-29), Mil helicopter gunships (Mi-24/35s), utility rotary-wing aircraft (Mi-17s) and Kamov naval helicopters (Ka-28/31s) are the best-selling items. These are widely considered world-class and expect to be in demand during the next 20 years before being superseded by a new generation of systems from the same makers.

T-90 main battle tank

Table 1. Volumes of deliveries and signed contracts to do with Russia’s military technical cooperation with other countries Year

2006

2007

2008

2009

Deliveries, billions US dollars

6,46

7,55

8,35

8,5

Contracts, billion US dollars

30

32

33

40

Table 2. Share of certain countries in Russian defense export

Share, %

Algeria

India

China

others combined

Syria

Malaysia

Venezuela

Vietnam

Afghanistan

29

25

15

10

8

5

5

3

3

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 45

commercial aviation

Superjet goes through its paces Alexey Sinitskiy

The upcoming completion of the Sukhoi Superjet 100’s certification program – and the start-up of deliveries – are expected to give a big boost to its promotion in the international regional aircraft marketplace. Dmitry Matsenov, the Senior Vice-President for Strategic Development at Sukhoi Civil Aircraft Corporation (SCAC), reviews the Sukhoi Superjet 100’s competitive advantages, current marketing plans, and prospects for further evolvement of the Superjet model range.

The certification program is nearing completion. To what extent has the aircraft confirmed the advertised economic advantages?

It’s no secret that during the design phase, we targeted lower direct operating costs about 10 percent compared to our key competitor, the Embraer 190/195. So far, we have managed to reach good fuel efficiency, lift-drag ratio and weight characteristics, so that now the certification tests are confirming that our direct operating costs are 6-8 percent lower. That’s not yet the 10 percent we are after, but it still means serious savings for operators. These data also are coming as something of a shock to skeptics, because the aircraft is living up to our expectations.

And yet rumors continue that the aircraft is overweight, that its landing gear cannot be used at most Russian airfields and its engines are mounted so low that all runway litter will end up in the intakes...

The aircraft is indeed heavier than originally planned, but we have a weight-reduction program worked out for the Long Range version that we will offer to the market around 2012. That aircraft’s characteristics, including its weight, will be an improvement on the current model. But even the current weight does not stop the aircraft from demonstrating the operational advantages I have mentioned. At the end of the day, it is not the weight that’s important to the operator but the aircraft’s performance and cost of ownership what affects operating costs first of all.

Now to the landing gear question: A certain stereotype exists about the Sukhoi Superjet 100’s allegedly limited operational capabilities in the harsh realities of Russia. In fact, the aircraft is designed for unrestricted operations on all regional routes previously served

by Tupolev Tu-134s and Yakovlev Yak-42s. Technically, the SSJ100 can fly to all airports where its operation has at least some economic sense. There may be some airports with low-quality runways where restrictions may apply to daily departures of fully-loaded Sukhoi Superjet 100s. But at such airports, it is highly unlikely that passenger numbers will warrant a significant increase in departure frequencies in the foreseeable future, even less so at full passenger loads and to the aircraft’s maximum range. Therefore, airlines will experience no

46 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

All illustrations are courtesy of SuperJet International.

Dmitry Matsenov

consequences of such restrictions in the real operating environment. In addition, the quality of airports in Russia is constantly improving as their airside facilities are renovated.

Another widespread myth has to do with the lowhanging engines. Look at the results of the runway water ingestion tests and you will see that the engines remain completely dry at all possible power settings. Water is best at demonstrating the distribution of aerodynamic flows, but runway litter and rocks will behave in a totally similar way. Therefore, neither we nor the operators have any apprehensions in this respect.

commercial aviation

Matsenov: ”The market provides us with enough opportunities for the next 20 years.”

What markets, apart from Russia, is the aircraft aimed at? Can it really break into the segments already occupied by competition?

We can and should break into new markets. Look at Embraer — who would have imagined 40-45 years ago that Brazil would ever become a world-leading aircraft manufacturing power?

Our aircraft was conceived as a regional airliner not only for Russia, but also for the international market. This is why its runway performance, range and other capabilities allow for unrestricted operations in Siberia and the Middle East, from short European runways and in the Asia-Pacific region, covering distances of up to 4,500 km. This aircraft is versatile, designed to the highest international standards, and we expect it to be a market success.

This success must be secured, first of all, through the aircraft’s highly attractive operating costs and economic efficiency. In terms of specific cost per passenger and cost pre flight, we are better than the Embraer 190 by 6-8 percent.

Also, we have better noise and emissions margins than our competitors. At present, all our rivals are within ICAO Chapter 4 standards, whereas we have

a margin of about 10-13 EPNdB. So if Chapter 5 materializes, we will be comfortably within it, while our competition will have to do something about their powerplant and think seriously about re-engining their existing products. We also have a serious margin under CAEP 6 emission standards.

In terms of passenger comfort, the Sukhoi Superjet 100 offers levels that are comparable to those of mainline aircraft. This will become evident if we compare its passenger cabin cross-section and ceiling height to other mainline and regional models.

In other words, comparing ourselves to our closest competitors, we look at the market with confidence. We believe that, after we have obtained a type certificate documenting all the advertised characteristics, the market’s interest in our aircraft will increase many times over. Even now, it is fairly high. And our price also is very attractive.

An addition to the acquisition cost, a very important consideration in new aircraft acquisitions is the financial transaction mechanism.

Absolutely, and here we need effective support from financial structures, lessors and export credit agencies. In Russia, an export credit agency is only being created, and we are contributing to this process. In parallel, we continue to work on developing financial plans for our foreign customers that will be based on export credits. We already have agreements with several banks on financing a number of transactions.

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 47

cOmmErciaL aviatiOn

sukHOi suPErJEt 100 EnGinE cErtifiED

By EurOPEan aviatiOn safEty aGEncy On june 23, the SaM146 turbofan engine developed jointly by Russia’s NPO Saturn and Snecma (Safran group) of France for the Sukhoi Superjet 100 regional aircraft, received a type certificate from the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). Thus it became the first Russian-built aero engine certified under the European regulations. Approval by Russian certification agency Avia Register is expected soon.

Receiving the certificate, jean-Paul Ebanga, Chairman and CEO of the Powerjet joint venture that runs the SaM146 program, said: “We are very proud of earning the type certificate for our SaM146 engine. Powerjet will provide a state-of-the-art engine right from service entry of the Sukhoi Superjet 100. This is a landmark in relations between the European and Russian aerospace industries. We are now looking forward to seeing the SaM146 enter revenue service in the next few months.”

The SaM146 completed its certification tests at the end of May by passing the final medium bird ingestion test. During the certification test program the engine logged 7,100 hours, including 3,500 hours in flight.

According to EASA head Patrick Goudou: “This certification shows that the SaM146 engine fully complies with EU safety regulations. It is the culmination of a particularly successful collaboration between Powerjet, the Interstate Aviation Committee of Russia and EASA. It marks the first certification of an aircraft engine jointly designed and produced in France and in Russia.”

The end of certification will make it possible to ramp up SaM146 production. The Russian government plans to further support NPO Saturn. When visiting the company in mid-june, Russia’s Prime Minister vladimir Putin told about the possibility to allocate additional budget funding to launch the engine’s serial production. NPO Saturn intends to deliver 13 powerplants to Sukhoi Civil Aircraft by the end of the year, and to increase its output to 33 engines in 2011. According to vladimir Putin, the annual production rate should grow up to 140 by the year 2014.

Also, in cooperation with our European partner – Alenia Aeronautica of Italy – we are seeking to establish contacts with global leaders in aircraft leasing. We already are in talks with large European firms, including Italian and French lessors, which are interested in our program. Some of them are considering ordering our aircraft. what share of the market do you currently expect to take?

The market provides us with enough opportunities for the next 20 years. The total capacity in the 100-seat aircraft segment through 2029 is estimated at some 5,515 aircraft. Of this figure, we expect to sell 800. The two unconditional leaders in this market are Embraer and Bombardier, but we do not believe they are capable of carving up the entire market between themselves, like Airbus and Boeing did in the mainline market. They simply don’t have enough strength and clout with to do that. This is why the window of opportunity we aimed for when designing our airliner still remains. The program, of course, has suffered certain changes, including in terms of the work timeline. We are slightly behind schedule, but even with this delay we still expect to sell some 800 aircraft; this is our conservative forecast. which markets do you consider to be of the highest priority?

Apart from the Russian market, I would single out two priorities – the East and the West.

The Southeast Asian, Indian and Chinese markets are very important to us. They are densely populated, and the social mobility levels are quite high, ushering in a boom in point-to-point regional services that will certainly need aircraft of our size. And, of course, it is very important for us to find big customers in Europe.

48 aircraft inDustry farnBOrOuGH sPEciaL

cOmmErciaL aviatiOn

The European direction is covered by our sister company Superjet International (SjI). We have the same parent companies, which are also our shareholders — the Sukhoi company and Alenia Aeronautica. Apart from after-sales support, SjI is tasked with marketing the Sukhoi Superjet 100 on the European and American markets. By attracting serious Western customers, SjI can considerably raise the program’s status and reputation. SCAC, for its part, directly works with the Southeast Asian, Indian and Chinese marketplaces, where the Sukhoi brand has been known for decades, and where the company is has a good reputation and enjoys longstanding business ties.

These are so far the two main directions. The American market is perhaps more difficult to penetrate. To obtain certification from the FAA airworthiness authority, you first need to line up an order from a U.S. operator, but our SjI colleagues also are working there. So there are prospects for this market, but it will be the next step for us to take. what are the current development plans for the superjet model range, and what is the status of this activity?

We have defined a development sequence for this evolution. First of all, in the framework of the ongoing program, we must complete certification of our baseline aircraft. By 2012, the Long Range variant will hit the market. Therefore, we will complete the

suPErJEt intErnatiOnaL is rEaDy tO PrOviDE traininG Committed to be a global training provider, Superjet International, the joint venture between Sukhoi holding and Alenia Aeronautica, is ready to provide the competent support for Sukhoi Superjet 100 flight and maintenance training.

The Cabin Emergency Evacuation Trainer (CEET) will be available at the SjI Training Center located in Tessera-venice by the end of july.

The Trainer is currently under acceptance at the Electronic Design and Modelling (EDM) facility in Manchester and it accurately reproduces the Sukhoi Superjet 100 design in terms of features and size in order to provide the realism required during training.

EDM is world renowned in the supply of emergency flight simulators and door trainers and it is specialized on simulators for emergency procedures.

The CEET is designed to train flight attendants and pilots in Crew Resources Management (CRM) in the best way for normal, as a Door Trainer, and emergency flight procedures. The system simulates several anomalies including, for example the door’s jam, the door handle’s locking or the slide inflation failure.

Simulation of hidden fire/blaze is provided with six smoke and fire generators and some extinguishers have been placed inside the simulator.

The CEET is available for “Transition Course” starting from the end of july. It will include a joint training course for pilots and flight attendants personnel.

The simulator is placed on a tilting platform support which simulates emergency evacuation with the Nose landing gear or one of the Main landing gear collapse.

The CEET represents a further step forward in the implementation of training tools while waiting to start the SSj100 entry into service.

Sukhoi Superjet 100 cockpit

farnBOrOuGH sPEciaL aircraft inDustry 49

commercial aviation

SUKHOI SUPERJET 100 COMPLETES ENGINE WATER PROTECTION TESTS In early June, Sukhoi Superjet 100, number 95003 has successfully completed the test program aimed at evaluation of engine protection against water jets from the runway. The tests confirmed that APU and propulsion system sustain normal operation while running over the wet runway within the full range of modes preceding the take off. So, SSJ 100 is able to carry out safe take-off and landing on runways, covered with water.

The tests were conducted in Zhukovsky-based Sukhoi Civil Aircraft Company Flight test center. The aircraft accomplished a total of 27 runs at speed ranging between 10 kt/h and 150 kt/h at different engine modes, special attention was paid to low speed modes, take-off mode and maximum thrust reverser. The tests were monitored by Russian Certification Authorities experts.

Video and photo shooting was carried out with the help of cameras, put on different distances from the pool, and minicameras put on landing gear of the aircraft. It confirmed that the water does not hit the air intake and the auxiliary power unit. No malfunction of auxiliary power unit and propulsion system was registered.

Air data system sensors, air intakes and drain openings in the air frame sustain normal operation while the aircraft is moving through the water veil. The stability & control of the aircraft were evaluated as well. The results of the tests are as follows: up to 150 kt/h (275 km/h) the aircraft goes steadily along the water covered runway and it is easily handled by an average skills pilot.

Therefore the results of the tests proved that SSJ100 is able to take off and land on water covered runways safely. Design characteristics (location of the engines and, air intakes and drain openings) of SSJ100 do not allow water to hit air intakes of propulsion plant and auxiliary power unit within the full range of speeds including runs with activated thrust reverser.

Engine water protection test

50 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

creation of the baseline platform for our civil aviation programs.

In parallel with this, we will launch a program in partnership with SJI to develop the Sukhoi Business Jet (SBJ). It will be derived from the baseline aircraft.

Redesigning the wing and fuel system will increase its range to 7,500-8,000 km. There will be other changes unique to business aviation, such as built-in airstairs and business-class passenger cabin but overall, the baseline model allows for a fairly quick launch of the SBJ model — we are aiming for around 2013.

For further developments, we believe the most promising future product will be a larger aircraft that could be dubbed SSJ100 New Generation at the moment. In this segment, the market is awaiting the advent of our Canadian competitor’s CSeries aircraft, but even after it emerges, there still will be a window of opportunity in this market niche. The passenger capacity of our new aircraft is being defined at the moment, but I can already say that it will make wider use of composite materials and new technologies.

Will the new model require new engines?

Yes, we study current options and new offers at the moment. We expect to give this project a conceptual framework this year, and present it to the market in 2011.

Let me ask you about another aspect of your company’s strategic development: what is the effect of foreign specialists working in the SCAC top management?

The cumulative effect of taking a foreign partner on board has been extremely favorable; that is what people notice both at SCAC and Sukhoi.

This effect manifests itself in several forms. First, after the arrival of the foreign partner, our company started working at a different pace – it started thinking of itself as a truly international company. The majority of our meetings now are held in two languages, and our cultural perception of each other has evolved.

We are no longer a Russian design bureau — we are a company that has all good reasons to stand tall alongside the market leaders which also employ specialists of various cultural backgrounds and nationalities. The level of our self-identification has grown seriously since our Italian partners arrived.

Second, they brought along a whole array of competences, particularly in the area of cost control. In essence, the Italian partners started a large-scale repricing program, aimed at inducing our suppliers to reduce prices. Today this program – which has been approved by the SCAC board of directors – is one of our company’s key performance indices.

Our Italian colleagues also are giving very serious support to the international certification program.

Our certification team is headed by an extremely ex-

Sukhoi Superjet 100 perienced manager, Antonio Gandolfo, who works side by side with our Russian colleagues and works with EASA towards European validations of the aircraft’s Russian type certificate.

Moving forward, our Italian partner is providing invaluable support in a whole range of testing activities, including environmental noise trials and the HIRF (High Intensity Radio Frequency) program.

There is virtually no corresponding equipment in Russia, and the availability of a European partner with an established complex of ground testing facilities, including at Turin, provides enormous savings in time and cost. These tests are scheduled for the second half of August, and they are another element demonstrating a positive nature of our cooperation.

We should make special note of our sister company, SuperJet International, which is tasked with organizing after-sales support for the entire Superjet 100 fleet the world over, and which has by now created a powerful platform for providing an entire range of after-sales services based on the highest standards. This service works 24/7, it has a vast network of inventory depots, and the spares delivery times will meet the highest standards. Its staff includes specialists whose experience includes working at Alitalia’s flight crew training center – so they have solid experience in pilot training. This competence is outside SCAC’s scope, but it is within the program, so we can

say with confidence that it is also an important part of our partner’s contribution – not only to the development of the program, but also in bringing it up to an international level.

I would like to return to what I started with: from the very outset we have been creating the Superjet 100 as an aircraft that would be in demand all over the world: in Russia, Europe, America, South East Asia, India and China, not only in its capabilities and performance, but in terms of its global after-sales support system as well.

Sukhoi Superjet 100 passenger cabin

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 51

commercial aviation

Tu-214: a master of many trades Konstantin Makienko, Vladimir Karnozov On 12 May 2010 the Russian aircraft makers achieved another milestone with the maiden flight of the RA-64517, a new special mission version of the Tupolev Tu-214 narrow body twin jet airliner.

This version, designated Tu-214PU (the suffix is acronym from “Control Post” in Russian), has been manufactured under contract with the Special Air Detachment under the Administration of the President of Russian Federation (also referred to as the Moscow branch of GTK “Rossiya”, GTK stands for “State Transport Company”). After some thirty to forty test flights in frame of the RA-64517’s certification program, the aircraft will enter service and be operated in the interests of the Russian defense ministry.

The contract also calls for delivery, in the second half of 2011, of a second such machine, RA-64520. The latter is now getting ready at the final assemble shop of the Kazan Aviation Production Association named after Sergei Gorbunov (KAPO). Next in the queue are two Tu-214 relay aircraft slotted for delivery next year and a pair of Tu-214ON for the Open Skies program. The latter aircraft is the responsibility of the Vega Concern of Radio Equipment, a specialist in special mission equipment.

Transaero's latest addition to the Tu-214 fleet 52 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

The Tu-214 has been selected by Russia’s Ministry of Defense and other governmental structures as the basic platform for special mission aircraft. Sadly, the production line at KAPO in its current shape does not allow a high production rate so as to deliver new Tu-214 aircraft to all interested buyers at short notice. So, naturally came an idea, to focus narrowly on governmental orders. However, after different options had been considered, the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) reactivated work with airlines. In particular, the corporation made decision to deliver two more airframes to Transaero.

The decision for continuation of Tu-214 production in the interests of commercial carriers is a very serious one in the given circumstances, when the global economy, including airlines and manufacturers, continue to suffer from the world-wide economic crisis.

Transaero placed order for Tu-214s in February 2005, five firms and five options. The contract went

commercial aviation

RA-64515 became the first special mission aircraft on the Tu-214 platform to Finance Leasing (FLC). The airline took delivery of its first Tu-214 (RA-64509) in April 2007, second (RA-64549) in November 2008 and third (RA-64518) in November 2009. Although Transaero was offered some alternatives, including Tu-204 and Tu-204SM aircraft, to be delivered instead of Tu-214s remaining on order, it refused.

In the view of the financial troubles experienced

by Finance Leasing, further work with Transaero is likely to be responsibility of Ilyushin Finance Company (IFC). A series of deals on the matter “is being put together”, according to IFC. Reports in the Russian media indicated that UAC and IFC are in agreement on how to manage issues with already built and brand new Tu-214s.

Independent analytical institutions assessed that IFC’s involvement into the Transaero Tu-214 program may bring it a business in excess of $100 million. IFC involvement shall boost the Tu-214 program as it is meant to bring in more funding to KAPO for expanding its manufacturing capacity. KAPO General Director Vasil Kayumov was quoted as saying that Finance Leasing halted funding the Tu-214 program upon completion of the third Transaero airframe in late 2009. Looking at various contingency measures, KAPO and MoD even considered completing two remaining airframes on the money of the Russian government. In that case the aircraft would instead go to governmental service rather than the airline’s.

After a series of consultations, UAC and other interested parties made decision to fulfill the February 2005 contract with Transaero in full, by delivering two remaining airframes on order in 2011-12 timeframe.

Furthermore, IFC General Director Aleksander Roubt-

sov told reporters that his company “will fund construction of new Tu-214s provided Transaero and other airline customers agree to accept them”. “We are considering various options on how to develop and expand our order portfolio”, he added.

The Russian government and the government of Tatarstan Republic (KAPO is based in Kazan, the capital of the Republic) are believed to have tentatively agreed to provide a financial aid package in support of the Transaero Tu-214 program at KAPO. The reason behind it is to keep the airline customers happy with Russian-made equipment and help KAPO sustain the crisis without shrinking workforce.

Meanwhile, market interest grows to temporarily grounded Tu214s previously operated by DalAvia and KrasAir. Sadly, both airlines went bankrupt in the conditions of the global economic crisis. Dalmashlizing, a company which owns the RA-64502 and the RA-64503 Vasil Kayumov, Rustam Minnikhanov, Aleksander Bobryshev and Aleksey Fedorov

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 53

commercial aviation

RA-64501 was the first Tu-214 operable prototype used for testing (now standing still in Khabarovsk airport after DalAvia ceased to be), is negotiating with unidentified would-be buyers. Besides, the RA64508 (ex-KrasAir) is also on sale. A year ago two ex-DalAvia aircraft went to Aerostars airline; it wet-leases them to the Syrian flag-carrier.

Transaero said many times that the Tu-214 proved worthy of airline service. In summer one of the Tupolevs demonstrated monthly utilization of 427 hours, which exceeds the monthly average for the Boeing 737NG in Russian service. But the carrier has difficulty in making ends meet, operating too small a fleet. Naturally, it wants more Tu-214s to ensure profitability of operations. With five aircraft in the fleet (better ten) Transaero is convinced it can operate the Tu214 fleet with profitably. Most of the time, Transaero places Tu-214s on relatively long routes, such as those from Moscow to United Arab Emirates and other remote tourist destinations requiring flight duration in excess of five hours. The carrier also uses the twinjet on scheduled services to Siberian cities, four to seven flying hours one-way.

Since introduction into service the Tu-214 has had some ups and downs. A turning point for the program occurred on June 1, 2009.

That day KAPO delivered two Tu-214SR aircraft, registration RA-64515 and RA-64516, to the Special Air Detachment. On the same day, both aircraft were ferried to Moscow Vnukovo airport, their main station. On arrival, they were inspected by the chairman of the Russian government Vladimir Putin. Reportedly, he made some remarks about high performance and manufacturing quality of the newly-acquired assets. Putin issued command to continue with purchasing more Tu-214s for governmental structures. The Tu-214SR is meant to replace the morally outdated Il-22 relay aircraft, a special mission airplane using the platform of Il-18 four-engine turboprop airliner.

The Tupolev Tu-214, also known as the Tu-204-200, is the most advanced version of the baseline Tu-204.

It differs from other versions in having higher gross weight and improved wing shape. Today, this is the best of the Soviet legacy platforms that are in producRA-64502 was the first deliverable Tu-214

54 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

commercial aviation

tion in the modern Russia. This fact prompted the Administration of the president of Russia, the Russian government and the Ministry of defense along with their agencies to select the Tu-214 as the basic platform for a number of special mission aircraft. Exact number of airframes to be procured is still being decided upon, but it is clear today that the grand total will certainly exceed a dozen units. Firm orders already placed by Russian government structures call for delivery of six Tu-214s in 2009-2011. This initial order placed in 2005 is to be supplemented by follow-on orders, with deliveries from 2011 onwards.

The Tu-214 is considered for a wide variety of applications: relay aircraft, flying command posts, airborne communications centers, electronic reconnaissance, radio emission analysis, VIP transport, airborne early warning and command, maritime reconnaissance aircraft etc.

The handover ceremony of the RA-64515 and RA-64516, turned into a massive gathering of KAPO employees. A few thousand people – almost all workforce of the enterprise – took part in the event.

They were elated by the fact that, after a fifteenyear break, the Russian government restored itself in the status of the main customer for KAPO products. The ceremony was attended by President and Chairman of the Executive Board of United Aircraft Corporation Alexey Fedorov, Prime Minister of Tatarstan Republic Rustam Minnikhanov (more recently he become President of the Republic), KAPO General Director Vasil Kayumov and Tupolev General Designer Igor Shevchuk. Kayumov and Shevchuk handed over symbolic keys to the aircraft to GTK Rossiya specialists. The key were accepted by Deputy Chief Engineer on new equipment Vladimir Kochegarov and head of special transportation operations department Aleksander Zuev.

Addressing the audience, UAC president said: “Respectable colleagues: workers, engineers and other employees of Kazan aviation production association!

We have a great day today. Two beautiful machines, two airplanes are being handed over to our customer. These aircraft symbolize very intense and hard work of all KAPO employees. These machines are special mission aircraft, they will play an important role in the national defense. They form a first pair in the large series of special purpose aircraft that are being built here. Our customers have been criticizing us for delivery postponements. They were right with the very fact that the delivery date has indeed shifted. But some of their arguments did not have much ground. And now, finally, we reached the point when deliveries are made possible. I am sure these pair will be followed by many more aircraft shortly, as more airframes are being completed here. These new airframes come in different versions. I am sure these new airframes will be completed on time and

with high manufacturing quality. Today I want to congratulate most heartedly the team of the Kazan plant and say: well done! I wish you to held ceremonies on new aircraft deliveries as many as possible.

Thank you for your hard work!”

Later on, answering journalists’ questions, Fedorov said: “the Tu214SR is a relay aircraft that is specially designed to carry out very specific missions. Because of this, we cannot tell you in much detail about the exact differences between this new version and the baseline platform being the Tu-214 passenger jet. A few additional nonstandard antennas are visible outwardly. Those antennas reflect the functions that this new version is intended to carry out. The relay aircraft uses the Tu-214 as a platform. The baseline aircraft meets all current international requirements. It can operate from various air strips. The airplane is allowed to fly in airspace of other countries around the globe since it meets their requirements including ecological, to noise levels, emission etc. The new version of the baseline aircraft has won approvals in the form of complimentary certificates in full accordance with the current requirements of aviation authorities. The airplane has been tested thoroughly, including in extreme conditions, climatic and not only climatic”.

Answering questions on timing of next deliveries, UAC president

Crew station of the RA-64501 said: “Several more Tu-214s are in a high degree of readiness. Some of them are in the final assembly shop, others are getting their components mated. Let me stress one more time that this pair of aircraft that we handed over today are the leading machines of the new, large series of aircraft that will come in a number of modifications. Production run of these special mission aircraft will be relatively large.

These aircraft will use the same basic platform, but differ in functions and, hence, in onboard equipment. Outwardly, changes will be few, so that few people would be able to tell one version from another.”

Touching on completions of the Tu-214SR cabin, Fedorov said: “the cabin design is very modern, offering high comfort. We have made all we could to ensure comfort conditions for work and rest of the crews who will fly these aircraft and operate their onboard equipment. The customer has put forward very demanding specification for the cabin. I believe we have managed to meet all of the customer requirements.”

On the matter of aircraft price, Fedorov conveyed the following information: “I can only say that we sell airlines Tu-214s in baseline pas-

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 55

commercial aviation

senger version at sticker price of just above 1 billion rubles (approx. $33 million). The Tu-214SR is, naturally, more costly because of the expensive onboard equipment”. It became known in summer 2010 that an improved passenger version of the Tu-214 is offered at $52 million apiece.

Journalists further asked, is there any something special in the Tu214SR that is meant to make this version luckier? “There is a whole lot of things that have been implemented into design of this version to achieve highest aviation safety standards”, Fedorov answered, and the modern avionics in the first place. All onboard systems and equipment are made inside the country. Our designers have applied their minds in best way to provide multiply backup for all onboard systems so that to ensure the highest level of aviation safety. Earlier, Russia did not produce aircraft that would come any near to the Tu-214SR in terms of mission performance. Aircraft that fulfilled similar missions were in production before, but they are morally and physically outdated today. The Tu-214SR will progressively replace them, brining about a new level of mission and operational performance.

Speaking on behalf of the Tatarstan Republic, Rustam Minnikhanov said: “Today is an important day in the life of Tupolev design house and the Kazan plant. I want to use this occasion to convey my most cordial wishes of prosperity to the team of Tupolev and Kazan plant, so that this pair of the new aircraft gives a head start for a large series of Tu-214s. I wish the aircraft made here will operate successfully for a long time. I hope your team will prove up to the challenges that stand before the Russian aircraft manufacturing industry in the field of civil, military and special mission aviation.” Later on, he told the members of the media: “Some of you may think that the TuBusiness class seats

56 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

214SR is the same as the baseline version, yet with some sort of a hat bolted to the upper fuselage. And they are wrong. This new version is a completely different aircraft by way of special missions it is intended to carry out. This machine does carry out all these new functions that were specified by the customer.

As per completions of the cabin, I can tell you: everything is made very nicely. I had a chance to see it with my own eyes when inspected the aircraft, its cockpit and cabin. The new aircraft is not merely a new toy for our customer. It is also the vehicle that brought together many companies and people working on the respective project. We contributed our hearts and mind to this project and become friends when working on this project – Fedorov and myself became friends on this project”.

Tupolev General Designer Igor Shevchuk addressed KAPO employees with the following words: “It is a great thing that Tupolev aircraft continue being built and get delivered to their customers. Today, a new pair of these outstanding vehicles is being handed over to the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation. Sincerely, I am very grateful to all of those people who took part in development, construction and testing of these airplanes – workers, engineers, ground and flight crews. I wish these two airplanes will serve successfully for many years, flying high in the peaceful blue skies. Let me remind

you that a month ago these airplanes proved their worth in a long-haul mission when they flew thirteen hours non-stop, over the Far East, Extreme North, then Moscow and back to Kazan. That time everything worked well, and according to the specification. That was a result of our hard work. Many thanks to all of you, please accept my cordial wishes of good health and happiness”.

Speaking on behalf of the aircraft operator and customer, Aleksander Zuev said: “Today is indeed a very happy day for all of us, the manufacturers and the customers. Let me remind you that these two beautiful aircraft are made under a governmental order, according to the contract with the Administration of the president of Russian Federation and in the interests of the special air detachment of GTK Rossiya. We have been closely following the work on these aircraft, by paying visits to the final assembly shop and other workshops of the Kazan plant, working hand-in-hand with Tupolev, KAPO and equipment suppliers. We always believed that this order is our small, but very much positive contribution into recovery of our aircraft manufacturing industry, into revival and strengthening of the Kazan aviation plant. It was hard and very intense work.

And here, today, we are very happy to see the work done. We are convinced that the experience obtained during creation of the relay aircraft for the GTK Rossiya special air detachment will help you reduce lead cycles on aircraft that would follow and improve their manufacturing quality. Let us promise each other that the delivery ceremonies such as this one today will become of regular occurrence and a good tradition for KAPO and Administration of the President. I wish you every success. Thank you all for your work!”

Vladimir Kochegarov, GTK Rossiya deputy chief engineer on new equipment told KAPO employees the following words: “Dear colleagues! Today is an important day for the plant, and also for us, the customer that takes delivery of these beautiful airplanes. The airlines have been waiting aircraft such as these for a long time. We all need speedy renewal of our fleets. This pair of new airplanes is just one small step in the right direction.

We put our faith in KAPO, the enterprise with a history of over 70 years, the enterprise that has successfully solved many tasks set by the government and its customers. We remember well how difficult it was to create this new version of the Tu-214 aircraft. Today, on behalf of the intended aircraft operator, the State Transport Company “Rossiya”, let me congratulate the whole team of KAPO, from a worker to the General Director, all of you who took part in that work, who contributed heart and mind into creation of these nice airplanes. Nice-looking airplanes fly nicely, that’s for sure. Thank you once again”.

Economy class cabin

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 57

commercial aviation

President of Tatarstan Republic Rustam Minnikhanov often visits the KAPO plant In his turn, KAPO General Director Vasil Kayumov said: “Respectable guests, dear colleagues! That’s something we have been striving for three years. We did not always have enough time to rest, we sometimes got nervous and demanded too much from each other.

But this moment, the delivery, has come, finally! The kind words that customers told us today are very much a reward for us. In our turn, we say “thank you” to all people who gathered today here, at KAPO’s flight test station, you came to share our feelings of satisfaction. You have been with us in the hard times, and now, when we feel better.

Let me assure you, that we will apply all of the experience amassed during creation of these two airplanes so as the follow-on orders will be fulfilled with higher quality and on time. We hope the Russian government will render effective support to the domestic manufacturers and aircraft operators. And we hope that the Tu-334, the new promising design from Tupolev, will enter mass production at our plant!”

In future, the two plants manufacturing Tu-204 series aircraft – Aviastar-SP in Ulianovsk and KAPO – shall cooperate closer on manufacturing of evolved Tu-204 series machines, such as the Tu-204SM. UAC president Alexey Fedorov said: “The Tu-204 series will stay in production for a few more years, until the next-generation narrow body jetliner, the MS-21, gets ready. Today, we are working on a deep modification

of the current baseline version that will have improved engines (PS-90A2), auxiliary power unit, onboard systems and a cockpit optimized for two cockpit crew members. The whole of avionics suite will be reworked as one of the measures to reduce operational expenses. We plan to introduce the Tu-204SM to the market in 2011. I believe we will be able to achieve profitability for the Tu-204 program with help of this new baseline model. Its introduction shall allow improve consumer merits of the aircraft and sell it for a higher price while cutting manufacturing costs.”

Introduction of the Tu-204SM will entail a broader industrial cooperation between Aviastar-SP and KAPO. Ulianovsk is likely to focus on manufacture of fuselages, while KAPO will concentrate on production of wing sections. Initial series is to be assembled at Aviastar-SP, that of Tu-204-100SM1 featuring Perm PS-90A2 turbofans. These engines will replace ordinary PS-90As. Experimental examples of the A2 have been tested at Perm Motors and won approval of the aviation authorities. Specification to the Tu-204SM calls for two-deck-crew operations, a new APU and conditioning system and lower weight of wiring. Hydrolic actuators of flaps and leading edges shall be replaced by electrically operated Electroagregat devices. Besides, the SM1 will have Lazeks INS-2000MT navigation system on Russian-made laser gyroscopes and double GPS/Glonass receivers.

At Farnborough’2008 UAC and Ilyushin Finance signed a firm order for 31 Tu-204SMs plus 30 options. The core contract was estimated at $1.5billion by catalogue prices. It is meant to be launch order for the SM version featuring improved Perm PS-90A2 turbofans, better avionics and onboard system. The deal also contained option for 30 more airframes.

Until the Tu-204SM gets available, the Tu-214 will remain the most advanced and competitive Russian jetliner. Preparations to series production of this version began in 1994. First KAPO built Tu-214 had its maiden President of Tatarstan Republic Rustam Minnikhanov and other participants in the Tu-214 project

58 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

Tu-214SR flight on 21 March 1996. In May 1997 the Tu-204-200 achieved type certification for the all-up weight of 103 tons, same as for the baseline Tu-204-100 launched earlier at Aviastar-SP. Urged by KAPO, Tupolev launched an effort aiming at increasing all-up weight to 111 tons (110.75 tons at liftoff). With that, the structural weight would rise by a fraction, to some 59 tons (empty equipped in the range of 62-63 tons), thus making Tu214 the most weight efficient jetliner ever produced in Russia. The principal decision on that issue was made in March 1999. On 15 April 1999 the RA-64501 commenced flight trials to compliance to the AP-25 air worthiness requirements harmonized with FAR Part 25 and JAR 25 (the Tu-204-100 won certification to the NLGS, the Russian national set of rules written in the times of the Soviet Union). For compliance to the new airworthiness standards at all-up weight of 111 tons, a large number of structural members were strengthened, as well as the landing gears and tires. AP-25 type certification for Tu-214 was issued on 29 December 2000.

By May 2007 ten Tu-214s were delivered to airline customers, including three to GTK Rossiya, five to DalAvia (including first deliverable example RA-64502), one to KrasAir (RA-64508) and one to Transaero (RA-64509, in April 2007). In November 2008 Transaero took delivery of RA-64549 (originally, MSN was 64013, but the airline appeared too superstitious to accept “13”). Except for GTK Rossiya, all other deliveries went via Finance Leasing Corporation (FLC). Sadly, the crisis bankrupted DalAvia and KrasAir, and their Tu-214s, along with other items in their fleets, suffered temporary grounding. During that period some aircraft undergone maintenance and upgrade work. The latter helped them find new proprietors and operators.

There are two versions of the cabin available for airlines, for 210 passengers in all-economy configuration and for 164 passengers in typical two-class cabin. In the first case the range is up to 7,200km.

Longer distances are achieved through decrease in payload. The Tu214D (engineering reference) with additional fuel tanks can cover over 11,000km or stay in the air for some 14 hours. Introduction of the NK93 geared fan engines promises reduction in specific fuel burn from 18.3 (for the PS-90A-powered baseline version) down to 15 gram per km*passenger.

On KAPO production line, the Tu-214 replaced the Il-62, built in 281 copies between 1966 and 1995 (In 2010 one more Il-62M was completed and went to the Ministry of defense). Of those about a hundred were exported. Some of these aircraft were temporarily hired by Japan Air Lines and Air France for trans-Siberian flights. Until March 2007, when Il-96-300 took over in that role, the Il-62M served the flagship and the main type that served the needs of the Russian government. Moving onto more technologically advanced Tupolev twin jet required KAPO to buy considerable amount of advanced manufacturing equipment in the West, including GEMCOR GSKE4261 riveting machines (able to work with 30-m-long wing sections).

Other imported items were G-5013T-XX-G86/128 riveting facilitation machine, Deckel DMU 50V metal cutting machine tools and other equipment from Lorenz, Agie and other western makers.

Achieving higher productivity is of paramount importance for the whole of the Russian aircraft industry, and KAPO is not an exception. The current figure of required labor per a Tu-214 stands at 450,000 man hours. Use of modern equipment can half this figure, and thereby make it comparable to that of Airbus in the case of the A321.

At entry into service the Tu-214 experienced numerous teething problems. Thanks for the courageous aviators of GTK Rossiya and DalAvia, the first customers for the type, the design has been rectified to such an extent that the best examples now amass over four thousand flying hours a month. Now, with a large state order having been placed on special mission aircraft, the Tu-214 program gets a new lease of life.

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 59

commercial aviation

Leasing solution for Russian jetliners On the record with: Alexander Roubtsov, General Director, Ilyushin Finance Co.

Our company currently has some 160 aircraft in our portfolio: 130140 of them are Antonov models and about 30 are from the Tupolev Tu-204 family. We are likely to keep this proportion in the future, as it reflects the market situation. There is not much demand for aircraft seating 210 passengers, at least not from our traditional customers.

Therefore, our current focus is on jetliners in the 75- to 100-seat category, which are a great deal more popular at the moment.

Our plans for the next five years remain unchanged: we intend to move into the top 20 of the world’s largest aircraft lessors. To get there, we need to have some 250-300 airliners in our portfolio, mostly Russian types. In essence, we must multiply our current 30 aircraft by 10. Such is the massive task we are facing. If we want to accomplish it, we must buy aircraft at a rate of 30 or even more a year. Of course, it will be difficult to meet this target in five years. Seven or eight years sounds more realistic. Nevertheless, our current plan is to achieve it in five years.

Alexander Roubtsov

Ilyushin Il-96 production continues. We are now marketing the Il-96-400T freighter version. It has been in successful operation with Polet Airlines. This model had its fair share of teething problems with the powerplant and airframe, which are now being gradually rectified. The aircraft is entering normal operation. In general, it has lived up to the design specifications.

Unfortunately, though, the Il-96 production rate is too slow – at just one or two airframes a year. We could be selling more of them but the VASO plant is backlogged for four years with orders both from ourselves and other customers, including the Russian Presidential administration. This is why we have now focused on other aircraft types.

We believe that further development of the Tupolev family is possible in the form of the Tu-204SM aircraft, which must be more advanced and more popular with carriers. The first prototypes are now being built, with the maiden flight scheduled for late summer.

We expect the Tu-204MS to be a good aircraft. As for its performance, we have to wait until the testing is over. I hope this model confirms its design parameters so we can market it, at least in the years preceding the Irkut MS-21.

I think that, if everything goes according to plan and the MS-21 project develops successfully, we may become United Aircraft Corporation’s [UAC] partner in promoting the MS-21.

Our other field of interest is the general aviation/ business aircraft market. This segment is currently severely underserved in Russia, although there is huge demand. Unfortunately, there is nothing off-the-shelf in this niche. So far we are looking at proposals in the 10- to 50-seat segment, at the level of market studies.

We consider both Russian-made and foreign-built aircraft – any aircraft in fact, because we feel this market is huge but there are simply no adequate products.

These are the things we will be dealing with in the next eight years.

Our primary focus now is on the An-148 family, including the An-158 and An-168 models. I believe that in the foreseeable future, a freight aircraft will emerge on the basis of the An-148 – the An-178. If it proves a market success, I do not rule out a commercial application for this model.

commercial aviation

At the 2010 Farnborough Airshow, Antonov is planning to reveal its new aircraft, the An-158. We expect to sign up for several such airliners and start marketing the model. We will keep buying Ukrainianbuilt Antonov aircraft and marketing them in Russia and other countries.

What is to be done to bring the An-148 to the level of a commercial product? I see three aspects here.

The first one is the quality of production at the Voronezh VASO plant and its suppliers. We see the need for introducing automation of the riveting, casting and machining processes. Naturally, most thorough attention should be given to production tooling, for the purpose of considerably improving the assembly quality. All this can be done within a relatively short time. This task is essentially up to UAC. The second aspect has to do with aircraft documentation. We need to work out a comprehensive MMEL (manufacturer’s minimum equipment list) that would allow for transit flights with APU and other system-level items unserviceable. Corresponding work is now under way (and we have already settled the APU issue), but in the early days, such things seriously impeded effective operation of the type.

The third aspect is that we must complete the construction of a full-flight simulator. This is the most pressing operational concern today.

There is a significant shortage of An-148 type-rated pilots. As a result, the aircraft we have delivered to GTK Rossiya airlines are not being used to the best of their performance; they are not logging enough flight hours.

First flight of the An-158 regional aircraft IFC has paid simulator specialist Transas Group a total of 300 million rubles [about $10 million] from its own budget for an An-148 simulator. It shall be a level D device with 3D visualization and full motion.

Now, we are seeking outside credit. We already have an approval from the credit committee of a large bank, one of Russia’s top five. We are at the end of selecting a partner for the installation of the simulator, which is almost ready, albeit without a motion system. We hope to be able to install it this summer so that we can begin providing crew training services to airlines in autumn.

Simultaneously, we will be working on a cabin simulator and a procedural trainer.

Roubtsov: ”We intend to move into the top 20 of the world’s largest aircraft lessors”

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 61

commercial aviation

Vladivostok Avia Tu-204-300 is on lease from IFC Where these simulators eventually will be deployed is not to be at our own training facility; rather, it will be a certified training center run at an airport. We are currently considering three locations – Pulkovo, Vnukovo and Domodedovo. Our role here is to procure the equipment, and the role of the training center will be to provide training services with the use of that equipment.

And there is also a fourth aspect. Additional spares inventories need to be set up at the base airports. IFC has prepared relevant proposals for Rossiya and other carriers. We believe that a consolidated spare parts pool must be set up jointly with UAC. Let’s hope that the first phase of this effort will be finished this year.

It is now clear that support for operators must also be rendered at the airport level. This includes relevant certification of ground personnel and bringing in the minimum required equipment. An example would be buying An-148 tow bars and leasing them out to airports.

The initial An-148 operational experience met our expectations, although we had thought there would be fewer defects and teething problems. Nevertheless, in the words of Rossiya General Director Sergey Belov: «The An-148 has proved worthy of airline service”. All four such aircraft currently in the Rossiya fleet are operable, they fly on scheduled passenger routes carrying passengers, each airframe making up to three flights a day. This is not bad for an all-new airliner that just entered revenue service.

On the other hand, we must keep working on the problems I have mentioned – crew training, further expansion of the number of airports that can accommodate the type, setting up an easily accessible spare parts pool at Pulkovo that could cater for any needs.

We will work on this, but it requires financial resources. In fact, raising additional capital towards this end is one of the targets of our IPO plan.

62 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

We proceed from the premise that an IPO is integral to our further development. To implement it, we must first buy out shares from our largest private stockholder, the National Reserve Bank, owned by Alexander Lebedev. We are currently negotiating with them, and I hope that in the next month or so we will find a solution, and will make new proposals to Mr. Lebedev. We expect to attract at least $250 million, maybe even as much as $300 million. We will then look at the demand for our shares to decide what to do next. Anyway, we are not going to do the IPO until autumn 2010.

Our effective leasing rate stands at some 3-4 percent a year, which means it correlates well with the rates charged by foreign lessors. In this respect our proposals are competitive.

UAC is now preparing its ideas on this topic, including the introduction of a domestic aircraft subsidy system modeled on the Brazilian ProEx program. I personally think it would be better to leave everything as it is now. Where we really need an equivalent of ProEx is in exporting; in that area it could actually help encourage export sales. We hope that our current system is preserved, and that the effective rate will go down now that interest rates on the credit market have dropped.

The exports support program, on the other hand, truly needs to be modernized. It is built on different principles, and foreign crediting agencies today lend money at half our rate. So we now have certain problems exporting Russian products; the current system is not effective and requires interest rate subsidizing.

airline customers

AN-148 proves worthy of Airline service The following excerpt is from a report delivered by Sergey Belov, General Director, State Transport Company Russia (Rossiya) at the conference on initial operational performance of the D-436-powered Antonov An-148 airliner held on 27 May 2010.

Our conference pursues a somewhat unusual goal – to analyze the initial operational performance of a new aircraft type. It is as yet early to speak about full-scale operation for the An-148, but we already can draw certain conclusions based on the results of this aircraft’s initial operation. Our airline’s proposal to hold this conference, made after an internal analysis of the first operational results, was due primarily by our desire to put all parties involved in the loop as early on as possible, and to provide timely feedback on the aircraft’s initial entry into commercial service.

First off, I would like to say that GTK Rossiya’s choice of the An-148 was by no means accidental. We first looked at it back in 2004, when

Sergey Belov, General Director, State Transport Company “Russia“ (Rossiya) and Yuri Ostrovsky, First Deputy General Director, Ilyushin Finance Co. 64 aircraft INDUSTRY industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

Prepared for publication by Vladimir Karnozov

Pulkovo [the airline that merged with Rossiya in 2006] was retiring its Tupolev Tu-134 regional fleet. It was at this point that the airline began studying available options in the 60- to 80-seat capacity segment to replace the mainstay fleet; at that time, we were operating Ilyushin Il-86s, Tupolev Tu-154s and Tu-134s. We were considering the technical characteristics of the Sukhoi Superjet 100, and also of Antonov’s airliners — in fact, we looked at interim aircraft versions that preceded the An-148, such as the An-74TK-300, the An-74-68, and certain others.

Our airline thoroughly studied all proposals and opted for the An-148. In 2007, we signed a financial lease agreement with Ilyushin Finance Co. (IFC) for six such airliners. The original schedule called for deliveries to be made in 2008-2009.

In reality, we received our first An-148 only in December 2009. The second and third aircraft followed in early 2010.

Although the initial schedule slipped, deliveries continue at a dynamic pace. Three of our four aircraft already are in operation, and we expect to take delivery of the aircraft bearing registration RA-61704 as our fourth in June, followed by #705 in August, and #706 in November of this year. There is an obvious pace to these deliveries, signifying that production is now set up and running.

By the end of the year, Rossiya will have a fleet of six An-148s. So we decided to share our initial operating experience with you. Six aircraft already represents a serious fleet, and we are planning to log quite a few flight hours with them. Our airline’s approach is this: the aircraft we buy must pay back our investment in revenue operations; they must justify our costs beginning this year.

It was not an easy job for us to negotiate for a customized aircraft version that would suit us. IFC, Pulkovo, Rossiya and Antonov set up working groups; we held 12 meetings to develop additional specifications and agree on optional equipment. All this work was necessary to get what our airline needed.

An-148 We were not paying for a production aircraft in factory configuration; we were buying an airliner customized to our specifications, one that would meet our expectations as an airline. I am happy to say that in the end – thanks to an active participation of all parties involved – we got what we wanted.

This was followed by the production run and initial delivery. As it was the first production aircraft, we found a number of shortcomings, mainly those on the production side. We didn’t blow them out of proportion, since we knew that the An-148 was a new-generation product for the Voronezh [VASO] plant, and that they had difficulties launching its production in contemporary Russia. But we also knew from our operational experience with VASO’s other product, the Il-86, that the Voronezh plant was a top-class production site.

I would like to note that we were accepting our first An-148 for revenue services, not for operational tests.

I think it is a target to be met by everyone present — to aim for delivering an aircraft in such a condition that would allow the airline to begin revenue operations immediately, within 48 hours. Because, you see, leasing payments start at the signing of the acceptance certificate. Although this is a performance conference, I am going to mention a number of economic parameters. After all, we fly to make a profit! And it is the An-148 that we pin our profit hopes on.

Our first An-148 has been used in scheduled service since December 21, 2009. Before the New

Year, it completed several revenue flights from St Petersburg’s Pulkovo to Moscow’s Sheremetyevo and Domodedovo airports. But it would be correct to say that Rossiya began full-scale An-148 operation only in 2010.

All three aircraft we have now are serviceable. So far we have not been stretching them to the limit but they have accumulated quite some flight hours already. I think that 167 hours a month is a good figure for an aircraft that is just entering commercial operation. From December 21, 2009 to May 20, 2010, our An-148 fleet accumulated a total of 915 flight hours and performed 710 landings.

The current limited operation of our An-148 fleet is not related to the aircraft’s performance. It is explained by the fact that Rossiya is short of An-148 type-rated pilots. The training system is not working fast enough in providing us with enough flight crew for all six aircraft we are to have received by the end of this year. Flight crew training today tops our agenda. An analysis of our An-148 fleet’s effectiveness shows that even if each of the aircraft keeps flying 167 hours a month they will not provide a profitable payback.

In their operation, the new aircraft are experiencing certain malfunctions, which is only natural. I would like to make a special mention of this. During initial operation of the An-148, we did not find any defects that could ground it.

We cannot but compare the An-148’s performance with that of Rossiya’s other aircraft types. Take the Boeing 737-500, which we use on roughly the same routes. We now have five of this type, aged 15-19 years.

Our hands-on operational experience with Russian- and foreign-made aircraft tells us that it is possible to keep a mixed fleet airworthy, given appropriate maintenance. Now that the An-148 is a new aircraft type of the latest generation, we pay special atten-

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft INDUSTRY industry 65

An-148 tion to its operational safety and airworthiness, without sacrificing operational efficiency.

We compared the operating costs for the An-148 and the Boeing 737-500, and concluded that in terms of per-flight costs, the An-148 was unconditionally cheaper to operate. For example, total costs for a round-trip service between St. Petersburg and Samara amount to 26,116 rubles [$840 at current exchange rates] for the An-148, against 48,402 rubles for the Boeing 737-500. For a roundtrip routing between St Petersburg and Moscow’s Domodedovo, it is 24,336 rubles for the An-148 compared to the 737-500’s 30,018 rubles.

Of course, in terms of seat-kilometers the economy will not be that impressive (384 rubles compared to 425 rubles for St. PetersburgSamara, and 358 compared to 263 for Domodedovo). This is because of the An-148’s smaller seating capacity (68 seats on the An148 vs. 114 seats on the 737). But here, again, we have to look at the passenger load factors. On the routes currently serviced by Rossiya, the load factors for the An-148 exceed 80 percent. This means that the An-148 is not only in demand today, it is essential to increasing frequencies.

To date, we are operating our new aircraft type on relatively short

routes, such as St. Petersburg-Moscow. As the initial operational phase continues, we place the greatest emphasis on ensuring the aircraft’s reliability.

The reason why our An-148s fly to Domodedovo, Sheremetyevo and Vnukovo [in the Moscow region] is not because these are the most cost-efficient destinations for Rossiya, but because we have four daily flights, say, to Sheremetyevo, in addition to Aeroflot’s 16. So [in case we have a problem with an An148 at one of the Moscow airports], we can always send a replacement over, or ask Aeroflot to pick up our passengers. The same with Domodedovo: we have nine daily flights there, so we can reach that airport at all times.

We have arrived at the conclusion that the An148’s highest operational effectiveness begins from 1,200-km.-long routes. With a full passenger load, the aircraft has a range of 4,000 km. We are currently forced to use it on the St. PetersburgMoscow route because we need to closely moni-

Boeing 737-500 66 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

airline customers

tor its airworthiness. In the future, we will start putting the airliner on longer routes in order to increase its operational effectiveness. All the teething problems must be rectified to result in a commercial success.

The aircraft has demonstrated a potential for intensive use on Rossiya’s routes. On certain days, some of our An-148s would perform up to three flights. But in order for the aircraft to pay back the leasing payments airworthiness expenses, we must operate each of them between 10 and 12 hours a day. There are aviation specialists in this room who understand that for a short-haul aircraft to accumulate so many flight hours is not an easy task. Logging 12 hours a day is in fact quite a feat, but we must achieve this target.

What are we hoping for? The aircraft is still manufactured in small batches. But we expect the production rate to grow, leading to a decrease in production costs and lower spares prices. And we are interested in cheaper parts: we operate these aircraft on a financial lease, and have further fleet expansion plans.

We also hope that the production ramp-up, and a subsequent increase in the number of An-148s in global operation, will eventually bring the lease payments down. More parts will be produced, and changes will be made to certain processes that will make maintenance easier.

We are now readying the An-148s and their crews for international operations. Back when we negotiated with the manufacturer, we insisted that the aircraft must be equipped for flights to Western Europe. We are, after all, part of the international community, and we compete against foreign carriers. We have yet to integrate into the European air

transport system with our An-148 fleet to fit into the global airport infrastructure. This is why, whether we like it or not, we are preparing the An-148 for international services.

Rossiya’s task is to regain a leading position in the Russian air transport system, including through the increase of frequencies and the use of aircraft with just the right capacity. In this regard, we very much rely on the An-148.

Passengers are satisfied with the aircraft, which is great. Customer satisfaction is indeed paramount. But we should not forget that an aircraft is a commercial product. Several manufacturers now offer similarly-sized airliners. The An-148 is coming of age in a cutthroat competitive environment.

We all have to face competition. People keep asking me: why don’t you increase revenues by increasing airfares? But how can I raise them if there are five or six other airlines out there, working the same routes and competing with us in the same price niche?

It often happens that we putting an An-148 on a route that is already serviced by our competitors’ Boeing 737s and Airbus A320s, as well as by new regional aircraft types. In essence, we have found our An-148s pitted against the larger Boeing 737s, even in the domestic market. Well, as compared with the 737-500, the Antonov indeed offers lower operating costs on a per-flight basis. But we also see the burden our airline carries by operating of this new aircraft type.

For us, there is no question of whether this aircraft is good or bad. Let me put it straight: the An-148 is very much a good aircraft. It has proved worthy of airline service. But we, together with the manufacturers, have yet much work to do to improve it and make it into a good commercial product able to unseat the competition.

We have visitors from various airlines, including from foreign carriers, who ask us about our experience operating this type and the labor costs involved. We tell them that the An-148 is a very good aircraft. We do have certain issues, but we seek to resolve them together with the industry.

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 67

airline customers

SHARING EXPERIENCE On the record: Lev Lander, Deputy Chief Engineer at the aircraft maintenance base, and head of the engineering and technical department, GTK Rossiya airline.

Preparations to ready the An-148 jetliner for acceptance, and for the initial period of operation, began several years ago. We started determining the airliner’s technical characteristics in February 2008.

At our request, changes were made to the radio equipment and arrangement of the passenger cabin.

We settled on a 68/75 seat layout: 60 economy-class seats and eight in business class, with the possibility of quickly converting to a 75-seat all-economy configuration. at the moment, all four aircraft received by our airline are outfitted with the 68/75 arrangement. We chose passenger seats from the Akko firm. This is a Russian company based at Sheremetyevo. In choosing the supplier, we were guided by considerations of quick repairability. However, no need for them to be re-

Lev Lander 68 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

Prepared for publication by Vladimir Karnozov

paired has yet arisen. In order to serve business-class passengers, it was decided to locate a second toilet at the front of the passenger cabin, an extra flight attendant’s seat and additional galley equipment. It must be said that our joint work with the developer and manufacturer in terms of defining the concept of the optional equipment and determining its cost caused great difficulties. Why was this? Naturally, everyone wants to sell for a slightly higher price, but we wanted to purchase for a slightly lower price. It transpired that the OEM had presented quite a lot of functions as options to be selected by the customer at extra cost, but the prices of those options turned out to be quite high.

Guided by the aim of saving money, we had to make do without many interesting options. We came to an agreement by September 2009 on the main concepts of the optional equipment and its cost. The airline was simultaneously preparing for the first deliveries. We formed a working group at the demand of the maintenance depot. Headed by the chief engineer, this group included specialists from the departments involved in of this aircraft type’s entry into service. The company that built the jetliner was providing relevant technical documentation to us. Great help was provided by Ilyushin Finance Co., which presented us with the An-148 operating manual.

When we embarked upon practical work, it proved difficult to make progress. Primarily because it was unusual for us because we decided to operate the aircraft not based on a maintenance schedule but rather by an MRO program. Composing that program was an all-new territory for us, because previously we worked with Soviet aircraft which require a different approach to maintaining airworthiness. Once we received the raw data, we started composing the MRO program. Our colleagues who service foreign-made aircraft like the Boeing 737-500, 767-300 and the Airbus A319/320, assisted us. With their experience of working on foreign aircraft types, we created the MRO program for the An-148. It turned out to be entirely appropriate and we are currently using it in practice.

I will talk separately about how the maintenance personnel were trained. A specialized An-148 zone was

airline customers

An-148 established at the line maintenance shop. Great care was taken in selecting its staff. But it has to be said that we had some choice. At the time we had just started to intensively retire our Tu-154, Tu-134 and Il-86 aircraft, and technical personnel were being freed up. We made choices of the personnel based on criteria which we had formulated for ourselves, proceeding from the technical characteristics of the An-148. Subsequently, time showed that this approach in selecting personnel was the correct one. Highly qualified staff started working for the new shop. We have no problems with the skills of the technicians and engineers. The only difficulty was to change the thinking of the shop specialists from the concept of scheduled maintenance to on-condition maintenance. Now, six months later, we have overcome this difficulty and are working normally.

The first group was formed with 12 avionics specialists and 12 airframe and engine specialists. Conversion training was carried out at the Antonov personnel training center. I think that the standard of training at the center is acceptable and quite good. The Antonov specialists had enough experience to carry out the training.

We also taught the next group there, consisting of 35 people – 17 airframe and engine specialists, and 18 avionics specialists. Now we have 59 certified specialists on this type. Another group of 22 currently is undergoing conversion training at our St. Petersburg center. We think that this number will be sufficient to carry out line and light maintenance of our six-aircraft fleet.

While the first group was being trained, the necessary equipment was being purchased. In total, we spent around 40 million rubles from our own budget on acquiring equipment and implementing the first stage of conversion training (the training costs of the very first group were covered by the lease agreement with IFC).

In the future, we will send our personnel to a training center in St. Petersburg, because training works out to be more expensive in Kiev due to the travel expenses.

This is how we approached the acceptance of the first aircraft: on September 25, 2009, Rossiya’s techni-

Passengers disembark at Pulkovo airport Technicians give An-148 a service

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 69

Rossiya opted for Russian-made Akko seats

cal commission was summoned to the Voronezh VASO plant to take delivery of the first An-148 aircraft, registration no. RA-61701. The acceptance process took some time. Initially, there was a lack of understanding between the factory and the airline. For our part, we strictly followed the program which had been prepared beforehand and approved by the chief engineer of the Rossiya maintenance base, which is quite a substantial document. This program is something like an operational register on how to go about the aircraft acceptance process. It includes a walk-around inspection, full fuelling to check for any leaks in the fuel tanks, an engine run-up, testing the deployment and retraction of the landing gear and equipment power-up tests.

Initially we encountered incomprehension from the plant workers, who were expecting that we would work in accordance with their in-house documents, which were different from ours. But during the work, over the course of the month, we came to understand each other. We understood what we wanted from the plant, and the plant understood that our demands were fair. Overall, in time we found a common language. Suffice it to say that when the first aircraft was being accepted, there were 150 issues on which we had different views. But when the third aircraft (registration no. RA-61703) was being accepted, there were only 38 such deviations. I can gladly note that the plant took our remarks into consideration.

On November 5, 2009, the RA-61701 aircraft flew to Pulkovo Airport, and on December 21, it began revenue operations. We received the second aircraft on December 30, 2009, and the third on April 16, 2010.

The second and third aircraft started revenue flights far more quickly than the first one. as of May 20, 2010, we

airline customers

have flown 915 hours on these three aircraft, performing 710 landings.

So far our aircraft have mainly been flying the St. Petersburg – Moscow route, which has been having its effect on the regularity of operations. In terms of passenger services, Moscow is the highest priority destination, and several airlines service this route, competing with one another. We have had instances when flights have been delayed, including for technical reasons. We have now been cleared to return to the base airport on a scheduled flight with an unserviceable APU. But I think this is only the start of the path which we need to continue on.

We need to work with Antonov and the aviation authorities on expanding the MMEL (minimum equipment list). We have had issues regarding the functioning of the landing gear retracting and lowering system – on two occasions the landing gear moved more slowly than normal. We carried out an investigation and localized the landing gear fault. There was a post-landing engine shutdown incident while taxiing at Samara’s Kurumoch airport. The cause of this was that the aircraft met a snow flurry head on (probably from a snowdrift next to the runway). After this the engine started normally and since then has been working on the RA-61702 aircraft without a single removal.

In terms of working with industry representatives, they are currently fully represented in Pulkovo. Antonov has two specialists here, VASO has a team of 11 people and Motor Sich has two. There is not much that needs to be said about the Voronezh plant: we have known its team for a long time, we have been working with their personnel for many years, they are the same people who worked with us on the Ilyushin Il-86 aircraft.

In terms of the work of the Motor Sich team, the two specialists sent to us on detachment are very qualified and skilled people. We would like the engine manufacturer to have a greater inventory of spare parts at their disposal at Pulkovo than they currently have.

We sometimes have to obtain some necessary items from the plant’s warehouse in Zaporozhie, Ukraine, which is not always acceptable in terms of time. Once we had to ask VASO for urgent help, and at our request they quickly sent a replacement engine starter system from their warehouse, which allowed us to promptly prepare the aircraft for its next flight. We believe that more rhythmical work would ensue if the Motor Sich representatives had more parts at Pulkovo.

I will say a few words about Antonov’s customer support service. I will stress that they created a good aircraft. Everyone praises it: the pilots, the passengers and the engineers. It is a decent aircraft, but it needs to be supported. I think that the level of Antonov’s support needs to be further improved. During last winter, which was unusually cold, with temperatures keeping at -20 degrees C. and below, pipes in the aircraft's tail froze. Rapid decisions were taken on this

problem, but a service bulletin has yet to be issued. Among positive examples, I can note that we have established a clear system of presenting information: we compose letters and data sheets for technical inquiries. I would like the decisions on these to be taken more quickly.

As regards documentation, it was nice to hear reports that an electronic version of the paperwork is ready. Moreover, the VASO representatives have a complete set of detailed drawings. They help us in our work. When we need to order a certain part, we look at these drawings and make our order.

Based on Rossiya’s experience, we have carried out a comparative analysis of the labor intensity of maintenance on the An-148 and Boeing 737. It shows that the An-148 developers still have things to work on. It probably makes sense to reduce the labor intensity of transit checks after every landing, and also of daily checks.

It is good that we and Antonov have mutual understanding on the fact that the aircraft should be flying as much as possible, and spend as little time as possible on the ground. We must continue to eradicate the old school of servicing aircraft, and more actively adopt new approaches to ensuring airworthiness.

In conclusion I want to speak about the six-month-long work on this aircraft. I will say again that the An-148 is a good aircraft, everyone likes it. But we should work further on improving its operational support. Airlines are commercial organizations and they need to earn money, to use their fleets for transporting passengers, and spend less time on repairs, maintenance, spares, etc. What should be done here? During the initial stage of the An-148 operation, some teething problems came to light, which need to be eliminated as soon as possible. But this is only possible through our joint efforts. I sincerely ask the industry to help us in this.

The industry representatives at Pulkovo need to be supplied with full technical kits whose content should be based on the experience of operating problems. Also, as the launch operator of this type in Russia, our airline would appreciate external financing of spares purchases. And the MMEL needs to be expanded as much as possible, to eventually become as elaborate as those for the Boeing 737 and Airbus A320.

special aviation

An eye in the Indian sky Pavel Nakhodkin In March 2010, an aircraft bearing a huge mushroom radome on its back landed in Mumbai. It was the second Beriev EI airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) system built by Russian and Israeli companies for the Indian Air Force. After the third such aircraft is handed over to the customer later this year, India may choose to place additional orders. The Indian project has helped to advance Moscow’s own modernization efforts, resulting in the A-50U upgrade of the Russian fleet of Beriev A-50 Mainstay aircraft. Additionally, work has started on a next-generation AEW&C system for the Russian Air Force.

The contract to supply India with three AEW&C systems, based around an Israeli radar and using a Russian aircraft platform, was signed in New Delhi in October 2003. Russia was represented by the state arms exporter Rosoboronexport. Selected as the lead contractors were the Taganrog-based Beriev Aircraft Company, Ilyushin Aviation Complex and Vega Radio Engineering Corporation. The Israeli contractor was Elta Systems Ltd, a subsidiary of Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI). Thus began the two countries’ second attempt at promoting their joint AEW&C product for export.

Known at Beriev as EI, the aircraft sometimes referred to in the press as A-50E or A-50EI

72 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

The Russian-Israeli project By the early 1990s, the only two countries that continued to produce major AEW&C systems were the US (with its E-3 Sentry AWACS, which first flew in October, 1975) and Russia (with the A-50 Shmel, NATO reporting name Mainstay, which made its maiden flight in December, 1978). Washington supplied Sentries to its primary allies: France, Saudi Arabia and the UK. The type also was deployed with NATO forces in Germany.

special aviation

Sweden’s Saab Microwave Systems developed a tactical AEW&C system around its Erieye radar in the 1990s. This system used a Saab 340/2000 turboprop or Brazil’s Embraer ЕМВ-145 regional jet as the airborne platform. The problem with Erieye was that it provided limited performance compared to the U.S. and Russian solutions.

Elta, meanwhile, was working on its own family of AEW&C systems, which had various effective ranges.

The company’s prototype EL/M-2075 Phalcon radar, developed in the late 1980s, received high praise from the militaries of Israel and many other countries. Elta originally planned to use the Boeing 707 as the Phalcon platform.

After the NATO AEW&C systems demonstrated their effectiveness in the Gulf and Yugoslav conflicts in the 1990s, a number of countries decided to procure equivalent equipment. China was one of them, but the Tiananmen Square events in April 1998 resulted in the U.S. and Europe imposing an arms embargo on Beijing. China responded by turning for armament to Russia and Israel. It also continued to develop an indigenous AEW&C system under a program launched in the 1960s, but that effort was progressing rather slowly. Russia offered to sell Beijing its A-50 systems. Israel, for its part, promoted Phalcon. The Chinese military eventually opted for the Israeli radar, but a suitable platform remained a problem since the embargo ruled out an American or European aircraft. Elta came up with the solution of using the Russian Ilyushin Il-76 or, more precisely, Beriev’s A-50 variant especially configured for the Shmel AEW&C system. China at that time already operated a fleet of Russian Il-76MD transports, so pilot conversion to the aircraft type would pose no problem.

To implement the program, Russia and Israel signed their first-ever military-technical cooperation agreement at Paris Air Show in June 1997. The signatories were Rosvooruzhenie (Rosoboronexport’s name before November 2000), Beriev, and IAI. The sides agreed to deliver four Plancon-equipped aircraft to China.

Beriev’s internal designation for the project was AI, although the press sometimes referred to the aircraft as A-50I. The manufacturer used a production A-50 (factory no. 86579) for system integration trials. The airframe was stripped of its original Russian equipment and appropriately upgraded to house the Israeli radar. A mission compartment and rest area were set up in the pressurized section of the fuselage. (Interestingly, the Russian Air Force’s production A50s have no rest area.) Beriev installed mission consoles and racks for Phalcon equipment. The resultant AI aircraft could accommodate five main crew, nine relief crew and 10 radar operators.

EL/M-2075 Phalcon The IAI/Elta EL/M-2075 Phalcon (Phased Array L-band Conformal) is a multi-mode pulse-doppler radar capable of detecting and tracking air and surface targets at tactical ranges of 370 to 450 km.

Its operating frequencies are between 1280 and 1400 MHz, which corresponds to the 21-23 cm wave bands.

Phalcon uses three to six distributed phased array antennas for 360-degree azimuth coverage. This design provides an operational advantage over the conventional mechanically-steered rotodomes used on the Sentry and Mainstay. Electronic scanning reduces the data refresh time to 2-12 sec., depending on sector priority, against 20-40 sec. for the rotodome systems. Phalcon can simultaneously track up to 100 targets and provide weapon pointing information for 12-15 of them. Thanks to a relatively low carrier frequency of 1-2 GHz, coupled with high processing speeds and clutter suppression ability, the system can detect slow-flying targets such as helicopters and UAVs, as well as cruise missiles and stealth aircraft. The system can switch between operating modes almost instantaneously.

Each of the six antennas measures 8.87 X 1.73 meters and includes 768 to 864 liquid-cooled, solid-state transmitting and receiving elements. The antennas are electronically scanned in both azimuth and elevation.

The EL/M-2075 is currently in service with three countries. The Israeli Air Force initially installed it on Boeing 707 aircraft. In 2007, it put into operation three Gulfstream G550 jets fitted with the advanced EL/W-2085 Eitam dual-band radar system. Under a 1989 contract between Israel and Chile, the Chilean Air Force in May 1994 received its first operational Phalcon mounted on a Boeing 707 (this aircraft became known as Condor). India, in May 2009, became the third country to have EL/M-2075 radars. The Republic of Singapore Air Force ordered four Gulfstream G550s in 2007, to use them with EL/M-2075 radars. These aircraft are to replace the country’s U.S.-built E-2C Hawkeye AEW&C fleet, and are expected to enter service in 2010.

A poll conducted by the Federation of American Scientists in 2009 identified EL/M-2075 Phalcon as the world’s best AEW&C system.

The flight crew area actually comprised two decks. The upper deck accommodated the two pilot seats, the flight engineer’s workstation and one spare seat. The lower deck was occupied by the navigator. Immediately behind the flight deck was the mission compartment with 10 consoles and the rest area, separated from the cargo hold by a soundproof wall. The rest area was outfitted with nine armchairs meant for radar operators or relief crew. The mission compartment and rest area were equipped with separate air conditioning, lighting, communications and intercom systems.

There was also a standard aircraft lavatory, which the production A-50 lacked. The rear loading ramp was refurbished, and an emergency hatch installed, to provide bailout capability for the operators.

The airframe was redesigned to accommodate the new equipment. It received a stationary radome measuring 11.5 meters in diameter (compared to the Mainstay rotodome’s 10.8 meter diameter). The radome weighed 13 tons together with the three Phalcon antennas, which were mounted inside at a 120° angle. The radome rested on reinforced masts.

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 73

special aviation

EL/W-2085 Eitam at Farnborough 2008

Apart from the three antennas in the radome, 71 additional antennas were scattered across the airframe. Of these, 44 antennas were part of the Phalcon system. The nose and aft sections of the fuselage and the wingtips were modified to accommodate antennas covered by radio-transparent fairings. Integration of the new equipment required changes to the aircraft’s power supply, air conditioning, oxygen supply, liquid and air cooling, communications and annunciation systems. The aft fuselage section was redesigned, and ventral fins added, to ensure directional static stability.

The AI aircraft first flew from Beriev’s Taganrog airfield on July 28, 1999, with test pilot Gennady Kalyuzhny at the controls. The testing program included 15 test flights and seven training flights. In October 1999, the AI ferried to Israel for Phalcon installation and testing.

But then a scandal broke. The U.S. government demanded that Israel freeze AEW&C deliveries to China. As a result, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak announced in summer 2000 that the Chinese contract was being suspended. He did add that “IAI will be looking for ways to follow through with the deal.” However, one year later Israel’s new Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, officially notified Chinese President Jiang Zemin that Israel would not be honoring the contract.

Washington in 2002 paid Tel Aviv $800 million in compensation for the thwarted deal.

The AI aircraft minus Phalcon system flew to China in 2002. There it was fitted with an indigenous KJ-2000 radar at the Xi’an aircraft factory. The system performed its maiden flight in November 2003.

A production KJ-2000 was first revealed to the general public on October 1, 2009, during the military parade in Beijing to mark the 60th anniversary of Communist rule. According to the Chinese press, the PLA Air Force currently operates four such aircraft, all converted from Il-76MD transports built by Uzbekistan’s TAPO Tashkent Aircraft Production Factory in 1994-96. Further expansion of the KJ-2000 fleet will depend on whether China manages to procure more Il-76s.

Indian Phalcon At around the same time as China, India also started looking at ways to develop a tactical AEW&C capability. The country’s Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) launched work on

74 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

an indigenous Airborne Surveillance Platform (ASP) in 1987. The program was led by India’s state corporation Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL). A HAL-748 twin turboprop (the Indian licensed version of the Avro 748/HS748) was selected as the platform. The ASP-fitted prototype crashed in January 1999, killing all eight crew and test engineers on board and leading to a five-year suspension of further work.

In parallel with the ASP program the Indian military sought to procure foreign AEW&C systems. One of the proposals considered was the Russian A-50, first demonstrated to Admiral Jayant Ganpat Nadkarni, Chief of the Indian Naval Staff, back in 1988. But the Indian Air Force tender was eventually won by Phalcon. The Indian pilots felt quite comfortable about the Israeli radar being installed on an Il-76 platform, since the Indian Air Force was already operating 18 Il-76MD transports and seven Il-78MKI aerial tankers.

The Indian Defence Ministry estimated at the time that it needed at least six Phalcons for guaranteed protection of the country’s airspace. The optimal figure was projected at 12 systems: nine in operation and three in reserve.

EI characteristics Wing span, meters

50.50

Length, meters

46.59

Height, meters

14.80

Max fuselage diameter, meters

4.80

Wing area, square meters

300.0

Normal take-off weight, tons

190

Powerplant

Four PS-90A-76 turbofans

Thrust, kg.

4 x 16,000

Max cruise speed, km./hr.

800

Operating range, kilometers

7,500

Service ceiling, meters

12,000

sPEciaL aviatiOn

The contract for India’s first three A-50-based Phalcons was finalized in early 2000. But problems then ensued that delayed the program by three years. In April 2000, the Indian Defence Ministry took one standard Russian Air Force A-50 on a 30-day lease for familiarization and pilot training purposes.

The Russian military interpreted this as New Delhi’s readiness to buy the Shmel system instead not Phalcon. The Russian Defense Ministry in effect prohibited domestic companies to work with Elta. Instead, it recommended Rosvooruzhenie to look into the possibility of selling India some of the available A-50s.

India rejected the proposal and entered talks with Airbus over the possible use of the A310 as a Phalcon platform. It was only in june 2001 that a RussianIsraeli working group persuaded the Indian Defence Ministry to sign the A-50 contract. Then the U.S. Department of State intervened in early 2002, demanding that Israel freeze the deal. The reason given was Washington’s concern about an escalation of tension between India and Pakistan. The program was again suspended, until the U.S. eased off in May 2003.

Finally, in October 2003, the Indian Defence Ministry, Rosoboronexport and Elta signed a contract worth some $1.1 billion for three Phalcon-based AEW&C aircraft. Deliveries were to be made in December 2007, September 2008 and April 2009.

The Russian contractors were again Beriev, Ilyushin and vega. The platform, known at Beriev as EI (but referred to in the press as A-50E or A-50EI), differs from the AI variant. It is based on an Il-76TD transport aircraft, rather than a production A-50. The main difference from the baseline is in the powerplant: the original four D-30KP-2 engines, rated at 12,000 kg. thrust, have been replaced with four all-new Aviadvigatel PS-90A-76 turbofans, with a rated thrust of 14.5 tons and considerable capability for thrust upating.

The new engine is fully ICAO compliant for noise and emissions. It offers greater reliability, a longer service life and better economics than the D-30, as well as enhanced operational stability and safety protection.

All this improves the aircraft ’s overall performance: its service ceiling increases from 10 km. to 12 km., expanding the radar coverage radius. Its operating range also increases – going from 5,100 lm. to 7,500 km., resulting in greater loiter times without aerial refueling.

Apart from the mission radar, the aircraft carries an ELINT (electronic intelligence-gathering) station, which includes four sets of antennas at the wingtips, in the nose and in the aft fuselage section. At distances of 400-500 km., the station receives, analyzes, and locates radio signals of any polarization types from surface emitters operating in the frequency range of 0.5-40 Ghz. The stations uses interferometer spacedantenna measurements to determine target bearing.

ELINT data are checked against radar data for more accurate target ranging and classification.

EI’s “dome” undergoes tests at Beriev facilities The “dome” is installed on EI, serial number KW-3552 (below)

The EI is fitted with a vega communications and data relay suite, built around two primary vhF/UhF radios, one hF transceiver and one hF receiver; 10 additional vhF/UhF radio stations, a satcom station and two ShF radios; processing hardware and software, and an intercom system.

The IFF (identification friend or foe) system is supplied by Thales. It interrogates targets by emitting a coded query signal and analyzing the reply. The system is capable of identifying an air or surface target to the tail-number level of detail, and also determines its bearing and range.

In April, june, and july 2005, TAPO delivered three new Il-76TD aircraft (factory/serial numbers 21727/94-02, 21730/94-03 and 21736/94-04, respectively) to Beriev. The first of them was converted to the EI variant by the fall of 2007. After a series of tests, on january 20, 2008, it flew to Israel for radar installation and testing. The Phalcon-equipped aircraft first flew from a Tel Aviv airfield on june 5 of the same year. A series of tests followed, after which the aircraft, bearing the Indian serial number KW-3551, flew to India on May 25, 2009. Three days later it, was formally handed over to the Indian Air Force in a ceremony at Palam Air Base near Delhi.

The second EI, serial number KW-3552, performed its first flight from Taganrog on january 11, 2009. In june, it was ferried to Israel.

farnBOrOuGH sPEciaL aircraft inDustry 75

special aviation

The modernized A-50 for Russia Participation in the AI and EI projects moved Beriev and Vega to radically renovate their production processes. The companies used their newly gained expertise to complete work on an upgrade solution for the Russian Air Force A-50s that had been suspended 10 years earlier. The upgraded variant is known as A-50U. The modernization effort mainly focuses on using contemporary lightweight radar hardware equipment, which substantially reduces the overall system weight. The aircraft can now take more fuel at the same take-off weight, which means an increase in its range and loiter time. Its take-off and landing performance, stability and controllability remain unaffected.

The A-50U system features improved detection and ranging performance for low-flying and low-signature air targets even in extreme countermeasures environments. It can detect helicopters and sea-surface targets. The rear hemisphere coverage performance also is improved on the A-50.

The avionics suite includes a satellite-based positioning system for increased navigation performance. The mission workstations are updated with multifunction LCD displays; they feature improved ergonomics and data presentation, easy access to instruments and controls, and more efficient annunciation. The A-50U has crew rest areas, utilities, and a galley.

In November 2009, Russian Air Force Commander Lt. Gen. Aleksandr Zelin signed the acceptance test certificate for the A-50 system’s A-50U upgrade modification.

The technical solutions incorporated in the A-50U program will be used for Russia’s prospective AEW&C system. News agencies reported in February 2010 that Beriev was developing such a system.

It is expected to surpass both the A-50U and the Indian EI variant, and may be rolled out by the middle of the decade. The new system will most likely be installed on the Il-476 heavy military transport, which will soon enter series production at the Ulyanovsk-based Aviastar-SP plant.

Nine months later, on March 25, 2010, the second Phalcon system was delivered to customer. Beriev is now completing construction of the third aircraft, serial number KW-3553, to be delivered to the Indian Air Force before the end of 2010. All three will be stationed at Agra An upgrade solution for the Russian Air Force A-50s is A-50U

76 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

Air Base in the northeastern state of Uttar Pradesh, one of India’s largest air force installations and home to that country’s Il-76MD and Il-78MKI units. Agra has already deployed the AEW&C ground component.

Indian prospects In order to effectively protect India’s borders, control the country’s airspace and prevent terror threats – especially in the wake of the November 2008 attack on Mumbai – the Indian military is seeking to form a single airspace defense system that would unite all radars and other military and civilian hardware under the air force’s command. Studies suggest that the Indian Air Force needs high- and medium-power radars, and also mobile low-power surveillance systems. The high-power class includes the Phalconequipped EI aircraft. Indian radar specialist Rohini has been partially responding to the country’s need for medium-power radars. Experts believe that India also needs to procure tethered aerostat surveillance systems. Two such aerostats were bought from Lockheed Martin in 2009.

In addition to the EL/M-2075 Phalcon systems, DRDO in 2004 announced the resumption of work on the indigenous Airborne Early Warning and Control System (AEW&CS). The agency invited private companies to join the program, with the Embraer MMB-145 jet selected as the platform. DRDO signed a protocol of intentions with Embraer in early 2005; in July 2008 the two parties signed a $210 million contract for the delivery of three ЕМВ-145 aircraft from 2011. Until now, this aircraft type (in the R-99 variant) has been used as the platform for the Saab Erieye radar. Five such aircraft entered service with the Brazilian Air Force in 2002-03. Four R-99s were supplied to Greece in 2003-05, and Mexico received one in 2004.

Prior to signing the Embraer contract, Indian military sources commented that AEW&CS-equipped

special aviation

Viktor Kobzev, Beriev General Director - General Designer ЕМВ-145s could supplement, and even partially supplant, India’s EI fleet. These statements moved some Indian and foreign media to question the feasibility of further EI purchases. However, according to several media sources, the Indian Air Force command has repeatedly stated that the ЕМВ-145 was failing to meet the AEW&CS requirements. In particular, the U.S. weekly publication Defense News quoted a top-ranking Indian military officer as saying that the Indian Air Force has over the past four years revised its AEW&CS specifications to include a new-generation AESA-based radar and satcom equipment. If implemented, these changes will make the entire system heavier, and the ЕМВ-145 will no longer be suitable as the platform. In the wake of these revelations, DRDO has announced that as soon as the first ЕМВ-145 arrives, it will be fitted with a full-size, full-weight AEW&CS mock-up for a series of test flights. The results of the flights, to be undertaken in 2012, a final decision will be made on whether the aircraft fits the system specification.

In the meantime, the successful entry into service of the first EI aircraft has prompted India to speed up talks on subsequent purchases. Speaking at the AeroIndia exhibition in February 2009, United Aircraft Corporation President Alexey Fedorov said: “We are positively interested in continuing our mutually beneficial partnership [on the EI program]. If more orders come for these aircraft, we will carry on in the existing cooperation, including with our Israeli partner.” Incidentally, the Beriev Board of Directors in early 2009 issued a resolution on opening a rep-

resentative office in Israel, apparently in anticipation of new export orders.

Finally, in mid-January 2010, several Indian and Russian media outlets reported that the Indian Air Force had contacted the Russian Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation with a request to purchase three EI aircraft, and an option for another six. Russia’s Interfax-AVN news agency quoted a military source as saying that “negotiations have just begun but we believe that Rosoboronexport may sign a contract as soon as 2010.” In February of this year, Beriev’s first deputy general designer, Nikolay Lavro, confirmed that talks were underway for the sale of nine more aircraft to India, including three firm orders and six options. “If Rosonoronexport signs a new EI contract with India, we will continue our joint work with Israel,” Lavro said. “The contract would allow for seamless continuation of AEW&C production for India.

The new batch would be installed on Il-476 aircraft.”

EI aircraft at Beriev’s home base in Taganrog

special aviation

Tu-214 Goes ON Roman Gusarov, Vladimir Karnozov

Tu-214ON desk model Next year will mark delivery of one more new version of the baseline Tu-214 aircraft. The turn is now for the Tu-214ON. Ample information on this model became available at MAKS’2009. During the air show in Zhukovsky, the Vega Concern of Radio Equipment, KAPO and the Bank of St. Petersburg signed contract on construction of a second Tu-214ON. To enable KAPO fulfill the contract, the Bank of St. Petersburg opened a credit line for the manufacturer. Signatures on the respective documents applied Vega General Director Vladimir Verba, KAPO General Director Vasil Kadymov and director of the bank’s Moscow branch Nikolai Udodov. According to the information revealed at MAKS’2009, the Tu-214ON shall enable the Russian Federation to fulfill its obligations under the Open Skies international treaty. This specially configured aircraft is intended for aerial photography and inspection flights. It will be equipped with special photo cameras to take aerial photos of infrastructure objects when overflying territories of “Open Skies” member states.

Vladimir Verba and Vasil Kayumov announce contract for Tu-214ON 78 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

Twenty seven nations signed the Open Skies treaty on 24 March 1992. Russia ratified it in May 2001. Since then the number of member states has grown to 34 (US, Canada and 32 European nations). Any state which signed-in has the right to overfly territory of other member states. Russia has so far performed about fifty such missions. The Tu-214ON has been created especially for that sort of missions. One airframe is now at a high degree of readiness at KAPO final assembly shop, second one being manufactured. Under arrangement with Russian MoD, which will operate the aircraft, Vega acts the project leader (which is also the case with other special mission aircraft on the Tu-214 platform).

Vega’s Vladimir Verba told the press that, under the Open Skies agreement, member states have the right to overfly and make aerial photography of infrastructure objects, which are subjects to international disarmament treaties. “The Russian defense ministry has made decision to place an order for several aircraft suitable for that role. The customer chose Vega to lead this project. We ran selection of a suitable platform and opted for the Tu-214”.

Vega has completed development of mission equipment for the Tu-214ON. The set includes radio transmitters and receivers, a surveillance radar, photo and television cameras, infra red seekers etc. “It was not easy to structure financing package for this project. By now we have found complete understanding with the customer on that and other matters”, Verba said. The Open Skies treaty and its implementation are under personal supervision of Russian president and prime minister, he stressed. First Tu-214ON shall be completed in 2011, and second by the end of that year. A third airframe may be added later, should the customer make a decision.

Timely completion of the manufacturing plans requires much effort from Tupolev and KAPO. The customer has issued approval for KAPO to use commercial bank credits. The additional capital is needed to intensify work on renovation of manufacturing equipment and make advance purchase of vendor items. KAPO will use commercial bank credits to improve and expand its manufacturing capability. The credit line opened by the Bank of St. Petersburg is meant to inject more cash into KAPO manufacturing process and make it run faster. Speaking on behalf of his bank, Nikolai Udodov said that, if necessary, the manufacturer can hire as much as six billion rubles under the opened credit line. “We expect our client will continue using our services in other projects.

We work closely with enterprises of the military-indus-

trial complex and know their specifics and needs. I am glad to be of help to such a high-class manufacturer as KAPO”.

Recently we were lucky to get some exclusive moments with the head of Vega and asked him if there is a possibility to export the Tu-214ON? Although this particular aircraft is developed to the specification compiled by the Russian defense ministry, its equipment is in many ways “universal”. The equipment set is suitable for various users, both governmental and commercial. Not all of the Open Skies member states necessarily have their own aircraft for aerial photography. There are very few companies in the world that can produce cameras for aerial photography with suitable performance. Equipment necessary for the Open Skies is not only universal, it also must have preset working modes and parameters.

Generally speaking, an Open Skies tailor-made aircraft bears resemblance to a photo reconnaissance plane. But there is a distinct difference. The latter is being created so as to have the best performance possible.

People working on reconnaissance aircraft projects do their best trying to equip their aircraft with finest sensors, in order to get best pictures. The higher resolution, the better. “That’s not the case with the Open Skies.

The member states agreed (and that the cornerstone of the agreement, otherwise it would not work) that the working parameters of the special aircraft operated by all member states shall be similar. Prescribed resolution for photo camera falls in between three and five meters. Even though a manufacturer can produce equipment with better performance, it gets downgraded so that every inspector, regardless of his country, gets pictures of the prescribed quality”.

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 79

Tu-214

All Tu-214 series aircraft going to governmental service come equipped with PS-90A engines

80 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

Moscow is ready to cooperate with other Open Skies member states. Especially with those not having specially-tailored aircraft of their own. Talks are open with Ukraine, Belarus and others. Today, these nations hire aircraft from those who have them. “When we get a pair of Tu-214ON completed and introduced into the Russian government service, we may consider supply of such aircraft or their services to foreign customers”, Verba says.

A respective decision is, surely, not at the level of the manufacturers, but rather that of the ministry of defense and the government. Verba continues: “Once the MoD has a fleet of two or three aircraft, it may consider a higher utilization for them. The customer may choose to offer those aircraft to other users. If other nations ask Russia for such aircraft or services, we can oblige them.

Our set of equipment developed for the Tu-214ON is already available, it meets all international requirements.

In terms technical, we are ready for cooperation”.

Should a foreign country choose to order a Tu-214ON and apply to the Russian government, there shall be no considerations of secrecy regime to prevent the manufacturer from signing a delivery contract. “Together with Tupolev and KAPO, Vega is ready to such a perspective.

The program may have export prospects if we complete the flight test program timely and satisfactorily”. Roughly half of the Open Skies member states do not have their specialized aircraft with necessary equipment. This opens before Russia some export perspective.

PiLOts

a Pilot's Passion Extracts from the speech made by Eugeny ryabinin, antonov test pilot at the initial operational performance conference for the antonov an-148.

One day recently I experienced some very special feelings, because for the first time I was a passenger aboard the An-148 jetliner aircraft, registration UR-NTA, the airplane I had been flying for six years. I paid money to buy a ticket from Kiev to St Petersburg, and I, a test pilot, then flew on “my aircraft“ as a passenger. These were wonderful feelings! There really is a lot that links me to this aircraft.

I remember approving the first line captain of GTK Rossiya – Russian Airlines for commercial operations on the An-148. This brought with it a feeling of responsibility: how will he fly on his own?

We pay a great deal of attention to you, the launch operators.

And now I am very nervous speaking to you. We take everything related to the An-148 to heart; we go through moments which are often out of our control... We have to endure these moments because if we, the participants in the An-148 program – who have worked on it from the very start – do not do this, then basically the project will not survive and will not develop.

For some reason, no economic figures were given today in the speeches by Rossiya representatives: for example, what the fuel consumption turns is, or what the average speeds are. I would like to give all of you all of these key figures now in the hope that you will find them interesting. We are carrying out an analysis based on the utilization of An-148 aircraft in Ukraine from the very start of their commercial operations on 1 june 2009. We are registering a stable fuel consumption of 1,760 kg. per block hour. This is continuing from month to month, give or take 100 kg. We have performed over 1,000 revenue flights. The average route length is quite short: 1 hr. 20 min. The average cruise speed is 700 km/hr. Let me remind you that the fastest cruise speed for this aircraft type is Mach 0.79.

I shall now discuss the aircraft ’s introduction on international routes. It is has been servicing the following cities: Stockholm, vilnius, Riga, Warsaw, Budapest, Sofia, Belgrade, Istanbul, Athens, Rhodes, Thessaloniki, Tbilisi, and Moscow’s vnukovo and

An-148 flight simulator in Kiev 82 aircraft inDustry farnBOrOuGH sPEciaL

Prepared for publication by Vladimir Karnozov

Eugeny Ryabinin

Sheremetyevo airports. We already have had several SAFA inspections, and there have been no criticisms of the aircraft. I personally had a SAFA inspection in Sofia. Two inspectors came, and they did not have a single item to write up.

I now want to talk about training of flight personnel. A well-trained pilot is definitely the safest asset.

At this stage, we have a training simulator which has been set up and is working in Kiev. Admittedly it is not a perfection. I agree on this with the previous speakers: they are absolutely right to make this criticism. But unfortunately, this is the only one we have for now. I will try to reassure you somewhat: by the end of this year, we are planning to obtain a simulator with wonderful visualization which will fully meet all the international standards (Level D) – just as you wanted it.

Despite its drawbacks, we use the Kiev simulator in flight crew training. As you know, we have already trained pilots for Aerosvit Airlines and Rossiya. Recently we finished training a second group, a further 17 people. And before this, if my memory serves me correctly, there were two groups of 14 people each.

As the next step, we perform what couldn’t be demonstrated in the simulator: we carry out airfield training instruction which, in my view, is of a very high quality. I think that the pilots that took part in this training were pleased, coming to a complete understanding of the aircraft. And I am sure that based the way they were trained on the An-148 during these airfield sessions, that wouldn’t know Western aircraft types based on what conversion training is offered

for Airbus or Boeing aircraft. We provide hands-on demonstrations of procedures that help them understand, get a feel for, and become familiar with this aircraft, and start to love it and respect it.

Tomorrow, we will start training another group of pilots here, with the activity based at Pulkovo.

From our point of view, we wish and hope that the new Rossiya pilots who will start flying the An148 will like the aircraft just as unconditionally as those who are already flying it.

The experience of our operations has shown that passengers like our aircraft very much. There are passengers who always travel on this type, including some frequent flyers. And we receive positive feedback at the end of the flights.

When people – both airline staff and passengers – see our aircraft, they say: “Thank goodness!

Finally, passenger aircraft are appearing under Russia’s Romeo Alpha (RA) national registration code, rather than a Bermudan Victor Papa (VP) registration; and these aircraft were made in Russia!“ Ukrainian passengers travelling on Aerosvit say similar things of the Ukrainian-built An-148s.

I will now talk about the problems which Rossiya specialists have spoken about. In Ukraine, no faults were observed on the UR-NTA aircraft over the entire year of its operation on scheduled services. There were no engine shutdowns. Also, we did not have any issues with landing gears. The change in the course of squawks on An-148 aircraft in operation in Ukraine can be traced in the chart provided.

This is indeed more a question for the manufacturers of the aircraft and its components. We hope that the issues concerning production will be resolved.

It is slightly frustrating that being Ukrainian citizens we, the Antonov test pilots and instructors, are not allowed to fly in the capacity of flight crew commander in the Russian airspace. We are not

given the change to perform flight training instruction from Pulkovo airport of St. Petersburg. Believe me, many problems which have been spoken about today would not have occurred if a third crew member, an Antonov test pilot, was on board. Before Rossiya started operating An-148s, we addressed the Russian aviation authorities, wrote letters in which we asked and implored them to let pilots from Kiev on board. But unfortunately our requests were not granted.

This is what I wanted to tell you. It is emotional, of course. But you should understand what it means for a test pilot who knows all the procedures, who knows the behavior of the aircraft both in the winter and summer (and we have carried out tests in various climatic conditions) not to be allowed to get involved in training his colleagues just because he has the “wrong“ passport...

Well, thank goodness that Russians themselves have started to fly this new type, and here in Russia your own flight instructors have emerged. I hope that the An-148 will have a long life in the skies over Russia and many other countries.

Antonov flight test base in Gostomel near Kiev FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 83

partners

Airbus and EADS in Russia This year has been declared the Year of France in Russia, which opens up a new phase in Franco-Russian relations and reinforces the two countries’ partnership in a full range of areas, including the aerospace industry. in the following interview, Vadim Vlasov, the head of Airbus and EADS in Russia, talks about key areas in the company’s cooperation with its Russian partners.

What is the current state of cooperation between EADS, Airbus and Russia?

Our development of an extensive strategic partnership began with the 2001 signing of a cooperation agreement between EADS and the Russian aerospace agency. This 10-year program included Russia’s participation in every phase of the development and production of new Airbus aircraft, from research and development to the manufacture of various materials and components.

In recent years, our aerospace cooperation has acquired a systemic nature. It is based on agreements signed with our strategic partner, the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), with a working group of EADS and UAC top managers set up in 2006. The group meets regularly to discuss both ongoing and future partnership projects.

Vadim Vlasov

Konstantin Lantratov, Vladimir Karnozov

On the whole, if you look at the history of our cooperation with Russia, you will see that it becomes ever deeper with each passing year. We began with purchasing titanium produce and conducting joint R&D programs with Russian research institutions and universities. As of today, we already have implemented more than 70 joint projects involving over 800 Russian specialists. It is not widely known that Russian scientists have been involved in the development of the world’s largest airliner, the A380. They were tasked with very important aerodynamic studies and calculations on airframe weight optimization.

The next step in our partnership with Russia was the opening of our ECAR engineering center in Moscow – which, by the way, is our first engineering center in Europe that has been set up outside the Airbus stakeholder nations. This center permanently employs 200 specialists, who are completely integrated with the Airbus design bureau and travel on regular work assignments to France and Germany, taking part in all our corporate programs.

The next stage of our partnership was the manufacture of components for Airbus at Russian factories, and a joint venture with UAC for A320/A321 passenger-to-freighter conversion.

Such a comprehensive partnership is a major achievement, both for us and for the Russian side.

It means a big step forward in our relations, moving beyond the simple «buy and sell” formula into skills and technology exchange, which I believe is a far more valuable form of partnership in this day and age.

We are proud that a country like Russia, with its long traditions in aviation, strong R&D potential and a deep pool of talent, is working with us as a fully fledged partner at every stage of the design and production of Airbus aircraft. To be frank, we did have certain difficulties early on – but this is only natural, as we were just learning to work together and building our relations. I can now say with 100-percent cer-

partners

tainty that the partnership program we have created not only is our common pride and joy, but also a perfect example of mutually enriching and successful cooperation between our countries.

And what about the economic crisis? Has it affected your joint projects?

Our position is this: crises come and go, but partnership remains. We are continuing all of our partnership programs with Russia without scaling anything back. What is more, we actually made some significant leaps forward in certain areas last year.

For example, we signed the largest and longestterm contract in the history of our cooperation with VSMPO-Avisma. This contract is for the supply of titanium through 2020. And we’re not talking just about round and flat-rolled titanium: the new business involves about value-added processed titanium products. VSMPO-Avisma is the main supplier of titanium for Airbus and most of our European contractors.

So it is not be an exaggeration to say that our aircraft are made of Russian titanium.

In 2009, EADS signed a framework agreement on long-term R&D cooperation with the Russian Academy of Sciences and the St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University. The agreement covers joint R&D projects in areas such as computer modeling and virtual testing based on modern mathematical methods.

Last year also brought another landmark event in our partnership: the maiden flight of the A330-

Airbus A320

200F freighter, which was made possible by the work of Russian engineers. More than half of all the design work on this project was done

by ECAR specialists.

What is the situation with A320 component production in Russia?

Some early challenges were said to have occurred in this cooperation.

There was a lot of tongue-wagging on this issue at the time, but no one wanted to understand what actually was happening. It was quite simple, really: there are different approaches to manufacturing and workplace regulations in Europe and Russia, so it took us some time to standardize and certify all the processes.

Yes, it took a while to get moving, and we did fall slightly behind the initial schedule – but what VASO and Irkut have now achieved is spectacular. Just think about it: the two Russian companies have overhauled their production facilities, implemented the latest technological processes, installed much new equipment, undergone a profound reorganization, achieved regulatory and technological compliance, etc. Russian specialists from Irkutsk and Voronezh – from top managers to line workers – have taken training courses and work assignments at the Airbus facilities in France and Germany. That is invaluable experience!

Also, Airbus operational support specialists have been working side-by-side with their Russian colleagues in Voronezh and Irkutsk since 2005, helping each other at every stage of the production process. A huge amount of work has been done, so that VASO and Irkut have now become not only certified component suppliers for Airbus, but modern manufacturers in their own right. They meet all the latest international standards.

Mass production of components is strictly on schedule and steadily gaining pace. To give you a few examples, VASO has already de-

partners

livered more than 40 engine pylon components. Irkut has supplied about 30 keel beams and more than 100 nose landing gear bays.

It has also launched production of flap tracks.

Dozens of A320s now in service have components made by Russian manufacturers. That is an excellent example of industrial integration, isn't it?

Is it true that Russian contractors also make A380 components?

Yes it is – although for some reason, this topic has not attracted a lot of media coverage. It is true that Russia is participating in the A380 project, which is the largest and most advanced commercial jetliner in the world. For several years now, our Russian partners have been supplying heat exchangers for the air treatment system, valve blocks for the flight control system, and cold-forged titanium parts for the wings and main landing gear. By the way, Airbus is the only Western aerospace company to source components from Russia. And mind you, we are not talking about nuts and bolts – we are talking about functionally significant and complex assembled components, without which the aircraft simply cannot fly.

What can you tell us about the A320/A321 freighter conversion program? What are the prospects here?

As you know, in 2007 we and our UAC partners set up a joint venture called Airbus Freighter Conversion (AFC). The plan is to have two conversion facilities. One of them is in Dresden, at the Elbe Flugzeugwerke facility, which is a former aircraft repair site. It is now part of Airbus, and serves as the company’s center of excellence for freighter conversions. At present, this facility converts A300s and A310s. the second conversion facility will be in Russia. As you know, UAC has recently made an official decision that the A320 conversion center will be set up in Ulyanovsk, at the Aviastar-SP plant. In my view, this is a good choice, especially since there will be a special economic zone there.

More than 120 Russian specialists now work at the engineering center in Dresden, which was set up in 2007. We already have finished the selection of the main component and equipment suppliers.

The engineering and design documentation is nearly completed, and preparations for EASA certification are in their final stages. So as you can see, the work is in full swing. We expect the prototype converted freighter to be ready in 2011.

I think this is a very promising project, both for Russia and for us. Despite the economic crisis, experts predict that the airfreight market will continue to grow, especially that segment of it which relies on converted aircraft. You are aware that the life cycle of an aircraft is about 30-35 years. After the first 20 years, using it as a passenger transport usually becomes less viable for the airlines.

The first A320 aircraft entered service in 1988, so we feel that in about five years’ time, passenger airlines will begin retiring those older airframes. And considering that the total number of A320 orders is well over 6,000 now, and could reach 7,000 or even 8,000, there will be plenty of work for us. By the way, we already have out first customer: leasing company AerCap has placed an order with us for the conversion of 30 of its airliners.

Why did you choose this particular project to partner with Russia?

For us, this project was the logical next step in our cooperation. Having learned how to work together with the manufacturing of components in Russia, we thought that it would be great to try a joint project.

Russian workers at VASO make parts for Airbus aircraft

partners

Airbus A320 Conversion offers excellent opportunities here. Essentially it offers guaranteed orders for the next 20 years, with a very clear process cycle and a fairly high return on investment. Conversion offers twice the profitability of building new aircraft, by the way.

We view this program as the next step in our partnership with Russia. The involved Russian companies will have a key role to play at every stage of its implementation. Apart from participating in the conversion itself and performing complex maintenance services, UAC and Irkut will have 95 percent of the work on the airframe design for the conversion, systems and interior. In addition, Irkut – which already has gained much experience in the manufacture of components for the passenger version of the A320 – will be the sole supplier of components for the conversion.

What are your plans for future joint projects with Russia?

We certainly have some thoughts in this regard.

We hold regular meetings with our UAC colleagues to discuss further cooperation. Russia has a lot of ideas here, which I'm sure will be very useful. We and our Russian partners already have achieved a lot, and created solid foundations for future partnership.

It is hard to say now what specific forms this partnership will take, but one thing remains unchanged: we are committed to long-term cooperation with Russia.

This cooperation will be mutually beneficial, making us all stronger and better.

How strong is your commercial position in Russia now? is there a lot of demand for your aircraft from the country’s airlines?

Seven Russian airlines now operate a total of more than 140 Airbus aircraft. Our cooperation with the region’s carriers was quite successful in 2009, despite the global economic crisis, with some 49 Airbus aircraft delivered to Russia and CIS countries. Apart from A320 single-aisle family air-

craft, which have been popular in Russia, this figure includes several widebody A330-200s and A330-300s.

We didn’t have any cancellations last year from the Russian companies. There were some negotiations on changing the delivery dates. But while some of our customers asked for those dates to be pushed back a little, others made use of the situation to pick up the earlier slots.

I think the Russian market has excellent growth prospects. According to our latest projections, Russian airlines will increase their aircraft fleets with seating capacities of 100 or more passengers from the 535 airliners in service in 2008 to more than 1,030 by 2028. It means that over the next 20 years, Russian airlines will buy more than 1,000 passenger aircraft to enlarge their fleets and replace older models. This number includes about 830 single-aisle jetliners and 160 widebodies.

Russia will become the sixth-biggest buyer of long-range airliners, after the United States, China, the UK, Germany, and India. The average annual growth of passenger air miles in Russia will be in the range of 5.6 percent during the next 20 years, which is much higher than the world average of 4.7 percent. We expect the fastest growth to come from international routes linking Russian cities with Asia-Pacific destinations (7.9 percent) and Latin America (7.3 percent).

Vadim Vlasov talks to Russian partners about prospects of A320 P2F program FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 87

Partners

BRAHMOS: a STORY of SUCCESS Vladimir Karnozov An interview with Dr. Sivathanu Pillai, Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director of the BrahMos Aerospace joint venture.

Sivathanu Pillai

88 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

The BrahMos joint venture with India and Russia is often cited as a success story. Why has BrahMos become a benchmark in international cooperation?

It was in the early 1990s after the Gulf War when the Indian Ministry of Defence realized the importance of cruise missiles. Indian scientists thought that we, too, needed to have cruise missiles. During the 1991 war in Iraq, a large number of Tomahawk missiles were launched by the U.S. to destroy much of Iraq’s capabilities. Our analysis showed that a first attack with cruise missiles was the main reason why Iraq was not able to deploy most of its military power.

India believed our cruise missiles should be very stealthy, flying at very low altitude and striking with precision. After seeing the whole world in terms of development, we decided to take the long road and go off the beaten path…selecting not a subsonic cruise missile solution, but choosing instead a weapon with supersonic speed.

We think that the key to “future war” is speed.

A supersonic missile needs a highly capable engine to reach the desired speed. This is why we focused on solid propellant technology. India already had experience in solid ramjet technology.

At first, we thought we would go for a solid propellant ramjet to propel the missile to its supersonic speed.

But with solid ramjet has limits in the Mach number that can be attained, whereas a kerosene-based ramjet can reach up to Mach 7. So in future we want to grow.

After understanding this, we were looking for who has the right technology? In India, we are very experienced with guidance systems. We have our own functional navigation systems, along with excellent experience in onboard computers through the Indian Prithvi and Agni ballistic missile programs.

Fortunately, our friends at NPO Machinostroyenia were working with us as consultants. There was a time when Russia and its companies were in a difficult financial position after the Soviet Union’s break-up.

As a result, the roots of our cooperation led to a fruitful arrangement very quickly. Both of us needed each other. One brought its achievements and funding for R&D, the other technologies for a supersonic engine.

PARTNERS

Based on this, it was decided we would develop the supersonic missile in India, making use of Russian propulsion technology. We realized that it would take from five to seven years for the technology transfer – and this is only enough to bring it into the system. So it was going to be a long time. Therefore, we thought it would be better to do things in parallel: work on the propulsion system in an approach that involves the engine directly. If we went shopping for such an engine, we would find many restrictions for its use. This is a highly-guarded technology for any nation. So we found the way to work together in a joint venture configuration. The name for this cooperation was derived from Brahmaputra and Moskva – two big rivers of our respective countries. This is about how the whole thing started. The missile is now in service.

What was the role of Gerbert Efremov in the BrahMos story?

At that time, he was the Director General at NPO Machinostroyenia. He has done a lot for us. Luckily, he had a clear vision – he could see the future. He was also able to keep the people motivated and positive.

He was good at R&D. This opened the money flow for the company. Also, cooperating with India brought in work for his company. We had many requirements for India’s cruise missile...and we still do. This means more work will be given to Russian specialists. Efremov was perceptive enough to see this potential.

If it was not for Efremov, could BrahMos have happened?

I don’t think it is possible to answer this question, as anyone who is heading a design bureau naturally wants to protect his own people. At that time, there was little opportunity to receive worthwhile funding from the Russian government. Working with India on BrahMos provided an opportunity, and Efremov understood this.

Then you actually employ Russian passport holders?

Yes, they work in my company.

India has had a long history of relations with the Russians. First, it was the Soviet Union, and then Russia. These relations survived the change from communism to capitalism. Was this change for the better in Indo-Russian relations in your area?

When Perestroika came, I saw a big disturbance in the Soviet Union and then in Russia. Up until 2000, there were many problems: political, economic and social. But after Putin came, things started to change. The whole situation started to stabilize. The Mafia’s influence is less, and I think people now feel safer. Things actually improved in Russia. So I think it is for the best.

Is it easier for you to work with the Russian now? or was it better 15 years ago?

In the early 1990s, there was financial crisis, and the mentality was one of survival. People and companies wanted to survive. Good engineers were prepared to take any job, having been forced to work in such low-paid jobs as drivers. Today the situation is different. Most young people learn English; they can work in IT and other modern technologies. It has come a long way, creating many good jobs. Skilled people are no longer dependant on the military industry to get a good job. So the military industry’s importance has come down, while that of the civil industry has increased. So it is quite different today that it was 15 years ago.

Increasing the speed for India’s cruise missile is likely to require a larger weapon. Do you think you will need to involve more Russian companies into a BrahMos 2 version?

We are not aiming to make it bigger. Currently, the BrahMos PJ-10 land-launched missile weighs 3 tons. It is quite big actually.

There is a special version to meet the air force requirement. We are adding fins and this version weighs 2.5 tons.

Do you think you can keep the launch weight under three tons, while increasing speed to Mach 5 and then further onto Mach 7?

Gerbert Efremov

Within your joint venture, do you actually employ Russians along with the Indians staff members?

How many Russians currently work at BrahMos Aerospace?

Frankly speaking, the number of Russians is not large. Basically, BrahMos Aerospace is an Indian company. Russia’s role is mainly design and development.

The Indian responsibilities lie more with design of the ground systems. The complete ground system has to be designed by the Indian side. We needed many people for this, and we run a large unit for such activity. Our Indian staff also is responsible for project management, marketing and exhibitions.

Although the number of Russians is small, more people can come from Russia and stay here in India when required. We have a center in Moscow, and one in Delhi in which they can communicate.

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 89

Partners

Russia's Minister for Industry and Trade Victor Khristenko (center) at BrahMos stand

We have reduced the weight to 2.5 tons for installation on aircraft, while the land-launched version weighs 3 tons. Even this is heavy. When considering this missile for use on a Sukhoi fighter, we are thinking of a lower weight. Besides, the shorter a missile, the better it is.

How will the BrahMos joint venture company develop?

It is the first India-based joint venture that handles the design, development, production and marketing of a complete weapon system. We have done well so far. It has been a shining example of cooperation between India and Russia. So far, Russia is very happy with this cooperation. We are also satisfied on the Indian side. So, this company has been very useful.

I think a larger production domain has to be arranged. It also is time to see how our product is being used in service by the armed forces. Knowing customer requirements and working to satisfy customer requirements over the entire lifecycle of a weapon are important for any defense company. That is what we are trying to focus on now.

BrahMos PJ-10 missile launchers

Indian Defense Minister Arackaparambil Kurian Antony and his predecessor, Pranab Mukerjee, have repeatedly said that BrahMos has been an “exemplary case.” Their desire is to use this successful experience and extend it to other projects, including the Multirole Transport Aircraft. What is your advice to other top managers who want to start projects such as the MTA? My first advice is that any joint venture should be under equal partnership. Both sides should bring in their respective competences. If one side is weaker, the other takes all. So, the first thing is to establish the competence. Competence is what matters.

A second important point is the user requirement.

You should know the customer. If a system is to be developed but the customer is not interested, then you are in the position of having to go after him, begging.

And that is not a good sign.

Third, you should establish a firm base of competitiveness. And then you will have to globally raise the competitive capabilities.

Is 50/50 participation good for other joint projects?

Equal participation is important.

What would you think the authorities of India and Russia should do to ease assist such endeavors in the future?

If it is a new development, various difficulties will need to be overcome. Difficulties can hamper any development. It is necessary to defeat the difficulty and succeed. For that, you must be able to grow your capabilities to overcome such challenges. In other

90 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

PARTNERS

words, your company must be viable. And remember: all of this is a continuous process.

Is the environment right for new joint ventures between Russia and India?

Yes, I think so. Importantly, BrahMos is the first joint venture between Russia and India in the defense sector. We did not have such experience before, and our cultures are different. We do not welcome the problems, but we welcomed friends. There should be mutual trust between the two sides. Trust is a major component, along with competence. Traditionally, we are friends, and this makes it easy to work. If there are secrets, these are not for good friends. Good friends will always find ways how to stay together. We do find ways to work together. And that’s the strength.

Even though we have BrahMos as a good example, there are very few other joint ventures involving Russia and India. Why is this so?

Yes, it is true that BrahMos is the only successful example. Why there are so few? People are an important element of the formula, and when adding the final element that has been missing, the whole thing turns into a success.

Do you have any messages for the employees of United Aircraft and its industrial partners?

In India we are really dependant on Russia. And we have been for a long time. Since 1960s, the Indian Air Force relies on Sukhoi, MiG etc. All of its primary types of military aircraft have had a Russian origin. Our cooperation has been well established in the area of defense. Now, it is a high time we expand our cooperation into the field of civil aircraft. There is a big requirement for modern civil passenger aircraft. Today, no passenger aircraft are produced in India, while Russia produces a number of types. At the same time, HAL and other local companies have amassed a good knowledge in aviation. The local people say “sophistication knowledge.” They can develop good cockpits, computers and composites. So it would be good for us both to join forces. The aircraft industries of Russia and India – beginning in India with Hindustan Aeronautics Limited – can succeed together.

Do you mean HAL can succeed working together with UAC through a joint venture on a 50/50 basis?

Yes. Using a joint venture could be the right step to develop a new aircraft together. We foresee three different aircraft: one would be sized at less than 50 passengers; the second would have a capacity of fewer than 100 passengers; while the third would be for the market requiring seating of less than 200 passengers.

Do you think one joint venture would make all three aircraft types? And is now the time?

Answer to both questions is: “Yes.” The global aircraft industry is in a downturn. We had better start now so that we can develop our aircraft and have it ready to enter the market at a time when the demand will be picking up. We live with cycles; our industry tends to go through seven-year cycles. As a result, I believe we had better do things now before others move into action.

Radar homing head of PJ-10 missile

However, some buyers would shy away from Russian-built civil aircraft, even though they may respect Russia’s military equipment?

But everything is in our own hands, and all the capabilities are there. HAL has the support from India’s government. Russian specialists support HAL activities in India. They worked with them before, and they work hand-in-hand with us now. Russia has deep roots in India. The creation of a joint venture between HAL and the Russian civil aircraft industry will help us both do better.

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 91

customer support

supporting an-148 This presentation was made at the Rossiya-hosted operational performance conference for the Antonov An-148.

The speaker was Valery Ivanov, head of the Antonov Design Bureau’s An-148 client support group.

The Antonov Design Bureau pays close attention to the operation of its products. Our aircraft are used in over 70 countries, and our firm's specialists endeavor to provide active client support everywhere.

I would like to tell you about An-148 operations in Ukraine.

The first aircraft to be delivered was given manufacturer serial number 01-01 (MSN01-01), and civilian registration UR-NTA. A week after being handed over to the airline for operation, it made its first passenger flight on the Kharkov-Kiev route. It happened the second of June 2009. A whole year has passed since then. We saw to it that both the maiden flight and the first anniversary were special occasions, making them memorable.

Here are the initial results of An-148 operation: we have established flights throughout Ukraine, flying to various airports. Late last year, service was started to other CIS countries, and then to Western Europe. We are continuing to add new destinations. Until recently, the average sector length was 1 hr. and 20 min.; we now have reached a duration of up to 2.5 hours. In other words, our sectors are increasing. The first routes were one-hour flights (from Kiev to Odessa, Simferopol, or Lvov), so that any faults could be fixed quickly. Now that the problem flow has declined considerably, it's become possible to expand the network of routes served by An148s, and the sector lengths continue to grow. In May, for example, we started flights to Thessaloniki, Greece.

Prepared for publication by Vladimir Karnozov

Let me note one peculiarity about operating URNTA. Most of its faults had to do with the airframe and avionics. Why the airframe? Because this particular aircraft, MSN01-01, was the first An-148 to undergo intensive use in the process of factory and certification tests. Its design has some peculiarities. Subsequent An-148 aircraft had design changes based on the experience of testing MSN01-01.

It's worth noting that the An-148 is a new-generation passenger jetliner, created with the use of cutting-edge technologies. It's full of sophisticated equipment and features modern performance levels. Even the leading Western producers don't have such an advanced aircraft in this class. On delivery, the first jetliner drew some minor criticisms concerning the overhead bins and paintwork. Some of them were repeated when Rossiya Russian Airlines took delivery of the RA-61701 aircraft from the VASO plant. Yet these comments are of a somewhat different nature. More complaints were received about the airframe. Tests and operation revealed some design flaws, which we endeavored to eliminate once the An-148 was in regular production, and we have made some progress on that: the aircraft delivered AeroSvit's newest asset, An-148-100B registration UR-NTC

customer support

to Rossiya were assembled with the changes we managed to make.

How do we see cooperation between designers and operators? Firstly, we train pilots and cabin crew – over a hundred specialists have undergone training. We train them efficiently, in the understanding that a very important stage of initial operation is under way.

The chief designer at Antonov decided to establish a client support group for the An-148. As group leader, I assisted in putting MSN01-01 into service: providing support to the airline, providing advice and technologies for fixing current faults, including aircraft system failures. My group is a small team that acts as the nucleus of relations between Antonov and airlines operating our aircraft. We endeavor to understand any defects that arise, and resolve them on the spot if possible. If not, we use every available means of communication to bring in the relevant specialist in any given area.

The An-148 has an excellent onboard technical servicing system (OTSS). We receive a great deal of data from it. Problems that would usually be difficult to understand are resolved more easily with the OTSS. Having worked on An-124-100 Ruslan aircraft in the past, I can compare their operations to the An-148, and I can say this much: the fault tracking level is much higher for the An-148 and troubleshooting naturally is faster and more efficient due to its more sophisticated built-in monitoring system.

To be honest, we aren't up to the Boeing and Airbus level yet, but we are actively working to create a modern client support system. We are establishing an information analysis support center, which is now being equipped with the latest data transfer technology for rapid response operation. Everything will be aimed at creating a system based on ideas expressed by the world's leading aviation specialists. We shall offer the same kind of support as the world's leading producers. At this point, it's still being developed: we have a center, the addresses are known, and we are starting to communicate…receiving information from Rossiya, processing it, and trying to deliver recommendations quickly.

Antonov's chief objective is to issue design documentation. As the aircraft designer, we undoubtedly are accountable for the aircraft in general. We also seek to influence the pace of supplementary design work, and proper operation. We see our chief task as ensuring that timely corrective action is taken.

We analyze the data presented today by Rossiya and Aerosvit Airlines, doing a great deal of productive work with them, resolving any questions that arise.

Allow me to note the significant decrease in questions arising at Aerosvit since it started operating the An-148. At the start, there were two questions per flight. Now, with the aircraft in service for a year,

An-148 registration UR-NTA in maiden flight six years ago

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 93

customer support

the number of questions coming in from the airline has practically dropped to zero: we get one question a week, or none. More questions are coming in from Rossiya than from Aerosvit, since we have already resolved some of them in Ukraine – working out and making changes to the design, technical specifications, software, and various manuals. This has been facilitated by the Ukrainian and Russian aviation authorities.

When setting up the client support group, we put some thought into providing flight safety support under these new conditions. We made a proposal: use the “technical solution“ document for timely intervention with the aim of taking action on complaints. This document is a simplified version of design documentation. When a “technical solution“ is signed by a design engineer, this isn't merely the signature of someone delegated to sign it; it's the signature of the person who has taken in all the pertinent information from his colleagues and endorsed it by his signature. Each document of this kind is revised numerous times and thoroughly considered. Its form is somewhat different from what we have used in the Soviet Union and later in the CIS. It's a new form, more efficient, and we expedite these documents.

Wing production for An-148 at the Kharkov plant in Ukraine

94 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

We also use conventional methods, issuing service bulletins; but we can't always coordinate everything quickly with those, since it takes time to issue and distribute a bulletin. But a “technical solution“ can be delivered faster, and we have taken advantage of that in providing client support for the An-148.

We have used this approach most actively on aircraft MSN01-01, which is owned by the Antonov Design Bureau. Of course, it helps that we, as the design bureau, have been carrying out the relevant procedures on our own aircraft. If we have a “technical solution“ and a technician crew is on site with the aircraft, then we give them the documentation and go out there and work together, implementing solutions. The only hold-ups involve working techniques.

After that we convene another meeting to report “technical solution“ results, and close them out with service bulletins for additional work required: that is, using the conventional practice of classifying a change and sending out updates.

The only difference is that when “technical solutions“ precede bulletins, what we achieve is preemptive action. The work is done before the formal procedure of making changes to the aircraft's technical specifications. We are trying to adopt the same approach in working with Rossiya. Based on our experience, I can say that we resolve some problems rapidly by means of timely “technical solutions“.

I have a list of about 35 questions in total, including 11 raised at today's conference, about faults and criticisms identified in the course of operating the aircraft. Technical documentation has been issued for questions about additional heating of the vacuum toilet waste system (which was required during the cold snap in the winter of 2009-2010), additional latching on the direct vision window, and others. Last winter, when we were trying to urgently resolve the additional heating problem, we came up with a temporary solution — working on aircraft to ensure that they kept flying even on the coldest days. Of course, we later issued relevant service bulletins. The question of the vacuum system heating, and uneven cabin heating has now been resolved; we are about to start making physical changes to the aircraft. We discuss all this in our explanatory notes, letters, and documentation received regularly

by Rossiya.

Antonov isn't standing still. We are actively working on developing the An-148. We recently received an additional certificate allowing Cat. III landings.

The certificate has been received, and the documentation is being passed on to VASO. So we have the green light to continue developing our aircraft and fly to Cat. III airports. This will require extra

customer support

investment, of course, but it will make operations more efficient.

A further development of the type, the An-158 version, made its first flight in late April. This aircraft is successfully going through factory flight tests. We shall soon begin its certification tests, which should be completed by the end of 2010. What's new in the An-158? Things that were optional features for the An-148 aircraft delivered to Rossiya, as compared to the initial factory model. The baseline version of the An-158 has the four onboard systems installed on production An-148s to meet the requirements of Rossiya. Push-button overhead baggage bins have been replaced with a new modified design. And that's only some of the many improvements and upgrades.

It's been good to hear some general impressions about the new aircraft from pilots, technicians, engineers, and passengers at Rossiya. I'm glad that most of these impressions are positive. Here's my personal view: I took delivery of the new aircraft from the designer, and participated in taking delivery of the first production aircraft at the end of last year and early this year. I remember my own first impressions and those of the specialists at Rossiya; I remember the red faces of the pilots and flight attendants after the first flight. And our faces were probably just as red. On the whole, however, it was very good to see how well prepared the whole Rossiya team was to meet the new aircraft. After only a week or two of working together, we were talking the same language – we understood what we were studying and how to do it, and the decisions we made.

An-158 along with An-32s in Antonov’s final assembly shop, Kiev

This constructive approach, being willing to clarify issues, and assistance from the VASO technicians – all of this helped us through the difficult initial stage of establishing normal operations for a new type of aircraft. We flew here yesterday on one of our own flights, where we had a chance to talk to pilots, flight attendants, and passengers. They said: “The aircraft is a success – we like it.“ It's a completely new type, of course, and still needs work to let things sink in and establish uninterrupted everyday operation. The Antonov team, our subcontractors and suppliers are continuing to work together on improving our product.

There are now two An-148s in scheduled service with Ukraine’s Aerosvit: UR-NTA was joined by UR-NTC in May. We Ukrainians will endeavor to catch up with our respected colleagues at Rossiya in terms of flights, cycles, and the number of passengers flown. This won't be easy, of course, given the higher rate of production for this type of aircraft in Russia. Rossiya took delivery of its fourth An-148 in late June and is preparing to receive two more by the end of the year. We're satisfied to note that An-148 aircraft are getting a good reception from passengers and airline specialists, and we're making every effort to live up to their high expectations.

airshow

India Aviation 2010

Vladimir Karnozov

United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), together with the State Corporation Antonov of Ukraine and HindAvia Aeronautical Services Pvt Ltd of India took part in the 2rd International Exhibition & Conference on Civil Aviation «India Aviation 2010». It was held 3-7 March in the territory of the Begumpet Airport airport, Hyderadad.

Aircraft number RA61703, a third deliverable example of the Russian-made An-148-100, was on display at India Aviation 2010. Assembled by the VASO aviation plant in Voronezh, this aircraft was intended for the State Transport Company “Russia” (Russian acronym GTK Rossiya). Delivery took place the following month.

On the opening day the joint stand by UAC, Antonov and HindAvia was attended by Praful Patel, the Minister for Civil Aviation of India. He exchanged greetings with the head of the Russian delegation Mr. Yuri Grudinin, Director of Regional Aircraft Directorate at UAC-Civil Aircraft. The Minister welcomed introduction of the new generation passenger jet created jointly by Russia and Ukraine to the Indian market. “I believe this airplane has good prospects here in India”, the Minister said.

Both Praful Patel and Yuri Grudinin expressed their

Vadim Vlasov 96 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL

airshow

hopes that our countries will continue to expand their collaboration in the sphere of high technologies and cooperate in development of the air transportation system.

During the show meetings and negotiations were held with dozens of interested Indian firms willing to purchase Russian airplanes, to master their maintenance and overhaul, to provide assistance and various services. Representatives of companies headquartered in twelve states of India attended the joint stand. Two Indian airlines signed protocols and preliminary agreements on delivery of passenger versions of the An-148 aircraft family. Those call for contracts, to be finalized in future, on a total of eight firm orders and eleven options. In addition, the local carriers expressed their intent to purchase ten aircraft in the cargo version. Yuri Grudinin shared this information with foreign and local journalists at a press briefing on 5 March.

Taking into account the high interest expressed by local carriers in the An-148 aircraft family, UAC and Antonov decided to initiate the procedure of type certificate validation with the Indian aviation authorities. The type certificate was issued by the Aviation Register of the Interstate Aviation Committee (ARMAK) in February 2007. Validation procedure shall be carried out in accordance with the bilateral aviation safety agreements entered earlier by the aviation authorities of both countries. The validation process should be completed by the end of 2010 to enable An-148 aircraft deliveries to Indian customers in 2011.

The need of the Indian carriers in modern aircraft of the An-148 size is estimated at about two hundred units over the next fifteen years. Should prognosis come true, Russia and India may considerably expand their cooperation in the sphere of joint aircraft production. This will allow to involve

more local enterprises, both public and private sector, including manufacturers of aircraft and their components, companies specializing in maintenance and repair, and firms offering various services to aircraft operators and passengers.

HindAvia Aeronautical Services Pvt Ltd, headed by president Dr. Siddhartha Bose helps UAC to promote its aircraft in the Indian market.

A pair of Kiran Mk.II trainers on show

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 97

photo report

FIRE FIGHTING HELICOPTERS in ACtION An actual fire fighting operation in Moscow, 30 June 2010.

Rotocraft have become a part of our everyday life, and yet it is always interesting to watch how they act in an emergency, rescuing our lives and property. On 30 June we happened to watch the outstanding performance of the helicopter crews in real action as they were putting down a flame in a densely populated urban area of the Moscow city. That day a fire occurred in the buildings of the Almaz scientific industrial association (NPO Almaz) located on the Leningradsky prospect. This point needs clarification. The company, for very long time known as NPO Almaz (developer of anti-aircraft missile systems, including the S-300 series and the more resent S-400 Triumph), changed its name on 15 January 2008 for the Head system design bureau of the Almaz-Antei anti-aircraft defense concern named after Academician A.A. Raspletin. Despite this, Moscow dwellers continue to refer to the beautiful Almaz head office building as the NPO Almaz. As it became known later, the buildings on fire actually belonged to the Scientific Research Institute of the Radio Equipment,

Roman Gusarov, Vladimir Karnozov a member in the Almaz association. This establishment is half-way through merging with NPO Almaz.

That day we happened to be near the place.

On 12:30, arriving at the entrance to the Aeroport underground station, a dense smoke came to our notice.

It was clearly visible in the blue skies over the city.

The smoke was black-black and dense, meaning fire fighting action was yet to be taken. It seemed the fire was in a distance of a mile, somewhere inside rather large fenced territory occupied by NPO Almaz and adjoining Mikoyan design house. Having taken some shots, we took the underground train to Voikovskaya station and then hiked all the way to the Sokol station.

While travelling, we found first reports on the Internet. They said fire fighters had arrived on the spot, and Mi-26

Ka-32 estimated the area on fire at some 400 square meters.

Official report said that over a hundred of equipment items were on their way to the Sokol area. A total of twenty fire fighting brigades were dispatched, tasked with putting down the flame. Four helicopters were summoned to render support from the air, three Kamov Ka32s and a Mi-26T. These rotorcraft belong to the Aviation Directorate of the Ministry for Emergency (Emercom).

Having emerged from the underground at Voikovskaya, we saw a Ka-32 with Emercom markings on it.

The helicopter was equipped with the VU-5 water “bucket” hanging on the sling. Apparently, the pilots were taking water from a nearby reservoir at the Northern River Terminal on the Moscow Channel, carrying it to the Sokol area for dropping it onto the fire.

Soon after we spotted one more Ka-32 equipped with a water gun. This helicopter also made circles between water reservoirs and the fire. Instead of using the water bucket, it sucked water by means of a hose, apparently using onboard water pump. The crew of this helicopter acted most bravely, by closing the building on fire at a height of merely 10-15 meters. When within the advertized range of the gun, some 30-50 meters, they “throwed” water charges into the flame from aside. Meanwhile, as we walked towards Sokol, a roof on fire came to our field of view. To reach it, the fire fighters drove their vehicles through fenced territory of the Mikoyan design house.

A fresh report appeared on the Internet: “By 13:00 the fire had been localized, upon which the fire fight-

ers began annihilating it.” From our perspective, we noticed that, although the smoke continued to go, it changed color from black-black to ash-grey. This provided evidence to the fact that the fire fighters had used some water and special substances to the fire. At some point a Ka-32 seemed to be dropping black-colored substance onto the fire, apparently subjecting it to some sort of special treatment.

Around 14:00 a Mi-26T flew towards the area. It carried a huge water bucket on sling. Apparently, the arrival of the world’s largest helicopter turned the tables decisively in favor of the fire fighters. Heavy water bombing terminated the fire completely. By 14:30 the smoke had stopped

FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL aircraft industry 99

photo report

coming. For half-an-hour a Ka-32 continued to make circles above the area, but it did not drop any more water.

Luckily, no-one was hurt in the affected area.

Emercom rescue teams managed to evacuate all people from the area, including a few persons who got stuck in the elevator in one of the ill-fated buildings.

The area affected by the flame was later estimated at 1200 square meters. Human factor (non-compliance to the safety measures instruction during repair of the roof) was blamed to be the cause.

Since we were no more than a witness, unable to help in any way, all we could was to make our opinion on the actions of the professionals. Taking account of the short distances between the helicopters and the open fire, we can estimate the work of the Ka-32s.

In our view, the crews demonstrated courage and good skills. Putting down flames in urban areas is a routine for Emercom: they register and participate in fire fighting operations a few hundred times every year.

100 aircraft industry FARNBOROUGH SPECIAL