Видео

Nice airplane.

I believe TU214 well be produced but with upgrading engine and cabins this plane have a future with relevant upgrades

Congratulation🎉

please MC-21-310 with PD14???????

Tu214 can be adapted to release cruise missiles from a hatch in the tail of the aircraft

Every pylon has cracks, and every pylon is even designed to have cracks. They are designed to keep the engine in place under all operating conditions for a defined amount of time, then they have to be swapped for new ones. But they are also designed to collapse when an engine vibration - e.g. after a broken turbine blade - gets so severe that it threatens to damage the wing. So every pylon has to have a minimum load capacity as well as a maximum load capacity, since they are also designed as a damage limitation system. The question is not if a pylon has cracks, the question is if the pylon has more cracks than it is supposed to have after a defined operation time. It may even be so that during an intermediate inspection cracks are found and engineers conclude that this pylon is allowed to stay in place until the next or the second next inspection, there are maintenance protocols for every single pylon on every single plane. The permissible progression of cracks is being defined by comparing parts in a plane with parts that have aged synthetically on a test rig.

MC-21 Test Flight

That's a well designed, redundant, heavy duty aircraft, unlike the western counterparts tbis aicraft is designed fon full cargo AND passenger loads without compromising on either or..... The Progress\ Soloviev engines are mature, resiliant and reliable tested over the years..... When you are and have the world largest energy reserves nobody cares about fuel efficient borderline aircraft that you have to choose between cargo or passengers....! By the way I likd a tree pilot crew instead of a two pilot setup, I rather eat peanuts ona flight instead with a couple less stewardesses but with a three pilot crew...! Your western logic regarding aircraft does not apply here since the fuel purchases are not in the same factor as they are in western countries plus the salafries are much lower for the pilots on western airlines operations....

Russia 🤔 is not short of fuel

That's one of the first prototypes with the old P&W decective engines....!.. Try to keep up with the -310 newer prototypes!..

Don't see why not. Russia is oil rich. Subsidising cost of fuel for its airlines isn't going to be a big problem. Lots of countries subsidise fuel cost for its citizens.

Tu-214 is an efficient and modern plane and the PS-90 family of engines offer acceptable level of service. Of course, improvements in the cockpit and cabin can be fone gradually.

It's good that sanctions were imposed, first Trump on composites, then Biden on engines and everything else. Thanks to them, we now have everything of our own. The Lord blessed the sanctions, testing Russia's strength.

It is april fool joke. As a Tu-160 VIP variant

It's an airbus repainted with a Russian logo.

This is old MC21 with PW engine.

For replacing of PS-90A is planed uprated version PD-16 with thrust up to 17.5 tf (38,600 lbf)

Lamentablemente no veo que el MC 21 vuele .. este programa tiene mucho demasiado y no es la prioridad no hay avances ya cansa ver videos viejos .

Here not PD14

👍

👍👍

Everything depends on the operator. Russian operators have no choice but to not purchase tu-214s for now. The positive side is that it is only half the price of an Airbus similar to the Tu-214. Buyers outside Russia may remain interested, given that almost 100 percent of its components are Russian-made, which is attractive to operators from Cuba, North Korea and Iran. On the other hand, there needs to be careful calculation. For example, the price of an Airbus A321 is 130 million dollars with fuel economy advantages. On the other hand, the tu-214 may cost 65 million dollars but is less fuel efficient. As an operator with minimal capital, maybe the Tu-214 is more affordable.

Boeing 757

nice video

The reason to build the TU-214 being an obsolete, heavier and equiped with thyrsty engines aircraft, is the big delay in the MC-21 program. Replacing the western parts it's not an easy task and will demand a lot of time. In the next years, Russia will have to replace western airplanes with anything they have available, no matter if it's performance is inferior to Boeing or airbus.

The Boeing destroyer first adopter : Iberia 🇪🇸💎

The Boeing 757 has a lot to offer which is why the 757 is one of my favorite aircraft. Plus, the 757 looks awesome next to the Tu-204.

No for a couple of reasons! The Superjet is a regional aircraft and there is a demand for regional aircraft. Second reason, the Airbus A318 and short fuselage versions of the Boeing 737 did not sell very well.

Sukhoi Superjet is Good.

🇷🇺🇨🇳👏👏👏

Russia can't even build a simple nine pax airplane. What a clown show of a nation. Maybe North Korea can help .

Common configuration, logistic save and one pilot's practice for various planes.

Another good thing is the advertising strategy: videos like this one on a regular basis help to keep the product in the eyes of potential customers and the flying public...well done and keep up the good work!

I think diversity is good and the various plane models will sell. But Russia is taking too much time and they need to move a little faster and sieze opportunity. Perhaps other countries will also buy instead of waiting for 3-5 years to receive a boing or airbus!

I like Russia's strategy of trying to create competition from within.

The Sukhoi SS-100 was an Italian majority project with Sukhoi being solely a final integrator along with the Yak-130..... It was never a Russian plane but an Italian project...!.. Now it is a Russian project since the Italians abandon it and sold their shares to the Russians....

Being one of the world's largest nations and the biggest oil producer one parameter that would be irrelevant is fuel economy or an extra flight engineer in the cockpit, thd Russians are pragmatic and overbuild their aircraft just like the old Soviet Union and compromise nothing making their aircraft resilient and capable of carring full cargo and passengers without limitations... They can use many engines to start a new aircraft design and have many to choose from Progress, Soloviev, Kuznetsov design bureaus or new ones from Rostec easieing the new ones in the future and utilize the old proven ones for the time being instead of rushing any new designg to market like the P&W 1XXX series, the SAFRAN or the SAFRAN/SATURN Powejet all with the failed rear turbine failures " Made in the USA "....

please do less talk, start building, selling and delivering for commercial operations already, all promises of deliveries after 2030 /2035, by that time these are very outdated tech. do like the chinese, no talk but they are delivering their planes to do the talking. right now it is at least 1 per month, they need to streamline and scale up production. airbus is doing 60 a320 per month, boeing has reduced its production to 20 per month due to reorganisation issues, but when the chinese / comac has sorted out teir supply chain, streamline it and scaled up, it will still take them years to cover their local demands for for years to come. they stopped taking deliveries of b737 max's after the deadly crashes anyway due to the hostile nature of america towards them in everything, so way buy from a country that sees you as their mortal enemy. they do not respect the chinese, then they do not need their business.

The short version of MC 21 will not be popular, including Aeroflot. But the long one will be very much in demand, not in such quantities as the standard one, but still. It will be used on particularly busy routes.

That's old news, first the MC-21 IS an aviation project based in the Yakovlev 242, the first prototypes were the -200 and -300 with the P&W 1XXX engines, the new prototypes are the -210 and -310 with the PD-14 engines.... Get it together.....!... Mixing apples and oranges....

What nonsense from Manturov, can't you look at Airbus's experience? The short A 319 is not sold simply because it is not economical, compared to the A 220, which has the same passenger capacity. For the MS 21 200, engines with a thrust of 12.5 tons of force are needed, and if you make a long SS 100 for 140 passengers, then engines with a thrust of 10.5 tons of force will be enough. In total, 4 tons of force less are needed, respectively, saving on fuel.

flying coffin

WHY DO YOU THE NARRATOR CONSISTENTLY CALL THE MC-21 THE MS-21 DO YOU KNOW HOW TO READ YOUR OR ARE ILLITERATE AND CAN’T WHAT YOU SUPERIOR’S PRINTED ON THE PAGE FOR OR WAS IS YOUR THAT SCREWED UP AND MADE THE MISTAKE AND YOU JUST FOOLISHLY FOLLOWED THEIR MISTAKE AND JUST READ OUT MS-10

6:07 😂😂😂😂😂😊

MCAS is that you?

Russia has various engines that can use as a replacement, like a Progress or Soloviev design bureau engines..... The original Sukhoi had a 70% western content which are being substituted currently....

Just look at the dirty rags they wrap the engine in.. So typical russian

the SS-100 was an Italian-Russian project with Leonardo been the majority leader and choose Sukhoi as a final integraror for their experience in aircraft building.... The Italians were responsible for marketing, sale and support for western countries and Russia for Asian countries....!.. The Italians abandoned the project in exchange for building the mid section of the Boeing 787.....

Love this, can't wait to see them succeed.

А если попробовать применить активное шумоподавление? "Активное шумоподавление - способ устранить нежелательный шум с помощью наложения, в противофазе, специально сгенерированного звука."(Википедия)