Douglas Barrie/MOSCOW
Even by the manufacturers' own figures, military production in Russia has collapsed by 80% over the past four years. Combat-aircraft producers in the former Soviet Union are battling for survival, and it is a fight they are not all going to win.
Aircraft programmes intended to provide the Russian air force (VVS) with front-line combat aircraft into the next century collapsed during the early 1990s as Russia's defence expenditure was greatly reduced.
A recent series of Russian parliamentary hearings into the plight of its manufacturers, both civil and military, heard tales of woe from the senior industry and air force officials who gave evidence.
Two confidential reports are now circulating at a senior political level as a result of the hearings.
Mikoyan acting chief designer Anatoly Belosvet told the parliamentary hearing that Russia was pursuing too many military programmes, and that there was a desperate need for further rationalisation.
Mikoyan's Project 701, a high-altitude interceptor intended to eventually replace the MiG-31M Foxhound B, has already been killed. The future of the MiG-31M multi-role fighter programme also remains in question, though it could conceivably eventually enter service in limited numbers. The MiG-29M programme was also halted, even though the bulk of the development programme had been completed. It now appears, however, that funding is being made available to finish this programme.
The design bureau is also struggling to complete the development of the prototype of its next-generation fighter, Article 1.42, despite a paucity of funds.
concern over competition
Even if the necessary cash were to be made available, some former Mikoyan employees are now concerned that it would be a struggle to complete the project because skilled personnel have been lost to Russia's newly liberated private sector.
Yakovlev's Yak-41 Freestyle advanced short/vertical take-off and landing replacement for the Yak-38 Forger, along with the Yak-44 airborne early-warning aircraft, met the same fate as the Mikoyan 701.
Should Yakovlev lose the VVS advanced jet trainer competition to Mikoyan, then it will effectively leave the arena of military-aircraft design.
Sukhoi appears to be in much better health than its rival Mikoyan. Although production of the Su-25TK Frogfoot ground-attack aircraft has so far been extremely limited, and the Su-37 single-engine strike-aircraft project is defunct, its core programmes seem to be more secure.
The Su-34 long-range strike aircraft derivative of the Su-27 Flanker fighter appears to be a high-priority VVS programme, with funding being made available. The aircraft is intended to supplant the Su-24 Fencer in the strike role.
Sukhoi is also pushing on with its Su-35, previously known as the Su-27M, although it is not clear whether it is receiving any credible funding from the VVS for this project. The design bureau could be gambling that funding for the Su-35 will eventually arrive from the air force.
Alongside these two projects, Sukhoi is also working on the T-60 long-range bomber project. Rumours of a Sukhoi bomber have circulated for years. The current programme is intended to provide a follow-on aircraft to fulfil the role now met by the Tupolev Tu-22M Backfire. Exactly where or what funding is being made available for this project is not clear.
It is uncertain whether Tupolev submitted a rival design to the T-60, although there are suggestions that it has also been looking at advanced bomber projects. Tupolev's position in the military environment, however, would appear to be more precarious than that of Sukhoi, and its continued role in designing combat aircraft must be questionable.
Sukhoi has also recently been bolstered by export success. Vietnam has purchased a limited number of Su-27 Flankers, while China is concluding an agreement covering a follow-on order to its initial 26 aircraft.
If the design bureaux are suffering serious difficulties, then so are the production plants associated with them. The Komsomolosk plant, which produces the Su-27, enforced a short working week during part of 1994, while the MAPO production site in Moscow is now seeking orders to fill the hole left by the completion of the Malaysian MiG-29 order.
Belosvet is reported as having advocated what amounts to a strategic review of current Russian combat-aircraft programmes. This may lead to a concentration of available funding on a few key programmes, allowing the rest to wither.
Mikoyan's core programme, the 1.42, might then be the one to wither, with the Su-35 viewed as an adequate air-superiority aircraft. The VVS could then "miss out" a generation of fighter aircraft.
Mikoyan has recently merged with the MAPO manufacturing plant in an attempt to ease its problems.
Mikoyan must continue to push the Fulcrum for export. With renewed funding to complete the MiG-29M programme now available, its chances of garnering additional sales must improve. The MiG-29M is also likely to find its way into VVS service. If, however, the 1.42 were to turn into little more than a technology demonstrator, Belosvet might still rue his advocacy of a "strategic review".
Source: Flight International
