NK-93 - PD-14 - PD-35
Author's articles
Will the PD-14 engine be better than the NK-93?

“PD-14 - engine held. In Perm, the Russian motor for the MC-21 is being prepared for the series and they are starting to create a PD-35 high-thrust engine. According to A.Inozemtsev, the PD-14 project is the most serious for the entire domestic aircraft engine industry. ”

Self-esteem is high, the beginning of the promising - let's hope that it will not befall the fate of the outstanding NK-93, about which the gene. The PD-14 designer unflatteringly replied:

“Apparently, I do not belong to the number of“ competent engine operators, ”because I do not consider the NK-93 project to be innovative, since The methodology and design tools, production technologies of NK-93 production belong to the middle of the 80-s of the last century. Respectfully, General Designer, Member of the editorial board of the journal “Engine” A. A. Inozemtsev

And it seems to be so, but for some reason, the most up-to-date PD-14, however strange it may seem, has not surpassed the “outdated” NK-93 in specific fuel consumption and cannot even put it on equal terms. And to the customer, no matter what time was used in the design of this product, he is interested in the final result: price and fuel consumption!

At the same time, I think that PD-14 really succeeded and the design characteristics were confirmed, but only in comparison with its older brother PS-90, which has the highest fuel consumption in its class: “As a result, the specific fuel consumption in cruising flight of PD-14 will fall , according to preliminary estimates, by 15% compared to existing engines: up to 0,53–0,54 kg / (kgf · h) versus 0,595 kg / (kgf · h) for PS-90 (WEAPONS OF RUSSIA).

“During the tests, we evaluated the characteristics and performance of the engine in flight conditions MC-21 - confirmed the reliability of the engine and its systems, the characteristics of the launch in flight in accordance with the requirements of the specification. The engine is currently undergoing overhaul to continue testing at ground stands. ”  

The conclusions on PD-14 are patterned, another thing on the NK-93 engine, completely different reviews:

* Vladimir Bychkov, Leading Engineer for Flight Testing, LII named after MM. Gromov:

“When the engine worked in the sky, it was time to be surprised - accidentally the“ human factor ”worked, in one of the modes NK-93 gave traction under 20 tons. And they believed that for a specific sample the 18 limit ... And the pilots wondered - the thrust is one and a half times higher than that of the standard engine (PS-90А) Il-76, and the fuel consumption is one and a half times less. Potential enviable " (Arguments of the Week, 22.06.2011).

*“The screw-fan engine, which has no analogues in its design, showed high performance during the flight tests in 2007. The degree of bypass at the NK-93 is 16,7. The specific fuel consumption according to measurements is at the level of 0,49 kg / kgf / h. ”

Theoretically, the PD-14 in price should be inferior to the Samara one, as an engine of a lower class, but that was not the case:

"The cost of NK-93 is about US $ 4.5 million, similar engines from foreign manufacturers have prices of US $ 5 million and more." (Wikimedia Foundation).

“A very subtle issue is pricing. The cost of one PD-14 is about six million dollars, and the PW1400G is 5,4 million. Would lessors agree to overpay 1,2 million dollars for a plane with a domestic engine that has the worst performance? It’s not long to wait for an answer to the question: the PD-14 series should have been launched this year. ” ("Military Industrial Courier"). Yes, there is nowhere more expensive!

“According to Alexander Inozemtsev, the PD-14 engine will be sold for a starting customer with a discount of 15-22% compared to competitors”.

Discount (eng. Discount): "Discount on the list price of goods or services provided by the seller to the consumer" (Wikipedia) It is easier to say corruption will first be paid by the State, and then the customer - where will he go!

Another curious detail!

If the Perm engine is built according to the most up-to-date technologies and assembled from the most modern materials, then it is on 1kg. Its own weight and thrust will produce more than the “outdated” NK-93 engine, respectively.  

And so:

* PD-14. - 14 000 kgf (thrust): 2870 kg (weight of the engine) = 4,878 kgf, or 1 kg. its own weight, the PD-14 engine produces a thrust of 4,878 kgf.

* NK-93. - 18kgs: 000kg, which equals 3650kg.

And on tests, he gave out a thrust equal to 20 tf, which means:

20kgf: 000kg, which equals 2650kgf. respectively NK-5.479 for 93kg. weight gave out thrust - 1kgf.

Here you have a more "perfect" PD-14, and yet the modified NK-93 will be even easier: “At present, the fans of five experimental engines are equipped with magnesium blades. However, it is supposed to install fans with blades made of epoxy graphitoplastic, with fins of the input edge made of titanium on serial and experimental engines that are planned to be produced in the future. ” (Wikimedia Foundation).

So you believe Professor A.A. Inozemtsev that their PD-14 is built with the latest technology and "is the most serious for the entire domestic aircraft engine building"? In our village, in a similar version, they said: “The ruble swings, but a kick!”

And on the horizon already looms the project PD-35

“In early January, ODK-Aviadvigatel (Perm) received from the parent United Engine Corporation an order for the production of engine-demonstrator technology (DDT) PD-35, intended for long-haul wide-body aircraft, reports bmpd with reference to the portal Aviation of Russia.

I should be glad, but the trouble is that the liberal officials (as well as the liberal designers) who rule Russia today, from small to large, are more interested in the financial beginning and zero responsibility for the final result. Presumably, the PD-35 will have the same "outstanding" finale as the PD-14: loud-sounding, but with performance characteristics that are inferior to foreign analogues, although for Russian engines this will really be progress. And in the price too! In addition, the State does not need this engine today, which was and is in the NK-93 engine. Why? Yes, because the same Il-96 with 4 engines is much safer in the air than it will be with 2 PD-35s, and most importantly, the NK-93 is almost ready, and even today it remains the best engine in the world, and the PD- 35 is a distant and unknown future. Its outside diameter is about 4m. (March 18, 2018 Aviation EXplorer). Will it touch the concrete when taxiing and taking off! For NK-93, the outer diameter of the engine is 3150mm, i.e. it will be almost half a meter higher from the ground than PD-35.

Judging by the amount allocated for the implementation of the PD-35 project, the government has plenty of money and let this project advance, good path for him, but only for the joint project of the Russian-Chinese ShFDMS, and for the IL-96 first of all, Samara is necessary engine!

And more importantly: “NK-93 is patent-free, does not require licensing for sales both in the domestic and foreign markets. The creation of a competitive engine NK-93 will allow developing the domestic aircraft industry and selling them for export without reference to a specific Russian aircraft. "

And in parallel, without delay, increase the thrust of the NK-93 to 23,5 tf. for Ruslan airplanes, which today require these engines and there is no sense for him to bother with future PD-35 engines when they are still on paper, and the designers of NK-93 promise to increase the thrust of NK-93 to 23,5 tf without problems. What the output will be PD-35 - this is another question, because earlier and for PD-14 no one doubted that it would be more modern and more economical than NK-93, but in fact - strictly the opposite!

And if we need to build more powerful engines for our planes, then, in my opinion, Samara NK-65, already forgotten, will be preferable to PD-35. Why? PD-35 is scaled PD-14, the basis of the NK-65 engine is taken from the NK-93 propeller-fan group and the gas generator from the unsurpassed NK-32 engine, which stands on the outstanding Tu-160 strategic bomber. Therefore, it will be not only smaller in diameter, but also much lighter than the PD-35 engine with the same thrust.

PD-35 weight = 8 t. (VPK.name vpk.name ›library / f / pd-35). And if we add up the weight of two engines NK-32 and NK-93: 3650 kg + 3650 kg = 7300 kg, i.e. Together they already weigh less than 8 tons, but when they "fold" separately the gas generator from the NK-32 and the propeller-fan group from the NK-93, then such an engine is unlikely to pull more than 5 tons. and the outer diameter will remain from the NK-93, which is also very important, especially for the Il-96 aircraft.

About noise NK-93

I watched on Samara television report from the test shop NK-93. A test engineer directly at a running engine tells the journalist, without raising his voice, that “While another engine was running, you would not have heard me, but this engine doesn’t roar, but hiss!”... I testify: it is “hissing” and I doubt very much that AA Inozemtsev can repeat the acoustics of the NK-14 in the PD-93 engine?

In conclusion, it should be noted that due to the efforts of “B. Khristenko, Deputy Manturov, Head of Russian Technologies S. Chemezov, General Director of OPK Oboronprom OJSC A. Reus and UAC President M. Pogosyan "(Arguments of the Week, 22.06.2011)" Currently, such aircraft engine schemes are being actively developed abroad . This promises unattainable for modern engines, fuel economy and noiselessness. An example is the promising engine "Rolls-Royce" Leap, already released for flight tests. According to the design scheme, he copies the NC-93. At the beginning of 2000, the NK-93 overtook its time and, therefore, including, obviously, was not supported by the leadership of the domestic aviation industry ”(MIC News).

So the works of these destroyers of our aircraft industry were not in vain, and after their retirement, the West will accept with open gates and will not arrest their unjustly acquired financial fortunes!

Vitaly Belyaev, especially for Avia.pro

The comparisons are completely wrong with the Guest. Both here and there, the refinement of the engines to the operating state is great, all this raw material. It is not necessary to compare with respect to anything, but to give the opportunity to bring both NK-93 and PD-14 to standard. Unfortunately, the junta Manturovsko-Pogasyanovskaya only harms the cause. Tov. Stalin would quickly stop this wrecking.

PD-14 is almost ready, NK-93 must be done anew. NK-93 would like to bring up to standard, but even so, work on various aircraft engines is more than enough (the resumption of production of NK-32 for Tu-160, TV7-117 for IL-112В and Il-114-300, VK-800 for light helicopters and to localize the production of L-410, which we plan to produce in our company, the second stage engine for Su-57), at least something to launch into the series first. About sabotage you know better.

The guest is disingenuous ... 10 (ten) PK-93 aircraft engines were manufactured and this engine model passed all ground bench tests with confirmation of all technical characteristics, and one engine passed flight tests on the Il-76ll aircraft and confirmed all the declared parameters .. This "unpromising" engine (NK-93) is currently being copied in the west ...

build an aircraft of the Il-62 type, for example, with a lower sweep of the wing. Install the NK-94 engine at the rear (rearranged with the rear position of the blades (pushing blades). Strictly behind the tapering fuselage. But the plumage is not T-shaped (there is no problem with the possibility of shading the stabilizer with the wing at large angles of attack). The bases of the stabilizers and keel are like once and the casing for the blades is installed. In the plus, a clean wing like on Tupoly and Ilah. Make a tail support like on IL-62 again so as not to accidentally hook the ground with the casing. And if you fantasize, then make a triplane a la Lozino-Lozinsky. Then will get agile aircraft and competitiveness in the segment of regional short and medium narrow-body, that is, as the Sukhoi Superjet. However, the motor alone, it is necessary to fight for reliability.

Craftiness? Inaccurately put it - maybe, but you have - an outright lie. The engine did not pass a single flight test stage. Bench worked, yes. But about the tests on the Il-76LL - they started, but not even completed the first stage. Therefore, there are no "confirmed parameters", this is a pure lie. In the West they don't copy - they have nothing to copy from. Use the idea? Yes, it is quite. But already at the modern level of technology development.
By the way, the maximum time on the gearbox is given 200 hours on bench tests. That is, the life test engine also did not pass.
Almost all digits on NK-93 are taken from several completed flights. To confirm this is not enough.
This engine has the right to life, just now it’s not up to it. It is only suitable for high planes and very large low planes due to its size. PD-14 is much more versatile.

Guest, and you custom-made hacks from this guild UAC, working on the braking of our domestic aircraft. Every sighted person sees for a long time what they are doing. FACTS, from the facts you can not hide anywhere. I believe the comments of designers of the Soviet school, who proved their competence.

I can also write about you all that you are registered. Meaning? Facts ... Almost all parameters given for the NK-93 engine come with the word "presumably". Are assumptions not facts, or do you have a different opinion? Interestingly, do the designers of the French school work in "Perm Motors" or what? Or American? Make friends with your head and with logic. Comments ... Each sandpiper praises its swamp.

Speak correctly.

Pages

upstairs