COMPETITIVE ASPECTS OF SOVIET AND WESTERN TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 52
• Document Creation Date: December 23, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 22, 2013
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: November 1, 1961
• Content Type: REPORT

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
SECRET
Economic Intelligence Report
COMPETITIVE ASPECTS
N? 111
50X1
OF SOVIET AND WESTERN TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT
CIA/RR ER 61-46
November 1961
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
Office of Research and Reports
50X1
SECRET
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
SECRET
Economic Intelligence Report
COMPETITIVE ASPECTS
OE SOVIET AND WESTERN TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT
CIA/RR ER 61-46
WARNING
This material contains information affecting
the National Defense of the United States
within the meaning of the espionage laws,
Title 18, USC, Secs. 793 and 794, the trans-
mission or revelation of which in any manner
to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
- Office of Research and Reports
SECRET
50X1
50X1
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E -C -R-E -T
FOREWORD
This report reviews the competitive aspects of Soviet and Western
turbojet and turboprop transport aircraft in relation to performance,
costs, utilization, facilities required for operation, and other eco-
nomic factors that influence the selection of Soviet aircraft for pur-
chase by countries outside the Sino-Soviet Bloc. In addition, such
aspects as safety of operation and life of aircraft, engines, and pro-
pellers are reviewed. The report is not intended to provide a detailed
study of individual aircraft but to give sufficient information to
bring to light areas of advantage or disadvantage between comparable-
Soviet and Western transports.
-
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
CONTENTS
Summary and Conclusions
Page
1
I. Characteristics and Performance
3
II. Carrying Capacity,? Comfort, and Convenience
6
III. Safety
9
IV. Utilization ,
11
V. Cost and Economy of Operation
12
VI. Life of Engines, Propellers, and Parts
14
Appendixes
Appendix A. Statistical Tables
17
Appendix B. Photographs of Aircraft
27
Tables
50X1
2. Payload Capability of Comparable Western and Soviet 50X1
Transport Aircraft
3. Comparison of Flying Hours per Aircraft Day of Selected
US, UK, and Soviet Transports
4. Comparison of Data on Overhaul and Total Life of Western
and Soviet Aircraft Engines
5. Specifications of Comparable Western and Soviet Long-
Range Jet and Turboprop Transport Aircraft 19
7
11
S -E -C-R-E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Page
6. Specifications of Comparable_Western and Soviet Short-
Range Jet Transport Aircraft 20
7. Specifications of Comparable Western and Soviet Medium-
Range Jet Transport Aircraft 21
8. Specifications of Comparable Western and Soviet Medium-
Range Turboprop Transports 22
9.. Specifications of Comparable Western and Soviet Short-
Range Turboprop Transports
10. Specifications of Comparable Western and Soviet Cargo
Aircraft
50X1
4.
- vi -
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E -C -R -E -T
COMPETITIVE ASPECTS OF SOVIET AND WESTERN TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT*
Summary and Conclusions
In a comparison for purchase between Soviet high-performance trans-
ports and those of Western designs, several competitive aspects must
be taken into account. Because the USSR usually apparently offers an
attractive price to a.prospective -customer, the Soviet price for initial
equipment probably will be lower than that of a comparable Wetern air-
craft.**
The operational economy of the Soviet jet transports is very poor --
in fact, too poor for profitable operation by Western standards. The
refueling and turnaround time for the Soviet transports, from all ac-
counts, is excessive. The acquisition of spare parts from the USSR may
be slow, although the USSR has demonstrated the capability to supply
requested parts on short notice as well as to provide information and
modification materials quickly. Some of the Soviet transports exhibit
maintenance deficiencies, and some turboprop aircraft have had opera-
tional problems. Such factors favor the purchase of a Western transport
in spite of the lower initial cost of a comparable Soviet aircraft.***
Along with operational econoty the safety aspects of Soviet trans-
? port aircraft suffer by comparison with those of Western aircraft. The
safety deficiencies are noteworthy on both the Soviet jet and turboprop
* The estimates and conclusions in this report represent the best
judgment of this Office as of 1 October 1961.
** When the term comparable is used, it is used advisedly, for the
Soviet turbojet or turboprop airliner does possess comparable aircraft
characteristics and basically similar carrying capacities. The advan-
tages of Western transport aircraft lie in economy of operation, safety,
higher rates of utilization, and -- of prime importance -- life of the _
aircraft and aircraft engine.
acxx When a Soviet transport is offered for sale to a particular country,
the various aircraft companies in the US will make available, free of
charge, sales engineers to assess the Soviet offer. These sales engi-
neers will compare the pertinent US and Soviet aircraft and will study
the aircraft needs of the particular country at no charge. Furthermore,
the US companies, if given the price of the Soviet aircraft offered in
any particular case, will compare the operating costs of the Soviet
transport and the Western aircraft.
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E -C -R -E -T
aircraft as is evidenced by the recently publicized crashes of Camel
(Tu-104) and Coot (I1-18) aircraft.* The Tu-104 apparently suffers
from lift problems during takeoff and braking difficulties while land-
ing, whereas problems with the engine and with vibration have thus far 4
plagued the operational existence of the 11-18. Western aircraft, on
the other hand, are tested at greater length and are accepted according
to the international standards of airworthiness prescribed by the Inter-
national Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), an organization that the
USSR does not recognize and has not joined.
According to all available information, Soviet transports are
utilized far less than are comparable Western models. For example,
individual US jet transports fly more during a given period of time
than the combined hours of three Soviet jet transports. The vast dis-
parity of utilization may be in part attributed to difficulties in
obtaining spare parts, especially when outside the USSR, and a variety
of maintenance problems that add to, the ground time of the Soviet air-
craft. A lack of requirements for travel also may be a major factor
in the excessive grounding of the Soviet transports.
The greatest contrast between Western and Soviet transports lies
in the respective guaranteed life, time to overhaul, and replacement
of parts for the aircraft. Two or three Soviet engines are discarded
before the guaranteed time to the first overhaul of a comparable Western
propulsion system. Guarantees of propellers and parts show equal con-
trast. The wide discrepancy in guaranteed and actual life before scrap-
ping of such expensive items as engines, propellers, and parts vastly
increases the operational cost of the Soviet aircraft. Even should the
Soviet aircraft be acquired as a gift, the costs of these replacements
may make the Soviet aircraft unsatisfactory economically, especially
when contrasted with comparable Western models.
* Operational failures occur in the use of any new aircraft whether
Soviet or Western. The crashes of Tu-104 aircraft, however, have been
reported late in the operational life of the aircraft. The engine
,problems disclosed by the crashes of 11-18 aircraft were of such magni-
tude as to have precluded certification in the US.
- 2 -
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
0
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E -C-R -E -T
I. Characteristics and Performance
A comparison of the characteristics and performance of Soviet trans-
port aircraft with Western transports reveals few significant differ-
ences.* It should be noted, however, that the capabilities listed for
? Western aircraft are actual capabilities, whereas for the most part
those listed for the Soviet models are based on Soviet claims or have
been estimated.
There is no long-range Western transport that is closely comparable
in size to the giant turboprop aircraft, the Cleat (Tu-114). Although
it compares favorably with the Boeing 707-720B turbojet in both range
and speed, the Tu-114 is a much heavier and larger aircraft. As to
the comparable performance of the two aircraft, Western airlines prefer
the frequency of flight of the 707 jet to the single long haul of the
Tu-114 with a heavier load. Downtime of the Tu-114 probably is greater
than that of the 707 because of difficulties with its engine reduction
gears, counterrotating propellers, and landing gear. Also, the failure
to obtain the Moscow-New York run, one of the few for which the Tu-114
As feasible, probably is a contributing factor to the lengthy downtime
of the aircraft.
A Western turbojet transport, the French Caravelle (about 20 feet
shorter than the Tu-104B), is superior in performance and passenger
accommodations to many of the Soviet jet transports. The Caravelle VI
carries 64 first-class or 80 tourist-class passengers, whereas the
Tu-104A carries 70 tourist-class passengers. The Convair 880, also
in the weight and size category of the Tu-104 series, is superior to
,the Soviet jet transports in speed, range, and other performance char-
acteristics.
In shorter range jet transports, there are few Western aircraft com-
parable to the new Soviet Cookpot (Tu-124), which has not yet entered
operational service in the USSR. ? The Tu-124 probably is comparable to
the British BAC 111, which, like the Tu-124 has not entered airline
service. The Caravelle has a higher passenger capacity, 64 to 80 per-
sons, compared with 44 to 68 reported for the Tu-124. The estimated
performance for the Tu-124 indicates that it has a cruising speed
approximately 60 miles per hour (mph) faster than the series III Cara-
velle, but it has a shorter range. An advantage of the Tu-124 is the
fact that it reportedly is fitted with wing leading edge slots for
operations on short runways.
50X1
* For characteristics and performance data on the various aircraft, see
Tables 5 through 10, Appendix A, pp. 19 through 24, below. For photo-
graphs of aircraft mentioned in this report, see Appendix B.
- 3 -
S -E -C -R -E -T
50X1
I Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E -C -R -E -T
Good comparisons may be made between the Soviet medium-range turbo-
prop transports, the 11-18 and the Cat (An-10), and the Lockheed Elec-
tra 188. The fuselage length and maximum takeoff weight of the Electra
are less than those of the An-10. Although the An-10 can carry a greater
payload than the Electra, it has a slower cruising speed and shorter
range. The external appearance of the Electra is somewhat more refined
than that of the An-10. The 11-18 is very similar to the Electra:in
both performance and characteristics, and few differences are noted in
these turboprop transports.
Also very similar in performance are the short-range turboprop trans-
ports, the Fairchild (Fokker) F-27, built in the US under license to
Fokker of the Netherlands, and the Soviet-designed Coke (An-2)--). The
reported range of the F-27 with maximum fuel is, however, greater than
that of the An-24. Furthermore, the F-27 is in airline use at present
and is a proved) successful carrier, whereas the An-24 has yet to be
proved in airline service.
Marked similarities also exist between Soviet and Western cargo
aircraft. The Cub (An-12); an Antonov-designed turboprop transport,
is essentially a military version of the An-10 with the aft fuselage
modified to incorporate a cargo-loading ramp through large doors on
the underside of the upswept rear fuselage. Although complete specifi-
cations and performance data on the An-12 are not available, they proba-
bly are much like the An-10. The An-12 appears to resemble very closely
in performance the Lockheed C-130B. The C-160 transport to be built
under the joint French-German "Transport Alliance" is not yet in pro-
duction, but specifications and predicted performance indicate that it
will be comparable with the An-8.
Soviet aircraft, in general, compare favorably with Western trans-
ports in the landing facilities required. The minimum takeoff field
length for the turboprop Tu-114 to clear 50 feet is the same distance
as is required for the Boeing 707 to break ground. The Camel series
requires a long runway and in most reported cases has traveled the full
length of the runway before becoming airborne. The braking action of
the Tu-104 on landing is described as violent and must often be supple-
mented by a parachute. Closely comparable in takeoff distance required
to clear 35 feet are the Lockheed Electra and the 11-18. The Electra
requires 4,700 feet compared with 4,850 feet for the 11-18.
The An-10, the An-12, and the An-24 (particularly the two latter
types) have a distinct advantage over Western aircraft in that they
can be operated from sod fields, and they can use any hard-surfaced
fields from which Western high-performance transports customarily take
off with loads. These Soviet aircraft may have considerable appeal
to underdeveloped countries, for such aircraft do not require the con-
struction of expensive, long, concrete runways for operation.
-It -
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
It is apparent that there are few striking differences between
Western transport aircraft and their Soviet-designed counterparts in
either characteristics or performance. In most cases, shortcomings in
one are balanced by slight comparable deficiencies in the other. The
two weaknesses common to all the Soviet transports should be noted.
The USSR has lost economy of operation because of the high rate of fuel
consumption in engine utilization. Also/ in order to maintain sim-
plicity and ease in production, the USSR consistently produces a heavier
structure than is manufactured in the West. The structural weight and
fixed evipment of the Soviet transport is 10 to 15 percent heavier
than the comparable Western aircraft. The operating empty weight of
the 11-18 even without seats and internal starting equipment, for ex-
ample, is about 23 percent greaterthan that of the Lockheed Electra,
although the 11-18 performs about the same mission with an equal pay-
load. 1/* 50X1
50X1
- 5 -
S -E -C 714 LT
50X1
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E -C-R-E-T
The structural weight of the Tu-l04 is heavier In all respects than
that of the Western transports, indicating that the Tu-l04 lacks the
structural efficiency of the Western transports. _V As a result, Soviet
transport aircraft sacrifice either range or carrying capacity, a costly
sacrifice for the prospective customer.
Two additional facts not evident from any comparison of data should
be borne in mind: first, as previously mentioned, because some data
concerning Bloc transport aircraft are based on Soviet claims, the actual
capabilities may fall somewhat short of the estimates submitted; and,
second, the Western transports are designed and produced according to
specifications and requirements determined by the lengthy experience of
airlines in hauling passengers and cargo. This invaluable experience
is not available to the Soviet airline, Aeroflot. Therefore, some of
the Soviet aircraft may not measure up to the intended roles prescribed
for economical usage on airlines.
II. Carrying Capacity, Comfort, and Convenience
Among the most important competitive aspects of Western and Soviet
transport aircraft is the passenger or cargo capacity of the aircraft.
A comparison of Soviet and Western transports with regard to.payload
capabilities is given in Table 2.*
It is apparent from the foregoing that there are few significant
differences in payload capabilities that are readily apparent when com-
paring Soviet and Western transport aircraft. As was the case, however,
with the comparison of performance in Table 21 the figures given for
Western aircraft are actual carrying capabilities, whereas those stated
for the Soviet transports are those claimed by the USSR or are estimated
figures
The one outstanding exception in passenger capacity, as shown in
Table 21 is the Soviet-designed Tu-1l4.1 a civil derivative of the Bear
(Tu-95) heavy turboprop bomber. Clearly capable of carrying more pas-
sengers a longer distance than any Western transport, the Tu-1l4 does
not appear a threat in terms of its being exported to foreign countries.
No underdeveloped country has a land mass so great as to require such
an extremely long-range transport. Even the USSR admits that the trans-
port is not suitable for operations of less than 2,700 nautical miles
nonstop, and Khrushchev himself has stated that the Tu-114 is basically
a bomber and as such is unsuitable for passenger service. Furthermore,
the aircraft, first shown in 1957, did not enter scheduled service in
the USSR until 19611 thus indicating continued or recurrent developmental
problems. Finally, it is unlikely that the Tu-1l4 can be used in any
* Table 2 follows on p. 7.
-6
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A0022000300.01-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
Table 2
? Payload Capability
of Comparable Western and Soviet Transport Aircraft 2/*
Country
Number of
Cargo
Cargo Range
in Nautical
Maximum
Cargo
Range
in Nautical
Miles with
Class of Aircraft
Aircraft
of Origin
Passengers
Pounds
Miles
in Pounds
Maximum Cargo
Long-range jet
Boeing 707-720
- US
131 to 189
19,630
5,200.
4o,053
4,000
and turboprop
DC8-50
US
112 to 173
361500
5,150
Vickers Super VC-10
UK
161 to 212
33,000
4,10o
58,000
3,4o0
Cleat (Tu-114)
USSR
120 to 220
34,00012/
5,40o
124,0o0
1,700
Short-range jet
Avro 771
UK
42 to 60
1,470
12,000
?435
Hunting BAC 111
UK
59
9,800
1,300
14,000
600
Cookpot (Tu-124)
USSR
44 to 68
810
Medium-range jet
De Havilland
Comet 4C
UK
72 to 102
19,630
2,250
24,610
Caravelle X
France
17,640
1,850
Boeing 720
US
90 to 112
14,850
1,950
33,955
1,200
Convair 880-22
US
88 to 110
23,150
2,780
26,780
Camel A (Tu-104A)
Camel B (Tu-104B)
USSR
USSR
70
100 1/
17,600 2/
22,140 2/
2,400 2/
?2,300 Eli
29,000
26,500
* Footnotes for Table
2 follow on p. 8.
- 7 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part- Sanitized Copy Approved forRelease2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
b -(.3 -.t.;
Table 2
Payload Capability
of Comparable Western and Soviet Transport Aircraft 2/
(Continued)
Class of Aircraft
Aircraft
Country
of Origin
Number of
Passengers
Cargo
Pounds
Cargo Range
in Nautical
Miles
Maximum
Cargo
in Pounds
Range
in Nautical
Miles with
Maximum Cargo
Medium-range
Lockheed Elec-
turboprop
tra 188
US
66 to 98
18,000
2,40o
26,500
3,000
Vickers Vanguard
UK
139
20,500
2,230
37,000
1,120
Britannia
UK
73 to 133
23,524
4,600
34,900
3,700
Coot (I1-18)
USSR
73 to 111
25,400
2,700
29,600
1,400
Cat (An-10 and 10A)
USSR
84 to loo
22,700
1184o
32,000
970
Short-range
Fokker F-27
US
32 to 48
5,000
1,300
8,930
677
turboprop
Handley Page Herald
UK
38
6,200
1,500
10,290
755
Coke (An-24)
USSR
32 to 42
8,750 sj
1,000
10,000
800
Turboprop cargo
Canadair CL44D5
Canada
77,392
1,900
Short Britannic
SC-5
UK
25,000
4,170
85,500
870
Lockheed C-130B
US
22,200
3,400
36,200
1,850
Camp (An-8)
USSR
17,000
1,445
27,000,
1,200
" Cub (An-12)
USSR
22,000
1,300
33,000
1480
a. For additional
b.
C.
d.
With full fuel
With passenger
With less than
characteristics, see Tables 5 through 10,,Appendix A-1 -
but with passenger furnishings removed.
furnishings removed.
full fuel.
- 8 -
S -E -C -R -E -T
pp. 19 through 24, below.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
41.
S -E -C -R-E -T
role other than that of an extremely long-range transport, at least in
its present configuration. The small doors and extreme height from the
ground preclude the aircraft from a cargo role without an extensive
modification or developmental program. -
There is little significant difference in passenger or cargo capac-
ity between Western and Soviet transports (other than the Tu-114), but
at least one major difference exists. The carrying capacity of Soviet
transports in general is slightly reduced by the surprisingly heavy
weight of the aircraft engines.' The weight of the AI-20 engine, used
on An-10, An-8, An-12, and 11-18 aircraft, is some 500 to 600 pounds
heavier than original Western estimates. This weight for the four-
engine aircraft amounts to approximately 1 ton in excess weight, there-
by reducing the potential range and the potential carrying capacity.
Although less important than carrying capacity, the comfort and
convenience of Soviet aircraft deserve mention. The Tu-104 aircraft,
for example, are described as being very noisy and uncomfortable while
taxiing. Furthermore, cabin pressurization is often erratic, and
the cabin temperature has been described as never exceeding 600 Fahr-
enheit. 2/ Also of inconvenience and discomfort to the passenger is
the fact that the passenger doors are considerably smaller than those
on Western transports, thus causing the traveler to bend or lower his
head when boarding or disembarking. / The vibration problems of the
11-18, An-101 and Tu-114 aircraft also would detract from the comfort
of the passenger.
III. Safety
Soviet transport aircraft are significantly inferior in the safety
of aircraft operations than are Western models. Both Soviet jet and
turboprop models suffer by comparison with Western aircraft in Safety'
factors, as is evidenced by the large number of crashes of Tu-104 and
11-18 aircraft within the past few years. Significantly, even in the .
Bloc there has been dissatisfaction with the safety of the Tu-104 and
11-18 transports. V East German pilots, for instance, consider the
11-18 unsafe and have stated that "it should be taken off the airways."
Three safety problems have been noted in the operation of the Camel
series of turbojet transports (Tu-104, Tu-104A, and Tu-104B). .4_81 First,
the problem of fuel consumption, previously mentioned, is of importance.
Fuel consumption appears to be 11,000 to 12,000 pounds per hour. The
Soviet practice apparently is to require a fuel reserve at night. It
has been reported that even in the USSR where fields are available, on
Aeroflot flights the red light on the fuel gauge repeatedly indicated
that the aircraft was on reserve fuel at each landing. Fuel problems
- 9 -
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E -C-R -E -T
of this nature would be greatly increased in underdeveloped areas in
which numerous adequate landing facilities are not available.
A second safety factor of the Tu-104 series relates to the prob-
lem of takeoff. The average time before the aircraft is airborne is
approximately 50 seconds, followed by a relatively slow rate of climb,
to altitude for a jet aircraft. This performance is in direct contrast-
to the high safety standards required by the ICAO.
A third safety defect involves the landing distance required for
the Tu-104 series in contrast to such comparable Western transports as
the Comet, the Caravelle, and the Convair 880. The stalling speed in
landing configuration and the required approach speeds appear very high
in the Tu-104 series, averaging 187 mph over the end of the runway and
175 mph at touchdown. The following braking action is violent, and the
braking is supplemented in an emergency by a drag parachute. Because
of this landing difficulty, many cases of tire failure have been re-
ported. Numerous cases of the aircraft running beyond the runway and
of brakes smoking and catching fire also have been reported. Water
trucks even have been employed to wet down the tires. According to US
safety standards, a runway of more than 11,500 feet is required for an
aircraft with the landing weight of the Tu-104. 12/ Few such runways
are available in the underdeveloped areas of the world.
Several safety deficiencies also are evident in the operation of
Soviet turboprop transports, notably the 11-18. All 11-18 aircraft
were grounded during 1960 following the widely publicized crashes of
some of the transports during the year. The trouble at that time
appeared to involve the fuel injection nozzles of the engine, which
allowed the flame to burn through the engine case into the nacelle
compartment where adequate fire protection was not available.
Although the 11-18 aircraft are again flying, considerable skepticism
toward the aircraft is still noted, and Soviet and Satellite citizens
reportedly are most reluctant to travel via the 11-18.
A significant safety deficiency of Soviet turboprop transports is
the comparatively lengthy time required to "feather" a malfunctioning
engine. Only a few seconds lost in this operation causes multiple
structural failures on the aircraft, and virtual disintegration re-
sults. Far more attention has been placed on Western transports in
the solution of this problem than has been noted on the Soviet models.
The engine problems with the 11-18 transport are obviously signifi-
cant. Reportedly the crash on 16 August 1960 of an 11-18 near Kiev,
in which all aboard were killed, resulted from fire originating in an
engine that burnea off one of the wings. 1E/ Because the An-101 An-81
-10 -
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -R -E -T
11-18,- and An-12 aircraft all use the same engine) the engine difficul-
ties with the 11-18 also would apply to the other aircraft and would
affect their operational safety. Along with these defects, the 11-18
reportedly has excessive vibration in the forward part of the aircraft,
a serious operational safety problem.
IV. Utilization
One of the most significant comparisons of Soviet and Western trans-
port aircraft is found in the comparative utilization of the aircraft.
Soviet transports suffer by comparison with the Western transports in
respect to utilization. The average revenue hours per aircraft day
for US airlines and for aircraft hours flown per day by the UK and by
Aeroflot, by type of aircraft, are shown in Table 3.
Table 3
Comparison of Flying Hours per Aircraft Day
of Selected US UK, and Soviet Transports 2/
US
UK USSR
Average Revenue Hours Hours Flown Hours Flown
per Aircraft Day 12/ , per Aircraft Day per Aircraft Day
Aircraft
,
Hours
Aircraft
Hours
Aircraft
Hours
Boeing 707
8.7
Viscount 701
7.0
Cat (An-10)
3.0
Douglas DC 8
7.1
,Comet 4
7.4
coot (11-18)
3.5
Lockheed Electra
7.6
Britannia 312
8.1
Camel (Tu-104)
2.5
a. The figures for US airlines include average revenue hours flown'
per aircraft day. An aircraft day is one on which an aircraft is
owned by an airline and is assigned to a route. Total aircraft hours
include all flying time -- whether revenue, nonrevenue, training, or
other -- whereas average revenue hours flown per day include only
time flown in revenue service. On an over-all basis, total flying
time in 1960 exceeded revenue flying time by about 3 percent. Thus
the average revenue hours flown per day in some instances understate
the average flying time per aircraft day. The figures flown per air-
craft day for UK airlines likewise apply to all days in which air-
craft were flown, but no differentiation is believed to have been
made between revenue and nonrevenue hours flown.
b. 11/
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E -C -R -E -T
The USSR has not published figures on the utilization of its air-
craft, and even if it had, it is doubtful whether such figures would
be meaningful in terms of the actual performance of these aircraft.
The only high-performance transport that has been intensively utilized
is the Tu-104, although several aircraft of this model-have remained
in year-round inactive status. The 11-18 and the An-10, although pro-
duced in quantity, have had engine trouble and have only'recently be-
come-completely operational. The Tu-114, produced in low numbers)
entered regular service only in April 1961, and neither, the Tu-124 nor
the An-24 has entered operational service.
The best available data on utilization of Soviet aircraft are those
obtained from Soviet logbooks. This information reveals that one
aircraft was flown on an average of 168 hours and 35 minutes per month
between 29 March and 21 November 1958, that a second Tu-104 averaged
97 hours and 9 minutes per month between 6 November 1958 and 9 July 1959,
and that a third averaged 38 hours and 13 minutes between 27 January
and 7 March 1961. 14/
Boeing 707 transports operated by commercial airlines are each
flown, on the average, a greater number of hours than were the three
Soviet Tu-104's combined. Boeing 707 transports owned by one airline
averaged 266 hours and 23 minutes per month each in th period between
August 1958 and December 1959. 12/
It is apparent that the Soviet transports are utilized far less 4 1
than are their Western counterparts. the 50X1
ground time of the various Soviet transports considerably exceeds that
of the Western models. A variety of causes, including difficulty in
obtaining spare parts when outside the USSR, maintenance deficiencies
on the aircraft, and other overhaul problems probably keep the air-
craft grounded excessively. 1.6./
V. Cost and Economy of Operation
The USSR is reportedly flexible in the terms offered the prospec-
tive purchaser of Soviet transports. The USSR is willing to adjust
the price, to offer favoi'able credit terms and low rates of interest,
and, of considerable importance, to accept payment in kind or commodity
or in the purchaser's own currency in order to make sales. Accompanying
benefits, such as technical training, also may vary from purchaser to
purchaser. The wide difference between the original cost of the Soviet
and the US aircraft and the wide difference in financing terms should
not, however, discourage the sale of Western aircraft. The difference
in original price and purchase in a country's own currency is often
made up by extremely high costs for spare aircraft engines and costs
for spare parts purchased from the USSR.
-12 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2 I
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
Such was the case with one of the European Satellites, Hungary.
The Hungarians were offered three 11-18 transport aircraft without
cost. The aircraft were assessed at a value of 3 million rubles
each. The Hungarians later learned that spare parts for the turbo-
prop transports would cost 10 million rubles.
It is clear that in spite of the apparent difference in original
cost/ based on hidden charges; on acceptability to the traveling public;
on ease of maintenance; and on ease of obtaining spare parts it is
more economical to buy Western aircraft. Perhaps for these reasons,
Communist China reportedly is negotiating for the purchase of the
British Viscount rather than buying comparable transports from the USSR.
The ease of maintenance and rapid delivery of spare parts is of
particular importance. US firms have offered, along with the purchase
of their aircraft, complete maintenance facilities located in the pur-
chasing nation, thus obviating the need for lengthy waits for parts
and overhaul operations. li/
Furthermore, as stated above, the USSR is not a member of ICAO.
As a result, its aircraft are not manufactured and tested according
to international standards of airworthiness set up by ICAO.
In addition to the price of the aircraft, the economy of operation
must also be considered. Operational economy of the Tu-104 series,
for example, is very poor -- in fact, too poor for profitable opera-
tions by Western commercial airlines. The Tu-104 and Tu-104A appar-
ently are too costly even by Soviet standards, and as a result the
USSR developed the 100-passenger Tu-10413. The passenger load was in-
creased, but the range of the aircraft was drastically decreased.
Consequently, the operational cost of the Tu-104B is still too high,
and the profit potential of the aircraft in normal air travel markets
is very likely low. 12/
The fact that single point refueling has not been installed on the-
Tu-104 aircraft is of SOME importance as is the fact that the individual
filler necks of the fuel tank are relatively small. The economical
operation of the aircraft is thus hampered as the refueling time and
the turnaround time of the aircraft are prolonged. 22/
Along with poor operational economy, Soviet aircraft purchased by
non-Bloc countries have displayed operational problems of some magni-
tude./ An-12 turboprop transports in particular have exhibited tech-
nical difficulties. Fuel tanks have burst; tires have blown out after
landing on steel matting, which buckles under the weight of the air-
craft; and the aircraft has exhibited handling problems.
-13 -
S -E -C -R-E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
It is therefore apparent that more than the original cost of the
aircraft must be considered in evaluating the cost aspects of Western
transports in comparison with transports produced by the USSR. Be-
cause the cost and inconvenience of overhaul of spare parts and engine
replacements, the acquisition of spare parts, and the high operating
cost-of the Soviet transport must be added to the initial cost, the
initial cost of the Soviet aircraft becomes less attractive in compari-
son with that of Western aircraft. Low initial cost is of little
importance when accompanied by unsatisfactory operational performance,
and indications are that airline operators using Soviet transport air-
craft continue to experience the difficulties outlined above.
VI. Life of Engines, Propellers, and Parts
Another significant competitive aspect of Western and Soviet trans-
ports in which the Soviet aircraft suffers badly by comparison is the
life of equipment and component parts. The life of the engine and of
the propeller blades for the Soviet transports falls far short of those
for comparable Western aircraft.
The estimated engine hours before major overhaul for Soviet air-
craft engines average around 200 hours, and the estimated total hours
of Soviet engine life before discarding the engine average only 800
hours. By comparison, the engine hours to first overhaul for Western
aircraft engines average 1,000 to 1,800 hours. A comparison of Western
and Soviet overhaul time and total life is shown in Table 4.*
The life of Soviet propellers, like that of the engines, compares
very unfavorably with the life of Western counterparts. The estimated
life of a propeller blade for the Soviet turboprop engine, other than
for the An-241 is only 300 hours, and that of :the An-24 is an estimated
600 hours. The comparable life for the Western propeller is 2,500 hours,
although a regulator plate must be checked at 1,250 hours.
In addition to the very short overhaul time and total life of air-
craft engines and propellers, many other parts on the Soviet transport
* Table 4 follows on p. 15.
-14-
S -E -C -R-E -T
50X1
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
beclas-sified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002260030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
Table 4
Comparison of Data on Overhaul and Total Life
of Western and Soviet Aircraft Engines
Soviet Aircraft Engines
Western Aircraft Engines
Engine
Engine Hours
to Major Overhaul
Engine Hours
of Total Life
Engine
Engine Hours
to Major Overhaul
Engine Hours
of Total Life
RD-3M
AI-20
NK-12
200
200
200
800
800
800
Pratt and Whitney
JT-3, and LIT-4
Allison-D501
Conway
1,200 to 1,800
1,000
1,200 to 1,800
Indefinite 2/
Indefinite
Indefinite
a. The.producer gives no fixed time before scrapping the engine. The engine can undergo an in-
definite number of overhauls, each of which prolongs its life. Although no figure can be estab-
lished, the life should be prolonged to more than 5,000 hours and may-run as high as 8,000 hours
after overhaul.
b: The Federal Aviation Agency requires an overhaul at 11000 hours, although the producer be-
lieves that 1,800 hours of operation is safe before an overhaul is required.
-15w
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
are changed frequently.
The great difference in the life of the Soviet transports and that
of transports designed and produced in the West is emphasized in many
reports. For instance, Ghana Airways has changed its scheduled flight
from Khartoum to Accra to bimonthly rather than weekly because the
AI-20 engines used in the 11-18 have a very high rate of failure in the,
heat at Khartoum. In addition, when President Tour4 of Guinea visited
Khartoum enroute from Cairo, the 11-18 on which he was riding had three
engines fail when preparing for takeoff in the afternoon heat. It was
necessary for the 11-18 to remain in Khartoum until late in the evening
so that a successful takeoff could b-e made. Li"
Even Bloc countries are reluctant to accept the Soviet aircraft,
primarily because of the high cost of frequent replacement of engines
and parts. Officials of the Polish Airlines (LOT) were reluctant. to
accept 11-18 aircraft in 1960 because of the necessary replacement of
parts after only 250 hours of flying time. The Poles, in fact, de-
sCribed the 11-18 as "no good" because the operation of the aircraft
was so expensive. EL2/
It is apparent that the Soviet transports have a far shorter life,
as regards overhaul and replacement of engines and components than do
comparable Western models. The cost ofthese frequent overhauls and
early scrapping of engines and parts renders the Soviet transport air-
craft economically unsatisfactory, even if acquired at a very low ini-
tial cost or in the nation's own currency when compared with a compa-
rable Western transport. Of equal significance for the purchaser, the
aircraft probably remains grounded an extended period while awaiting
shipment df the part from the USSR.
-16-
S-E-C-R-E-T
50X1
z
50X1.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2 I
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E-C-R-E-T
APPENDIX A
STATISTICAL TABLES
- 17 -
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
of Comparable Western
S -E -C -R -E -T
Table 5
Specifications
and Soviet Long-Range Jet and Turboprop Transport Aircraft ,
Item
Unit of Measure
Western Aircraft
Soviet Aircraft
Boeing
Douglas
Vickers
Tupolev
Aircraft
Engine
Number of engines
Thrust
Maximum weight
Landing weight
? Weight with zero
fuel
Operational weight
empty
Maximum fuel
Wing area
Span
Length
Height ?
Wing loading
Weight-to-thrust
ratio
Cabin length
'Cabin width
Cabin height
Cabin volume
Payload
? Passengers'
Cargo
Maximum cargo
Cargo range
Maximum cargo
range
Cruising speed
Pounds
Pounds
Pounds
Pounds
Pounds
US gallons
Square feet
Feet and inches
Feet and inches
Feet and inches
Pounds per square foot
Feet and inches
Feet and inches
Feet and inches
Cubic feet
Pounds
Pounds
Nautical miles
Nautical miles
Knots
707-320
P and W
JT4A-9
4
16,800
311,000.
207,000
190,000
132,924
23,812
2,892
142'-5"
152'-11"
107
4.63
111-6"
11'-7"
7'-7"
8,150
131 to 189
17,930
40,053
5,200
4,000
522.
707-720
, R-R Conway
MK 508
4
17,500
311,00o
207,000
190,000
131,244
23,812
2,892
142'-5"
152'-11"
41'-8"
107
4.43
111,-6"
11,-7n
. 8,150
131 to 189
19,630
40,053
5,200
4,000
522
?-DC8-40
R-R Conway
RC 12
4
17,800
310,000
199,500
124,369
23,079
2,773
142,-5"
150,-6"
42,-4"
111.8
102-1"
11,-6"
71-3"
112 to 173
36,500
4,700
510 '
DC8-50
P and W
jr3D-3
4
18,000
310,000
199,500
124,529
23,079
2,773
142,-5"
150,-6"
42,-4"
111.8
102-1"
11,-6"
71-3"
112 to 173
36,500
5,150
510
VC-10
R-R Conway
RCO/42/2
MK 540
4
20,250
301,000
197,500
176,500
134,200
20,700
2,800
140'
158,-10"
39'-1-1/2"
106.9
3.7
91,-4"
11,-6"
71-6"
150
24,500
38,000
5,600
4,700
48o
Super VC-10
RCO/42/4
4 ?4
21,825
347,000
241,000
219,000 ,
22,50o
2,800
146,
186,
39,-6"
118,'
11,-6"
7,-6"
161 to 212
33,000
58,000
4,100
3,400
475
Cleat (Tu-114)
NK-12
12,500
352,000
283,400
206,000
186,750
23,000
35470
168'
174'
42'
108
7.2
154,-2"
12'
7'
16,420
120 to 220
34,000 2/
124,000
5,400
1,700
415
a. With full fuel but with passenger furnishings removed.
- 19 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Table 6
Specifications
of Comparable Western and Soviet Short-Range ,Tet Transport Aircraft
Item
Unit of Measure
Western Aircraft
Soviet Aircraft
Tupolev
Aircraft
Engine
Number of engines
Avro 771
Bristol BS 75
2
Hunting
BAC 107
Bristol BS 75
2
BAC 111 2/
Rolls Royce
RB 163-1
2
Cookpot (Pu-124)
? Soloviyev
Thrust
Pounds
7,350
7,350
9,850
Maximum weight
Pounds
52,000
48,50o
66,300
Landing weight
Pounds
50,000
46,000
62,500
Weight with zero fuel
Pounds-
56,000
Maximum fuel
US gallons
2,400
2,680
2,702
Wing area
Square feet
800
825
980
Span
Feet and inches
77,-5-1/2"
81,/-8"
88,-6"
Length
Feet and inches
80,-4-1/2"
84,
94,
Wing loading
Pounds per square foot'
65
59
67.7
Weight-to-thrust ratio
3.54
3.3
3.36
Cabin length,
Feet and inches
44,-6"
Cabin width
Feet and inches
9,-9"
10'
10,-4-1/2"
Cabin height
Feet and inches
-
6,-6"
Payload
Passengers
42 to 60
50 to 59
59
44?to 68
Cargo
Pounds
9,800
Maximum
Pounds
12,000
12,000
14,000
Cargo range
Nautical miles
1,470
2,500
1,300
Maximum cargo range
Nautical miles
435
950
600
810
Cruising speed
Knots
495
14140
1+35
1+80
a. Aircraft not available
until 1963.
-20 -
S -E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A00220?0030061-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
Table 7
Specifications of Comparable Western and Soviet Medium-Range Jet Transport Aircraft
Item
Unit of Measure
Western Aircraft
Soviet Aircraft
De H'avilland
Caravelle
Boeing
Convair
Tupolev
Aircraft
Engine
Comet 40.
.Avon RA 29
MK 525
Trident
OH-121
RR RB 163
VI
Avon RA 29
MK 531
VII
GE CJ805-
230
X
P and W
JT8D-1
727
P and W
Jr8D-1
720
P and W
Jr3c-7
880-22
GE CJ805-
35
Camel A
(Tu-104A) ,
RD-3M
Camel B
(Tu-1045)
RD-3m
Number of engines
4
3
2
2
2
3
4
4
2
?2
Thrust
Pounds
10,500
12,200
10,500
16,100
14,000
14,000
12,000
11,200
19,800
19,800
Maximum weight
Pounds
162,000
' 105,000
103,620
114,640
142,000
186,000
190,000
164,000
167,000
Landing weight
Pounds
120,000
100,000
98,655
109,130
131,000
175,000
145,000
141,100
141,100
Weight with zero
fuel
Pounds
102,500
85,000
78,265
142,000
120,000
Operational weight
empty
Pounds
75,085
63,200
52,910
105,000
90,865
95,000
Maximum fuel
US gallons
10,700
4,600
4,900
4,070
7,350
9,232
10,770
8,700
8,700
Wing area
Square feet
2,121
1,350
1,579
1,579
1,579
1,650
2,433
2,000
1,990
2,100
Span
Feet and inches
114,-10"
89,-10"
112,-6"
112,-6"
112-6"
108,
130,-10"
120'
112-7"
112-7"
Length
Feet and inches
111,-6"
114,-9"
105,
108,-8"
134,-1"
136,-2"
129'-4"
124'
128'
.
Height
Feet and inches
29,-6"
27,
28,-7"
41,-6"
36,-4"
37'-8"
37'-8"
Wing loading
Pounds per square foot
76.4
77.8
65.5
76
95
82.5
84
Weight-to-thrust
ratio
3.86
2.87
4.95
3.85
4.25
4.15
4.2
Cabin length
Feet and inches
78,-3"
96,-6"
89'-3"
Cabin width
Feet and inches
9'-8"
10,-8"
10'-6"
10.-6"
Cabin height
Feet and inches
6,-6"
7,-1"
6'-11"
6,-11"
Cabin volume
Cubic feet
5,650
5,900
Payload
Passengers
72 to 102
75 to 94,
64 to 80
68 to 89
70 to 114
90 to 112
88 to 110
70
100
Cargo
Pounds
19,630
17,640
17,640
14,850
23,150
17,60012/
22,10 12/
: Maximum cargo
Pounds
24,610
21,500
18,453
19,840
24,000
33,955
26,780 .
29 000
26,500
Cargo range
Nautical miles
2,250
1,560
1,850
1,850
1,950
2,780
,2,400
2,300 2/
Maximum cargo
range
Nautical miles
610
1,14140
1,200
Cruising speed
Knots
435
510
430
450
520
525
530
1460
460
a. With less than full fuel.
b. With passenger furnishings removed.
- 21 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Table 8
Specifications'
of Comparable Western and Soviet Medium-Range Turboprop Transports
Item
' Unit of Measure
Western Aircraft
Soviet Aircraft
Lockheed
Vickers
Britannia
Il'yushin
Antonov
Aircraft
Engine
Electra 188
Allison
501-D13A
'
Vanguard 953 Viscount 810
RR TYNE RR DART
MK 512 MK 525
Series 300 '
Bristol
Protius 765
Coot (1-1-18)
20
Cat (An-10A)
AI-20
Number of engines
4
4
)4
4
4
4
Horsepower
4,050
5,050
1,990
4,445
) +,000
' ) 4,000
Maximum weight
Pounds
116,000
146,500
72,500
185,000
134,000
119,000
Landing weight
Pounds
95,600
130,500
64,000
137,000
.
112,000
110,000
Weight with zero
. Pounds
86,000
122,500
57,500
128,000
fuel ,
,
Operational weight
empty
Pounds
56,000
82,500
41,565
93,100
69,000 21
62,000
Maximum fuel
US gallons
5,520
6,160
2,280
10,300
6,250
3,980
Wing area
Square feet
1,300
1,529
963
2,070
1,500
1,300
Span
Feet and inches
99'
118.
93,-8-1/2"
142-3-1/2
'"
123,
124-5"
Length
Feet and inches
104'-6-1/2"
122-10.4"
85'-8"
124,-3"
118,
121,-6"
Height
Feet and inches
32)-1"
34-11"
26'-9".
37'-6"
33'-4"
32'-1"
Wing loading
Pounds per, square foot
89
96 .
75.4
89.5
89
88
Power loading
ratio
7.16
6.6
9.11
10.4
8.4
7.2
Cabin length
Feet and inches
90'-10"
67'
Cabin width
Feet and inches
10'-8-1/2"
10'-6"
12'-6"
Cabin height
Feet and inches
6'-10-1/2"
6,-6"
.8,-6"
Cabin volume
Cubic feet
2,800
Payload
Passengers
66 to 98
139
73
73 to 133
73 to 111
84 to 100
Cargo
Pounds
18,-000
20,500
14,300
. 23,524
25,400
22,700
?Maximum cargo
Pounds
26,500
37,000
14,500
34,900
29,60012/
32,000
. 'Cargo range
Nautical miles
2,400
2,230
1,530
4,600
2,700
1,840
Maximum cargo
range
Nautical miles
3,000
1,120
1,500
3,700
1,400
970
Cruising speed
Knots
352
365
310
310
342
335
a. With passenger- furnishings removed and without internal starting equipment. The weight is 73,000 pounds when fitted for 84 passengers.
b. With passenger furnishings removed.
- 22 -
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
-
f sr, I
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
Table 9
Specifications
of Comparable Western and Soviet Short-Range Turboprop Transports
-Western Aircraft
Soviet Aircraft
Handley
Item
Unit of Measure
Fairchild
Fokker
Page
Avro
Canadair
Japan
Antonov
Aircraft
F-27
F-27
Herald
748
540A -
?NAMG YS-11
Coke (An-24)
Engine
RR Dart RDa
RR Dart RDa
RR Dart RDa
RR Dart
Eland NEI
RR Dart RDa
Al
7 MK 528
7 MK 528
7 MK 527
DDa 7
6 K504A
1011 MK
MK 531
P542
Number of engines
2
2
?2
2
2
2
2.
Horsepower
2,105
2,105
2,105
2,105
3,500
3,060
2,000
Maximum i.reight
Pounds
37,500
37,500
39,000
36,000
53,200
50,265
39,000
Landing weight
Pounds
35,700
35,700
38,900
35,500
50,670
48,o6o
Weight with zero
Pounds
36,000
30,010
44,090
.fuel
Operational weight
empty
Pounds
22,237
23,105
23,000
20,344
32,333
29,760
Maximum fuel
US gallons -
1,680
1,365
1,300
1,370
2,580
1,850
1,080
Wing area
Square feet
754
754
886
749.9
963.8
1,024.4
760
Span..
Feet and inches
95,-2"
95'-2"
94,-9-1/2"
95'
105,-4"
105, ,
95' .
Length
Feet and inches
77,-1-1/2"
77,-1-1/2"
71,-11"
67,
81,-6"
86,-3-1/2"
74,-6"
Height
Feet and inches
27,-6"
27,-6"
23,-4"
24,-10"
28,-2"
30,
Wing loading
Pounds per square foot
49.8
49.8
43
, 48
55.2
49.36
51..4
Power loading
ratio
8.93
8.93
9.28
8.56
7.6
8.2
9.7
Cabin length
Cabin width
Cabin height
Feet and inches
Feet and inches
Feet and inches
42,
8,
6,
Payload
Passengers
40
32 to 48
38
40 to 44
48 to 52
52 to 60
32 to 42
Cargo
Pounds
5,000
6,200
6,756
4,117
5,620
8,750 2/
Maximum cargo
Pounds
8,930
10,290,
9,666
8,137
12,125
10,000 2/
Cargo range
Nautical miles -
1,360
1,300
1,500
1,760
1,975
1,280
1,000
Maximum cargo
range
Nautical miles
677
755
1,070
1,100,
- 346
800
Cruising speed
Knots
266
266
243
252
280
250
280
a. With passenger furnishings removed.
- 23 -
S -R
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release ?013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Table 10
Specifications
of Comparable Western and Soviet Cargo Aircraft
Item
Unit of Measure
Western Aircraft
Soviet Aircraft
Canadair
Short
Britannic
Lockheed
Antonov
Aircraft
Engine
CL44D4
RR TYNE
RTy-12
CL44D5
RR TYNE
RTy-12
CL44D6 2/
RR TYNE
Stage IV
SC-5 IV
RR TYNE
RTy 12
C-130s
Allison
P56-A7A
C-130A
Allison
T56-A7A
Camp (An-8)
AI-20
Cub (An-12)
AI-20
Number of engines
4
4
4
4 ?
4
4
2
4
Horsepower
5,730
5,730
6,445
5,730
4,050
4,050
4,000
4,000
Maximum weight
Pounds
205,000
205,000
225,000
218,000
135,000
124,200
88,000
130,000
Landing weight
Pounds
165,000
175,000
175,000
205,000
135,000
124,200
67,000
Weight with zero
fuel
Pounds
155,000
165,000
165,000
196,000
Operational weight
empty
Pounds
88,872
87,608
88,042
107,185
69,300
59,400
Maximum fuel
NS ,gallons
12,200
12,200
12,200
12,200
6,960
6,960
16,000 -
39,800
Wing area
Square feet
2,075
2,075
2,075
2,466
1,745
1,745
1,300
1,300
Span
Feet and inches
142'3-1/2"
142,-3-1/2"
142-3-1/2"
158-9-1/2"
132-7"
132-7"
124.-8"
124-8"
Length
Feet and inches
136-8"
136.-8"
136'-8"
136-5"
97'-8"
97'-8"
103-2"
109'
Height
Feet and inches
38'-8"
38'-7"
38'-7"
47,
38'
38
36'
32'-5"
Wing loading
Pounds per square foot
99
99
108.5
88.4
77.3
71.3
Power loading
8.95
8.95
8.75
9.5
8.3
7.7 :
ratio
.
Cabin length
Feet and inches
98'-7"
98'-7"
98'-7"
84.-4"
41.-5"
41'-5"
40,
52'-6"
Cabin width
Feet and inches
11'
11'.
11'
16'-1"
10'
10'
11'
9'-6"
Cabin height
Feet and inches
6'-9'
6'-9"
6'-9"
13'-9'
9'-1"
9'-1"
10'
9'-6"
Cabin volume
Cubic feet
6,380
6,380
6,380
11,750
4,300
4,300
3,900
Payload
Cargo
Pounds
25,000
22,200
29,200
17,000
22,000
Maximum cargo
Pounds ?
66,128
77,392
76,958
85,500
36,200
38,800
27,000
33,000
Cargo range
Nautical miles
4,170
3,400
2,520
1,445
1,300
Maximum cargo
range
Nautical miles
2,640
1,900
2,900
870
1,850
1,700
1,200
480
Cruising speed
Knots
342
348
353
340
320
292
275
300
a. Aircraft available in 1962.
- b. Aircraft available in 1964.
-24-
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
50X1
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
APPENDIX B
PHOTOGRAPHS OF AIRCRAFT
- 27
S
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E -C -R -E -T
Long-Range Jet and Turboprop Transports
- 29 -
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
e
?
S-E-C-R-E-T
...? ... : -, . - - - ._. ?, ' - '-'7"."---- .
4L - -
. ....-
ero,
' -? '''' - 41 ? - . 4
? --S, ? ? - 14,',,I ?. 1. ' A " . . ' -4
US: Boeing 707-441
US: DC-8
- 31 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
" Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
UK: Vickers Super VC-10
USSR: Cleat (Tu-114)
- 33 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
r Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E -C -R -E -T
Short-Range Jet Transports
-- 35 -
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
- UK: Hunting BAC 111
USSR: Cookpot (Tu-124)
- 37 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
, ?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
Medium-Range Jet Transports
- ,39
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
UK: De Havilland Comet
.
,04,4A-1 ;12. ci 0-10" ti-064t,
,
France: Caravelle
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-0-R-E-T
US: Boeing 720
US: Convair db0
-43 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
USSR: Camel A (Tu-104A)
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
' Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E-C -R-E-T
, Medium-Range Turboprop Transports
-47-
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
4
S-E-C-R-E-T
KIM ? ROYAI
US: Lockheed Electra 188
UK: Vickers Vanguard
- 149 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
UK: Vickers Viscount
UK: Britannia
- 51-
S-E-C-R-E-T
I -
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
USSR: Coot (I1-18)
USSR: Cat (An-10)
- 53 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E -C -R -E -T
Short-Range Turboprop Transport
- 55 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
US: Fokker F-27
UK: Handley Page Herald.
- 57 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
?T.
S-E-C-R-E-T
USSR: Coke (An-24)
- 59 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
LI
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S -E -C -R -E -T
TurbOprop Cargo Aircraft
- 61 -
S -E -C -R -E -T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
11,
S-E-C-R-E-T
Canada: Canadair CL-41-05
461111r
UK: Short Britannic SC-5
-63-
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
S-E-C-R-E-T
US: Lockheed C-130B
USSR: Camp (An-8)
- 65 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
J?
S-E-C-R-E-T
USSR: Cub (An-12)
- 67 -
S-E-C-R-E-T
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
50X1
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
R
Next 3 Page(s) In Document Denied
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A002200030001-2
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A0022000300
SECRET
SECRET
I, Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/08/22 : CIA-RDP79R01141A0022000300
01-2
50X1
50X1
01-2