Nikolay Fonurin, Lead Flight Test Engineer at PAO Yakovlev, spoke about the differences between MC-21 versions, the operation of domestic equipment, and a comparison of the PD-14 with the Pratt & Whitney engine. The conversation took place on September 23 during the MC-21-300 flight with tail number 73054 from Zhukovsky to Irkutsk, where a group of journalists was heading.
The flight test engineer's workstation integrates data on the operation of the aircraft's main systems. The screens display parameters of the control system, wing mechanization, power plant, air-speed parameter measurement and air conditioning systems, as well as images from video cameras in the cockpit.
According to Fonurin, all information is collected in the onboard measurement system, recorded on storage devices, and after the flight, used to prepare reporting documentation necessary for the certification process. The set of displayed parameters is pre-adapted for a specific test program, which is preceded by ground checks.
Comparing the early MC-21-300 and the import-substituted MC-21-310 version, the engineer noted differences in equipment composition and the complexity of its integration. The MC-21-300 used already known imported systems, which needed to be combined and configured, whereas in the Russian version, a significant part of the equipment had to be replaced with domestic analogues and their operation coordinated within the airliner.
The 'three hundred' was equipped with known and proven equipment. It only needed to be combined, adjusted, connected, and everything worked. With the MC-21-310, it's a bit more complicated. Domestic equipment has largely gone through a stage of restoration and revival, and now we are integrating it into the aircraft. And, let's say, teaching it to fly. This is the difference. But the future is still ahead, and it belongs to us.
The specialist separately focused on the power plants. According to his assessment, PD-14 and Pratt & Whitney belong to the same class and have identical thrust characteristics, but the American geared engine is slightly more economical than its Russian counterpart.
According to the engineer, there should be no significant difference for the passenger.
If you find yourself on board an MC-21-310 and don't know what you're flying on, you, as a passenger, won't notice it
For pilots, differences may manifest in certain nuances of engine operation, for example, when increasing RPM, but overall, the operating modes and thrust characteristics are similar.
Import substitution affected not only engines and onboard electronics but also the aircraft's design. The MC-21-300 used composite materials of foreign origin, while the Russian version has a wing made of domestic composites. Russian actuators appeared in the control system. Fonurin reported that the aerodynamic and flight performance characteristics of the aircraft with domestic components have already been checked during tests and practically coincided with the indicators of the original version.
Differences are also noticeable in the cockpit. Honored Test Pilot of PAO Yakovlev, Andrey Voropaev, who also participated in the interview, spoke about new indicators and controls on the import-substituted aircraft.
According to him, the MC-21-300 has earlier versions of equipment, while the import-substituted aircraft uses updated domestic solutions, including new Ulyanovsk indicators with richer colors and lower reflectivity. Andrey Voropaev noted that this makes information perception more pleasant.
A comparison of the MC-21 versions shows that the transition to domestic components affected several levels of design and equipment at once — from the composite wing and actuators to engines and cockpit elements. At the same time, according to the lead flight test engineer, the main flight characteristics of the aircraft were kept close to the original ones.
Comments