Returning from academic research to aircraft design
After the Second World War, Vladimir Myasishchev’s existing design team was disbanded. He moved to teaching at the Moscow Aviation Institute while continuing to study the prospects for large jet aircraft. Contacts with the Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute, TsAGI, brought his academic parameter studies into industry discussions. He presented a long-range bomber proposal to its scientific and technical council, examining achievable range and payload.
On 24 March 1951, the Soviet Council of Ministers established Experimental Design Bureau No. 23, or OKB-23, within the Ministry of Aviation Industry, with Myasishchev as chief designer. The initial objective was a four-engine long-range jet bomber, with a prototype to be completed and tested quickly. The new numbered bureau also reconcentrated earlier design experience and personnel networks.
References: [1]
Organizing premises and personnel together
The bureau occupied Aircraft Factory No. 23 in Moscow’s Fili district. Participants later recalled that its first offices were on a mezzanine inside an assembly shop. The factory, under director Leshchenko, was responsible for manufacturing. State support took the form of an existing production base, personnel assignments and joint tasks for research organizations and the factory. Design and manufacturing were closely connected from the outset.
The team included former colleagues returning to work with Myasishchev and young engineers assigned from aviation institutes. Amir’yants’s retrospective estimates that young people made up about one-third of the early organization, while experienced staff generally led specialized groups. Teaching relationships from the Moscow Aviation Institute became a source of personnel, with transmission of experience taking place alongside urgent engineering work.
Turning one aircraft into coordinated assignments
Leonid Selyakov joined the bureau in April 1951 and began preliminary design of the future M-4, later leading its technical-project department. The chief designer set the overall direction, while specialists coordinated aerodynamic shape, structure, engines and ground facilities. Four jet engines near the wing roots meant that wing and landing-gear decisions required consultation between groups.
The article commemorating Selyakov emphasizes the simultaneous challenges of a high-aspect-ratio wing, engine installation, bicycle landing gear and hydraulic controls. These systems had to fit into one heavy aircraft, and changing the weight or space required by one could affect the overall arrangement. The project department translated specialized judgments into a scheme that the factory could implement.
References: [4]
Connecting aerodynamic research with development
Data for large, fast jet aircraft were still incomplete. While teaching at the Moscow Aviation Institute, Myasishchev conducted parameter studies with TsAGI and submitted the results to its scientific and technical council. After the bureau’s establishment, research institutions, design bureaus and factories shared development work on aerodynamic arrangement, engines and structure.
Participants’ accounts describe the M-4’s high-aspect-ratio swept wing and careful development of the air intakes, nose and other parts of its layout. The bureau used specialized research to make design choices, connecting the capabilities of external scientific institutions to the aircraft’s development schedule.
Landing gear took design questions into production
The bicycle landing gear provides a concrete example of this cooperation. Main supports arranged along the fuselage helped preserve a clean wing, but aircraft weight raised questions about tire capacity and runway loading. The participants’ account explains that choosing multi-wheel bogies concerned both structural arrangement and the ability of concrete pavements to withstand concentrated loads.
Manufacturing was therefore involved throughout design. The large airframe required changes to production facilities and processes, and components such as landing gear needed ground verification. Amir’yants particularly emphasizes Myasishchev’s practice of prioritizing ground-test rigs before advancing the complete aircraft. Forming the bureau also meant organizing calculation, testing and production together.
Improvement continued after the first flight
The M-4 prototype first flew in January 1953, followed by factory and state trials. The flight demonstrated the new team’s ability to design and manufacture a large jet aircraft, while the range required for long-distance missions continued to drive improvements. A government decision of 6 July 1954 began development of an M-4 derivative. The bureau and cooperating enterprises worked on propulsion, aerodynamics and weight reduction, producing the 3M, which first flew in 1956.
The 1951 establishment created both an aircraft project and a collaborative team organized around it. Institutes supplied personnel, research organizations provided experimental knowledge, the factory manufactured the aircraft and test results fed back into design.