AA7295 From Australia, joined Aug 2007, 637 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 8184 times:
I may be going to Cuba in May 2011. I will be flying in to Havana from Cancun. I would like to try Cubana, but they use the Yak-42 aircraft. I am a bit cautious and scared of flying on this aircraft as it is one of the Soviet aircraft from yesterday, not to mention Cubana's track record.
Despite this, I would like to still try Cubana. My question is do you think it would be safer to fly Cubana CUN to HAV where the CUN mechanics have given it a check or vice versa HAV to CUN where Cubana operations are based?
dazeflight From Germany, joined Jun 1999, 580 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (5 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7977 times:
To be honest, if the sole fact that this is "a soviet aircraft from yesterday" scares you away, you should rather not fly Cubana at all. If you want to try them out, I see no point in flying with their Airbus' planes inherited and/or leased from other companies opposed to a true Cubana-plane.
The mechanics at CUN will most likely not check the plane anyway, btw.
SIBILLE From Belgium, joined Jun 2005, 497 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (5 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7824 times:
I ve flown on CU Il9 and Il6 a few month ago, on TU5 and AN4 a long time ago and I m still alive. I think there is no safety problems with CU. They need to bring tourists for their national economy and I think they neet a safe fleet to avoid bad reputation. Y42 is a great aircraft to fly but I must tell you that they could change the type at the very last minute (320, IL6, T20)
PlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 12150 posts, RR: 56
Reply 6, posted (5 years 2 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 7260 times:
Quoting JJJ (Reply 3): I would avoid flying a Yak-42, but only because it's SO noisy.
It's not that bad actually, certainly no worse than a MD-80.
I've had half a dozen flights in the type and experienced no problems, it's a fun little aircraft and what's more it's not that old. Most of Cubana's are just over 20 years, but in terms of cycles the aircraft are very low and have a lot of life in them.
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
AR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7499 posts, RR: 41
Reply 7, posted (5 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 7197 times:
My two cents as there is probably no one else in this forum that knows more about airlines and aircraft than you:
I would never question the Cubana engineers or maintenance, they are probably some of the best in the planet, but I would question their budget available for the past 2 years, given the measures Raúl has been taking for a while now, so in truth, I would avoid Cubana altogether.
They had a recent crash, for which I admit I know nothing about, but it was recent on a western aircraft and apparrently, and I say this with caution, appparently, mechanical failure had something to do with it.
B6JFKH81 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2948 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 7130 times:
Quoting dazeflight (Reply 1): The mechanics at CUN will most likely not check the plane anyway, btw.
Why would they? The flight crew does a walk-around, and contacts MX if something is wrong. There isn't any reason for MX to do a meet and greet for every flight. That's how our airline does it...even at the hubs. MX comes out during the turns if they are needed. R.O.N. aircraft is a different story though, there are typically MX packages assigned (daily checks, weekly checks, etc.).
"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
longhauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 6004 posts, RR: 43
Reply 12, posted (5 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 7111 times:
Quoting AA7295 (Reply 8): Should I go Aeromexico CUN to HAV? Or Aeromexico on the way back. I am now thinking on the way there?
If you mean safety, as in likely to get killed, then it is a crap-shoot either way. No more likely one way than the other.
If you mean safety, as in delays or cancellations, then it is best to stick with the carrier's own "turf" as they have more options to help the passenger. In that respect, it would be best to fly AM CUN-HAV and CU HAV-CUN.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!