Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/2789178/

Topic: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Rob878
Posted 2006-05-24 20:54:14 and read 9902 times.

I know that there is alot of criticism about Russian planes, but they have built some great ones and I am sure that the new planes are very up to standard with western built aircraft.

Also, there are many airlines such as First Air that fly old 732's and 727's, why dont we see some Tu-154's? Or anything along those lines.

Do the D.O.T in Canada and FAA in the States have it out to keep commercial operators from using Russian built aircraft??

I know i was interested in bringing some AN-2's here to Canada to use in bush operations, because they are phenomenal airplanes for Bush applications. Less than 80,000 CND could buy me an airworthy AN-2 instead of $1,000,000.00 for a Cessna Caravan which lacks in many areas compared to the AN-2's.

After months of research and talks with D.O.T people, it seemed to me that under no circumstance would they allow Russian birds to be used commercially.

Do you think this has anything to do with agreements between manufacturers such as Cessna and the government to protect their businesses?? I could imagine that there would be many operators using russian aircraft if it was allowed.


Rob

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Skyman
Posted 2006-05-24 21:05:45 and read 9879 times.

I think it is because people in North America are to scared to board a russian plane. Otherwise there aren`t to many reasons. Look at the new Tupolew 204. It is a really good plane and a lot cheaper than american, european or else.
The old T-154 are now even getting sorted out with Aeroflot. Just too old for duty to Europe. But a lot of charterflights to Russia or the Balkan are using the T-154 in summer.
Greetings

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: MAH4546
Posted 2006-05-24 21:12:43 and read 9851 times.

Domodedovo Airlines is planning to inagurate non-stop service between Miami and Moscow this fall with an IL-96, 3x a week.

It isn't that Americans are scared to board Russian planes. It is simply that Aeroflot choses to send their Boeings here. Aeroflot has flown Russian-built aircraft to Anchorage, Seattle, Miami, Dulles, and NYC in the past.

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: B777-700
Posted 2006-05-24 21:16:21 and read 9840 times.

The AN124 of course is floating around quite a bit. Avialeasing has a small fleet of AN12 and AN24 cargo planes based in South Florida's OPF airport.

Domodedovo is due to start DME-MIA with and IL96.

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: SFO2SVO
Posted 2006-05-24 22:17:29 and read 9754 times.

I do not think there's much chance for passenger planes (even RRJ) unfortunately: reasons are parts/support availability (how long would it take to get a replacement if TU-204 engine fails on, say, SJC-AUS run?), 3 men crew and, yes, reputation.
There is some definite space for freighters though, and it is already happening:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1043195/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0978664/M/

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Rob878
Posted 2006-05-24 23:34:01 and read 9627 times.

Its good to see some russian birds in North America operating commercially. Maybe the trend will continue to some passenger jets in the near future. I think it would be great if Boeing and Airbus would have another competitor!.


Rob

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: N328KF
Posted 2006-05-24 23:44:07 and read 9585 times.

Quoting SFO2SVO (Reply 4):
I do not think there's much chance for passenger planes (even RRJ) unfortunately: reasons are parts/support availability (how long would it take to get a replacement if TU-204 engine fails on, say, SJC-AUS run?), 3 men crew and, yes, reputation.

I believe it's some combination of Alenia and Boeing doing the support network. That should make customers breathe easier.

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Wjcandee
Posted 2006-05-24 23:54:52 and read 9530 times.

Quoting Rob878 (Thread starter):
Do you think this has anything to do with agreements between manufacturers such as Cessna and the government to protect their businesses??

No. I think it's the free market at work, combined with more stringent certification requirements (or...to be clearer, "different" certification requirements).

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Theweave33
Posted 2006-05-25 00:54:26 and read 9428 times.

I've asked a few aviation-ignorant people in the last few hours what the first thing that came to their mind when I said Russian Aircraft. Most wouldn't trust them at all. Though I myself would feel completley safe in them if they were owned by most carriers I'm familiar with. Around Christmas time I was talking to my mom about the DC-10 and all she could recall were the horrible disasters that happened to those aircraft regardless of the very good safety record otherwise. It's the same principle. Once a reputation has been earned, it is really hard to lose to re-establish one. Many people only hear about the disasters and do not take into consideration that those jets fly thousands of routes each year without a major problem.

Also, the airlines stick with what works. The Airbus and Boeing planes have worked fine so why all of the sudden introduce Russian Jets or anyother for that matter. Any change is a risk.

And finally you got a third model you'd have to introduce into an already bi-model fleet.

Yet, I would love to see some Russian models make it over here!

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Remcor
Posted 2006-05-25 01:47:33 and read 9358 times.

The problem is that many carriers that fly Russian aircraft have a sub-par safety record overall - whether or not that be because of poor maintenance, poor crew, poor climate conditions in the regions they fly, or poor aircraft.

I've flown my share of Russian aircraft and while I don't have any safety complaints, they generally just aren't quite as comfortable as their Western counterparts. Therefore richer carriers will probably buy Western, while poorer carriers will stick to Russian. Poorer carriers generally have a poorer safety record and therefore that will reflect poorly on the aircraft.

Plus, while Russian aircraft have lower upfront costs, the maintenance costs on their older engines can be twice as much as western aircraft, or so I've heard.

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: AeroWeanie
Posted 2006-05-25 01:57:53 and read 9327 times.

There is a very basic reason that there are no Russian airliners in service with an airline in the US. No Russian airliner, except the Il-96T (TCDS A54NM), has ever been Type Certified in the US. Without a Type Certificate, they can't be used for hire by a US operator.

To FAA certify a Russian airliner would be very expensive and no one has yet wanted to repeat what Ilyushin went through on the Il-96T certification.

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Wingscrubber
Posted 2006-05-25 02:00:16 and read 9319 times.

I posted a similar question a while ago, might be worth a look... it was a more general question about the use of Russian airliners.
Why Not More Russian Airliners Flying? (by Wingscrubber Jan 16 2006 in Civil Aviation)#ID2551374

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Skyman
Posted 2006-05-25 02:20:46 and read 9289 times.

That is a very good link you gave Wingscrubber. Thank you.
Another reason for russians not getting on the market is that they can�t provide tha same service as airbus or boeing and that makes a very big part of buisiness nowadays.

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Redcordes
Posted 2006-05-25 20:01:54 and read 7614 times.

Check the tech/ops. forum for past discussions.

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: RedFlyer
Posted 2006-05-25 20:18:04 and read 7396 times.

Quoting Theweave33 (Reply 8):
The Airbus and Boeing planes have worked fine so why all of the sudden introduce Russian Jets

Many airlines have switched from an all-Boeing to an all-Airbus fleet (and vice-versa) so needless to say, there could be compelling reasons for switching to a Russian-built model. Money would be the deciding factor and when it comes to Russian aircraft their list prices are considerably lower. If the FAA were to certify Russian aircraft I have no doubt airlines would flock to them, or at least give them serious consideration. But then certification by the FAA may entail a hefty increase in list price to cover the associated costs.

I've always felt it was a shame that the Russians don't take a more aggressive stance in marketing their newer aircraft. It would be nice to see them break the current duopoly between the two titans (and it would certainly break some of the more repetitive A vs. B threads on here).

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Lightsaber
Posted 2006-05-25 20:21:41 and read 7355 times.

Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 7):
No. I think it's the free market at work, combined with more stringent certification requirements (or...to be clearer, "different" certification requirements).

 checkmark 

Can Russian aircraft put 20 minute turns at the gate? nope, there goes LCC interest. Add 5% to CASM for poor turn times (fewer flight hours per day).

Do Russian aircraft beat A or B on fuel economy? (IIRC 30% of CASM currently). Nope. All that added weight for landing in snow hurt them. Not to mention the engines are a generation and a half behind western designs. So add 5% to 10% to CASM for poor fuel burn.

Do Russian aircraft beat A or B on maintenance? Nope (~ 10% of CASM IIRC for Western aircraft). I've heard numbers of 50% to 100% higher. I know for engines its about double due to Russian designs having much shorter cycle lives between shop overhauls. So add 5% to CASM for flying a Russian design.

Others have noted the 3 man cockpits (fixed on the latest designs). So we'll ignore this one.

Cost? Well, a lease is typically 11% of CASM (again, IIRC). So even a free airplane doesn't count for much in CASM reduction...  scratchchin 

Risk? (Part delays, etc.) Add 10% to the estimated CASM.

So for 5% (turn times)+ 5% (best case MX) + 5% (best designs added fuel burn) + Risk to save maybe 5% on CASM for purchase price? You make the call.

Basic economics says no to Russian designs. Recall that NW made a big deal that the DC-9's made sense until $35/bbl. At $70/bbl? Fuel efficiency matters a lot more than it did five years ago...

Mind you, I think the designs are safe and if I ever need to land in a foot of snow, Antonov is my airframe of choice! But to and from LAX? A, B or hopefully soon E.

Lightsaber

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: FLY2LIM
Posted 2006-05-25 20:24:43 and read 7311 times.

Quoting Theweave33 (Reply 8):
I've asked a few aviation-ignorant people in the last few hours what the first thing that came to their mind when I said Russian Aircraft. Most wouldn't trust them at all. Though I myself would feel completley safe in them if they were owned by most carriers I'm familiar with. Around Christmas time I was talking to my mom about the DC-10 and all she could recall were the horrible disasters that happened to those aircraft regardless of the very good safety record otherwise. It's the same principle. Once a reputation has been earned, it is really hard to lose to re-establish one. Many people only hear about the disasters and do not take into consideration that those jets fly thousands of routes each year without a major problem.

How many people choose to buy a Honda/Toyota, and how many choose a Hyundai instead? They are all good cars, but the Korean cars have a bad reputation.
There are dozens of Russian aircraft flying in Peru because they are cheap to buy/lease. I'm still not getting on one, though.

FLY2LIM

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: FRAspotter
Posted 2006-05-25 20:26:41 and read 7310 times.

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 14):
(and it would certainly break some of the more repetitive A vs. B threads on here).

It would than be A vs. B vs. I vs. T vs. An  Silly

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: BlueSky1976
Posted 2006-05-25 20:35:17 and read 7203 times.

Quoting Rob878 (Thread starter):
Do the D.O.T in Canada and FAA in the States have it out to keep commercial operators from using Russian built aircraft??

If a Russian plane is designed and built to FAA/JAA specs, there is no legal reason not to certify it in the States.

Quoting Rob878 (Thread starter):
I know i was interested in bringing some AN-2's here to Canada to use in bush operations, because they are phenomenal airplanes for Bush applications. Less than 80,000 CND could buy me an airworthy AN-2 instead of $1,000,000.00 for a Cessna Caravan which lacks in many areas compared to the AN-2's.

See above. The main reason for that is that An-2 was never designed to be used in the West, therefore it didn't have to be built with FAA/JAA certification in mind (as a matter of fact when An-2 was being designed there was no JAA and I'm not sure who was the FAA predecessor at the time). As far as functionality of the plane goes, you're right: NOTHING beats it in its class. And it's one hell of a plane too - the best looking biplane, definitely!!!

Quoting SFO2SVO (Reply 4):
I do not think there's much chance for passenger planes (even RRJ) unfortunately: reasons are parts/support availability (how long would it take to get a replacement if TU-204 engine fails on, say, SJC-AUS run?), 3 men crew and, yes, reputation.

RRJ is being designed with a very, very, VERY close cooperation between Boeing and Sukhoi. If Boeing decides to venture into the sub- 130 seat market, I wouldn't be surprised a bit if they use their own version of RRJ design. Basically, RRJ is the reason why Boeing decided to establish their own design bureau in Russia. I believe Boeing will also provide quality control and manufacturing feedback to Sukhoi. Stereotypes aside, RRJ will be just as good as Embraer or Bombardier - both design-wise, economy-wise and quality-wise.

I heard the rumour this morning that SAS is in negotiations to be one of the launch customers for RRJ-95...

"the Russian Sukhoi aviation enterprise is in negotiations with SAS about the purchase of 22 RRJ planes - the CEO Wiktor Subbotin said" - source (in Polish): http://www.rzeczpospolita.pl/gazeta/...060525/ekonomia/ekonomia_a_38.html

[Edited 2006-05-25 20:43:08]

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Rob878
Posted 2006-05-25 20:49:08 and read 7034 times.

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 15):
Can Russian aircraft put 20 minute turns at the gate? nope, there goes LCC interest. Add 5% to CASM for poor turn times (fewer flight hours per day).

Do Russian aircraft beat A or B on fuel economy? (IIRC 30% of CASM currently). Nope. All that added weight for landing in snow hurt them. Not to mention the engines are a generation and a half behind western designs. So add 5% to 10% to CASM for poor fuel burn.

Not to be rude, but maybe some research into these Russian airplanes will give you a better view and opinion.

Tu-204's utilize Rolls-Royce RB211535E4 or 535F5 turbofans. Which are the same as on some of the most modern 757's, plus there is Rockwell Collins avionics in use.

Il-96t's and m's use Pratt & Whitney PW2337 turbofans.



Can there be a 20 minute turn around time at the gate??? OF COURSE, just as sure as a 757 can, a Tu-204 can. Tupolev is also considering using the Rolls Royce Trent 700 engines (commonly used on the A330 200's) on some of their designs. It is all the same stuff being used.

American Components, French Components, Russian Components. ALL MADE IN TAIWAN!!!!  .... well, most of them anyways.

Rob

[Edited 2006-05-25 20:54:26]

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: B777-700
Posted 2006-05-25 23:13:34 and read 6768 times.

Quoting FRAspotter (Reply 17):
It would than be A vs. B vs. I vs. T vs. An

I > A + B anyway!  Wink

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Solnabo
Posted 2006-05-25 23:30:36 and read 6745 times.

I like Il-96, but why are the engines so close compared to the A343 under the wing? Maybe this question has been discussed before, sorry for that but I´m very curious...

Good or bad for Il-96-300?

Micke//SWE  wave 

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Skyman
Posted 2006-05-26 00:18:46 and read 6684 times.

Quoting Rob878 (Reply 19):
Can there be a 20 minute turn around time at the gate??? OF COURSE, just as sure as a 757 can, a Tu-204 can.

I have to give Rob my support because he is right.  bigthumbsup 
Concerning the RRJ the best technology from Russia, Europe and America is being combined into this aircraft. I think it will find it�s place in aviation. The biggest opponent for the RRJ will probably be the Embraer 135 and 175. I see more and more of them flying around in East Europe every day.

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: StarGoldLHR
Posted 2006-05-26 01:17:33 and read 6627 times.

Who says Russian Airliners dont come to the US ?

it doesnt get bigger than this at JFK -

Big version: Width: 1248 Height: 972 File size: 107kb
AN-225 taxi's to departure at JFK, 14th Sept 2003

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: MD90fan
Posted 2006-05-26 02:52:07 and read 6575 times.

Quoting Skyman (Reply 22):
I have to give Rob my support because he is right.
Concerning the RRJ the best technology from Russia, Europe and America is being combined into this aircraft. I think it will find it�s place in aviation. The biggest opponent for the RRJ will probably be the Embraer 135 and 175. I see more and more of them flying around in East Europe every day.

No the -175 will be a threat maybe, but the ER3???? come on man tell me your kidding  Smile

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Lightsaber
Posted 2006-05-26 04:31:24 and read 6495 times.

Quoting Rob878 (Reply 19):
Il-96t's and m's use Pratt & Whitney PW2337 turbofans.

None of the Pratt's were certified. There was a big political mess.

While I respect you're doubtfull, I had coworkers working on the IL-96M/T... The politics and economics killed the project. The economics killed any hope of selling in the west and politics prevents any Russian airline from buying with Pratt's. I talked to them about all the reasons they believed the IL-96 wasn't ever going to sell in the west. I gave a snapshot of those reasons in my prior posts.

I'm afraid my estimates are close enough to be correct. Can a four engine IL-96M/T compete with an A332? Not on CASM.

Don't get me wrong, I would love for a Russian airliner to work and I have much hope for the RRJ.

Quoting Skyman (Reply 22):
I have to give Rob my support because he is right.

As to the 20 minute turn times... I've talked to a few mechanics who have worked tupelovs (not sure on the type). They all complained that they weren't designed for fast turns. Recall that in Russia they still have internal customs... If I'm wrong, please provide me a link or information.

I'm not saying Russian engineers aren't great. We've hired them by the dozen where I work. However, I've worked aerospace engineering and I know how hard it is to make a product good enough for the fleet. Nothing I've heard about puts any of the current Russian products in the forefront.

For the record, I've been present at the disection of modern Russian designs were we ripped apart engines and airframes to see what we could learn from them. Were there good design ideas? Heck yes!!! But was the overall package ever competitive? No.

Where the Russians excel: with anything to do with Titanium. It doesn't suprise me at all Boeing is outsourcing Ti parts to Russia. They have better Ti metalurgy and welding than anyone.

Have you ever though examined a Russian design and analyzed it for design for maintenance? Yuck! Parts that are LRU (line replacable units) in any western aircraft are welded assemblies on Russian designs. Does this save weight? Yes! Does it extend service life? No. Do Western companies make the parts LRU's because they know they often must be replaced during that 20 minute turn?  checkmark 

Can their aerodynamics be great? Yes!

I really value the Russian engineering and I know in certain areas they excel.

But I've seen the disections and I've always walked away with "great idea, but no western customer would tolerate that compromise."

Personally, the Tu-204 is their best jet airliner hope. Do we really need another a.net discussion on four engine economics (IL-96)? But I've yet to see the Tu-204's economics compare favorably with any airliner still in production . Why is it always compared with obsolete aircraft?  scratchchin  The 757 ended production as it wasn't competitive enough to justify further orders except possibly in the resurgant trans-Atlantic market. So possibly the Tu-204-224 has a niche there.

But think about this, pretty soon the Tu-204 will be competing with the 783 and 788. Since aquizition costs are such a low percentage of CASM... Is the Tu-204 ready? Its only 4 years from now that a 2nd 787 line might be open... Personally, I think the window of opportunity for the Tu-204 was shut by the 787.

I look at it this way, if the Tu-204 was a really strong aircraft, wouldn't it fly Moscow to Europe more in pax duty?

Also, do realize, I'm talking mostly from the pax aircraft perspective. I fully realize aquizition costs are much more important with frieghters. I also realize most freight duty allows for slow turn times. Thus, the Tu-204 and IL-96 might have a strong future in those markets. Personally, I hope so. I like compitition.

But I know how brutal the world of aerospace engineering is. A+ efforts are required. A, B, Bombardier, and Embraer are there. I belive the RRJ will be also. But there is a reason so many "should have succeeded" airframes sit in the scrap heap of history. Close isn't good enough.

Lightsaber

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Rob878
Posted 2006-05-27 02:23:50 and read 6249 times.

All I am saying is wait and see... Times are changing and russia is a big player when it comes to aircraft. I think in the next 10 years we will start to see some western airlines using eastern planes.

With the race for the first SSBJ's (super sonic business jets) Tupolev is a major player against Aerion, Gulfstream, Aerospace international, Sukhoi and a few more i cant remember off of the top of my head.

An when people say that Russian birds dont have quick turn around times like New Airbus' or Boeing's or even embraer and the like, well neither did the 727, early 747's A300's MD-80's, 707, DC-8. These are what you would like the compare Il-62, Tu154's and others when it comes to turn around time.

New russian birds such as the Tu204 can turn around in 20 min no problem, or the Tu334.

The newer the tech, the faster the turnaround times, russian, french or american. At least that is what i think and see.


Rob

Topic: RE: Why No Russian Airliners In North America?
Username: Lightsaber
Posted 2006-05-27 03:27:49 and read 6195 times.

Quoting Rob878 (Reply 26):
All I am saying is wait and see... Times are changing and russia is a big player when it comes to aircraft. I think in the next 10 years we will start to see some western airlines using eastern planes.

With the race for the first SSBJ's (super sonic business jets) Tupolev is a major player against Aerion, Gulfstream, Aerospace international, Sukhoi and a few more i cant remember off of the top of my head.

An when people say that Russian birds dont have quick turn around times like New Airbus' or Boeing's or even embraer and the like, well neither did the 727, early 747's A300's MD-80's, 707, DC-8. These are what you would like the compare Il-62, Tu154's and others when it comes to turn around time.

I 100% in the future the Russians could be a force. Both the RRJ or a SSBJ has a lot of merit.

I hope to see their aircraft in the skies soon! You noted a lot of obsolete designs; in today's market the sales life of an airliner is constantly shrinking. Hey, we're talking already about the end of the 777's sales life. (Yes, they'll operate for years to come, but I'm talking sales.) They must be more keenly aware of time to market. The RRJ will be the first test of this.

But they also need to be more sensitive to customer service. One reason Pratt is in the dog house is that during the late 80's RR and GE ran circles around them in aftermarket support. e.g. part delivery times, etc.

I really believe the Russians can do well. But the market requires one to do well in all categories.

Lightsaber


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/