I know the Illyushin 62 to be earsplitting at takeoff. No doubt that is part of the reason it is no longer in revenue service in the US. Its famous accident at Ted Stevens International Airport is another.
Pilotpip From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3081 posts, RR: 12 Reply 4, posted (9 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3575 times:
I've only seen one russian jet, and as I recall it had two pilots, an engineer, navigator, and radio operator. I guess that was finacially feasable in the days of communism when everybody had to have a job. Maybe this has something to do with it as well?
Stefandotde From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (9 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3394 times:
L 188: "Short answer....they are loud.
I doubt the tail incident here at ANC had anything to do with the russian jets. "
That can't be the reason, L188. We were talking about loud 727 too , also I called them dirt-catapults. The russian planes are allowed to fly to FRA too and you bet that we have much harder eco-restrictions than the US has.
Just to compare what aircrafts are still flying in the US vs. western europe.
Ben From Switzerland, joined Aug 1999, 1391 posts, RR: 52 Reply 13, posted (9 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3105 times:
So anybody can tell me which russian aircraft isn't allowed to fly to the US cause of it's loudness?
As we know, Stefan, there isn't one.
For everyone else:
Most of the reason they don't fly to the USA is because the airlines who have Russian aircraft prefer to fly their western equipment (passenger perception) to 'the west'.
Besides, there are only a few airlines, and a few types that could operate to the USA anyway, given the long distances.
The Russian far-east to Alaska routes are the only ones where you will see a Tu-154 (it is only a medium range airliner), and apart from that, the Il-62 and Il-96 are the only other types which could make the distance.
Cubana won't be opening many routes to the USA in the near future either. That's a shame!
Don't forget there are some Antonovs which operate from Florida (are they still there?) and many An-124/225s in use every day in the USA.
I wish some people would get over their cold war hangups.
Stefandotde From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (9 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3091 times:
@Ben: I would have been surprised that there is a restriction.
So maybe maybe airlines with older russian planes (or other planes which are very noisy) have to pay more fee when they want to use airports.
Lots of european airports do so: the louder a plane, the more fee.
And maybe that's one of the reasons why most of the eastern european airlines use younger planes from europe or the us (and also acceptance from passenger).
Sovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2339 posts, RR: 14 Reply 19, posted (9 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2734 times:
Tu-154Ms are stage 3 compliant. Tu-154Bs aren't and as far as I know none have been convetred to stage 3. I think the Il-62M is somewhat stage 3 compliant after all it flies in Europe. Basic Il-62s are the loud ones(they have the same engines as the Tu-154B). Il-86s are non stage 3(modified Tu-154B engines is your reason). Il-96 are quiet just like an A-340 for example. An-124s/225s fly to USA and have stage 3. It even says it on the engine nacelles.
Jetdeltamsy From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2984 posts, RR: 8 Reply 21, posted (9 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2637 times:
soviet/russian aircraft are percieved by westerners as being unsafe.
you will find that most of their flights from moscow to western european destinations utilize their boeing/airbus fleet. flights between moscow and eastern european and other destinations are on russian aircraft.
it's a marketing thing.
Worked for too many airlines to list. Banktupcy after bankruptcy after bankruptcy.