Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s  
User currently offlineOD720 From Lebanon, joined Feb 2003, 1924 posts, RR: 33
Posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 5467 times:

There have been questions about Aeroflot's 777s so many times lately in here and untill recently, we all thought that they will be gone soon.

Here is the link:
http://www.aviatsiya.ru/forums/viewthread.php?tid=1043

If you read from the link above, you'll understand the subject.
In a nutshell though, a few years ago, Aeroflot decided to have the 767 as the only foreign built wide-body jet in its fleet, dumping both the 777s and the A310s. But it seems that the airline has decided to keep the 2 777s after all.

The narrowbody fleet will be made of A319/320/321s alongside the Tu-134 and Tu-154s.

Before anyone asks for a source of the info, let me say that http://www.aviatsiya.ru is made up of many "insiders" in CIS aviation and the news reported is almost always right.

Regards.

[Edited 2004-07-08 21:24:12]

30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 5264 times:

Not surprised really. SU have been saying that the 777 was due to be returned for a while now, but the reported dates always seemed to come and go.

With the way in which the Russian economy is expanding at the moment, there could even be thoughts of taking on extra aircraft as their international traffic grows.

Now let's see them in the new livery!


User currently offlineHamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2735 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5142 times:

Good news indeed for Aeroflot. Although it appears AM will now have to find another source for their planned acquisition - probably leased from AF.

And now, I must finally succumb to one of those statements that I hate seeing on this website - aircraft liveries. But seriously, if Aeroflot keeps the 777, can you imagine how gorgeous it would be if repainted in the new livery?!? My God, that would be one fine lookin' aircraft!

Regards,

Hamlet69



Honor the warriors, not the war.
User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5133 times:

Aeroflot should definitely have the 777 in their fleet. If people here remember the TV show "Airport", SU pulled a couple of rows out of the Y cabin after passenger surveys asked for a little more pitch.

The Russian cabin crew were also all smiles at having the aircraft to work with. The SU premium cabins looked excellently appointed.

AM should be able to find other 777s available; the UA ones have Pratt engines which might fit their fleet better.


User currently offlineTasha From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5112 times:

It is only fitting that Aeroflot keeps the B777. It serves them very well in a great many ways.

1. It is arguably the most advance, and in some ways most cost effective airliner in the World. Sorry Airbus fans, I'm not trying to start anything here - but Airbus really has nothing to match it.

2. It is the current flagship of global international service, and as that a status symbol.

3. The Boeing 777, in effect, places Aeroflot in the class of premium carriers. With all but a few exceptions, LH being the most notable, any airline that does NOT operate the B777 is for all intents and purposes second rate. Not to say that they are bad or have horrid service - they are not seen to be the equal (in the public's eye) to those that do.

4. Respectability in the West. This leads perhaps to greater profits as more Western business people, and leisure travelers may consider Aeroflot to Russia over a Western carrier.

That's all just my opinion. Would I fly Aeroflot? Hmmmm, I really don't know. I have heard all the horror stories and things. But if I get to fly on a B777, that certainly helps.

Tasha  Smile/happy/getting dizzy



[Edited 2004-07-09 02:14:53]

User currently offlineContinentalFan From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 356 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5004 times:

Tasha,

What about Virgin Atlantic and Qantas, to name two off the top of my head? They don't fly 777s and I would hardly consider them "second rate."


User currently offlineTasha From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4992 times:

Continentalfan,

"What about Virgin Atlantic and Qantas, to name two off the top of my head? They don't fly 777s and I would hardly consider them "second rate." "

Neither would I, they are part of the few exceptions out there. LH, is the most notable one. I firmly believe that the reason LH doesn't operate the B777 is entirely political in nature.

Tasha  Smile/happy/getting dizzy


User currently offlineIowa744fan From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 931 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4943 times:

Quick question. The only route that I know of that Aeroflot uses the 777s on is the thrice weekly Moscow-Seattle-San Francisco (if they still do this one). What other routes do they operate since I would think that this would only require one of the two aircraft? Thanks.

User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 4903 times:

They use them on occasional SVO-LHR flights, and also into China. Basically where they need the capacity.

User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 4884 times:

The other premier carriers may not have 777 , but they sure have 744s!


747SP
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 960 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 4846 times:

The other premier carriers may not have 777 , but they sure have 744s!

And the real good ones have both  Big grin


User currently offlineWarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 4835 times:

Agreed! DfwRevolution.


747SP
User currently offlineOD720 From Lebanon, joined Feb 2003, 1924 posts, RR: 33
Reply 12, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 4751 times:

An observation: There are absolutely no A300, A330 and A340 in East Europe ( including Poland, Hungary and Czech) and the CIS. Not a single one!
There was one A300 with Kyrgyzstan Airlines a few years ago which I think was returned to the original owners, Onur Air of Turkey.

The only large Airbuses are the A310s.

Thus, the Aeroflot 777s are the largest twin jets in that region. There are a good number of 767-300s with many airlines.



User currently offlineA330Fan1 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 856 posts, RR: 11
Reply 13, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 4746 times:

Aeroflot keeping 777s: great, the triple seven is a good plane, and a good part of Aeroflot's fleet.

...but personally I think they should get A330s and even maybe some A340s! Aeroflot's livery on these airbuses would look just absolutely fascinating. If not the A340, then at least the A330, which is an economically wise plane to get (not to mention most beautiful  Smile), as well as simply an overall good investment.

-A330Fan1


User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 4737 times:

Aeroflot can't 'invest' in anything at the moment, due to Russian taxation.

Their best strategy is Bermuda registered aircraft like the 767 and 777 fleet, on lease from ILFC and GECAS. As they are not imported as such, the huge tax penalty is avoided.

The A330 would be a bad move as their current fleet is Boeing for longhaul, with Russian built aircraft like the IL-96. Adding a third longhaul type would just complicate their fleet structure and increase costs.


User currently offlineL410Turbolet From Czech Republic, joined May 2004, 5665 posts, RR: 20
Reply 15, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 4716 times:

There are absolutely no A300, A330 and A340 in East Europe ( including Poland, Hungary and Czech) and the CIS. Not a single one!

OD720,
what is your point? Firstly I'd not put PL, H, CZ in the same region with Russia. Secondly, whatever a/c SU flies has absolutely no influence on LOT's or Malev's choice of medium/long range aircraft. BTW, A330 is the most likely replacement for OK's A310s since these are getting too old.


User currently offlineOD720 From Lebanon, joined Feb 2003, 1924 posts, RR: 33
Reply 16, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 4699 times:

L410Turbolet,

What point? I said it was an OBSERVATION that there are no widebody Airbuses.

Regards.


User currently offlineGKirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24904 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4645 times:

Neither would I, they are part of the few exceptions out there. LH, is the most notable one. I firmly believe that the reason LH doesn't operate the B777 is entirely political in nature.

Going by that, then the only reason AA,DL,CO operate 777s is due to political pressure.



When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineAeroflot777 From Russia, joined Mar 2004, 3005 posts, RR: 27
Reply 18, posted (10 years 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4553 times:

The guy on the website is just speculating!!!! He is wondering himself, and asking other people to confirm him. This doesnt sound like its 100% true. Aeroflot is doing poorly on their Russia - USA routes, therefore they seriously don't need them.
Iowa744fan,
Aeroflot doesn't fly to San Francisco anymore. They fly to Seattle and that's their final destination. They use the B767-300ER on this route.


Aeroflot777


User currently offlineVoodoo From Niue, joined Mar 2001, 2070 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (10 years 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4461 times:

Tasha wrote:
any airline that does NOT operate the B777 is for all intents and purposes second rate. Not to say that they are bad or have horrid service - they are not seen to be the equal (in the public's eye) to those that do.

[sarc....on] Thanks for speaking for The Public. [sarc.....off]
Funniest BS I've read here in a while. The only plane you can count on The Public accurately knowing is no longer in service. Concorde. The rest are just fat or skinny, usually twin engined, jets.

[Edited 2004-07-09 14:31:44]


` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
User currently offlinePe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19188 posts, RR: 52
Reply 20, posted (10 years 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4450 times:

"Aeroflot is doing poorly on their Russia - USA routes, therefore they seriously don't need them."

SU doesn't use its 772s on its USA routes, but rather primarily to DEL, AA), Japan">NRT, AA), China">PEK, and LHR (on SU and Fr only).

Tasha - AA, UA, etc., might be deemed 'first-rate' carriers in your mind, but are they making a profit? Nope. In contrast, some of the 'second-rate' airlines of which you speak ARE making a profit - which is surely far more important than any class crap.



"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
User currently offlineTasha From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (10 years 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4393 times:

Voodoo & Pe@rson:

What I wrote was personal opinion... The Concord was totally obsolete at retirement, but marginally profitable. Let me point something out to you (that you seem to have forgotten) - just because a carrier is or isn't profitable does not at all reflect on the superiority of the aircraft it uses for a specific route.

Gkirk:

No, they don't have the pressures from Germany's government (although LH is a "private" company now) to purchase Airbus. Also, the pressures of a European airline purchasing European aircraft.


I would love to further discuss this here, but I'm off to the airport. Going to ATL today...

Tasha  Smile/happy/getting dizzy



User currently offlineRoberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (10 years 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4253 times:

The Boeing 777, in effect, places Aeroflot in the class of premium carriers. With all but a few exceptions, LH being the most notable, any airline that does NOT operate the B777 is for all intents and purposes second rate. Not to say that they are bad or have horrid service - they are not seen to be the equal (in the public's eye) to those that do.

BTW you forgot SA and perhaps RJ, QR and Gulf Air, all of which i - a memeber of the public - would much rather fly over AA UA or DL.

And a lot of the other "first rate" airlines use A333's/A340's too.

Respectability in the West. This leads perhaps to greater profits as more Western business people, and leisure travelers may consider Aeroflot to Russia over a Western carrier.

Please your average member of the public doesnt have a freaking clue what a 777 is.

And why start an A vrs B in such an irrelevant thread.


User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 850 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (10 years 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4126 times:

Tasha;
Are U for real? You´re sure a A-bus basher if I ever seen one!!

"dont wanna have A vs B war"!

"T7 is the best, all other a/c´s are second rate"!! Hellooooooooo... Nuts

Mike//SE



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineKosmonaute From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 90 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (10 years 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4127 times:

The Boeing 777, in effect, places Aeroflot in the class of premium carriers. With all but a few exceptions, LH being the most notable, any airline that does NOT operate the B777 is for all intents and purposes second rate. Not to say that they are bad or have horrid service - they are not seen to be the equal (in the public's eye) to those that do.

Let's not forget SK, LX, and OS [unless we include Lauda with OS].

Do you really think the general public sits there and ponders on the quality of an airline based on if it operates a Boeing 777 or not? Come on. I think a lot of people have a difficult enough time telling a 777 from a 767 from a 737. To sit there and say that the public judges an airline based one the utlilisation of one aircraft is ridiculous.



Burning airlines give you so much more.
25 Post contains images Solnabo : Sure you got a right to a opinion, but I think you´re waaaay out of line here!! Mike
26 Tasha : First of all - this certainly isn't an Airbus v. Boeing thread. I stated opinion - no one here has to like it. I did not say one bad thing about Airbu
27 Post contains images Russophile : Before anyone asks for a source of the info, let me say that http://www.aviatsiya.ru is made up of many "insiders" in CIS aviation and the news report
28 Post contains images OD720 : Thank you Russophile for pointing out the "almost". I needed some support, a little late but very much appreciated. Cheers.
29 Boeing4ever : Sure you got a right to a opinion, but I think you´re waaaay out of line here!! You're one to talk Solnabo! If she's anti-Airbus, then consider her a
30 OD720 : Boeing4ever, Some say it's because of tax exemption reasons but it's not. I think it has got more to do with insurance and ownership reasons. This is
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will The 787s Make The 777s Redundant? posted Thu Jul 21 2005 06:45:33 by Avalon
DL Will Keep 777s On Order posted Thu Jul 22 2004 14:51:05 by Deltaffindfw
How Long Will Malev Keep The F70? posted Wed Dec 3 2003 11:16:19 by Steph001
So Now, Will Airtran Keep The 717? posted Tue Jul 1 2003 15:16:10 by 727LOVER
Will Bwia Keep The 340s For More Than 5 Years. posted Sat May 11 2002 21:57:18 by BWIA 772
Will AA Keep The TW Registration On Former TW A/c? posted Thu Mar 21 2002 21:40:52 by TrnsWrld
Will There Ever Be An Engine Bigger Than The 777s? posted Tue Oct 23 2001 07:15:00 by Lax
US/DL: Why Keep The Delta Name? posted Fri Nov 17 2006 20:28:17 by D L X
Singapore Will Keep A380 Order posted Wed Nov 8 2006 06:54:55 by Jimyvr
Who Will Supply The Parts For Airbus? posted Mon Nov 6 2006 19:34:25 by Idlewild