FLY777UAL From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4512 posts, RR: 2 Posted (16 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2041 times:
All biases aside, would you be willing to fly onboard a brand new Russian Il-96M for a long haul flight if it was operated by a new airline from say, the United States, or the UK, or from Switzerland (as an incentive, say that the interiors and onboard service were up to SQ standards)? Would you question the safety or reliability of the jet?
How do you think the general public would react to the Russian plane?
Slawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3804 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (16 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1945 times:
Sure why not, the public in general does not pay attention to the type of airplane that they are flying on. The IL96M is not that much different from many western types and I'm sure that it is just as safe as any of them as long as the pilots are compitent.
"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
Raddog2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (16 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1923 times:
I would definitely fly an IL-96. I agree with Slawko...most people probably wouldn't even know it was Russian. I would have to think twice about older types though, like the IL-62. The 4 engines on the rear bit is cute, but not cute enough to make me want to try it.
TeenFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (16 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1922 times:
I think they should make that HUGE Antonov cargo airship a passenger plane. That could probably hold 600 passengers. I might be a little hesitant to fly it though if it wasnt tested but if it was tested like Boeings aircraft, then i would fly it in an instant. I saw how Boeing tested their 777 engines on the Discovery channel last night, they threw ice sheets, dead birds, etc in the engine as it was running and the titanium blades easily chopped them up. They also shaked the plane repeatedly up and down at high forces and eventually tested how high the wings could bend. The wings started out straight and the gradually bent the wings to 24 ft above that before they snapped!
Avion From Bouvet Island, joined May 1999, 2205 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (16 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1893 times:
The reason why russian jets are not operated in western because they are very heavy and use to much fuel. Lufthansa said it will consider the cargo Tu204 if it will get lighter. For safety they are equal to boeings and airbuses. I would definitely try it.
Kuba74 From Poland, joined Mar 2000, 432 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (16 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1879 times:
You`re right- most people do not even know the type of the aircraft they fly. Several years ago ( I think it was 1984) I flew LOT`s Antonov 24 on a domestic route in Poland. Nowadays LOT uses ATR 42/72 on domestic routes and believe me, there is no major difference from the passenger`s point of view. You have equal legroom, seats are the same (not very comfortable), one thing is that russian plane was noisy.
I have never flown russian jet- my dad who flied it quite often (TU134, TU154, IL-62) told me it was really noisy.
Second thing is safety- in 1980`s LOT has lost two IL-62 (all passengers died) and AN24 had also several accidents in Poland. Since LOT has changed it`s fleet into all- western aircraft there was no accidents. And that`s why I do not like russian planes.
Tr1492 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 109 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (16 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1870 times:
I don't think I'd get on a Russian jetliner - not to offend anyone, but the so-called "safety record" of the IL-86 and -96 is just that - those planes do not even come close to the amount of flight cycles and hours Western aircraft are subjected to, and comparitively speaking, given the small fleet numbers, their safety record can be misconstrued. Also, do you see what kind of plane Aeroflot flies on their international routes - mostly A310's! As for the older Russian planes, well, no chance!!
All that said, I would like to see the Russian plane industry grow and produce some good, quality aircraft, not copies of 757's - I, for one, think it'd be great for the avaition industry worldwide, as right now we only have Airbus & Boeing, and in a few years from now, we'll be talking about those products exclusively! Can you imagine the posts ten years from now - "Hey, remember the good old days when you could fly on a Lockheed or a McDonnell-Douglas"!!
Airman99o From Canada, joined Aug 1999, 981 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (16 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1845 times:
I must laugh at all of you saying that you wouldn't fly on these aircraft!! Sure the russians have had some really nasty accidents, but so have the americans, europeans and whoever else!! it just seems so bad that the russians were falling out of the sky because of the ammount that were flying in the older soviet and partner republics!! Also Russian aircraft were built to withstand much harsher climates and surfaces!! So in my mind I would surely fly Russian New and Old!! Mind you I don't think that I would want to fly a DC-10 or a MD-11, and espically a older 737!! Something about those rudders I realy don't trust!! Just my thoughts!!
Gagarin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (16 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1844 times:
I would be rather concerned about flying particular airline rather than the aircraft.
Bear in mind there are many operators in former Soviet Union, most of them having couple or so many aircrafts. I would be seriosly concerned if my flight arrangement would include any of them even if they flew DC-9s.
But Aeorflot International, Pulkovo or Ukrainian natioanal career seem to me perfectly sound airlines, and I wouldn't mind flying in their aircraft any time. Actually, getting on Pulkovo Airlines Tu-134 would be a treat for a lifetime...
Avia_Arg From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (16 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1834 times:
I've flown russians planes before and probably not with the best airline...Cubana. But no hesitation at all getting on a Tupolev 154...not at all. My opinion on people who are hesitant on getting on a russian jetliner or any jetliner for that matter...proves to me ignorance on their part. Though russian aircraft may not be up to "WESTERN" standards ,they are tough aircraft and built to last and still flying. Just because it's a russian plane doesn't mean is not safe people!!
ALL PLANES CRASH NOW AND THEN...that's life!
And as far as comments go about russian planes looking like for example the Tupolev 204 looking like the 757...I mean come on!! what are they suppose to look like though there are obvious differences all planes look very much the same 767, 320, 737, 777, 757, 330, 204, 96, 340, 727, 154, md80, 134, 334, atr42, f50, dch8s, crjs, erjs, 728, 190, same kind of configurations ... 747s and soon to be A3XXs. I don't understand what people would like to see russian aircraft or aircraft in general to look like. I don't get it...does anyone have an original desgin? A plane that wouldn't look like any other aircraft? If you do I'd like to see it! The most original design I've seen in recent years are those flying wings for passenger service. In short all aircraft will have similar characteristics and configurations for many years to come wether they are russian, american, european, brazilian, or canadian.
I'd love to try the IL96M or -300...hope one day one of these reach Buenos Aires...otherwise I'll have to go to it!