Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Russian Aircraft Vs Western Aircraft  
User currently offlineCedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8658 posts, RR: 53
Posted (17 years 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6186 times:

I agree with Zmey Gorynich, let's get out of the cold war. I think the Il-62 is a poorly engineered aircraft (the LOT accident being one of many examples), and the Il-86/96 may not be as economical as an A330 (but probably not far behind the MD11). But the Tupolevs and the entire Soviet fleet generally were built to withstand incredible extremes of temperature, weather, operating environment, and an average USSR-era Aeroflot pilot's day-to-day ops would turn a US domestic pilot (or Western European pilot for that matter) green with terror. The aircraft are probably stronger than American or Airbus, and the pilots definitely used to much more difficult conditions, so with this in mind I would happily fly with virtually any Russian pilot and airline, as long as the plane was maintained properly. Just because someone was once a communist doesn't mean they can't design or fly a plane as well as someone who is a capitalist. How could ideological differences mean anything? Also, Antonov aren't Russian, they're Ukrainian.

fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
6 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineCV990 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (17 years 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6192 times:

Hi Cedarjet.

Your topic its interesting. During many years everybody would say that most of soviet airplanes were copies of western airplanes, well that's something that we should discuss in other topic. About what we have I give some credit to those people, they knew it was dificult to have western know-how so they had to develop their own products, and after all we have to admit that they sucessed it. It was not nothing like western types but they've donne the best they could. I find soviet aircraft quite unique, we can't say that the TU134 was a DC-9 or a TU154 was a B. 727 or a IL62 was a VC-10. For me for example one genuine soviet design was no doubt the TU114, it was a monster but it was the fastest prop aircraft in the world. We also know that during the old times comunist countries had to buy soviet hardware and that gave lots of limitations to airliners. I remember one time when Chile was a marxist regime the soviets wanted them to buy IL62 for intercontinental routes and the chilieans said " no way!!!"
But we must not forget those planes, their are part of our hobby though!
Take care!

User currently offlineSashA From Russia, joined May 1999, 869 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (17 years 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6187 times:

Good point - Cold War is in the past!

Antonov is, yes, a Ukraine-based design bureau. Still, when we're talking Soviet planes then that includes Antonov. If about Russian, then probably they can be excluded.

But hey, these separation of Ukraine from Russia is only a political hassle. People in day-to-day life still refer to each other as people of one nation. And there're always the ones who feel "nationalistic", yeah, but they're fewer.

BTW, I noticed a trend that majority of later air accidents involving Soviet-made (and Western, too) planes, took place under care of African, Middle East or Asian operators. Must be due to poor maintenance, or wha?

Alex A

User currently offlineSlawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3804 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (17 years 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 6185 times:

You are right about the latest accidents, it usually is poor maintenance, and I don't want to start any conflict but no True Ukrainian Refers to himself as a Russian or Soviet in Nationality. Maybe in Haritage, but most of us spent almost 80 years trying to get away from Russia. But anyways, you are right when talking about Soviet built planes Antonov must be included. Their planes don't have the greatest record either. But the new AN-170?? I think it is called looks to be a promissing new step in the western direction, Even the germans are interested in it, and I think it will bring Antonov into the next century. Aswell as the TU-204, and Il-114 In Russia, Maybe this bad reputation for Russian and Ukrainian planes will be changed??

"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
User currently offlineAA 737-800 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 199 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (17 years 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 6186 times:

I'm a fairly large fan of Russian aircraft, but I've never heard of the An-170. Maybe you're refering to the An-70. It has 4 propfan engines. It's promoted as a replacement for the older versions of the C-130, but due to the Russian and Ukrainian reputation in the industry most countries will buy the C-130J instead, which has improved engines over the C-130. Russia has even offered the An-70T/77, a version of the An-70, to NATO, but it has been turned down simply becase it was Ukrainian, even thought it is better overall than any Western prop-powered transport yet to reach the drawing board. The Russian are VERY desperate to sell aircraft, and it looks like the An-70 is there golden opportunity.

BTW - The Russians are so poor that to conserve expensive jet fuel, one of their attack plane, the Su-25, can run on diesel, kerosine and pertol as well as jet fuel. Can you amagine the smell when one of those takes-off using diesel?

AA 737-800

Civil engineering isn't about making things perfect...just better.
User currently offlinePhilly phlyer From United States of America, joined May 1999, 317 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (17 years 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 6185 times:

Thank all of you for interesting and intelligent posts without prejudice or nationalism. Russian planes were made to perform in very difficult conditions that would be murder on many western aircraft. They have done that job well. The observation about maintenance is the central issue these days.

Now if we can get the same message through to the Boeing vs. Airbus types. We need diversity and competition if aviation is to progress. Without it, we'd still be flying nothing but 737-200s, 727-200s and 747s! [Anyone think Boeing would have invested in the 737NG, 757, 767 or 777 if it didn't have competition?] This would be a pretty boring board without some diversity.

User currently offlineZmey Gorynich From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (17 years 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6185 times:

glad to see all of you here, guys!

privet, bratva!
rad, chto nashih zdes' mnogo. nakonec-to!
kto-nit' letal? davayte spishemsya?

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...
Russian Aircraft Vs Western Aircraft posted Fri May 28 1999 15:34:14 by Cedarjet
Russian Aircraft Vs. U.S. And European Aircraft posted Fri Aug 25 2000 01:40:52 by Superfly
Russian Taxes On Aircraft Imports? posted Wed Jul 7 2004 12:46:04 by Southpac
Possible VS Aircraft Names posted Tue Jul 6 2004 02:38:36 by VSFullThrottle
VS Aircraft Refit posted Sun May 16 2004 16:44:23 by PlaneMad
Like Russian And Soviet Aircraft? posted Fri Jan 9 2004 11:54:57 by Pe@rson
Power Ports On VS Aircraft? posted Wed Nov 19 2003 23:59:00 by Safetydude
Training Costs Vs. Aircraft Deals? posted Tue Jun 12 2001 21:15:19 by Asdf
VS Aircraft To Delhi? posted Wed Aug 16 2000 21:00:44 by Airmale
Registration # VS. Aircraft type posted Sat Nov 21 1998 06:50:52 by Sean