Fly2CHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4438 times:
Have always wondered why Western and non-communist countries have been reluctant to order Illuyshins, Tupolevs, etc.
Having a look at the impressive initial order book for the Concorde on a recent thread, I am similarly surprised that Aeroflot was the only carrier to order the 'Concordski' (I realise the same issues with noise may have prevented this).
Centrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3600 posts, RR: 20
Reply 3, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4354 times:
I am really lost here. I thought that Russia was no longer a "Communist" nation in the policy sense. They have a free market and a stock market. I believe that they became this in about 1988.
As for purchasing of Russian aircraft. Well I have always thought they were designed really for the Russian market and the ability to be put into military service at a moments notice. And we all know that Russian Military aircrats are durable and pretty darn good. (Cool is good)
If Russia really wants to move toward competition in the world market, the government has to allow some of their design bureaus to go under. And as you pointed out with the TU144, Aeroflot pretty much is the launch customer for almost every plane in Russia.
If you look at their space industry, things are looking good. The U.S. needs Soyuz, the EU wants the Kliper, and they can do it for less and still make it work. Though Soyuz had bumps it is still very reliable. The TU144 was a great idea. It could hold more people than Concord, it had canards which allowed it to fly at lower speeds (I think), and was a little more durable. NASA, Boeing and I think Lockheed all looked at it to look for new Supersonic designs.
Some recent Illyusians can be fitted with P&W engines (this was to try and sell them outside of Russia) but majority of Russian planes use Russian engines which do not meet many noise and fuel efficiency standards. Russians can make good planes just not the way much of the world wants them and needs them.
(I am going off many things I have read on this Forum, around the net, seen on TV and heard from my Aviation friends. Correct me if I have any mistakes. Mistakes are part of learning.)
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
757MDE From Colombia, joined Sep 2004, 1753 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4207 times:
Quoting Centrair (Reply 3): I am really lost here. I thought that Russia was no longer a "Communist" nation in the policy sense. They have a free market and a stock market. I believe that they became this in about 1988.
It's true, I think he meant why countries not belonging to the ex iron curtain or with a communist past have virtually no Russian Airplanes (with some exceptions of course) and why Russian planes haven't got much orders since the demise of the Soviet Union.
From what I've heard, the biggest problem is the lack of maintenance and spare part guarantees, because for what I've read (again) the planes, specially the new ones, have good quality (ask TNT about their TU-204s).
Politics as usual play an important role, and Russia hasn't a strong influence on potential buyers as Europe (Airbus) and USA (Boeing) might have.
ChiefT From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 368 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 4163 times:
Quoting Fly2CHC (Thread starter): Have always wondered why Western and non-communist countries have been reluctant to order Illuyshins, Tupolevs, etc.
In the 70's we had a small airline "General Air" (first regional airline in Germany in terms of what we understand presently under that) here in Germany. They had 5 YAK-40FG ( a version with western avionics) in their fleet:
D-BOBC (cn 9230122/CCCP-87819,D2-EAG,I-JAKO)
D-BOBE (cn 9230623.
That was in 1972.
After an accident they were sold, General Air busted.
The airline offered flights within Germany; like Lübeck-Kassel-Frankfurt
Horus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 59
Reply 9, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3982 times:
Quoting MD90fan (Reply 8): Is Egypt a Communist country, because some of the Egyptian airlines have TU-204.
Cairo Aviation operate a fleet of 3 Tu-204s (SU-EAF/H/I) and a Tu-204C (SU-EAG). The airline's owner is Ibrahim Kamel who owns Sirrocco Aerospace who in turn have a 49% stake in Tupolev. The main reason Cairo Aviation (formerly known as Air Cairo) was formed was for Sirrocco Aerospace to demonstrate the Rolls Royce engined Tu-204 to the international market and was only meant as a short term venture but they still fly today.
p.s. the Tu-204 operated by TNT (SU-EAJ) is wetleased from Cairo Aviation
N328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6542 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3962 times:
I think the RRJ will be an exception. Boeing and SNECMA have 50% design input into the airframe and engines, respectively, Boeing is responsible for project management and some of the marketing, and they also will manage the logistics network in the West (which helps with spare parts issues).
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
Dougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks ago) and read 3870 times:
Interesting stuff. I know a guy who was a GE tech rep back in the day. Ariana Afghan Airlines owned a CF6 equipped DC10 and they kept one spare engine in Kabul. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan one of the first things they did on arrival in Kabul was to grab Ariana's spare CF6 and spirit it off to who knows where? I'm sure that there are some passing internal similarities to soviet era large turbofans that were part of this technology transfer.
MD90fan From Bahamas, joined Jul 2005, 2931 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 3657 times:
Quoting N328KF (Reply 10): I think the RRJ will be an exception. Boeing and SNECMA have 50% design input into the airframe and engines, respectively, Boeing is responsible for project management and some of the marketing, and they also will manage the logistics network in the West (which helps with spare parts issues).
That's what I think, but I heard Belavia may order up to 12 TU-204-300 for use on international routes.
Scalebuilder From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 3638 times:
I remember to have seen a TU-134 in the color scheme of Aviogenex back in the 80's. This airline also flew the Boeing 727. The airline should have been based in Yugoslavia. It is surely gone as of today.
One of the few airlines that ever operated a mix of western and Soviet aircraft.
RIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1788 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (9 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3448 times:
Quoting Centrair (Reply 3): The TU144 was a great idea. It could hold more people than Concord, it had canards which allowed it to fly at lower speeds (I think), and was a little more durable.
- It was pretty cramped, seating up to 150 passengers instead of Concorde max 128, on 5 seats in a row being only 40 cm wider. The canards were not just to decrease take-off/landing speed. You won't install additional system unless you can't do without it, while Concorde had no problems with existing runways; the whole reason of canards was that Tu144 was catastrophically unstable on low speeds. It was no more an "enhancement" than a crutch is; you generally don't need it if you are healthy - Tu144 wing was not. As for "a little more durable" - even if it is "a very little", I've no idea where it could come from. Concorde served the market during, without service suspension, about 26 years. Tu144 was almost non-existing, performing total 102 commercial flights, of which only 55 with passengers.
Overall, I agree, it was a great idea. Same as Concorde or Boeing 2707. But it never materialized to anything that could be merely eligible to be compared to Concorde. Still, unlike US design, it was a real thing, and as such, deserves its place in history as "the only other SST ever built".
As for Soviet aircraft being sold outside Soviet bloc (I assume we don't mean only airliners), there are plenty of Soviet helicopters and transport airplanes (mostly An12s, An26s, and even some An8s were still flying quite recently) virtually everywhere in the world. The Soviet aviation industry is a great part of world aviation - hopefully, Russian/Ukrainian one stays and has its future.