Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why No Russian Airliners In North America?  
User currently offlineRob878 From Canada, joined Apr 2006, 45 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 10123 times:

I know that there is alot of criticism about Russian planes, but they have built some great ones and I am sure that the new planes are very up to standard with western built aircraft.

Also, there are many airlines such as First Air that fly old 732's and 727's, why dont we see some Tu-154's? Or anything along those lines.

Do the D.O.T in Canada and FAA in the States have it out to keep commercial operators from using Russian built aircraft??

I know i was interested in bringing some AN-2's here to Canada to use in bush operations, because they are phenomenal airplanes for Bush applications. Less than 80,000 CND could buy me an airworthy AN-2 instead of $1,000,000.00 for a Cessna Caravan which lacks in many areas compared to the AN-2's.

After months of research and talks with D.O.T people, it seemed to me that under no circumstance would they allow Russian birds to be used commercially.

Do you think this has anything to do with agreements between manufacturers such as Cessna and the government to protect their businesses?? I could imagine that there would be many operators using russian aircraft if it was allowed.


Rob

27 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSkyman From Germany, joined May 2006, 494 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 10100 times:

I think it is because people in North America are to scared to board a russian plane. Otherwise there aren`t to many reasons. Look at the new Tupolew 204. It is a really good plane and a lot cheaper than american, european or else.
The old T-154 are now even getting sorted out with Aeroflot. Just too old for duty to Europe. But a lot of charterflights to Russia or the Balkan are using the T-154 in summer.
Greetings


User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33289 posts, RR: 71
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 10072 times:

Domodedovo Airlines is planning to inagurate non-stop service between Miami and Moscow this fall with an IL-96, 3x a week.

It isn't that Americans are scared to board Russian planes. It is simply that Aeroflot choses to send their Boeings here. Aeroflot has flown Russian-built aircraft to Anchorage, Seattle, Miami, Dulles, and NYC in the past.



a.
User currently offlineB777-700 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 10061 times:

The AN124 of course is floating around quite a bit. Avialeasing has a small fleet of AN12 and AN24 cargo planes based in South Florida's OPF airport.

Domodedovo is due to start DME-MIA with and IL96.


User currently offlineSFO2SVO From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 403 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 9975 times:

I do not think there's much chance for passenger planes (even RRJ) unfortunately: reasons are parts/support availability (how long would it take to get a replacement if TU-204 engine fails on, say, SJC-AUS run?), 3 men crew and, yes, reputation.
There is some definite space for freighters though, and it is already happening:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1043195/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0978664/M/



318-19-20-21 332 343 717 727 737-234578 743-4 752 763 772 D9/10 M11/8x/90 F70 RJ85 ATR72 SF340 E120 TU34/54 IL18/62/86/9
User currently offlineRob878 From Canada, joined Apr 2006, 45 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9848 times:

Its good to see some russian birds in North America operating commercially. Maybe the trend will continue to some passenger jets in the near future. I think it would be great if Boeing and Airbus would have another competitor!.


Rob


User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6491 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9806 times:

Quoting SFO2SVO (Reply 4):
I do not think there's much chance for passenger planes (even RRJ) unfortunately: reasons are parts/support availability (how long would it take to get a replacement if TU-204 engine fails on, say, SJC-AUS run?), 3 men crew and, yes, reputation.

I believe it's some combination of Alenia and Boeing doing the support network. That should make customers breathe easier.



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineWjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5350 posts, RR: 22
Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 9751 times:

Quoting Rob878 (Thread starter):
Do you think this has anything to do with agreements between manufacturers such as Cessna and the government to protect their businesses??

No. I think it's the free market at work, combined with more stringent certification requirements (or...to be clearer, "different" certification requirements).


User currently offlineTheweave33 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 41 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 9649 times:

I've asked a few aviation-ignorant people in the last few hours what the first thing that came to their mind when I said Russian Aircraft. Most wouldn't trust them at all. Though I myself would feel completley safe in them if they were owned by most carriers I'm familiar with. Around Christmas time I was talking to my mom about the DC-10 and all she could recall were the horrible disasters that happened to those aircraft regardless of the very good safety record otherwise. It's the same principle. Once a reputation has been earned, it is really hard to lose to re-establish one. Many people only hear about the disasters and do not take into consideration that those jets fly thousands of routes each year without a major problem.

Also, the airlines stick with what works. The Airbus and Boeing planes have worked fine so why all of the sudden introduce Russian Jets or anyother for that matter. Any change is a risk.

And finally you got a third model you'd have to introduce into an already bi-model fleet.

Yet, I would love to see some Russian models make it over here!


User currently offlineRemcor From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 9579 times:

The problem is that many carriers that fly Russian aircraft have a sub-par safety record overall - whether or not that be because of poor maintenance, poor crew, poor climate conditions in the regions they fly, or poor aircraft.

I've flown my share of Russian aircraft and while I don't have any safety complaints, they generally just aren't quite as comfortable as their Western counterparts. Therefore richer carriers will probably buy Western, while poorer carriers will stick to Russian. Poorer carriers generally have a poorer safety record and therefore that will reflect poorly on the aircraft.

Plus, while Russian aircraft have lower upfront costs, the maintenance costs on their older engines can be twice as much as western aircraft, or so I've heard.


User currently offlineAeroWeanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1610 posts, RR: 52
Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 9548 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

There is a very basic reason that there are no Russian airliners in service with an airline in the US. No Russian airliner, except the Il-96T (TCDS A54NM), has ever been Type Certified in the US. Without a Type Certificate, they can't be used for hire by a US operator.

To FAA certify a Russian airliner would be very expensive and no one has yet wanted to repeat what Ilyushin went through on the Il-96T certification.


User currently offlineWingscrubber From UK - England, joined Sep 2001, 854 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 9540 times:

I posted a similar question a while ago, might be worth a look... it was a more general question about the use of Russian airliners.
Why Not More Russian Airliners Flying? (by Wingscrubber Jan 16 2006 in Civil Aviation)#ID2551374



Resident TechOps Troll
User currently offlineSkyman From Germany, joined May 2006, 494 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 7 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 9510 times:

That is a very good link you gave Wingscrubber. Thank you.
Another reason for russians not getting on the market is that they can�t provide tha same service as airbus or boeing and that makes a very big part of buisiness nowadays.


User currently offlineRedcordes From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 245 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 7 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 7835 times:

Check the tech/ops. forum for past discussions.


"The only source of knowledge is experience." A. Einstein "Science w/o religion is lame. Religion w/o science is blind."
User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4376 posts, RR: 28
Reply 14, posted (8 years 7 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 7617 times:

Quoting Theweave33 (Reply 8):
The Airbus and Boeing planes have worked fine so why all of the sudden introduce Russian Jets

Many airlines have switched from an all-Boeing to an all-Airbus fleet (and vice-versa) so needless to say, there could be compelling reasons for switching to a Russian-built model. Money would be the deciding factor and when it comes to Russian aircraft their list prices are considerably lower. If the FAA were to certify Russian aircraft I have no doubt airlines would flock to them, or at least give them serious consideration. But then certification by the FAA may entail a hefty increase in list price to cover the associated costs.

I've always felt it was a shame that the Russians don't take a more aggressive stance in marketing their newer aircraft. It would be nice to see them break the current duopoly between the two titans (and it would certainly break some of the more repetitive A vs. B threads on here).



My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13549 posts, RR: 100
Reply 15, posted (8 years 7 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 7576 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Wjcandee (Reply 7):
No. I think it's the free market at work, combined with more stringent certification requirements (or...to be clearer, "different" certification requirements).

 checkmark 

Can Russian aircraft put 20 minute turns at the gate? nope, there goes LCC interest. Add 5% to CASM for poor turn times (fewer flight hours per day).

Do Russian aircraft beat A or B on fuel economy? (IIRC 30% of CASM currently). Nope. All that added weight for landing in snow hurt them. Not to mention the engines are a generation and a half behind western designs. So add 5% to 10% to CASM for poor fuel burn.

Do Russian aircraft beat A or B on maintenance? Nope (~ 10% of CASM IIRC for Western aircraft). I've heard numbers of 50% to 100% higher. I know for engines its about double due to Russian designs having much shorter cycle lives between shop overhauls. So add 5% to CASM for flying a Russian design.

Others have noted the 3 man cockpits (fixed on the latest designs). So we'll ignore this one.

Cost? Well, a lease is typically 11% of CASM (again, IIRC). So even a free airplane doesn't count for much in CASM reduction...  scratchchin 

Risk? (Part delays, etc.) Add 10% to the estimated CASM.

So for 5% (turn times)+ 5% (best case MX) + 5% (best designs added fuel burn) + Risk to save maybe 5% on CASM for purchase price? You make the call.

Basic economics says no to Russian designs. Recall that NW made a big deal that the DC-9's made sense until $35/bbl. At $70/bbl? Fuel efficiency matters a lot more than it did five years ago...

Mind you, I think the designs are safe and if I ever need to land in a foot of snow, Antonov is my airframe of choice! But to and from LAX? A, B or hopefully soon E.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineFLY2LIM From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1188 posts, RR: 10
Reply 16, posted (8 years 7 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 7532 times:

Quoting Theweave33 (Reply 8):
I've asked a few aviation-ignorant people in the last few hours what the first thing that came to their mind when I said Russian Aircraft. Most wouldn't trust them at all. Though I myself would feel completley safe in them if they were owned by most carriers I'm familiar with. Around Christmas time I was talking to my mom about the DC-10 and all she could recall were the horrible disasters that happened to those aircraft regardless of the very good safety record otherwise. It's the same principle. Once a reputation has been earned, it is really hard to lose to re-establish one. Many people only hear about the disasters and do not take into consideration that those jets fly thousands of routes each year without a major problem.

How many people choose to buy a Honda/Toyota, and how many choose a Hyundai instead? They are all good cars, but the Korean cars have a bad reputation.
There are dozens of Russian aircraft flying in Peru because they are cheap to buy/lease. I'm still not getting on one, though.

FLY2LIM



Faucett. La primera linea aerea del Peru.
User currently offlineFRAspotter From United States of America, joined May 2004, 2361 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (8 years 7 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 7531 times:

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 14):
(and it would certainly break some of the more repetitive A vs. B threads on here).

It would than be A vs. B vs. I vs. T vs. An  Silly



"Drunk drivers run stop signs. Stoners wait for them to turn green."
User currently offlineBlueSky1976 From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1912 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (8 years 7 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 7424 times:

Quoting Rob878 (Thread starter):
Do the D.O.T in Canada and FAA in the States have it out to keep commercial operators from using Russian built aircraft??

If a Russian plane is designed and built to FAA/JAA specs, there is no legal reason not to certify it in the States.

Quoting Rob878 (Thread starter):
I know i was interested in bringing some AN-2's here to Canada to use in bush operations, because they are phenomenal airplanes for Bush applications. Less than 80,000 CND could buy me an airworthy AN-2 instead of $1,000,000.00 for a Cessna Caravan which lacks in many areas compared to the AN-2's.

See above. The main reason for that is that An-2 was never designed to be used in the West, therefore it didn't have to be built with FAA/JAA certification in mind (as a matter of fact when An-2 was being designed there was no JAA and I'm not sure who was the FAA predecessor at the time). As far as functionality of the plane goes, you're right: NOTHING beats it in its class. And it's one hell of a plane too - the best looking biplane, definitely!!!

Quoting SFO2SVO (Reply 4):
I do not think there's much chance for passenger planes (even RRJ) unfortunately: reasons are parts/support availability (how long would it take to get a replacement if TU-204 engine fails on, say, SJC-AUS run?), 3 men crew and, yes, reputation.

RRJ is being designed with a very, very, VERY close cooperation between Boeing and Sukhoi. If Boeing decides to venture into the sub- 130 seat market, I wouldn't be surprised a bit if they use their own version of RRJ design. Basically, RRJ is the reason why Boeing decided to establish their own design bureau in Russia. I believe Boeing will also provide quality control and manufacturing feedback to Sukhoi. Stereotypes aside, RRJ will be just as good as Embraer or Bombardier - both design-wise, economy-wise and quality-wise.

I heard the rumour this morning that SAS is in negotiations to be one of the launch customers for RRJ-95...

"the Russian Sukhoi aviation enterprise is in negotiations with SAS about the purchase of 22 RRJ planes - the CEO Wiktor Subbotin said" - source (in Polish): http://www.rzeczpospolita.pl/gazeta/...060525/ekonomia/ekonomia_a_38.html

[Edited 2006-05-25 20:43:08]


Now get your f***ing Jumbo Jet off my airport!!! - AC/DC "Ain't No Fun To Be a Millionaire"
User currently offlineRob878 From Canada, joined Apr 2006, 45 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 7255 times:

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 15):
Can Russian aircraft put 20 minute turns at the gate? nope, there goes LCC interest. Add 5% to CASM for poor turn times (fewer flight hours per day).

Do Russian aircraft beat A or B on fuel economy? (IIRC 30% of CASM currently). Nope. All that added weight for landing in snow hurt them. Not to mention the engines are a generation and a half behind western designs. So add 5% to 10% to CASM for poor fuel burn.

Not to be rude, but maybe some research into these Russian airplanes will give you a better view and opinion.

Tu-204's utilize Rolls-Royce RB211535E4 or 535F5 turbofans. Which are the same as on some of the most modern 757's, plus there is Rockwell Collins avionics in use.

Il-96t's and m's use Pratt & Whitney PW2337 turbofans.



Can there be a 20 minute turn around time at the gate??? OF COURSE, just as sure as a 757 can, a Tu-204 can. Tupolev is also considering using the Rolls Royce Trent 700 engines (commonly used on the A330 200's) on some of their designs. It is all the same stuff being used.

American Components, French Components, Russian Components. ALL MADE IN TAIWAN!!!!  .... well, most of them anyways.

Rob

[Edited 2006-05-25 20:54:26]

User currently offlineB777-700 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (8 years 7 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6989 times:

Quoting FRAspotter (Reply 17):
It would than be A vs. B vs. I vs. T vs. An

I > A + B anyway!  Wink


User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 859 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (8 years 7 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6966 times:

I like Il-96, but why are the engines so close compared to the A343 under the wing? Maybe this question has been discussed before, sorry for that but I´m very curious...

Good or bad for Il-96-300?

Micke//SWE  wave 



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineSkyman From Germany, joined May 2006, 494 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 7 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6905 times:

Quoting Rob878 (Reply 19):
Can there be a 20 minute turn around time at the gate??? OF COURSE, just as sure as a 757 can, a Tu-204 can.

I have to give Rob my support because he is right.  bigthumbsup 
Concerning the RRJ the best technology from Russia, Europe and America is being combined into this aircraft. I think it will find it�s place in aviation. The biggest opponent for the RRJ will probably be the Embraer 135 and 175. I see more and more of them flying around in East Europe every day.


User currently offlineStarGoldLHR From Heard and McDonald Islands, joined Feb 2004, 1529 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (8 years 7 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6848 times:

Who says Russian Airliners dont come to the US ?

it doesnt get bigger than this at JFK -

Big version: Width: 1248 Height: 972 File size: 107kb
AN-225 taxi's to departure at JFK, 14th Sept 2003



So far in 2008 45 flights and Gold already. JFK, IAD, LGA, SIN, HKG, NRT, AKL, PPT, LAX still to book ! Home Airport LCY
User currently offlineMD90fan From Bahamas, joined Jul 2005, 2931 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (8 years 7 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 6796 times:

Quoting Skyman (Reply 22):
I have to give Rob my support because he is right.
Concerning the RRJ the best technology from Russia, Europe and America is being combined into this aircraft. I think it will find it�s place in aviation. The biggest opponent for the RRJ will probably be the Embraer 135 and 175. I see more and more of them flying around in East Europe every day.

No the -175 will be a threat maybe, but the ER3???? come on man tell me your kidding  Smile



http://www.devanwells.blogspot.com/
25 Post contains images Lightsaber : None of the Pratt's were certified. There was a big political mess. While I respect you're doubtfull, I had coworkers working on the IL-96M/T... The
26 Rob878 : All I am saying is wait and see... Times are changing and russia is a big player when it comes to aircraft. I think in the next 10 years we will start
27 Lightsaber : I 100% in the future the Russians could be a force. Both the RRJ or a SSBJ has a lot of merit. I hope to see their aircraft in the skies soon! You no
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...
Why No Russian Planes In The U.S.? posted Tue Sep 28 2004 01:55:33 by Wedgetail737
Why Are There Mean FA's In North America? posted Wed Oct 6 2004 04:02:38 by Ktachiya
Vancouver Again No 1 Airport In North America posted Mon May 19 2003 20:21:39 by Connector4you
Calgary (YYC) Is No. 1 In North America posted Fri Jun 23 2000 03:01:05 by Carioca Canuck
Why No Flights Between Luxembourg and N. America? posted Sat Sep 16 2006 21:30:23 by USADreamliner
Why No Glass Jetways In US Airports? posted Thu Jun 22 2006 16:52:26 by Ilyag
Why No WN Expansion In CLE? posted Tue Jun 6 2006 01:19:38 by Chrisjake
Bring Back The Meals In North America! posted Sun Jan 22 2006 11:14:59 by Ppostro
SIA- Why No Drug Warnings In Advertising? posted Fri Dec 2 2005 04:12:33 by RichardJF
Potential A350 And A380 Customers In North America posted Sat Nov 12 2005 09:58:09 by Columba