Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
YAK-42. RJ Alternative?  
User currently offlineLHMark From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 7255 posts, RR: 46
Posted (14 years 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1273 times:

120 pax (appx), good short-field performance, ventral airstairs... is anybody looking at these? I wonder if they could be re-engined, a'la IL-96M.


"Sympathy is something that shouldn't be bestowed on the Yankees. Apparently it angers them." - Bob Feller
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSushka From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 4784 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (14 years 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1258 times:

They are good workhorses and they were made to replace the TU 154 and TU 134. I like how you can climb up the butt in them.


Pershoyu Spravoyu Litaki!
User currently offlineAer Lingus From Ireland, joined May 2000, 1563 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (14 years 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1252 times:

I love Russian airliners.  
Apparently these aircraft are offered with western avionics like the Il-96 and TU-204 but its capacity is too much like the 737. Confidence in Russian airliners is still at an all-time low despite them being excellent aircraft at low low airframe prices  

Martin


User currently offlineIlyushin96M From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 2609 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (14 years 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1244 times:

YAK42 wasn't made to replace TU154 or TU134, actually. The aircraft is more or less in a class by itself, operating from the more primitive airfields in Russia and with a passenger capacity and range that best suits it to short-range flights. I think it is the closest design to today's regional jets, but came long before their time.

The YAK42 was the second Soviet type to be withdrawn from service due to unexplained crashes. Not long after its introduction into service in the mid '70s, there were several crashes which later were determined to be the result of design flaws in the aircraft's flap system. The design was modified and re-introduced as the YAK42M.

The current models suffer from the maladies of all Soviet-era jetliners - overly thirsty engines and primitive passenger accommodations. I've heard there is a newer version, YAK242, under development which has twin engines and EFIS cockpit, but this may have been abandoned. There hasn't been anything new from Yakovlev for quite awhile.

A re-engineing program was studied for both the YAK40 and YAK42 which would have involved rebuilding the tailfin and tailcone, thus eliminating the centre engine, and equipping YAK40s with Lycoming turbofans, and YAK42s with CFM engines. Due to prohibitive cost, much like the CFM re-engine program for IL86, this program was dropped.


User currently offlineAer Lingus From Ireland, joined May 2000, 1563 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (14 years 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1241 times:

The YAK-42 was meant to be a replacement for the TU-134. I read it in a magazine article about the history of the aircraft

Martin


User currently offlineIlyushin96M From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 2609 posts, RR: 12
Reply 5, posted (14 years 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1237 times:

That makes sense, it was MEANT to replace TU134s, but never really did. That was the case with several Soviet types - for example, the Ilyushin IL86 was meant to be broadly equivalent to the Boeing 747, and meant to replace the IL62 on Aeroflot's long-range intercontinental routes. However, it did not meet its projected range and was relegated to medium-range routes.

I think the YAK42's early design flaws prevented it from being completely successful, as the TU134 soldiered on, and YAK42s are not altogether common throughout Russia.


User currently offlineAer Lingus From Ireland, joined May 2000, 1563 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (14 years 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1235 times:

With regard to the Il86.
I read a history recently on that aircraft also. Prior to that I did know it had bad range but not as appalling as the 1800 miles according to the former East German ailrine Interflug. Apparently the aircaft was required to stop twice: once here in Ireland (Shannon) and once in Gander in Newfoundland. On some occasions with strong headwinds, a third stop was required in Luxembourg. What kind of performance is that !

Martin


User currently offlineLHMark From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 7255 posts, RR: 46
Reply 7, posted (14 years 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1225 times:

The bureaus comprising the Soviet aerospace industry, while truly excellent at airframe design, and extremely creative at problem-solving, never developed good high-bypass turbofans. The IL-86 and '62s were tremendously thirsty compared to western counterparts.

Isn't the Yak-42 still in production?



"Sympathy is something that shouldn't be bestowed on the Yankees. Apparently it angers them." - Bob Feller
User currently offlineIlyushin96M From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 2609 posts, RR: 12
Reply 8, posted (14 years 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1222 times:

Martin, the IL86 is seriously deficient in range to the point where it can fly only on routes under 5 hours non-stop. I posted a trip report about a flight I took with Aeroflot aboard an IL86 in 1992 (very detailed and contains some info on the IL86's range deficiencies). We made the stop in Gander after only about three hours' time, then the flight across the Atlantic, then we stopped at Shannon. From there, we continued on to St. Petersburg.

The reason for the IL86's poor range is that the engines powering it were not designed specifically for the aircraft. They are 26,600 lb thrust Kuznetsov NK86 turbofans, basically a revamped version of the NK8 turbofan powering the TU154A and B-2. Fuel consumption is excessive because these four low-powered, inefficient engines have to work very hard to move the huge IL86. Imagine, 106,400 lbs of thrust pushing an airliner roughly the size of a DC-10, which has 150,000 lbs of thrust (or so) pushing it.


User currently offlineSlawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3799 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (14 years 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1201 times:

The ones in production now are the Yak142 and Yak242 both are the smae size as teh Yak42 but the 142 comes with a new modern cockpit and the Yak242 comes with a modern cockpit and only TWO PS-90A Turbofans


"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
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...
Interesting Yak 42 @ ZRH posted Fri Feb 24 2006 16:42:41 by Rw774477
Sovjet Tried To Sell Yak-42 To Finnair posted Tue Feb 21 2006 23:58:32 by Andaman
Due Gander, Cubana Yak 42 posted Tue Oct 18 2005 18:52:05 by RobK
Yak-42 Scheduled Flights To Central Europe posted Fri Apr 1 2005 13:32:35 by Airevents
Cubana Yak-42 Due Shannon At Midnight posted Thu Mar 10 2005 22:20:50 by RobK
Yak 42 In MCO; Anyone Know Why? posted Tue Jan 18 2005 08:11:03 by Groundstop
Yak-42 @ ZRH posted Thu Dec 16 2004 16:52:43 by Rw774477
YAK-42 And All-white A320 @ ZRH posted Thu Oct 14 2004 14:28:14 by Rw774477
YAK 42 Sightseeing Flight From CGN posted Thu Oct 7 2004 17:53:09 by DTManiac
Yak 42 Sightseeing Flight At Cologne Oct 30 posted Thu Oct 7 2004 13:24:05 by Cedarjet