KSUpilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 656 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 7 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5311 times:
In the next few years what are the chances that the Russian aircraft companies will be seen in western fleets? You the RRJ which could be a nice alternative to Embraer and Bombardier. And isn't there a Russian aircraft that is similar to the 757? With Boeing halting 757 production, could this Russian counterpart get a chance at life?
What has held Russian aircraft back, from what I have read online, most passengers are pleased with them, so it is not a quality issue.
Levg79 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 989 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 5257 times:
I'd say technology is one point where Russian aircraft fall behind. Other than that, you have seen how many people do not trust Airbus simply because it is not a Boeing. Imagine a person like that having to fly Tupolev.... These are I think the only reasons why Russian aircraft are not popular in the western world.
A mile of runway takes you to the world. A mile of highway takes you a mile.
Irobertson From Canada, joined Apr 2006, 601 posts, RR: 4 Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 4 days ago) and read 5199 times:
Lets try and infuse some facts in here, or at least something plausible. First of all, "people that don't trust airbus because they're not boeing" don't procure planes for airlines, they post at airliners.net all day long.
What we do know is that Russian aircraft companies are dirt poor in comparison to Boeing and Airbus. Its hard for them to sell aircraft to places like North America when they have no maintenance facilities over there and everything would have to come back to Russia for work. They don't have the money to build that infrastructure yet, so their growth is slow. The RRJ market is a good area for the Russians to focus on since they can build capital by selling to places nearby like China.
But they're already starting by offering aircraft like the IL-96M with Pratt and Whitney engines and Honeywell avionics (I'm not sure if they're still offering it since they got relatively little interest, though Transavia was apparently interested), and Tupolev offers the aforementioned 757 clone (which is isn't really) the Tu-204 series which has a few operating examples working both as passenger and cargo haulers. TNT has had at least a couple and I believe they offer them with Western engines and avionics as well.
I think that Russia could break into the market, but they need to build up their infrastructure and prove they could provide a support network that extends over the whole globe. I think that as far as "safety" goes, we should really look at how resilient the old generation Russian aircraft are, still mainline aircraft for dozens of airlines. I believe they're only getting better, but that's also an opinion.
There's a very knowledgeable member on here named Tu204 who might be able to offer some hard facts on the state of Russian aircraft designs and sales.
Scalebuilder From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 4 days ago) and read 5183 times:
Quoting Irobertson (Reply 2): but they need to build up their infrastructure and prove they could provide a support network that extends over the whole globe.
This is absolutely the key to the magic breakthrough and long-term success.
Quoting Irobertson (Reply 2): I think that as far as "safety" goes, we should really look at how resilient the old generation Russian aircraft are, still mainline aircraft for dozens of airlines. I believe they're only getting better, but that's also an opinion.
I think Russian aircraft are of good and reliable design too. Just my opinion as well. They were designed to operate independently at airports with little or no ground support or infrastructure. Additionally, these aircraft had to retain the ability to land or take off from primitive airstrips in often hostile climates.
What has hurt the Russian aircraft industry is not their design, but their "lack of" knowledge and capacity in developing fuel efficient and reliable engines. In my humble opinion, this has historically been the greatest setback of the Russian aircraft industry.
KSUpilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 656 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 5153 times:
It is a shame that Russian aircraft are always shown as unreliable tin cans. I guess that is all left over from Cold War.
Quoting Irobertson (Reply 2): I think that Russia could break into the market, but they need to build up their infrastructure and prove they could provide a support network that extends over the whole globe.
Definitely the key for them. One way they could also prove themselves is working with a western company, like Bombardier or Embraer.
Quoting Irobertson (Reply 2): and Tupolev offers the aforementioned 757 clone (which is isn't really) the Tu-204 series which has a few operating examples working both as passenger and cargo haulers.
Even though it is not a "clone" it is close. If you were an airline which would you rather have, a brand new Tu-204 or a used 757. I don't see American airlines like CO or AA replacing their 757s with Tu-204s, however, some cargo airlines in the west could use it. TNT is just one example. I remember a thread awhile back after FedEx acquired some used 757s...someone asked why FedEx didn't look into the Tu-204.
Hey, with the weather conditions these aircraft endure, I wouldn't mind flying on a Russian aircraft.
Good point. It does. Although that comparison shows a "shorter" Tu-204 (I think? Maybe there's another variant with a different number like 214 or 234 that's longer) to a 757-300. I've seen pictures of Tu-204s where I have thought of the 752, but I've also though of the A321. But you're right about the Embraer thing for sure. When I saw a TNT 204 with my own eyes at Dublin over the summer (while taxiing), I did get the impression of a Embraer nose.
Penguinflies From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 975 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4979 times:
New TU-204 western equpt is something like $30 million before export taxes.
New B757, while in production, was twice that.
The export taxes, the inability for TU to provide an extensive parts network and lack of financing leads european and western airlines to go back to Airbus, Boeing, Embraer, and Bombardier. They can provide discounts, attractive financing, and support networks.
A388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9130 posts, RR: 13 Reply 10, posted (6 years 7 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4955 times:
The reason why the TU-204 is compared to the 757 is because they DO come close to each other in both size and the way they look! Levg79 showed pictures of the shorter TU-204 version and the 757-300 which are different in size but also not the right examples.
Airbuseric From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 4068 posts, RR: 51 Reply 12, posted (6 years 7 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4913 times:
Apperently KLM is looking to the RRJ program as replacement for their current fleet of F50/70/100 aircraft. Maybe these aircraft series will just fulfill their needs, where Western companies like Bombardier and Embraer just don't have the right product. Hopefully the RRJ will get a good chance outside the Russian (related) countries.
"The whole world steps aside for the man who knows where he is going"
EFHK From Finland, joined Nov 2006, 392 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (6 years 7 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4327 times:
In my opinion, people in the west have way too much prejudices about Russian-built aircraft that they would actually be bought for a long time. At least in Finland there are all kinds of horror stories floating around about "how a piece of roof collapsed on landing when I was on board a SU Tu-154" etc.
I have never flown on a Russian-built aircraft myself, so I've only heard these rumours, and thus I'm not too enthusiastic about them. I've also heard the noise and seen the smoke of AN-12s and Tu-154s flying over my home. Of course they are old models so that might not be a fair comparison. And yes, I've seen MD-80s taking off too.
But the subject brings me a question, if there's nothing wrong with flying Russian-built aircraft in Russia, why do airlines such as S7 and FV replace their fleets with Western-built aircraft as fast as they can?
[Edited 2006-11-19 23:11:49]
One of the best places in the world: McDonald's in T2 at FRA.
Levg79 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 989 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (6 years 7 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4202 times:
Quoting Shinkai (Reply 8): If i remember correctly, FedEx do have some Russian aircrafts
Quoting Shinkai (Reply 17): Apologies, I got this one wrong. But if I recall correctly, there is one US airliner that have Russian aircrafts in its fleet. Was it UPS or DHL? Or was it some Cuban airliner?
CU is the only "western" airline operating Russian aircraft. They have probably operating each type of Russian aircraft at one point or another.
Irobertson From Canada, joined Apr 2006, 601 posts, RR: 4 Reply 23, posted (6 years 7 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3512 times:
Quoting EFHK (Reply 20): But the subject brings me a question, if there's nothing wrong with flying Russian-built aircraft in Russia, why do airlines such as S7 and FV replace their fleets with Western-built aircraft as fast as they can?
Finnair used to operate Russian aircraft at one time, I believe.
I'm guessing one of the reasons for the western infusion of aircraft is that due to the collapse of the Russian economy following the end of communism nearly bankrupted the Russian aviation industry. They no longer had the military or civil orders rolling in from the government, so now they're playing a very slow game of catch-up. As far as I'm aware (and if I'm wrong, please let me know), there is no modern short-medium range airliner being tabled in Russia right now. There's the RRJ (just being built), the Tu-204 series (which has been bought in small numbers), and the IL-96 (not many but they're all in service I believe). There may be others that I've forgotten about.
The most common Western airliners I see in Russian pictures are 737s, A320-series, and some A310s. There isn't a Russian equivalent of that except things like the Tu-134 and 154, and the newest best working versions of those are still flying and quite popular (think NW DC9s ), but there's also a good deal of western regional airliners available used, so they're being bought up. But they're not replacing "everything" that's Russian made in every airline. Aeroflot still has a well kept fleet of 154s that can be seen frequently in Central and Eastern Europe, and they even have some Aeroflot-Nord 134s that are all biz class I believe. Domededovo Airlines has a fair number of Russian birds in their fleet, even some rare ones like the IL-68 (semi-clone of the VC-10).
I don't know much about the engines though, except its one of the reasons you're not seeing many Russian birds in North America, how would you maintain it?
FVTu134 From Russia, joined Aug 2005, 170 posts, RR: 1 Reply 24, posted (6 years 7 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3311 times:
FYI, the Tu-204 Does operate for TNT, although through Air Cairo leases and TNT from what I've heard are very happy with those birds. They are modern, reliable and basically do the job. Fuel burn has come down with the most recent PS-90A2's and now approximates western engines (of current design).
The Tu-204 has also been offered with the 757's engines (RR) although I never heard of any takers.
The main problem with getting these birds flying in the west is, as mentioned before, the support network. Also I believe that anything more then a B-Check needs the bird flown into the plant in Ulyanovsk which is obviously a big objection, not to mention cost, for any cost-sensitive airline (basically everybody).
Russian manufacturers have the same aerodynamic capabilities as western manufactureres and even though they may be a bit behind on manufacturing technology, todays aviation business is a global business and the aircraft is just a shell. You can put FMS's, EGPWS, etc... on any aircraft you want.
Now if they could only get rid of some of the bureaucracy.....
who decided that a Horizon should be HORIZONtal???
25 A520: There are thousands of them: A300/310/320/330/340. Just wait until Russia takes a majority share in EADS!