UN_B732 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 4286 posts, RR: 5 Reply 1, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 8116 times:
Do you have a link to a press release? I always thought the IL9s were going to truck along longer. Wikipedia even wrote something about them getting PTVs (even though i never believed it).
I will miss the TU5 and IL9.. It's truly the end of an era. Losing Siberia's was bad enough.
Planenutz From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1267 posts, RR: 12 Reply 4, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 7692 times:
Source is SABRE. All TU5 and IL9 deisngations are removed after 241009.
IRelayer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1071 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 7648 times:
Darnit! The window of opportunity to fly these aircraft on a reputable carrier is closing fast
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5341 posts, RR: 11 Reply 8, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 7307 times:
Weird, as we've just had a thread about the Tu-154 still being in production, with a photo of one in final assembly taken just a week ago.
And I thought that the IL-96-300 was a relatively new aircraft???
Ambanmba From Australia, joined Jan 2008, 48 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 7188 times:
Realising that this would eventually happen, we booked flights on SU849 and SU844 for our upcoming trip to Russia specifically to ride the TU5 in both directions. Just this morning I got notification that SU849 is now on an A320.
PlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11139 posts, RR: 63 Reply 10, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 7172 times:
The Tu154 will fly on for decades to come, but after other airlines like S7 pulled the plug on Russian types I suppose Aeroflot felt the need to follow suit. The Il-96 wasn't supposed to be withdrawn for years yet, although the Tu154 was earmarked to be withdrawn this year.
Vhqpa From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 1383 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 7087 times:
Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 8): And I thought that the IL-96-300 was a relatively new aircraft???
The IL-96-300 despite being new still carries a 3 man crew and is a quad. It is easy to see why SU favour the 763/332 over the IL9. I can also remember the Russian Govt. until recently had some restriction which more or less forced SU to operate the type however recently this was reversed and theres no reason to keep the type as long as originally planned.
And the TU5 isn't really in production (as in taking orders) it's a few unfinished frames from the 90's which are at snails pace getting completed with spare part stocks.
Vhq
"There you go ladies and gentleman we're through Mach 1 the speed of sound no bumps no bangs... CONCORDE"
I wouldn't be SO optimistic seeing how quickly even the relatively newer Tu-154Ms already disappeared in eastern Europe and China in the last few years alone. I forcast the small local Russian carriers to fly them for another 5 years, so til 2014 (half a decade).
The Il-86 might stop flying totally (except the 4 Air Force machines) in only 2 years, so hurry!
The Il-96 with about a dozen passenger machines built might have its rarity against it, but I guess Conviasa, Cubana and one or two small Russian airlines might continue with them, but maybe not !
All three aircraft might be rarer then an Il-18 is now in 5 years time...
See you in CWF and KIV
Servaas
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
Trintocan From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2000, 3191 posts, RR: 4 Reply 13, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 6870 times:
The IL96 is not really new - it is a design that first flew in 1988 and is thus of comparable vintage to the 747-400 and MD11. The type's small numbers and very slow production rate have limited its service fleet. SU IL96s are the oldest of those built - indeed some which it had ordered were cancelled after prolonged waits for deliveries. CU's planes are the newest around.
It is a bit of a shame to see the CIS fleet leave SU but with the times the world is in they are looking for the most cost-effective fleet possible. These 3-crew, 3 and 4-engined birds simply do not stand up alongside the twin engined, 2-crew replacements SU are bringing in.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 22062 posts, RR: 51 Reply 14, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6775 times:
Its good to see Aeroflot becoming more and more run along commercial lines. These old Russian dogs were economic basket cases compared to Western equipment.
Here is a quote from the Director of Aeroflot that was published last fall;
Let's compare the wide bodies. We have long been operating the Ilyushin Il-96, while we have Boeing 767-300ER. The Ilyushin burns 12 tonnes per hours, the Boeing 5.5 tonnes. Let's multiply 10,000's flight hours by six tonnes of fuel-- that's the sort of saving we can get through fleet renewal.
Our priorities are simple, when we replace a Soviet airliner for similarly sized Airbus or Boeing, we save fuels in the order of tonnes per hour, while also seeing much greater operating reliability, and passenger comfort.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Airproxx From France, joined Jun 2008, 553 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 6606 times:
Sad indeed.
Are there any Russian jets specialists here to carry a light (as I'm trully an incult, I must admit!) on the average fuel burn and capacity between an A320 and a TU 154? Just for my own info!
Thanks!
If you can meet with triumph and disaster, and treat those two impostors just the same
Tango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3725 posts, RR: 31 Reply 16, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 6503 times:
Which reminds me... inconceiveable as it may seem... at some yet unknown point in the future we will finally hear the same type of announcement concerning DL's ex-NW DC-9s... which will no doubt make for a topic with 200+ replies guaranteed within 24 hours from the time it is posted.
MEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4117 posts, RR: 37 Reply 17, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 6466 times:
Quoting Airproxx (Reply 15): Are there any Russian jets specialists here to carry a light (as I'm trully an incult, I must admit!) on the average fuel burn and capacity between an A320 and a TU 154? Just for my own info!
Very roughly the Tu-154 fuelburn is about 1,7 times that of a A-320 (both around 165 seats), with other words the Airbus is about 60% of a Tu-154.
Still a Tu-154 CAN make sense due to the low acquisition price which can outweigh fuel burn if you have busy and slow periods. In the last few years Aeroflot, Rossya and S7 used their A-320/737s for like 4000 hours a year, and used the 154s and Il-86s only in the busiest season, maybe 500-1000 hours a year.
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14354 posts, RR: 26 Reply 18, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 6334 times:
Unfortunately, as charming as some find the Russian types, this was inevitable. They simply aren't as efficient as Western airliners and in today's world every drop of gas counts. I'm sure that many are sad to see them go but I know that I won't miss them.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Acheron From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1418 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks ago) and read 6016 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 18): I'm sure that many are sad to see them go but I know that I won't miss them.
Spoken like a true aviation nut...not.
Back on topic, such a shame to see the Tu-154M go, I loved the looks but never got a chance to fly on one.
As for the Il-96, I'm not to worried since I'll get to see both of V0's Il-96.
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14354 posts, RR: 26 Reply 20, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks ago) and read 5978 times:
I understand your sentiments, but "because aviation enthusiasts like them" is not a valid reason for airline management to keep any type in the fleet when other more efficient and comfortable types are readily available.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Airproxx From France, joined Jun 2008, 553 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4732 times:
Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 17): Very roughly the Tu-154 fuelburn is about 1,7 times that of a A-320 (both around 165 seats), with other words the Airbus is about 60% of a Tu-154.
Still a Tu-154 CAN make sense due to the low acquisition price which can outweigh fuel burn if you have busy and slow periods. In the last few years Aeroflot, Rossya and S7 used their A-320/737s for like 4000 hours a year, and used the 154s and Il-86s only in the busiest season, maybe 500-1000 hours a year.
Thanks for the russian course
If the Rossya, S7 and Aeroflot TU154s and other russian types flew so few hours, I assume that it's the same for the crews?
By the way I'd say there's a Skyteam effect in Aeroflot management, the most visible part being the retirement of old russian jets and introduction of more recent western jets... Shall we expect big difficulties in a near future for russian manufacturers?
If you can meet with triumph and disaster, and treat those two impostors just the same
Acheron From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1418 posts, RR: 1 Reply 22, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4686 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 20): but "because aviation enthusiasts like them" is not a valid reason for airline management
No, but we aren't in a " for airline management lovers" site, are we?.
Quoting Airproxx (Reply 21): Shall we expect big difficulties in a near future for russian manufacturers?
Maybe, though we'll see if Sukhoi get lucky with the Superjet(and I hope they do, love the looks). As for the others, Tupolev still makes the Tu-204 and 214 and Il still makes cargo carriers and is moving towards a new military freighter.
SurfandSnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2588 posts, RR: 31 Reply 23, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4544 times:
Oh no!? Isn't this good news? Aren't both of these aircraft inferior in terms of performance and passenger satisfaction compared to similar Western aircraft? Aren't these planes used only on domestic/CIS flights or very marginal international routes because only then can Aeroflot justify their use? If anything it is great to hear that Aeroflot will soon be fully transformed from an iconic Soviet enterprise forced to operate second-rate airplanes to a quality reputable global carrier operating a safe, modern fleet of aircraft. Moscow has the potential to become a massive transit hub between Western/Central Europe and East/Southeast Asia, especially if Aeroflot continues to make improvements such as these.
Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
IRelayer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1071 posts, RR: 2 Reply 24, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4432 times:
Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 23): Oh no!? Isn't this good news? Aren't both of these aircraft inferior in terms of performance and passenger satisfaction compared to similar Western aircraft? Aren't these planes used only on domestic/CIS flights or very marginal international routes because only then can Aeroflot justify their use? If anything it is great to hear that Aeroflot will soon be fully transformed from an iconic Soviet enterprise forced to operate second-rate airplanes to a quality reputable global carrier operating a safe, modern fleet of aircraft. Moscow has the potential to become a massive transit hub between Western/Central Europe and East/Southeast Asia, especially if Aeroflot continues to make improvements such as these.
Yeah but but...these planes are so coooool!
I agree with you, but its still sad to see a little bit of diversity gradually fade away and be replaced by the same old standard A/C we see everywhere else.
-IR
25 Alessandro: I think operators in places like Tajikistan still going to operate Tu-154s in many years to come. Il-86, I think you only see them in Hadjj flights i
26 NG1Fan: It is a moment with mixed feelings. I used to take a few domestic flights within Russia (mainly European Russia). Not just on SU, but also on UTAir, D
27 Dennys: Very sad news for both Russian aircrafts types . I do hope Domodedovo , Conviasa , Cubana , Rossya will hand them over . regards IL96 Lover
28 Dennys: To Acheron . Do you know whether Conviasa is to fly Paris with IL96 ? Thanks dennys IL96 Lover
29 Uzzzer: Why 'Oh no'? Oh, yeah! Frankly, I'm happy that Tu-154 are disappearing Lets put aside the design affection. Those fuel thirsty dinosaurs will be histo
30 Acheron: Not for the time being. They'll probably be put to use in the in CCS-DAM-THR while the A340 will finally start the MAD route. But at this point I mig
31 Hjulicher: Well, come Q4 2009, Aeroflot is supposed to receive it's first SSJ, so in reality, they are replacing some of the already replaced Tupolev's with Sukh
32 Dennys: Where ever you can be , please please , shoot and shoot these Sovietic Beauties , and share your pictures on the web !!! kind regards dennys ( IL 96 L
33 Brons2: Back in 2005, Turkey was a good place to go to see many Soviet types, Tu-154, Tu-204, IL-86 and IL-96 all at AYT. I don't know that I have much desire
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1267 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1980 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 24928 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jan 2008, 48 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4117 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2000, 3191 posts, 
, 22062 posts, 
From France, joined Jun 2008, 553 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
