Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Very Exotic! Russian Airliners Orders!  
User currently offlineFCKC From France, joined Nov 2004, 2348 posts, RR: 4
Posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 13862 times:

See by yourself..

Clean Air Brasil (Who are they ?) : 2 ILL96-300 + 4 TU204SM + 2 TU204SM Cargo

Icaro Ecuador : 2 TU204SM Cargo + 1 option

Cielos Del Peru : 2 ILL96-400T Cargo + Perhaps one other

Russian Government : 2 ILL96-300

Air Koryo : 1 TU204-100 , operate 1 TU204-300 (Shrunk)

Iran Airtours : 5 TU204 + 25 options

Transaero and S7 are both said negociating orders for TU204s.

Surprising , isn't it ?

As always with the Russian airliners orders , will believe it , when will see the planes painted !


Information secured by Flight International during the last MAKS show.

42 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAA777223 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1246 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 13642 times:

I have heard more stories about people ordering IL-96s recently. That shocks me in light of the fact that there was a thread on here, very recently saying that all production for the aircraft was being stopped and remaining orders were being canceled. What gives?


Sic 'em bears
User currently offlineA300 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 474 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 13439 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting AA777223 (Reply 1):
I have heard more stories about people ordering IL-96s recently. That shocks me in light of the fact that there was a thread on here, very recently saying that all production for the aircraft was being stopped and remaining orders were being canceled. What gives?

Perhaps the threat to close the line was a bluff to get new orders.



Boland Aseman Jayegah Man Ast.
User currently offlineIceberg210 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 147 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 13258 times:

Glad to see the Russians getting some new orders. It's really too bad that there is still such a bias against these aircraft because they really have become quite excellent equipment over their development. For all those airlines who just a little while ago were unhappy with Boeing for canceling the 757 when they would have liked to have more (when they had the money, which Boeing couldn't wait for, it really wasn't a good situation on either side of the equation) the 757ski is still available and has really blossomed as an excellent aircraft with Western avionics and engines. You almost wonder if some company could reenter the commercial aviation field by private labeling and supporting these Russian aircraft that have become far more efficient and attractive to Western airlines...


Erik Berg (Foster's is over but never forgotten)
User currently offlineRIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 13024 times:



Quoting AA777223 (Reply 1):
there was a thread on here, very recently saying that all production for the aircraft was being stopped and remaining orders were being canceled.

- it was not about "all production for the aircraft was being stopped and remaining orders were being canceled" (and I already said it in some other thread where same false statement was made). It was about decision by appropriate Russian Ministry to stop production shortly as only 19 were produced during 20 years and only 2 more orders were expected (government, which are listed above). Obviously, if all of a sudden more orders follow, the decision may be reverted, but, overall, it is believed that aircraft is obsolete (it's interesting how in Russian forums they are discussing how Il96-300 is "not much worse than 767-300ER") and for Russian aircraft industry it's much more promising to concentrate on something they can really go ahead with - like SSJ, followed by some 150+ seater. 2 more orders (from Clean Air Brasil - indeed, who are they?) are hardly to change the picture.


User currently offlineThegreatRDU From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2310 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 12935 times:



Quoting FCKC (Thread starter):
Transaero and S7 are both said negociating orders for TU204s.

I don't understand s7 why are they getting any aircraft they can land their hands on regardless of type...there's almost no commonality



Our Returning Champion
User currently offlineFCKC From France, joined Nov 2004, 2348 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 12719 times:

Forgot to add , Icaro bought 2 AN148s as well....

User currently offlineNCB From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 12664 times:



Quoting AA777223 (Reply 1):
I have heard more stories about people ordering IL-96s recently. That shocks me in light of the fact that there was a thread on here, very recently saying that all production for the aircraft was being stopped and remaining orders were being canceled.

It has been decided to temporarily stop the PAX line of the IL-96, but the freighter is still being offered.

Atlant Soyuz also firmed up a 30 AN-148, 15 TU-204 deal at MAKS following a loi signed at LBG.


User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26993 posts, RR: 57
Reply 8, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 12637 times:

I would love to see more IL96's and TU204's . Its getting boring just A&B .

User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17504 posts, RR: 45
Reply 9, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 12576 times:



Quoting Iceberg210 (Reply 3):
It's really too bad that there is still such a bias against these aircraft

There's a reason there's a "bias" against Russian aircraft. Even Russian carriers are biased against them, in spite of import tarriffs, because they're junk.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineAcheron From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1656 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 12125 times:



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 9):
There's a reason there's a "bias" against Russian aircraft. Even Russian carriers are biased against them, in spite of import tarriffs, because they're junk.

Such a very well informed opinion...  Yeah sure


User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8964 posts, RR: 39
Reply 11, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 11890 times:



Quoting FCKC (Thread starter):


Clean Air Brasil (Who are they ?) : 2 ILL96-300 + 4 TU204SM + 2 TU204SM Cargo

Ha! I have been wondering when this would happen, though I only expected freighters. Outside of the larger companies, the Brazilian cargo fleet is abysmally old. This is very good news.

However, having never heard of this company, I have to say I'll believe it when I see it.



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineBA From United States of America, joined May 2000, 11153 posts, RR: 58
Reply 12, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 11643 times:

Syrian Air is going to lease two brand new Tupolev TU-204s, for delivery in April and May of next year for a period of 18 months with an option to buy them.

http://www.zawya.com/story.cfm/sidZAWYA20090901041000/



"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17504 posts, RR: 45
Reply 13, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 11355 times:



Quoting Acheron (Reply 10):

Such a very well informed opinion...

Russian airlines won't even buy most Russian aircraft, and they get significant economic incentives to do so. What does that mean to you?



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineCsavel From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1363 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 10749 times:



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 13):
Russian airlines won't even buy most Russian aircraft, and they get significant economic incentives to do so. What does that mean to you?

It may mean that they are junk.

It also may mean that people's perception of them as junk means that Russian airlines won't buy them because that will mean they fly with empty planes. Cargo airliners have less of a bias and it seems that although small, some cargo airlines are taking a chance.

Airbus and Embraer also had problems of this nature, Eastern "testing" the A-300 was a major breakthrough.

I think the Sukhoi superjet and AN148 will change perceptions and might be the "tipping point."
The look more western and don't have that Soviet look that older Tupelovs and Ilyushins have. Seems superficial, but that is the way it is.



I may be ugly. I may be an American. But don't call me an ugly American.
User currently offlineAcheron From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1656 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 10413 times:



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 13):
Russian airlines won't even buy most Russian aircraft, and they get significant economic incentives to do so. What does that mean to you?

How many russian airliners have been designed and built in the last 20 years that are not an "improved" version of an old design 70's?. 1 or 2 at most.

Thats probably more of a reason than them just being "junk" according to you.

And it could tell me is that the economic incentive of buying it doesn't offset the cost of operating one in the long run, at least for planes like the Tu-154M, Il-96 or Il-86. So, it doesn't mean they are "junk", just not cheap to operate.

But hey, I guess for you, the SSJ and the MS-21 will be junk too.


User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17504 posts, RR: 45
Reply 16, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 9899 times:



Quoting Csavel (Reply 14):
It also may mean that people's perception of them as junk means that Russian airlines won't buy them because that will mean they fly with empty planes

Russian carriers have flown Russian aircraft to the West for years, and load factors have never been the problem. Even to destinations used to Russian aircraft, Aeroflot and others are replacing with Western aircraft. Getting people on the plane isn't the problem.

Quoting Csavel (Reply 14):
I think the Sukhoi superjet and AN148 will change perceptions and might be the "tipping point."

It certainly could be, but there have been several promising iterations of Russian aircraft that amounted to zilch.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 15):
How many russian airliners have been designed and built in the last 20 years that are not an "improved" version of an old design 70's?. 1 or 2 at most.

Thats probably more of a reason than them just being "junk" according to you.



Quoting Acheron (Reply 15):
And it could tell me is that the economic incentive of buying it doesn't offset the cost of operating one in the long run, at least for planes like the Tu-154M, Il-96 or Il-86. So, it doesn't mean they are "junk", just not cheap to operate.

So they're costly to operate, outdated aircraft. I'm still hearing "junk".



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineFlaps From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 1277 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 9763 times:

It isn't just operating economics, but product support. The higher operating costs of these aircraft are partly offset by lower acquisition costs. The spotty support however has been the biggest problem. Junk is not an appropriate term for the situation. They aren't junk, they are simply less competitive when compared to western designs.

User currently offlineMalaysia From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 3352 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 9159 times:



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 9):
because they're junk.

Well my opinion on Russian Planes are that one sovi... oops I mean russian jet can seem to hit a mountain and then fly to see another day.



There Are Those Who Believe That There May Yet Be Other Airlines Who Even Now Fight To Survive Beyond The Heavens
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8541 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 9092 times:



Quoting Flaps (Reply 17):
The spotty support however has been the biggest problem. Junk is not an appropriate term for the situation. They aren't junk

This also reminds me of, for example, the Fokker situation. And Dornier.


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25260 posts, RR: 85
Reply 20, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 8999 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

My first experience of a Russian airliner was the IL-62 with Interflug.

It was an extremely comfortable and pleasant ride and the cabin service was excellent.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineFlygbear From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 33 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (5 years 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 8845 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

New aircraft orders are nice to see, but at the same time does it not seem that so many orders are announced at the Paris Air Show or MAKS. But systematiclly, shortly thereafter, orders are drastically cut or cancelled. As though some carriers are puffing up, or flexing their muscles to their competitors as to how strong, or bold, that carrier is?


flygbear/MSP
User currently offlinePylon101 From Russia, joined Feb 2008, 1561 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 5942 times:

Orders for TU-204/214 from S7 and Transaero and Atlant-Soyuz give a strong signal that the period of having Boeing or Airbus in the fleet as a sign of prestige - those times are over.

To keep and use old 737-300 and 757-200 is tiresome and expensive.
That's why these airlines preferred TU-204. They are Moscow based and there is no problem with technical support.

Some airlines, like Red Wings, have all TU-204 fleet - and doing great on very lucrative vacation charters market.

Same relates to AN-148 and SSJ.

Looking out from A-B box may damage vision.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 9):
There's a reason there's a "bias" against Russian aircraft. Even Russian carriers are biased against them, in spite of import tarriffs, because they're junk.

Really, no comment.


User currently offlineNCB From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (5 years 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 5570 times:

The real reason that Russian airliners did not sell are several.

In the West, buying Soviet was anti-propaganda, so no western airliners were sold.
There is still alot of that mentality.

Russian airlines never bought Russian equipment, aren't interested in them?
That is false. Aeroflot still has the IL-96's on standby whenever it needs them.

It is a fact that most passenger jets built by Russians aren't as efficient as some European ones, the reliability being affected by absence of a decent maintenance program induced by government operations under a communist regime.

Then there is the biggest problem: marketing.
Russian aircraft manufacturers have the worst marketing departments of all. Just look at their horrible websites.
Sukhoi is bringing a slight change to this and are trying to market their product pretty well.
Put GTF on the SSJ platform, it should sell as well as the Cseries.
Marketing determines the impression that airlines will get, and with it, their customers.

It is a bit harsh to qualify them as junk.
Russian airliners are as safe, even safer in some cases, compared to Western designs.
Airbus and Boeing aircraft are AOG everytime the smallest sensor goes frenzy or a light goes on. With Russian airliners, if they're deemed operational, they fly, even if some insignificant indicators don't work.
Who buys them usually? Low budget operators.
Due to lack of cash and to increase profitability, this kind of operators tend to rely too much on the strength of the Russian machines, go beyond the limits of the airworthy (many don't even respect weight & balance) and crash.

And the sad reality is that Russian airliners are no different with other airliners in the fact that over 80% of crashes are caused by human error.
Partially due to inappropriate maintenance, but also because of lack of decent crew training by their often cash-strapped operators.

The IL-96 for instance, has suffered no hull loss accident thus far.
The IL-86, its predecessor has been qualified as one of the safest aircraft in airline service and has been praised by ICAO.


Last but not least, Russian airliners are cheaper.
Not only are they cheaper, but they look cheaper as well.
When a passenger flies on a cheap-looking aircraft, he thinks: "this airline buys cheap airplanes, so it doesn't have much money, so it may not be investing enough in aircraft maintenance (this is the important part, passengers tend to think that airplanes are some kind of spacecraft), so they become afraid and stop flying them again.

The same is valid for aircraft having non-conventional shapes... some even avoid turboprops...

If tomorrow Lufthansa buys IL-96's with an interior looking the same as their A340's, passengers would simply accept it. Only thing in the beginning is that though AOG rate may be half that of an A340, passengers/media might start whining that the IL-96 is not reliable everytime it AOG's or a flight is cancelled because a pilot is sick and there is no one on standby...

To me, Airbus & Boeing airliners are alot like junk, they have thousands of underbuilt, sometimes hidden weaknesses, that ultimately cost alot of money to keep going.
Though troubleshooting of general systems is easier, troubleshooting of non-traditional failures is a true nightmare and can keep aircraft on the ground for weeks, even months.

But most of them look fresh and nice inside, and that's what matters to the passengers.


User currently offlinePylon101 From Russia, joined Feb 2008, 1561 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (5 years 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5261 times:

My respect, NCB.
Your comment is objective in all respects.

I can only say the RUS manufacturers have been trying to do better.
Hopefully Russian brands will remain on mid-size and short-range market.
They should - if they want to stay competative on military aircraft market.
That's the goal of United Aviation Corporation.

UAC doesn't plan to invest into wide-bodies.
It doesn't make us, Russian aviation enthusiasts, happy, of couse.
But there is a kind of consensus here that a nation of 140 mln. can not manufacture aircraft in all segments.


25 MaverickM11 : Russian carriers obviously have bought Russian aircraft, but there has been a major financial incentive to do so. And given a choice? Russian carrier
26 Pylon101 : Maverik, We are talking about a country that suvived a kind of revolution. A country that had a real chance to get desintegrated. All modest achieveme
27 MaverickM11 : It's not bashing. The truth is Russian aircraft up until now have been totally uncompetitive. That's not to say it can't change. Facts are facts. Rus
28 Flighty : This is sensible. Even Japan would struggle to match the 787 and A350. And while both Japan and Russia have plenty of brilliant engineers, Japan has
29 SDQ777 : I'm wondering if the Russians ever attempted to sell their Perm engines to Boeing or Airbus.
30 RIX : - irrelevant stereotypical oversimplification (the only obstacle for Soviet airliners to be good sellers beyond Soviet bloc and third world, huh? I'v
31 Pylon101 : RIX, I agree with most of your points. You touched the core problem of Russia's geo-political and economic positioning. We are not supposed to go deep
32 PanHAM : whereas the mountain gets arrested the next day..... Now, looking at the list of potential or actual buyers, take the Russian carriers who have to bu
33 Pylon101 : Nobody here in Russia is going to offer IL-96-300 to LH. I noted in all three postings that Russian experts don't see any niche in wide-body aircraft
34 NCB : RIX, thank you for criticising. Unfortunately, your comment doesn't mean anything as you seem to have misunderstood what has been written, or not been
35 Pylon101 : NCB, You think MS-21 project is going to be wide-body? I thought it would be a single aisle of a size of TU-204. So far they didn't freeze the design.
36 NCB : No that's not what I meant to say. MS-21 is (and will stay) a narrowbody program, of the caliber of the 737/320. But it proves that Russian aerospace
37 Pylon101 : Well. It's a somewhat special forum. Unlike the Washington Post forum and others of that kind- where I post what I think - here I used to think twice
38 Lightsaber : Actually, their problems are: 1. efficiency. Russian designs are heavier (due to their superior rough field performance) and tend to have engines a h
39 PanAm788 : Umm if in the early 1980s, the Soviet Union produced the fastest, safest, most comfortable airliner, would AA by it? I don't think they would. That m
40 RIX : NCB, I replied to your particular points with particular comments - please don't hide behind "It is not good practice to come in between a discussion
41 Pylon101 : Hm, what is "a half generation", I am wondering? Yes, engines - efficiency, service cicles - used to be an issue. A good thing, though, that RUS manu
42 Acheron : Not really a problem. V0(Conviasa) recently bought 4 CRJ-700, and will order another 3, and they are factory new.
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...
Russian Airliners And North American Operators posted Thu Aug 23 2007 18:00:22 by BlueSkys
Why No Russian Airliners? posted Tue Jul 3 2007 11:52:33 by BR715-A1-30
Russian Airliners - Do They Have A Chance? posted Sun Jul 23 2006 00:27:59 by Stormbringer
Why No Russian Airliners In North America? posted Wed May 24 2006 20:54:14 by Rob878
Why Not More Russian Airliners Flying? posted Mon Jan 16 2006 14:05:15 by Wingscrubber
Russian Aircraft Orders By Non-Communist Countries posted Thu Dec 8 2005 06:19:24 by Fly2CHC
Cubana And Russian Airliners posted Mon Sep 12 2005 10:09:09 by TG990
Russian Airliners In The US posted Tue Sep 6 2005 03:17:21 by Liedetectors
Do Large Russian Airliners Come To North America? posted Sun Jul 17 2005 20:17:10 by Lnglive1011yyz
What Is The Future Of Russian Airliners. posted Sat Apr 23 2005 20:11:23 by Georgiabill