Delta777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 658 posts, RR: 0 Posted (13 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 37408 times:
I found a web site that listed all of the fatalities adn crashes of all MAJOR airlines around the world. i was looking at AeroFlots and they have about 3 crashes every year! or at least they used to. see for yourself:
Al From Australia, joined Jun 1999, 593 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (13 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 37177 times:
Delta 777 your information is badly skewed. The "old" Aeroflot had in excess of 3,000 airframes and covered everything from cropdusters in Siberia to the long haul intercontinental fleet of the old elite International arm. How many of those "at least 3 per year" were on the elite, seperate, (as in the Aeroflot the rest of the world outside the USSR only ever saw) intercontinental fleet?? Probably just a couple over all those years - very comparable to other carriers. Taking into account the amount of airframes for Aeroflot as a whole and the astronomical amount of daily departures of all of those airframes, then 3 incidents per year equates to a fairly excellent record IMHO, and more than likely a better record, statistically wise (which is what you were on about) than most of the more "respected" western carriers. Air China is arguably a more balanced equation - although the International division of the old CAAC and now Air China itself has a superlative record (1 fatality in over 40 years) the domestic CAAC divisions within mainland China were woeful. The old fleet size of CAAC is comparable to many other carriers, but again, like Aeroflot, the International division was the only one that the rest of the world outside of China ever saw/flew on, and as they were run, like Aeroflot, as a seperate division, that record is the one that should show up. Cheers/Regards. Al.
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (13 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 37037 times:
Remember the kid flying the Airbus?
People need to remember that virtually every civilian plane in the Soviet Union, and even some military ones, were in Aeroflot colors. In remote areas of Siberia, they actually used Aeroflot aircraft as schoolbuses, landing at tiny hamlets, picking up a few kids in each one and finally landing near the school.
They also flew their planes in conditions which would be unacceptable to a western airline. The Tu-154 which crashed the other day was roughly equivalent to the 727, but could operate from unprepared airstrips where the 727 would sink into the mud. And operating at -40 or -50 degrees was not unusual.
Finally, people still make the mistake of calling all the domestic carriers Aeroflot, including the crash the other day. Aeroflot, for the last decade almost, is only the Sheremetyevo-based airline, with about 60 or 70 planes. The rest are something else.
Aviatsiya From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 37006 times:
Yes, I do remember the kid flying the Airbus, and it is on this exact point which shows one knowledge of the intricacies concerning civil aviation in Russia. The A310 which crashed in 1994 (from memory without checking), was NOT an Aeroflot A310. It was in fact, operated by RAL and crewed by RAL crews, but operated for Aeroflot. It all had to do with the A310 being the first "western" aircraft being allowed to operate in the Aeroflot fleet, and to get around the tax laws and to gain concessions, the aircraft were leased by RAL...not Aeroflot.
I think I still have it here in my email somewhere (I keep most things handy). Will try to locate it and post it.
Trintocan From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2000, 3258 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (13 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 36957 times:
Statistics can be very misleading. The 1994 list shows an IL86 being lost but the reality of that plane was that it was struck in New Delhi by a hijacked, crashing Sahara India 737-200. That plane skidded off the runway and hit the empty IL86, which caught fire. 2 ground crew members attending to the plane were later found to have been killed. Does that count as an Aeroflot crash? No, it does not - Aeroflot had nothing to do with that, it was bad luck.
No IL86 has ever crashed. Overall, despite the seemingly long lists for Aeroflot write-offs, if one puts into perspective the conditions in which it operated flights and the numbers of planes and services their record is about the same as any other western carrier.
Il75 From Argentina, joined May 2001, 263 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (13 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 36931 times:
"Seriously, Aeroflot Russian International Airlines should have called themselves something else. In keeping the name, they've kept all the bad publicity".
Indeed a very interesting point: the big question here is how many "westeners" fly nowadays with Aeroflot compared to how many Russians.
I wonder if by changing the name Aeroflot could have attracted some foreigners but at the price of loosing a lot of its own market. This thread seems tu suggest that it is precisely Aeroflot the best choice if your are going to fly safely in or to Russia with a Russian carrier!
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8044 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (13 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 36886 times:
Actually, Aeroflot's Soviet-era record is not bad considering the flying conditions they have to endure.
Try landing and takeoffs on what amounts of packed gravel runways in temperatures below -30 degrees Celsius much of the year. I'm surprised there hasn't been more accidents in conditions that Western pilots would not dare try to fly in. That's why Russian planes have strongly built landing gears to start with, and the An-2 was very popular because it could fly into any flat field regardless of ground condition.
Airsicknessbag From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, RR: 33
Reply 19, posted (13 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 36874 times:
>>>Does that count as an Aeroflot crash? No, it does not - Aeroflot had nothing to do with that, it was bad luck.
well, Trintocan, maybe you noticed I didn´t talk about "crashes" but "write offs" (or "full hull losses", if you like that terminology better). And the fact that "SU had nothing to do with it" or "bad luck" - that could be applied to lots of "real" crashes as well.
>>>You fell into the trap - Aeroflot has lost only 1 aircraft, the A310, since the breakup. All the other losses were of other airlines.
Hmm, Charles, I actually had tried hard not to - I did NOT include in that list the countless "XY-stan Avia Enterprise North South East West Flight Directorate Air" crashes. Only the ones clearly indicated as "Aeroflot". Wouldn´t your argumentation also exclude all Condor crashes from the LH safety record? Just a thought.
Anyway, I´m no expert on Russian aviation; check out http://www.aviation-safety.net yourself, maybe you can do more with that information than I can.
RedAirForce From Ukraine, joined Aug 1999, 197 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (13 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 36871 times:
"Aeroflot's safety record has improved because they are now flying some modern up-to-date Western made aircraft from Airbus and Boeing."
How do you figure this? They have one 777, a couple of 767s and a few 737's from Boeing to go with a few older Airbus AC. The vast majority of the fleet is still Russian built; the vast majority of flights are still inside Russia with Russian built AC.
I would not say that the record has improved, rather stayed somewhat steady, which was not that bad to begin with.
RIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (13 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 36847 times:
Hmmm... www.airdisaster.com shows the last Aeroflot crash to happen in July '92 (Tu134 at Ivanovo, I remember it since I still was there at that time). As for the list provided by Airsicknessbag... well, for instance, losses in 1994: only three with fatalities
Tupolev 134 RA-65760 7(7)
Gromov Flight Test Centre/Aeroflot
Airbus A.310 F-OGQS 75(75)
Antonov 22 RA-09331 7(10)
Aeroflot / CIS Air Force
of which neither Gromov Flight Test Centre nor CIS Air Force (what is it??? never heard about!!!) are Aeroflot while that A310 was of Russian International Airways, not Aeroflot Russian International Airlines. Too many mistakes to consider aviation-safety.net as a reliable source...
Aviatsiya From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (13 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 36791 times:
You fell into the trap - Aeroflot has lost only 1 aircraft, the A310, since the breakup. All the other losses were of other airlines.
You too have fallen into the trap. The A310 was not Aeroflot at all; as I have explained above, it was RAL (Russian Air Lines). The aircraft was painted in Aeroflot livery (the one with the eagle on the tail) and operated for Aeroflot.
Let's think about this:
Air New Zealand leases one of their 747-200Bs to Airtours International. Air NZ provides the crew (flight, engineering, etc) for the aircraft. The aircraft is also given Airtours livery. On a flight for Airtours from London-Istanbul, the Air NZ 747 crashes into the Mediterranean.
Who does this crash go against?
Air New Zealand or Airtours?
It would be Air New Zealand, because Airtours have nothing to do with the aircraft, it is only being operated for them.
This is the same with the RAL A310 which crashed in 1994. The aircraft had nothing to do with Aeroflot, and as such, RAL is fully responsible for this.
After the 1994 crash, RAL was closed down, and the A310s came under direct Aeroflot control.
I have alerted sites like aviation-safety.net to this fact, but they don't seem to care about providing correct information, as they still refer to the 1994 crash as Aeroflot.
There was a big list on that site. For the March 1994 entry, the operator wasAEROFLOT-ARIA, but for the entries, the operator was AEROFLOT.
So did AEROFLOT lost A310 in 1994? NO! It was AEROFLOT-AVIA that lost their A310.
Evidence 3: Flight Number.
Today, Aeroflot uses SU593 for SVO->HKG flight. Back in 1994, The A310 crash was also SU593 from SVO to HKG. Traditionally, when the flight number involves to serious accident, they usually get replaced with another pair of flight number. However, Aeroflot didn't didn't replace flight number 593.
: Well if I was the kid flying the Airbuts I sure wouldn't let it crash....
: http://www.airdisaster.com/cgi_bin/view_details.cgi?date=03231994&airline=Russian+International+Airways This is the entry for the A310 accident in 199
: That article on Russian airline safety can be found at http://www.avia.ru/english/articles/24may-1.shtml Examining Russia's Air Safety Record - by Pau
: Looking at the list that Airsicknessbag has compiled 00: 1 IL76 98: 1 IL62 96: 1 AN124 95: 1 TU154 94: 1 A310, 1 IL86, 2 TU134, 1 AN72, 1 AN26, 1 AN24
: Concerning my list, I appreciate how you shed some light on that, especially you, Scotty/Aviatsiya. I´m far from defending the accuracy of "my" list
: Isn´t the fact that those a/c were in SU colours a hint that those were SU flights as well? Technically belonging to other companies, but really SU?
: lol thanks for your reassurance guys! I'm flying from LHR to DEL via SVO on SU on August 18. I was wondering why the airfare was about £100 cheaper t
: I'm sorry Scotty, you don't convince me, I think it IS disputable if the A-310 is Aeroflot or not. Passengers buy a ticket at an airline and swap the
: Scotty, 1.: Liveries OK, point taken. 2.: Who is the operator If I understand you correctly, you want to judge who operates an aircraft by the crew?
: Dear RedAirForce, In 1994 I still was in the former USSR (not in CIS as it can be seen from my user name). I'm still not sure that there was such a th