Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Iran Fleet To Be Replaced Or Lifespan Extended?  
User currently offlinehaveasafeflight From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4270 times:

The head of Iran's Civil Aviation Organization, Reza Nakhjavani, has recently announced that the country's fleet will be replaced with a new one, and at the same time the lifespan of existing fleets extended by 25%...

http://www.arabianaerospace.aero/iran-to-replace-old-fleet.html

I'm skeptical about Nakhjavani's comments and I'm a little confused by his quote where he said that "We also plan to raise the lifespan of the fleets by 25%" If they are going to extend the lifespan of their airplanes (which can be done relatively easily - look at the USAF's B52's - 50+ years in operation and still going strong) that's hardly a "replacement". If they actually plan on purchasing replacement aircraft, how exactly can they go about this in light of the sanctions? There are well over 100 large passenger aircraft in Iran, and given the sanctions that Iran faces it's not likely that they will be inking any deals with Boeing or Airbus anytime soon - so just how exactly does Nakhjavani plan on implementing this? Russian/Ukrainian aircraft are an option, but lets not forget that Iran has had ample opportunity to buy brand new Russian/Ukrainian metal over the years (no sanctions there) but has not done so for the simple fact that they have a strong preference for western made airplanes. My guess is that Nakhjavani is referring to second-hand Boeing and Airbus airplanes.

Presuming that the replacement aircraft are second-hand, an important aspect to consider in such a case is the number of cycles that the replacement aircraft have. Although the replacement aircraft may be younger, that doesn't necessarily mean that they have a longer lifespan as they may very well have significantly higher numbers of cycles/flight hours. A good example of this is the three former Qantas 747-300's that Iran Air recently acquired:

Iran Air Aquires Ex-QF 747-300s! (by na Mar 27 2012 in Civil Aviation)#76

These 747's actually have a higher number of cycles/flight hours than Iran Air's existing 747's (-100/200/SP's) so that begs the question, where is the logic in purchasing replacement aircraft with higher utilization cycles than the aircraft they are supposed to replace? Which in turn raises doubts on the value of Nakhjavani's entire exercise if it's not going to be a long term solution, and may even be counter-productive given the significant MRO challenges that unfamiliar aircraft will represent to Iranian technicians.

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinehaveasafeflight From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3677 times:

Today's federal register online reports that the Temporary Denial Order against Mahan Air and it's affiliated companies has been extended. So with sanctions against Iran's airlines literally becoming worse by the day, how can Reza Nakhjavani possibly deliver on his comments about replacing the country's entire fleet of aircraft... the guy must be delusional:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-04-17/html/2012-9154.htm


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31420 posts, RR: 85
Reply 2, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3556 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting haveasafeflight (Reply 1):
So with sanctions against Iran's airlines literally becoming worse by the day, how can Reza Nakhjavani possibly deliver on his comments about replacing the country's entire fleet of aircraft...

Iran Air is taking delivery of three former Qantas Boeing 747-338s that were purchased by a company in Kyrgyzstan, which does not have any sanctions in place against Iran.


User currently offlinehaveasafeflight From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 3318 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):

Iran Air is taking delivery of three former Qantas Boeing 747-338s that were purchased by a company in Kyrgyzstan, which does not have any sanctions in place against Iran.

As far as I know, you are correct in that Kyrgyzstan doesn't have sanctions against Iran per se. However that does not mean that they can go ahead and sell Iran anything they like.

I'm not an expert on international sanctions, however I am aware that there are conditions limiting what can and can't be sold to certain countries, depending on the country of origin of the products/goods in question.

As we all know, a Boeing 747 is a US origin product, and therefore subject to existing sanctions based upon the proposed end user (that's why Boeing can't sell new airplanes to Iran). The fact that the end user of these former Qantas 747-300's is Iran Air, which itself is sanctioned, means that there is a real risk of the US seeking to impound these airplanes if they are given the opportunity to do so, i.e. if they fly into US friendly territory.

So this is a lot more complex than saying that (insert country name here ......) doesn't have sanctions against Iran, and this is what is unclear in Reza Nakhjavani's statement, i.e. he doesn't (perhaps because he can't) substantiate how this can/will be achieved. If it were the head of the German aviation regulator coming out with such a comment, I wouldn't think twice about it, but this is Iran we are talking about.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31420 posts, RR: 85
Reply 4, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 3183 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Per Wikipedeia, the current sanctions prevent any Boeing or Airbus airframe younger than 7 years from being sold to Iran nor may Boeing or Airbus directly sell any plane, regardless of age.

QF's 747-300s are a good bit older than 7 years, so they appear to be acceptable within the sanctions.


User currently offlineiceberg210 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 147 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 3112 times:

I don't think the passenger version is still in production, but what if Iran bought some IL96's, TU204's and AN148's (which they already have on order) (don't know if there are Western components that would make this not work on those aircraft.) But could be a good way to buy some 'diplomatic' favors from Russia,and renew the Iranian fleet. Don't know if Russia would be interested, but hard to imagine they wouldn't be interested in a influx of cash and orders into their aerospace industry. And yes I know that the IL96, TU204 etc aren't exactly the most 'modern' aircraft but still perhaps not the worst compromise compared to using old used up frames from second hand sources.

Probably no chance of happening, but would be really neat if it did.



Erik Berg (Foster's is over but never forgotten)
User currently offlinecrazyguineapig From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 71 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 3083 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):

Not only must the frame in question be 7 years of age or older, but only certain countries are "allowed" (or are willing) to sell a/c to Iranian carriers in the first place. For example, even if a carrier in a western country has an 8-year old Boeing or Airbus widebody that Iran Air or Mahan could use, they would not be able to sell it to Iranians like, say, a Ukranian or some CIS carrier would.

Since Iran Air has a history of buying a/c from Brazil (e.g. TAM selling Fokkers to IR), is it possible for an Iranian carrier to buy new Embaer aircraft? Or are there too many American components involved for such a deal to take place? I feel like there is a need for narrowbody a/c in Iran as much as there is for widebodies, no? Would they still consider a Sukhoi Superjet 100 order, or maybe MS-21s with aviadvigatel engines?

Otherwise, the second-hand Boeing and Airbus a/c will inevitably pop-up in the market. It should not be a surprise to anyone if Iran Air soon acquires some 744s. I wonder whether A340s are a possibility, as perhaps are 762s and 763s which are becoming more common on the market (TAM and Transaero are offloading their 767s soon, think about that).

EDIT: Iceberg210--the An-148s are the least likely to join Iranian fleets. A Tu-204 order by Iran Air was swiped off the shelf a couple of years ago and now the order seems to have lost legitimacy. Knowing that various Russian carriers are operating Il-96s only for a period of time, it is not impossible for the acquirement of such aircraft as they have rather similar capacities to the A300 and A310.

[Edited 2012-04-18 08:13:18]

User currently offlineiceberg210 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 147 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 2994 times:

Quoting crazyguineapig (Reply 6):
Iceberg210--the An-148s are the least likely to join Iranian fleets.

Actually given that the Iranians have a joint manufacturing agreement with Antonov and have ordered 50 planes I'd say it's very likely they're going to end up with a bunch of An148s, and probably some AN158's as well.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...tonov-an-148-regional-jets-318749/



Erik Berg (Foster's is over but never forgotten)
User currently offlinehaveasafeflight From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 2844 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):

QF's 747-300s are a good bit older than 7 years, so they appear to be acceptable within the sanctions.

I understand the former QF 747-300's recently acquired by Iran Air were built around 1986, but I don't think it's as simple as the age of the aircraft being older than 7 years. Mahan Air experienced no end of troubles with the 747-400's (approx 20 years old) they acquired through a highly convoluted process involving Armenian and British front companies and intermediaries.

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...ral_aviation/print.main?id=5244946

Interestingly, the original poster of the link above correctly predicted that Mahan Air would be forced to get rid of the 747-400's on their international routes. It makes you wonder about the advice they received to have made such a mistake.


User currently offlineIR800 From Iran, joined May 2009, 47 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 8 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2511 times:

Take a look at this link, about Mahan's 744s:
http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.../ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2009/3314.html


User currently offlinehaveasafeflight From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (2 years 8 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2210 times:

Quoting IR800 (Reply 9):
Take a look at this link, about Mahan's 744s:
http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup....html

There's some interesting information there for sure. Any thoughts on the likelihood of 747-400's being acquired by Iranian carriers at some point in the future, in light of the multiple difficulties that Mahan Air experienced with this aircraft type?


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...
AeBal Fleet To Be Returned To Lessors By Spanair posted Sun Sep 14 2008 09:43:00 by Vfw614
Finnair HEL-JFK: MD11 To Be Replaced By A333 posted Tue Apr 29 2008 18:32:42 by Andaman
Iran Air To Be Privatised posted Tue Apr 29 2008 09:31:10 by 777way
Iran Air To Be Privatized In 2008 posted Thu Sep 27 2007 16:34:50 by OwlEye
MacArthur Airport (ISP) Tower Needs To Be Replaced posted Wed Dec 13 2006 22:27:14 by Dragon-wings
LGA Central Terminal To Be Replaced posted Tue Oct 3 2006 19:00:49 by RJpieces
To Be Flat, Or Almost Flat, In Business Class posted Mon Jul 17 2006 16:23:08 by Leelaw
Mesaba Expects Fleet To Be Cut In Half posted Tue Jan 10 2006 22:19:24 by LUVRSW
Soon The 757 Will Need To Be Replaced! posted Thu Oct 13 2005 00:46:14 by CV990
N235NW, To Be Repainted Or Retired? posted Thu Mar 31 2005 06:13:59 by N808NW