Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Armavia No Longer Operating Its Only SSJ100?  
User currently onlineN14AZ From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2715 posts, RR: 25
Posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 6117 times:

Flightblogger reports that Armavia is no longer flying its only delivered SSJ100 jet and is not willing to take over their next airframe:

Links:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/
http://rt.com/business/news/sukhoi-s...mavia-refuses-to-buy-aircraft-961/

I didn't know that Armavia is operating just a single aiframe of this new airplane. Does anybody know more?
It raises the question if such a relative small airline should become the launch customer of an entire new airplane....


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © William Scolaro - Malpensa Spotters Group



[Edited 2012-08-07 07:44:34]

9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineju068 From Vanuatu, joined Aug 2009, 2640 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 6084 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I think it was mentioned on here that they were experiencing financial difficulties. Could it be related to that?

User currently offlinezkojq From New Zealand, joined Sep 2011, 1222 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 6035 times:

Armavia seems to have had financial issues for a while. An A319 was repossessed at some point recently and in the last year two other Airbus A319s as well as two A320s have been returned to the lessors.

From a financial point of view it doesn't make sense to operate only one of an aircraft type (they only intended to operate a maximum of two anyway) for an extended period of time - particularly an aircraft type that hasn't been 'proven' as such.

This recent thread discussed Armavia not taking up the second Sukhoi Superjet it had on order:
Armavia Cancels Second SSJ Order (by thenoflyzone Jul 10 2012 in Civil Aviation)?threadid=5510030&searchid=5519031&s=armavia#ID5519031



Air New Zealand; first to fly the Boeing 787-9. ZK-NZE, NZ103 AKL-SYD, 2014/08/09. I was 83rd to board.
User currently offlineDublinspotter From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2011, 123 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5972 times:

hi

Very odd, I would've thought they had more than one after a year, considering Aeroflot have a few I believe.

I am guessing this is related to the crash in Indonesia?

They haven't sold at all many since the beginning and even fewer have been delivered to customers. I really like the plane and I hope it manages to find success but I think this will be a not to successful plane and will be in limited use.  

(Just my thoughts)

Dublinspotter  



Dublinspotter :)
User currently onlineN14AZ From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2715 posts, RR: 25
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5935 times:

Quoting Dublinspotter (Reply 3):
I am guessing this is related to the crash in Indonesia?

As per the article, no. It's rather about the reliability of the Sukhoi, quote from the article linked above:

Quote:
The plane is not bad, but not perfect. Airbuses and Boeings fly 330-350 hours per month, while the Sukhoi spent only 150 hours flying, " RBC daily quotes a source close to Armavia. “The last straw was it spent four days clearing customs in Russia to have a two-day service.


User currently offlineRubberJungle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5922 times:

More information from Flightglobal:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...delivery-dispute-escalates-375179/


User currently onlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2492 posts, RR: 11
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 5802 times:

Armavia's website seems to support the fact that the SSJ is no longer flying with them.

http://www.u8.am/index/view/id/4/lang/en

With any new type, operational problems are to be expected the first few years. Look at the A380. I guess Armavia doesn't have the financial leverage one would require to overcome these kinds of hurdles.

This also explains why they chose a tried and tested (and cheaper !) B735, having leased 3 from OK with Czech flight crews, in order to service their destinations for the time being.

Suckhoi should have chosen a more financially stable company, such as SU, as a launch customer, if for no other reason than to avoid the bad press this has created for them.

As for U8, well, they gave it a shot in the big leagues and soon realised that it is above their pay grade !

Thenoflyzone



us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offliner2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2630 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4950 times:

As posted here and elsewhere, this has more to do with financial troubles than aircraft performance. In any case it makes little sense to operate just 2 aircraft of one type, those leased 735's are probably a better fit for an airline like U8 than A32x and SSJ.

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 4):
Quote:
The plane is not bad, but not perfect. Airbuses and Boeings fly 330-350 hours per month, while the Sukhoi spent only 150 hours flying, " RBC daily quotes a source close to Armavia. .

SU flies them around 240 hours per month, so this seems more an Armavia issue.


User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11655 posts, RR: 60
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 4858 times:

This is Armavia blowing hot air, it's not the aircraft which has difficulties, it's the airline.

I actually wonder if they'll try and order more SSJs as a result of this. Might sound odd on the face of it, but Rossiya pulled a similar stunt before ordering more An-148s, although their financial position was better than Armavia's.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineLGWGate49 From Sudan, joined Nov 2009, 138 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3572 times:

Well it seems that the airline is now blaming it on substandard quality:

http://www.eturbonews.com/30528/arma...-superjet-100-due-substandard-qual



Look for the ridiculous in everything, and you will find it
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...
Is NW The Only Carrier No Longer Carrying Mail? posted Sat Jan 17 2004 01:39:01 by M404
Leahy No Longer Expects 30 A380 Orders In 2012 posted Wed Jul 11 2012 02:46:35 by anfromme
BAW A318s No Longer Operated By BAW! posted Wed Jun 13 2012 14:41:30 by fcogafa
Tokyo-Sapporo No Longer World's Busiest Air Route posted Sat May 26 2012 07:18:40 by HOONS90
Ports No Longer Served Non-Stop From AKL? posted Sun Jan 8 2012 21:04:55 by byronicle6
Destinations No Longer Flown From SEA posted Sat Jan 7 2012 11:21:11 by BoeingGuy
Destinations No Longer Flown From SJC posted Tue Jan 3 2012 19:10:57 by BoeingGuy
Cities Which FR No Longer Serves? posted Thu Dec 29 2011 09:36:27 by aviatorcraig
Intl Markets No Longer Served By Pre-Merger United posted Thu Nov 17 2011 08:53:32 by Sulley
Avod No Longer Necessary? posted Mon Sep 5 2011 07:53:45 by Delta2ual