globalflyer777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 15989 times:
The newly appointed head of the Civil Aviation Organization of Iran (CAO), Hamidreza Pahlevani, has announced that 10 new passenger planes will be added to the national fleet in the next few months. Pahlevani also said that two passenger planes have already joined the Iranian civil air fleet:
LV From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 1888 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 15960 times:
Wasn't there a thread on here recently about a company in one of the former Soviet countries buying used Airbus planes and then reselling them to Iranian airlines in a way that very thinly got around the sanctions in what could be best described as a gray area?
vaus77w From Australia, joined Aug 2011, 143 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 15595 times:
According to Iran Air Aquires Ex-QF 747-300s! (by na Mar 27 2012 in Civil Aviation)?threadid=5423982&searchid=5458073&s=iran+air+QF#ID5458073 Iran Air supposedly purchased 3 used 747-300s (ex-QF aircraft). However I'm not sure they are operational yet, they do not appear under Iran Air on airfleets or wiki.
na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10064 posts, RR: 11 Reply 3, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 15481 times:
They were able to secure much of LHs A300s through whatever third party a few years ago, they have aquired an old ex-LH A340 and a German AF A310 recently, they bought those old QF 743s a few months ago, so this announcement shouldnt be too much of a wonder.
jumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 638 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 15053 times:
I do wonder about the mixed state of sanctions against Iran as applied to air travel.
Iran isn't allowed to buy Airbus/Boeing aircraft on the open market, but Iran Air is allowed to fly to EU destinations - I don't know about US cities.
The EU seems happy to allow increasingly old, and presumably as time goes by potentially less safe aircraft into EU airspace - wouldn't it make more sense to allow them new more reliable and safer civil aircraft? Or is it the US content of Airbusses that stops the sale of Airbus planes to Iran?
Personally I think its a wonder how Iran Air keeps flying as well as it does.
aloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8523 posts, RR: 46 Reply 6, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 14691 times:
Quoting jumpjets (Reply 5): The EU seems happy to allow increasingly old, and presumably as time goes by potentially less safe aircraft into EU airspace - wouldn't it make more sense to allow them new more reliable and safer civil aircraft?
We're talking about politically motivated sanctions, which are almost traditional at this point. The kind of sense that you're talking about was, IMHO, never a consideration. What has been applied is a strict limitation on the aircraft that Iran Air may fly to the EU, just A300s, A310s and a single 737 are allowed as per April 2012.
Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
jumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 638 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 14513 times:
Quoting aloges (Reply 6): We're talking about politically motivated sanctions, which are almost traditional at this point.
Totally agree - but it all seems a bit of a hotch potch to me.
The EU has sufficient reservations about Iran to ban the selling planes to them but insufficient concerns to ban Iran Air from the EU.
In the absence of access to new planes or access to supplier parts the EU slowly but surely whittles down the number of planes deemed safe enough for EU airspace. So in effect by degrees applying theoretically non-political sanctions against Iran Air.
I am not advocating either increasing or reducing the sanctions, there are much better minds than mine to think that through - I'd just like to see a sensible consistent approach - ands if possible the return of the Iran Air 747SP [ If they still have one] to LHR
vio From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 1357 posts, RR: 9 Reply 9, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 8866 times:
Well, what about Soviet planes, like the TU-204 for example... or the IL-96?... or the Sukhoi-100... Are there sanctions regarding these airplanes as well? (Maybe the Su-100, since it's very "western" in its components.) I must addmit, I don't know how these sanctions work in detail. Obviously, Iran is restricted on a lot of things that it can purchase from the West...but that's probably the extent that I know...
Superior decisions reduce the need for superior skills.
JoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5281 posts, RR: 30 Reply 11, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 7861 times:
I've always thought the sanctions against US aircraft parts was purely out of spite. It is a penalty directly against the Iranian flying public, putting them in danger every time they fly and does nothing to harm or change the will of the government.
By now, Iran is either making replacement parts or getting them through back channels. I flew on an Iranian MD-83 and it didn't crash even once.
Part of the problem getting Russian airliners is that there just aren't that many of them and production is too slow to even fill their domestic orders. Even the ones that are available aren't allowed to fly in Russia anymore.
On the other hand, there are tons of good, used western airliners which have years of safe flying left in them which would suit Iranian airlines just fine...but we can't be soft on those darned Iranians.
jumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 638 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 5083 times:
Quoting keegd76 (Reply 14): Er, no it doesn't. Haven't you heard of the Black List:
Yes I have - please see post 7
Quoting jumpjets (Reply 7): In the absence of access to new planes or access to supplier parts the EU slowly but surely whittles down the number of planes deemed safe enough for EU airspace. So in effect by degrees applying theoretically non-political sanctions against Iran Air.
Does the EU actually deny parts for their Airbus planes and then turn around and blacklist them as unsafe? It looked like the document had some A300 exceptions. It would really be a moral low to deny EADS parts to blacklisted airlines purely for political reasons. They are basically admitting via the blacklist that civilian lives are in danger in those planes and if they are not willing to sell parts to fix their own product, its pretty sad day in the EU.
Aesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 5737 posts, RR: 9 Reply 17, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 4439 times:
As I said it's US sanctions. If they want a non US part there shouldn't be a problem, but lots of parts (including ones that tend to need replacement like avionics) are US build. So the political blame is on you.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
These strict sanctions are imposed by the government of the United States. No US based company is allowed to deal with companies that entertain trade relations with sanctioned Iranian enterprises. Which is why Iran Air still manages to buy fuel, source spare parts or even whole aircraft - as long as the Iranian market is more lucrative to that particular company, they'll deal with them and ignore the USA and vice versa.
It's arguable that an economic sanction levied upon Iran Air is jeopardizing the security of innocent civilians and is as such counterindicate; however, the ban is justified by claims that the Iran Air fleet has been and is being utilized on behalf of the Iranian regime to transport weapons and material for the Iranian nuclear program. Some aircraft are supposed to exude atomic radiation even.
On another note, as an international corporation Iran Air enables Iran to obtain foreign currency and to earn money.
Regrettably, the desires of aviation enthusiasts and the travelling public find little to no consideration on any political agenda. Especially when they have the sweet side effect of supporting one's own economic interest (ie. the EU airlines still flying into Iran).
Personally speaking, the short-sightedness and ineffectiveness of these sanctions are symptomatic for US foreign policy. They have symbolic value at best, demonstrating to Israel and the American public that the USA doesn't support oppressive regimes. The fact that the US will support any dictator to reach a common goal is just as overlooked as the fact that contrary to their desired effect - weakening the Iranian regime - these and other sanctions only make it easier for despots to perpetuate the notion of American being an evil, imperialist oppressor of the rest of the world and thus, in fact support these regime's domestic political agendas. Discussing the ridiculousness of the Iranian nuclear program would definitely digress too far off topic at this point, but it is a mere pretext for foreign governments to excersize said sanctions.
So back to the actual topic at hand.. I would be quite delighted to see 743s and A343s in Iran Air colors visit Europe though they're obviously by no means worthy replacements of the 741, -2s and -SPs.
solarflyer22 From US Minor Outlying Islands, joined Nov 2009, 597 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (1 year 4 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3995 times:
Quoting Aesma (Reply 17): As I said it's US sanctions. If they want a non US part there shouldn't be a problem, but lots of parts (including ones that tend to need replacement like avionics) are US build. So the political blame is on you.
I see. The blame is on our side of the atlantic for sure. If the EU is providing their parts then that explains the A310 and A300 exemptions.
I have not heard of IranAir being used to transport radioactive materials but it'd be easy to detect since that materials leaves a trace. It's quite a moral conundrum if thats true. I am surprised Airbus doesn't produce a alternative parts for customers not wanting to deal with the USA. That would probably be more than Iran anyway. I know they have alternatives for the honeywell electronics.
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26005 posts, RR: 78 Reply 20, posted (1 year 4 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3882 times:
Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 11): I've always thought the sanctions against US aircraft parts was purely out of spite. It is a penalty directly against the Iranian flying public, putting them in danger every time they fly and does nothing to harm or change the will of the government.
Yep. Its stupid. Boeing would make a fortune in Iran. IR has the money to reequip with brand new planes and has always stated a Boeing preference.
Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 13): Couldn't some of the Russian airlines sell their TU-204s to Iran, as they seem keen to reequip with western planes?
A lot of TU-204s have RB211 power, no?
Quoting something (Reply 18): the ban is justified by claims that the Iran Air fleet has been and is being utilized on behalf of the Iranian regime to transport weapons and material for the Iranian nuclear program.
Yeah, which are ridiculously thin. Sort of like the "explanation" for the USS Vincenses shoot down of the IR A300.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
luckyone From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1951 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (1 year 4 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3573 times:
Quoting axelesgg (Reply 22): Well, if Air Koryo (national carrier of North Korea) managed to purchase two TU-204, american engines or not, why would it not be possible for IranAir?
Well for one the demands of the two carriers are very different. Air travel in the DPRK is, to my knowledge, limited to a few dozen flights a week, mostly to Beijing, and only required two or three aircraft. Even that requirement took years to fulfill. Iran actually has a well-established, in demand air travel system. I would surmise the Russians are simply incapable at the present time of meeting the demand for frames required by the Iranians.