There have been questions about Aeroflot's 777s so many times lately in here and untill recently, we all thought that they will be gone soon.
Here is the link:
http://www.aviatsiya.ru/forums/viewthread.php?tid=1043
If you read from the link above, you'll understand the subject.
In a nutshell though, a few years ago, Aeroflot decided to have the 767 as the only foreign built wide-body jet in its fleet, dumping both the 777s and the A310s. But it seems that the airline has decided to keep the 2 777s after all.
The narrowbody fleet will be made of A319/320/321s alongside the Tu-134 and Tu-154s.
Before anyone asks for a source of the info, let me say that http://www.aviatsiya.ru is made up of many "insiders" in CIS aviation and the news reported is almost always right.
Regards.
[Edited 2004-07-08 21:24:12]
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
-
- whitehatter
- Posts: 5180
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Not surprised really. SU have been saying that the 777 was due to be returned for a while now, but the reported dates always seemed to come and go.
With the way in which the Russian economy is expanding at the moment, there could even be thoughts of taking on extra aircraft as their international traffic grows.
Now let's see them in the new livery!
With the way in which the Russian economy is expanding at the moment, there could even be thoughts of taking on extra aircraft as their international traffic grows.
Now let's see them in the new livery!
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Good news indeed for Aeroflot. Although it appears AM will now have to find another source for their planned acquisition - probably leased from AF.
And now, I must finally succumb to one of those statements that I hate seeing on this website - aircraft liveries. But seriously, if Aeroflot keeps the 777, can you imagine how gorgeous it would be if repainted in the new livery?!? My God, that would be one fine lookin' aircraft!
Regards,
Hamlet69
And now, I must finally succumb to one of those statements that I hate seeing on this website - aircraft liveries. But seriously, if Aeroflot keeps the 777, can you imagine how gorgeous it would be if repainted in the new livery?!? My God, that would be one fine lookin' aircraft!
Regards,
Hamlet69
-
- whitehatter
- Posts: 5180
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Aeroflot should definitely have the 777 in their fleet. If people here remember the TV show "Airport", SU pulled a couple of rows out of the Y cabin after passenger surveys asked for a little more pitch.
The Russian cabin crew were also all smiles at having the aircraft to work with. The SU premium cabins looked excellently appointed.
AM should be able to find other 777s available; the UA ones have Pratt engines which might fit their fleet better.
The Russian cabin crew were also all smiles at having the aircraft to work with. The SU premium cabins looked excellently appointed.
AM should be able to find other 777s available; the UA ones have Pratt engines which might fit their fleet better.
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
It is only fitting that Aeroflot keeps the B777. It serves them very well in a great many ways.
1. It is arguably the most advance, and in some ways most cost effective airliner in the World. Sorry Airbus fans, I'm not trying to start anything here - but Airbus really has nothing to match it.
2. It is the current flagship of global international service, and as that a status symbol.
3. The Boeing 777, in effect, places Aeroflot in the class of premium carriers. With all but a few exceptions, LH being the most notable, any airline that does NOT operate the B777 is for all intents and purposes second rate. Not to say that they are bad or have horrid service - they are not seen to be the equal (in the public's eye) to those that do.
4. Respectability in the West. This leads perhaps to greater profits as more Western business people, and leisure travelers may consider Aeroflot to Russia over a Western carrier.
That's all just my opinion. Would I fly Aeroflot? Hmmmm, I really don't know. I have heard all the horror stories and things. But if I get to fly on a B777, that certainly helps.
Tasha
[Edited 2004-07-09 02:14:53]
1. It is arguably the most advance, and in some ways most cost effective airliner in the World. Sorry Airbus fans, I'm not trying to start anything here - but Airbus really has nothing to match it.
2. It is the current flagship of global international service, and as that a status symbol.
3. The Boeing 777, in effect, places Aeroflot in the class of premium carriers. With all but a few exceptions, LH being the most notable, any airline that does NOT operate the B777 is for all intents and purposes second rate. Not to say that they are bad or have horrid service - they are not seen to be the equal (in the public's eye) to those that do.
4. Respectability in the West. This leads perhaps to greater profits as more Western business people, and leisure travelers may consider Aeroflot to Russia over a Western carrier.
That's all just my opinion. Would I fly Aeroflot? Hmmmm, I really don't know. I have heard all the horror stories and things. But if I get to fly on a B777, that certainly helps.
Tasha
[Edited 2004-07-09 02:14:53]
-
- ContinentalFan
- Posts: 343
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Tasha,
What about Virgin Atlantic and Qantas, to name two off the top of my head? They don't fly 777s and I would hardly consider them "second rate."
What about Virgin Atlantic and Qantas, to name two off the top of my head? They don't fly 777s and I would hardly consider them "second rate."
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Continentalfan,
"What about Virgin Atlantic and Qantas, to name two off the top of my head? They don't fly 777s and I would hardly consider them "second rate." "
Neither would I, they are part of the few exceptions out there. LH, is the most notable one. I firmly believe that the reason LH doesn't operate the B777 is entirely political in nature.
Tasha
"What about Virgin Atlantic and Qantas, to name two off the top of my head? They don't fly 777s and I would hardly consider them "second rate." "
Neither would I, they are part of the few exceptions out there. LH, is the most notable one. I firmly believe that the reason LH doesn't operate the B777 is entirely political in nature.
Tasha
-
- iowa744fan
- Posts: 906
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Quick question. The only route that I know of that Aeroflot uses the 777s on is the thrice weekly Moscow-Seattle-San Francisco (if they still do this one). What other routes do they operate since I would think that this would only require one of the two aircraft? Thanks.
-
- whitehatter
- Posts: 5180
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
They use them on occasional SVO-LHR flights, and also into China. Basically where they need the capacity.
-
- warren747sp
- Posts: 988
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
The other premier carriers may not have 777 , but they sure have 744s!
-
- DfwRevolution
- Posts: 9339
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
The other premier carriers may not have 777 , but they sure have 744s!
And the real good ones have both
And the real good ones have both
-
- warren747sp
- Posts: 988
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Agreed! DfwRevolution.
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
An observation: There are absolutely no A300, A330 and A340 in East Europe ( including Poland, Hungary and Czech) and the CIS. Not a single one!
There was one A300 with Kyrgyzstan Airlines a few years ago which I think was returned to the original owners, Onur Air of Turkey.
The only large Airbuses are the A310s.
Thus, the Aeroflot 777s are the largest twin jets in that region. There are a good number of 767-300s with many airlines.
There was one A300 with Kyrgyzstan Airlines a few years ago which I think was returned to the original owners, Onur Air of Turkey.
The only large Airbuses are the A310s.
Thus, the Aeroflot 777s are the largest twin jets in that region. There are a good number of 767-300s with many airlines.
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Aeroflot keeping 777s: great, the triple seven is a good plane, and a good part of Aeroflot's fleet.
...but personally I think they should get A330s and even maybe some A340s! Aeroflot's livery on these airbuses would look just absolutely fascinating. If not the A340, then at least the A330, which is an economically wise plane to get (not to mention most beautiful
), as well as simply an overall good investment.
-A330Fan1
...but personally I think they should get A330s and even maybe some A340s! Aeroflot's livery on these airbuses would look just absolutely fascinating. If not the A340, then at least the A330, which is an economically wise plane to get (not to mention most beautiful
), as well as simply an overall good investment.
-A330Fan1
-
- whitehatter
- Posts: 5180
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Aeroflot can't 'invest' in anything at the moment, due to Russian taxation.
Their best strategy is Bermuda registered aircraft like the 767 and 777 fleet, on lease from ILFC and GECAS. As they are not imported as such, the huge tax penalty is avoided.
The A330 would be a bad move as their current fleet is Boeing for longhaul, with Russian built aircraft like the IL-96. Adding a third longhaul type would just complicate their fleet structure and increase costs.
Their best strategy is Bermuda registered aircraft like the 767 and 777 fleet, on lease from ILFC and GECAS. As they are not imported as such, the huge tax penalty is avoided.
The A330 would be a bad move as their current fleet is Boeing for longhaul, with Russian built aircraft like the IL-96. Adding a third longhaul type would just complicate their fleet structure and increase costs.
-
- L410Turbolet
- Posts: 6403
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
There are absolutely no A300, A330 and A340 in East Europe ( including Poland, Hungary and Czech) and the CIS. Not a single one!
OD720,
what is your point? Firstly I'd not put PL, H, CZ in the same region with Russia. Secondly, whatever a/c SU flies has absolutely no influence on LOT's or Malev's choice of medium/long range aircraft. BTW, A330 is the most likely replacement for OK's A310s since these are getting too old.
OD720,
what is your point? Firstly I'd not put PL, H, CZ in the same region with Russia. Secondly, whatever a/c SU flies has absolutely no influence on LOT's or Malev's choice of medium/long range aircraft. BTW, A330 is the most likely replacement for OK's A310s since these are getting too old.
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
L410Turbolet,
What point? I said it was an OBSERVATION that there are no widebody Airbuses.
Regards.
What point? I said it was an OBSERVATION that there are no widebody Airbuses.
Regards.
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Neither would I, they are part of the few exceptions out there. LH, is the most notable one. I firmly believe that the reason LH doesn't operate the B777 is entirely political in nature.
Going by that, then the only reason AA,DL,CO operate 777s is due to political pressure.
Going by that, then the only reason AA,DL,CO operate 777s is due to political pressure.
-
- Aeroflot777
- Posts: 3246
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
The guy on the website is just speculating!!!! He is wondering himself, and asking other people to confirm him. This doesnt sound like its 100% true. Aeroflot is doing poorly on their Russia - USA routes, therefore they seriously don't need them.
Iowa744fan,
Aeroflot doesn't fly to San Francisco anymore. They fly to Seattle and that's their final destination. They use the B767-300ER on this route.
Aeroflot777
Iowa744fan,
Aeroflot doesn't fly to San Francisco anymore. They fly to Seattle and that's their final destination. They use the B767-300ER on this route.
Aeroflot777
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Tasha wrote:
any airline that does NOT operate the B777 is for all intents and purposes second rate. Not to say that they are bad or have horrid service - they are not seen to be the equal (in the public's eye) to those that do.
[sarc....on] Thanks for speaking for The Public. [sarc.....off]
Funniest BS I've read here in a while. The only plane you can count on The Public accurately knowing is no longer in service. Concorde. The rest are just fat or skinny, usually twin engined, jets.
[Edited 2004-07-09 14:31:44]
any airline that does NOT operate the B777 is for all intents and purposes second rate. Not to say that they are bad or have horrid service - they are not seen to be the equal (in the public's eye) to those that do.
[sarc....on] Thanks for speaking for The Public. [sarc.....off]
Funniest BS I've read here in a while. The only plane you can count on The Public accurately knowing is no longer in service. Concorde. The rest are just fat or skinny, usually twin engined, jets.
[Edited 2004-07-09 14:31:44]
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
"Aeroflot is doing poorly on their Russia - USA routes, therefore they seriously don't need them."
SU doesn't use its 772s on its USA routes, but rather primarily to DEL, AA), Japan">NRT, AA), China">PEK, and LHR (on SU and Fr only).
Tasha - AA, UA, etc., might be deemed 'first-rate' carriers in your mind, but are they making a profit? Nope. In contrast, some of the 'second-rate' airlines of which you speak ARE making a profit - which is surely far more important than any class crap.
SU doesn't use its 772s on its USA routes, but rather primarily to DEL, AA), Japan">NRT, AA), China">PEK, and LHR (on SU and Fr only).
Tasha - AA, UA, etc., might be deemed 'first-rate' carriers in your mind, but are they making a profit? Nope. In contrast, some of the 'second-rate' airlines of which you speak ARE making a profit - which is surely far more important than any class crap.
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Voodoo & Pe@rson:
What I wrote was personal opinion... The Concord was totally obsolete at retirement, but marginally profitable. Let me point something out to you (that you seem to have forgotten) - just because a carrier is or isn't profitable does not at all reflect on the superiority of the aircraft it uses for a specific route.
Gkirk:
No, they don't have the pressures from Germany's government (although LH is a "private" company now) to purchase Airbus. Also, the pressures of a European airline purchasing European aircraft.
I would love to further discuss this here, but I'm off to the airport. Going to ATL today...
Tasha
What I wrote was personal opinion... The Concord was totally obsolete at retirement, but marginally profitable. Let me point something out to you (that you seem to have forgotten) - just because a carrier is or isn't profitable does not at all reflect on the superiority of the aircraft it uses for a specific route.
Gkirk:
No, they don't have the pressures from Germany's government (although LH is a "private" company now) to purchase Airbus. Also, the pressures of a European airline purchasing European aircraft.
I would love to further discuss this here, but I'm off to the airport. Going to ATL today...
Tasha
-
- Guest
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
The Boeing 777, in effect, places Aeroflot in the class of premium carriers. With all but a few exceptions, LH being the most notable, any airline that does NOT operate the B777 is for all intents and purposes second rate. Not to say that they are bad or have horrid service - they are not seen to be the equal (in the public's eye) to those that do.
BTW you forgot SA and perhaps RJ, QR and Gulf Air, all of which i - a memeber of the public - would much rather fly over AA UA or DL.
And a lot of the other "first rate" airlines use A333's/A340's too.
Respectability in the West. This leads perhaps to greater profits as more Western business people, and leisure travelers may consider Aeroflot to Russia over a Western carrier.
Please your average member of the public doesnt have a freaking clue what a 777 is.
And why start an A vrs B in such an irrelevant thread.
BTW you forgot SA and perhaps RJ, QR and Gulf Air, all of which i - a memeber of the public - would much rather fly over AA UA or DL.
And a lot of the other "first rate" airlines use A333's/A340's too.
Respectability in the West. This leads perhaps to greater profits as more Western business people, and leisure travelers may consider Aeroflot to Russia over a Western carrier.
Please your average member of the public doesnt have a freaking clue what a 777 is.
And why start an A vrs B in such an irrelevant thread.
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Tasha;
Are U for real? You´re sure a A-bus basher if I ever seen one!!
"dont wanna have A vs B war"!
"T7 is the best, all other a/c´s are second rate"!! Hellooooooooo...
Mike//SE
Are U for real? You´re sure a A-bus basher if I ever seen one!!
"dont wanna have A vs B war"!
"T7 is the best, all other a/c´s are second rate"!! Hellooooooooo...
Mike//SE
-
- kosmonaute
- Posts: 87
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
The Boeing 777, in effect, places Aeroflot in the class of premium carriers. With all but a few exceptions, LH being the most notable, any airline that does NOT operate the B777 is for all intents and purposes second rate. Not to say that they are bad or have horrid service - they are not seen to be the equal (in the public's eye) to those that do.
Let's not forget SK, LX, and OS [unless we include Lauda with OS].
Do you really think the general public sits there and ponders on the quality of an airline based on if it operates a Boeing 777 or not? Come on. I think a lot of people have a difficult enough time telling a 777 from a 767 from a 737. To sit there and say that the public judges an airline based one the utlilisation of one aircraft is ridiculous.
Let's not forget SK, LX, and OS [unless we include Lauda with OS].
Do you really think the general public sits there and ponders on the quality of an airline based on if it operates a Boeing 777 or not? Come on. I think a lot of people have a difficult enough time telling a 777 from a 767 from a 737. To sit there and say that the public judges an airline based one the utlilisation of one aircraft is ridiculous.
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Sure you got a right to a opinion, but I think you´re waaaay out of line here!!
Mike
Mike
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
First of all - this certainly isn't an Airbus v. Boeing thread. I stated opinion - no one here has to like it. I did not say one bad thing about Airbus, now did I? It seems to me that most of you cringe when someone says something nice about Boeing once in a while.
Tasha!
Tasha!
-
- Russophile
- Posts: 1304
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Before anyone asks for a source of the info, let me say that http://www.aviatsiya.ru is made up of many "insiders" in CIS aviation and the news reported is almost always right.
What do you mean almost?
The guy on the website is just speculating!!!!
Not speculation at all. There is method in my madness.
What do you mean almost?
The guy on the website is just speculating!!!!
Not speculation at all. There is method in my madness.
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Thank you Russophile for pointing out the "almost". I needed some support, a little late but very much appreciated.
Cheers.
Cheers.
-
- Boeing4ever
- Posts: 4479
- Joined:
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Sure you got a right to a opinion, but I think you´re waaaay out of line here!!
You're one to talk Solnabo! If she's anti-Airbus, then consider her a counter-balance to your pro-Airbus cheerleading and constant jabs at Boeing.
Now, a real question...why do most of Aeroflot's non-Russian aircraft feature tail numbers that aren't Russian?
B4e-Forever New Frontiers
You're one to talk Solnabo! If she's anti-Airbus, then consider her a counter-balance to your pro-Airbus cheerleading and constant jabs at Boeing.
Now, a real question...why do most of Aeroflot's non-Russian aircraft feature tail numbers that aren't Russian?
B4e-Forever New Frontiers
RE: Aviatsiya.ru: Aeroflot Will Keep The 777s
Boeing4ever,
Some say it's because of tax exemption reasons but it's not. I think it has got more to do with insurance and ownership reasons. This is somewhat similar to the MEA fleet at present where even the aircraft owned by MEA do not carry Lebanese (OD-) registrations.
Regards.
Some say it's because of tax exemption reasons but it's not. I think it has got more to do with insurance and ownership reasons. This is somewhat similar to the MEA fleet at present where even the aircraft owned by MEA do not carry Lebanese (OD-) registrations.
Regards.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: 717atOGG, A321Lufthansa, Acey559, alto87, AnishReddi, Arion640, ausinTex, B595, bretonrlong, calpsafltskeds, CATIIIevery5yrs, Coma993, CriticalPoint, DBCoop3r, DEN1895, DeSpringbokke, docmtl, Eirules, F14TCT, Fiend, flash330, flyoregon, FN374, GalaxyFlyer, GEWhiz, glbltrvlr, hue97msy, hykee, ibthebigd, icareflies, IgorD, JannEejit, JohnDavis, kalvado, KeroBurner, mapimi, MDTflyer1, mil76, Miwi0170, mooseofspruce, NZ321, orlandocfi, PA110, PA815, Password, PB26, Pennineuk, PepeTheFrog, portola2727, prebennorholm, sagechan, ShamrockBoi330, slick1017, Tenaja85, TWA772LR, UA804Heavy, Want2fly, yhu, Ztim and 280 guests