Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
incitatus wrote:Of the 22 777-300ERs in Aeroflot's fleet, three seem to be parked or going through maintenance.
RA73140, serial number 41679 assembled in 2012
RA73139, serial number 41680 assembled in 2013
RA73134, serial number 41689 assembled in 2014 flew last on August 15.
The 777s have become a critical airplane to fly between Moscow and Russia's far east. I wonder if the cargo holds are more important than the seats.
toobz wrote:Only really the mandated updates/fixes etc are relevant.I seriously wonder how safe these western aircraft are that are currently flying. Aren’t there quite a few updates that have to be done to the systems of these aircraft? How are they managing this?
toobz wrote:I seriously wonder how safe these western aircraft are that are currently flying. Aren’t there quite a few updates that have to be done to the systems of these aircraft? How are they managing this?
ReverseFlow wrote:toobz wrote:Only really the mandated updates/fixes etc are relevant.I seriously wonder how safe these western aircraft are that are currently flying. Aren’t there quite a few updates that have to be done to the systems of these aircraft? How are they managing this?
Some airlines decide not to do 'nice to have' updates (e.g. reliability fixes).
So if nothing safety critical has come out recently, I don't see any reason why they are any different to ones flying elsewhere for the moment.
Disclaimer: If the appropriate maintenance program is being performed.
MalevTU134 wrote:incitatus wrote:Of the 22 777-300ERs in Aeroflot's fleet, three seem to be parked or going through maintenance.
RA73140, serial number 41679 assembled in 2012
RA73139, serial number 41680 assembled in 2013
RA73134, serial number 41689 assembled in 2014 flew last on August 15.
The 777s have become a critical airplane to fly between Moscow and Russia's far east. I wonder if the cargo holds are more important than the seats.
What important and urgent cargo could there be between the already underdeveloped Russian Far East and Moscow, that cannot be sent by rail? It's not a rhetorical question, but I'm rather genuinely interested to know.
Phosphorus wrote:I would have thought that a mechanics license would be under the local regulator?toobz wrote:I seriously wonder how safe these western aircraft are that are currently flying. Aren’t there quite a few updates that have to be done to the systems of these aircraft? How are they managing this?
Russian aviation forums had some sliding schedules published, when and what for which aircraft batch becomes illegal. I'm lazy to search for specific threads, and many of them no longer exist -- moderators work overtime to pluck too interesting topics out themselves, before censorship shows up and shuts down the whole discussion platform for good -- or helps it change ownership into more cooperating hands.
So, from memory, basically, for Airbus (only widebodies? or all? not so sure), the first critical step (or misstep) is a software update and/or patch that comes sometime in August-September.
(more knowledgeable people could chime in on exact schedules).
From that moment on, the rabbit hole starts to become deeper for the question "legal airworthiness of these aircraft".
There are similar dates for other types, of course. Experts here would know these critical points, where stolen goods start to become notably divergent from legit goods.ReverseFlow wrote:toobz wrote:Only really the mandated updates/fixes etc are relevant.I seriously wonder how safe these western aircraft are that are currently flying. Aren’t there quite a few updates that have to be done to the systems of these aircraft? How are they managing this?
Some airlines decide not to do 'nice to have' updates (e.g. reliability fixes).
So if nothing safety critical has come out recently, I don't see any reason why they are any different to ones flying elsewhere for the moment.
Disclaimer: If the appropriate maintenance program is being performed.
If spare parts are not available or counterfeit, and mechanics certification is no longer current, it's less mundane. As they like to say in Russia, "suddenly the evening isn't as languid anymore".
dcajet wrote:Perishable food/consumer goods that can't last the 7+days a train trip takes? Just guessing...
RJWNL wrote:dcajet wrote:Perishable food/consumer goods that can't last the 7+days a train trip takes? Just guessing...
You are probably right, but I thought ‘all russians had their own vegetable patch’ so why bother flying food in from other parts of the country or world?
ReverseFlow wrote:Phosphorus wrote:I would have thought that a mechanics license would be under the local regulator?toobz wrote:I seriously wonder how safe these western aircraft are that are currently flying. Aren’t there quite a few updates that have to be done to the systems of these aircraft? How are they managing this?
Russian aviation forums had some sliding schedules published, when and what for which aircraft batch becomes illegal. I'm lazy to search for specific threads, and many of them no longer exist -- moderators work overtime to pluck too interesting topics out themselves, before censorship shows up and shuts down the whole discussion platform for good -- or helps it change ownership into more cooperating hands.
So, from memory, basically, for Airbus (only widebodies? or all? not so sure), the first critical step (or misstep) is a software update and/or patch that comes sometime in August-September.
(more knowledgeable people could chime in on exact schedules).
From that moment on, the rabbit hole starts to become deeper for the question "legal airworthiness of these aircraft".
There are similar dates for other types, of course. Experts here would know these critical points, where stolen goods start to become notably divergent from legit goods.ReverseFlow wrote:Only really the mandated updates/fixes etc are relevant.
Some airlines decide not to do 'nice to have' updates (e.g. reliability fixes).
So if nothing safety critical has come out recently, I don't see any reason why they are any different to ones flying elsewhere for the moment.
Disclaimer: If the appropriate maintenance program is being performed.
If spare parts are not available or counterfeit, and mechanics certification is no longer current, it's less mundane. As they like to say in Russia, "suddenly the evening isn't as languid anymore".
dcajet wrote:RJWNL wrote:dcajet wrote:Perishable food/consumer goods that can't last the 7+days a train trip takes? Just guessing...
You are probably right, but I thought ‘all russians had their own vegetable patch’ so why bother flying food in from other parts of the country or world?
Stereotypes of babushkas pickling anything they can grow during the summer at their dachas...
I really don't know how Russia's supply chains work... Having been at a few large supermarkets in Moscow it does not look like present day Muscovites depend on their dachas for feeding themselves. No different from what it looks like in any modern European city. The variety and quantity of food available is evident and comparable to Western Europe. In this regard, this is no longer the USSR.
Phosphorus wrote:dcajet wrote:RJWNL wrote:
You are probably right, but I thought ‘all russians had their own vegetable patch’ so why bother flying food in from other parts of the country or world?
Stereotypes of babushkas pickling anything they can grow during the summer at their dachas...
I really don't know how Russia's supply chains work... Having been at a few large supermarkets in Moscow it does not look like present day Muscovites depend on their dachas for feeding themselves. No different from what it looks like in any modern European city. The variety and quantity of food available is evident and comparable to Western Europe. In this regard, this is no longer the USSR.
Specifically Moscow is seemingly unable to really do too much of that "vegetable patch" sort of thing, anymore. Together with suburbs, it's what? 20 million people minimum? Every "dacha"/vegetable patch that's within 100 km from the city core is too expensive as a real estate for sale, and is a candidate to be converted into a McMansion as a minimum, or 30-storey apartment block possibly. So it's external food supplies, most of the time. Considering logistical bottlenecks for road transport (including imported stuff), short shelf-life stuff would legitimately be flown in.
dcajet wrote:Phosphorus wrote:dcajet wrote:
Stereotypes of babushkas pickling anything they can grow during the summer at their dachas...
I really don't know how Russia's supply chains work... Having been at a few large supermarkets in Moscow it does not look like present day Muscovites depend on their dachas for feeding themselves. No different from what it looks like in any modern European city. The variety and quantity of food available is evident and comparable to Western Europe. In this regard, this is no longer the USSR.
Specifically Moscow is seemingly unable to really do too much of that "vegetable patch" sort of thing, anymore. Together with suburbs, it's what? 20 million people minimum? Every "dacha"/vegetable patch that's within 100 km from the city core is too expensive as a real estate for sale, and is a candidate to be converted into a McMansion as a minimum, or 30-storey apartment block possibly. So it's external food supplies, most of the time. Considering logistical bottlenecks for road transport (including imported stuff), short shelf-life stuff would legitimately be flown in.
The previous round of sanctions and counter-sanctions imposed by Russia following the Crimea invasion, suddenly left wealthy Muscovites and local 5 * chefs and foodies without access to French and Italian delicacies such as fine cheeses. Interestingly, local entrepreneurs partnered with local chefs and were able to spawn the local manufacturing of some of these goods, with a reasonable amount of success. Not sure this can be replicated this time around.
dcajet wrote:Phosphorus wrote:dcajet wrote:
Stereotypes of babushkas pickling anything they can grow during the summer at their dachas...
I really don't know how Russia's supply chains work... Having been at a few large supermarkets in Moscow it does not look like present day Muscovites depend on their dachas for feeding themselves. No different from what it looks like in any modern European city. The variety and quantity of food available is evident and comparable to Western Europe. In this regard, this is no longer the USSR.
Specifically Moscow is seemingly unable to really do too much of that "vegetable patch" sort of thing, anymore. Together with suburbs, it's what? 20 million people minimum? Every "dacha"/vegetable patch that's within 100 km from the city core is too expensive as a real estate for sale, and is a candidate to be converted into a McMansion as a minimum, or 30-storey apartment block possibly. So it's external food supplies, most of the time. Considering logistical bottlenecks for road transport (including imported stuff), short shelf-life stuff would legitimately be flown in.
The previous round of sanctions and counter-sanctions imposed by Russia following the Crimea invasion, suddenly left wealthy Muscovites and local 5 * chefs and foodies without access to French and Italian delicacies such as fine cheeses. Interestingly, local entrepreneurs partnered with local chefs and were able to spawn the local manufacturing of some of these goods, with a reasonable amount of success. Not sure this can be replicated this time around.
Sachmet wrote:dcajet wrote:Phosphorus wrote:
Specifically Moscow is seemingly unable to really do too much of that "vegetable patch" sort of thing, anymore. Together with suburbs, it's what? 20 million people minimum? Every "dacha"/vegetable patch that's within 100 km from the city core is too expensive as a real estate for sale, and is a candidate to be converted into a McMansion as a minimum, or 30-storey apartment block possibly. So it's external food supplies, most of the time. Considering logistical bottlenecks for road transport (including imported stuff), short shelf-life stuff would legitimately be flown in.
The previous round of sanctions and counter-sanctions imposed by Russia following the Crimea invasion, suddenly left wealthy Muscovites and local 5 * chefs and foodies without access to French and Italian delicacies such as fine cheeses. Interestingly, local entrepreneurs partnered with local chefs and were able to spawn the local manufacturing of some of these goods, with a reasonable amount of success. Not sure this can be replicated this time around.
I think the cheese episode isn't really the one to look at but WWII. The suffering the Russian people were willing to endure for victory was incomparable with any other nation. I guess they can live without the latest updates of their western equipment (and of course French cheese). Flying will be less safe at least up to the time when indigenous models have replaced their present fleet. I personalty think terror attacks will be much more of a problem then the maintenance. Especially as there is no real control where all those shoulder mounted SAMs being sold off on the Ukrainian black market. It will also potentially be a big issue for all the world wide (including military) aviation.
Sachmet wrote:I think the cheese episode isn't really the one to look at but WWII. The suffering the Russian people were willing to endure for victory was incomparable with any other nation.
Newark727 wrote:Sachmet wrote:I think the cheese episode isn't really the one to look at but WWII. The suffering the Russian people were willing to endure for victory was incomparable with any other nation.
There's an important difference, though. In WWII the USSR was attacked by a regime whose goal was literal racial extermination. Here, Putin instigated a war of choice for... unclear reasons. I can't purport to know the Russian state of mind right now, but if Putin's Ukrainian adventurism blows up in his face, the result isn't Moscow being turned into an ornamental lake or every Russian speaker west of the Urals starving to death - failure conditions which may have affected the level of deprivation the USSR's citizens were willing to face to defeat Germany.
Newark727 wrote:Sachmet wrote:I think the cheese episode isn't really the one to look at but WWII. The suffering the Russian people were willing to endure for victory was incomparable with any other nation.
There's an important difference, though. In WWII the USSR was attacked by a regime whose goal was literal racial extermination. Here, Putin instigated a war of choice for... unclear reasons. I can't purport to know the Russian state of mind right now, but if Putin's Ukrainian adventurism blows up in his face, the result isn't Moscow being turned into an ornamental lake or every Russian speaker west of the Urals starving to death - failure conditions which may have affected the level of deprivation the USSR's citizens were willing to face to defeat Germany.
Sachmet wrote:Newark727 wrote:Sachmet wrote:I think the cheese episode isn't really the one to look at but WWII. The suffering the Russian people were willing to endure for victory was incomparable with any other nation.
There's an important difference, though. In WWII the USSR was attacked by a regime whose goal was literal racial extermination. Here, Putin instigated a war of choice for... unclear reasons. I can't purport to know the Russian state of mind right now, but if Putin's Ukrainian adventurism blows up in his face, the result isn't Moscow being turned into an ornamental lake or every Russian speaker west of the Urals starving to death - failure conditions which may have affected the level of deprivation the USSR's citizens were willing to face to defeat Germany.
You mean the difference that Russia (SU) invaded Poland, Finland and Stalin was a murderous dictator?
In any case Russian are known to be resilient. Also there is war propaganda on all sides - it means the situation present itself different for the ones living in Russia because they don't watch CNN or read the NYT. If true or not but they see the invasion as a pre-emptive strike against a invasion from the West. To them the situation feels similar to WWII.
Phosphorus wrote:Sachmet wrote:Newark727 wrote:
There's an important difference, though. In WWII the USSR was attacked by a regime whose goal was literal racial extermination. Here, Putin instigated a war of choice for... unclear reasons. I can't purport to know the Russian state of mind right now, but if Putin's Ukrainian adventurism blows up in his face, the result isn't Moscow being turned into an ornamental lake or every Russian speaker west of the Urals starving to death - failure conditions which may have affected the level of deprivation the USSR's citizens were willing to face to defeat Germany.
You mean the difference that Russia (SU) invaded Poland, Finland and Stalin was a murderous dictator?
In any case Russian are known to be resilient. Also there is war propaganda on all sides - it means the situation present itself different for the ones living in Russia because they don't watch CNN or read the NYT. If true or not but they see the invasion as a pre-emptive strike against a invasion from the West. To them the situation feels similar to WWII.
It's not only internal folks. Plenty of "fellow travelers" and "useful idiots" (Lenin's words, not mine) around the world too:
https://ukrainecouncil.quora.com/Russia ... ne-war-cri
Sachmet wrote:Phosphorus wrote:Sachmet wrote:You mean the difference that Russia (SU) invaded Poland, Finland and Stalin was a murderous dictator?
In any case Russian are known to be resilient. Also there is war propaganda on all sides - it means the situation present itself different for the ones living in Russia because they don't watch CNN or read the NYT. If true or not but they see the invasion as a pre-emptive strike against a invasion from the West. To them the situation feels similar to WWII.
It's not only internal folks. Plenty of "fellow travelers" and "useful idiots" (Lenin's words, not mine) around the world too:
https://ukrainecouncil.quora.com/Russia ... ne-war-cri
The point is that the idea to make the Russians suffer to weaken and demotivate them is contra productive and historically unfounded. When it comes to aviation it will only motivate them to produce or continue producing in greater numbers their new or already existing civil models like the IL-96, TU-214, MC21 and smaller turboprops.
For me this all presents itself as half hearted measures without a proper plan. Those "sanctions from hell" have until now increased Russians income from exports while reducing or re-routing the the output. It also is pushing China, Iran and Russia into a strategic alliance (aviation included).
Sachmet wrote:The point is that the idea to make the Russians suffer to weaken and demotivate them is contra productive and historically unfounded. When it comes to aviation it will only motivate them to produce or continue producing in greater numbers their new or already existing civil models like the IL-96, TU-214, MC21 and smaller turboprops.
For me this all presents itself as half hearted measures without a proper plan. Those "sanctions from hell" have until now increased Russians income from exports while reducing or re-routing the the output. It also is pushing China, Iran and Russia into a strategic alliance (aviation included).
Sachmet wrote:Phosphorus wrote:Sachmet wrote:You mean the difference that Russia (SU) invaded Poland, Finland and Stalin was a murderous dictator?
In any case Russian are known to be resilient. Also there is war propaganda on all sides - it means the situation present itself different for the ones living in Russia because they don't watch CNN or read the NYT. If true or not but they see the invasion as a pre-emptive strike against a invasion from the West. To them the situation feels similar to WWII.
It's not only internal folks. Plenty of "fellow travelers" and "useful idiots" (Lenin's words, not mine) around the world too:
https://ukrainecouncil.quora.com/Russia ... ne-war-cri
The point is that the idea to make the Russians suffer to weaken and demotivate them is contra productive and historically unfounded. When it comes to aviation it will only motivate them to produce or continue producing in greater numbers their new or already existing civil models like the IL-96, TU-214, MC21 and smaller turboprops.
For me this all presents itself as half hearted measures without a proper plan. Those "sanctions from hell" have until now increased Russians income from exports while reducing or re-routing the the output. It also is pushing China, Iran and Russia into a strategic alliance (aviation included).
Vicenza wrote:Sachmet wrote:The point is that the idea to make the Russians suffer to weaken and demotivate them is contra productive and historically unfounded. When it comes to aviation it will only motivate them to produce or continue producing in greater numbers their new or already existing civil models like the IL-96, TU-214, MC21 and smaller turboprops.
For me this all presents itself as half hearted measures without a proper plan. Those "sanctions from hell" have until now increased Russians income from exports while reducing or re-routing the the output. It also is pushing China, Iran and Russia into a strategic alliance (aviation included).
I agree with you entirely, including earlier posts. Everyone is fully aware that sanctions only, and ever have, hit innocent people of a country......never the leadership who actually caused them.
Sachmet wrote:The point is that the idea to make the Russians suffer to weaken and demotivate them is contra productive and historically unfounded. When it comes to aviation it will only motivate them to produce or continue producing in greater numbers their new or already existing civil models like the IL-96, TU-214, MC21 and smaller turboprops.
(...)
Sachmet wrote:incitatus wrote:Sachmet wrote:The point is that the idea to make the Russians suffer to weaken and demotivate them is contra productive and historically unfounded. When it comes to aviation it will only motivate them to produce or continue producing in greater numbers their new or already existing civil models like the IL-96, TU-214, MC21 and smaller turboprops.
(...)
The Russia of today is not the USSR. I recently read an estimate that a quarter of the defense budget in Russia is lost in kickbacks.
There is an amazing set of photos of Russian aircraft and helicopters in a.net posted by Fyodor Borisov. There is a common theme: pretty much all those helicopters and aircraft are 1960s and 1970s designs. Russia has done many fewer projects since 1990. Here is one example of how it works in Russia today: the latest generation of the IL-76 - in itself a 1960's design. Work on the project started in 2010. First flight in 2014. From 2012 to 2022 they delivered 12 units. Anything Russia embarks on in civil aviation will be a huge struggle. Even restarting the production of some workhorses like the Tu-154 will be nearly impossible. Ramping up Tu-214 production 5 times, ah, good luck.
I grew up on Physics and Math books from the USSR. They were amazing, the people that wrote up the problems were absolutely brilliant and ingenious. They are all gone or retired now and I am not aware of a similar new generation.
In general I agree but the loss in skills is symmetrically, the west doesn't look that good neither. I do prefer the 737 classic anytime over the newer models or any of the airbusses. Or the "anytime baby" F14 tomcat over the "even pigs can fly giving them enough thrust" F35. That the 70's design is inferior than present almost pilotless models is not given. Progress isn't just counting years or adding new features. In the case of the MAX improved fuel economy (new but wider engine with greater bypass ratio) it came at the cost of safety (and ultimately lives). Newer doesn't equal better.
ReverseFlow wrote:Sachmet wrote:In general I agree but the loss in skills is symmetrically, the west doesn't look that good neither. I do prefer the 737 classic anytime over the newer models or any of the airbusses. Or the "anytime baby" F14 tomcat over the "even pigs can fly giving them enough thrust" F35. That the 70's design is inferior than present almost pilotless models is not given. Progress isn't just counting years or adding new features. In the case of the MAX improved fuel economy (new but wider engine with greater bypass ratio) it came at the cost of safety (and ultimately lives). Newer doesn't equal better.
The accdent rate would say something different.
http://cdn1.vox-cdn.com/assets/4807802/ ... safety.jpg
https://www.airlineratings.com/wp-conte ... 2017-1.jpg
Sachmet wrote:Newark727 wrote:Sachmet wrote:I think the cheese episode isn't really the one to look at but WWII. The suffering the Russian people were willing to endure for victory was incomparable with any other nation.
There's an important difference, though. In WWII the USSR was attacked by a regime whose goal was literal racial extermination. Here, Putin instigated a war of choice for... unclear reasons. I can't purport to know the Russian state of mind right now, but if Putin's Ukrainian adventurism blows up in his face, the result isn't Moscow being turned into an ornamental lake or every Russian speaker west of the Urals starving to death - failure conditions which may have affected the level of deprivation the USSR's citizens were willing to face to defeat Germany.
You mean the difference that Russia (SU) invaded Poland, Finland and Stalin was a murderous dictator?
In any case Russian are known to be resilient. Also there is war propaganda on all sides - it means the situation present itself different for the ones living in Russia because they don't watch CNN or read the NYT. If true or not but they see the invasion as a pre-emptive strike against a invasion from the West. To them the situation feels similar to WWII.
Sachmet wrote:ReverseFlow wrote:Sachmet wrote:In general I agree but the loss in skills is symmetrically, the west doesn't look that good neither. I do prefer the 737 classic anytime over the newer models or any of the airbusses. Or the "anytime baby" F14 tomcat over the "even pigs can fly giving them enough thrust" F35. That the 70's design is inferior than present almost pilotless models is not given. Progress isn't just counting years or adding new features. In the case of the MAX improved fuel economy (new but wider engine with greater bypass ratio) it came at the cost of safety (and ultimately lives). Newer doesn't equal better.
The accdent rate would say something different.
http://cdn1.vox-cdn.com/assets/4807802/ ... safety.jpg
https://www.airlineratings.com/wp-conte ... 2017-1.jpg
Those statistic don't really say much. Better would be to compare the same types (like 737c vs MAX vs NG) flying in the same companies at the same years. Anything else can be constructed in many ways and doesn't mean that the older model would be less safe if it had not been replaced with the newer ones. Why personal experience isn't a prove neither I can only state that all the complex electronic isn't cutting it for me at least. Russian aircraft used to be more robust and can take more beatings (bit like the population) but consumes more fuel and provides less comfort. When it comes to fuel: Russia has plenty.
Well I can't see Russian stopping flying or being unable to produce their own types. Sure like any change it will difficult at first but as wrote above they have plenty of motivation to overcome those. If they succeed or not I can't state for sure. I don't own a time-machine so time tells me nothing - history does and it tells quite a story of successes in producing world class aviation technology. The last thirty years made them lazy consumers in the civil sector. Now they got a nice kick and it will help them to focus on making them completely independent from key western components again.
The only thing that I doubt is that this outcome was the intention of the sanctions!
RJWNL wrote:I don't think many parties will be interested in such 'working relationships' for a long time to come...
Vicenza wrote:RJWNL wrote:I don't think many parties will be interested in such 'working relationships' for a long time to come...
I've said it several times, as equally have others, in the weeks following stabilisation of the situation, you can bet your bottom dollar that companies, including lessors, will be queuing up to do business again. It's a fact of life as seen in every conflict that ever existed. Companies are only to happy to make money no matter what.
ReverseFlow wrote:But regarding the capacity to produce world class aviation technology - it's not only enough to design great aircraft but you've got to build, support and upgrade them, too.
Therefore I don't see the Russian aircraft industry being able to compensate for the loss of western aircraft in the short to mid term.
Was it Il-96 were to be built 2-3 a year due to the sanctions?
Airbus and Boeing combined build 2-3 a DAY.
Sachmet wrote:ReverseFlow wrote:But regarding the capacity to produce world class aviation technology - it's not only enough to design great aircraft but you've got to build, support and upgrade them, too.
Therefore I don't see the Russian aircraft industry being able to compensate for the loss of western aircraft in the short to mid term.
Was it Il-96 were to be built 2-3 a year due to the sanctions?
Airbus and Boeing combined build 2-3 a DAY.
No - in contrary they build so few because the Russian aviation industry could not compete with the markets giants. Now as Russia is excluded from buying Boeing and Airbus they suddenly got back the whole Russian inland market. I guess they did send a big "thank you" west.
Sachmet wrote:ReverseFlow wrote:But regarding the capacity to produce world class aviation technology - it's not only enough to design great aircraft but you've got to build, support and upgrade them, too.
Therefore I don't see the Russian aircraft industry being able to compensate for the loss of western aircraft in the short to mid term.
Was it Il-96 were to be built 2-3 a year due to the sanctions?
Airbus and Boeing combined build 2-3 a DAY.
No - in contrary they build so few because the Russian aviation industry could not compete with the markets giants. Now as Russia is excluded from buying Boeing and Airbus they suddenly got back the whole Russian inland market. I guess they did send a big "thank you" west.
Sachmet wrote:So according to thisReverseFlow wrote:But regarding the capacity to produce world class aviation technology - it's not only enough to design great aircraft but you've got to build, support and upgrade them, too.
Therefore I don't see the Russian aircraft industry being able to compensate for the loss of western aircraft in the short to mid term.
Was it Il-96 were to be built 2-3 a year due to the sanctions?
Airbus and Boeing combined build 2-3 a DAY.
No - in contrary they build so few because the Russian aviation industry could not compete with the markets giants. Now as Russia is excluded from buying Boeing and Airbus they suddenly got back the whole Russian inland market. I guess they did send a big "thank you" west.
Noshow wrote:From an industrial standpoint I see the program the easiest to scale up should be the Il-76. All russian, just updated and big capacity and flexibility. But not really efficient and comfortable for passenger flights. Superjets will not cut it, too small, and the MS-21 is lost without all the western partners and suppliers. Maybe they should restart the Tu-154, possibly with newer engines? That would be a quick and dirty way to get all the capacity needed.
Noshow wrote:Talking about new builds only. Until a short time ago there was at least a low rate mothballed military Tu-154 line that might be restartable. Not sure about the Tu-214, is it ready for "mass" production? Their rates are super low anyway. Like a dozen per year. So they will need a huge kick start for long lead items first, engines, gears and such while they prepare the final assembly sites and suppliers. It will neither be easy nor cheap and they will not end up with modern fleets.
Noshow wrote:My thought came from the idea to source everything inland and use an existing working design. I agree to the out of date technology problem. But if they start to develop some domestic airliner from scratch now, say an "MS-22", when could this be ready? Without western parts and supplies.
I just think about solving their practical need for seats and airframes in the fastest and easiest way -not the cheapest- from their perspective.
Phosphorus wrote:Cannibalizing Airbuses and Boeings will be how they do it.
MC-21 is full of carbon fibre of the types that russia isn't able to make. Who is supplying them now, after more decent manufacturers turned away, when this war began in 2014? It's Solvay, right? If Solvay continues to supply carbon fibre, and similarly inclined sanction-busters continue to ship dual-use materials into russia, there's no need to return to technologies of yesteryear.
(...)
TWA302 wrote:This photo is from 20-Aug but thought it was pretty powerful. Taken in Sochi.
Video as well
https://twitter.com/i/status/1560880915194281984
Noshow wrote:Talking about new builds only. Until a short time ago there was at least a low rate mothballed military Tu-154 line that might be restartable. Not sure about the Tu-214, is it ready for "mass" production? Their rates are super low anyway. Like a dozen per year. So they will need a huge kick start for long lead items first, engines, gears and such while they prepare the final assembly sites and suppliers. It will neither be easy nor cheap and they will not end up with modern fleets.