https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/ ... index.html

This is different than the ban of Russian aircraft. This blacklist is over safety concerns and in effect over all EU states.

I am guessing it's more of a retaliation over Russia's attempt to circumvent sanctions and take over leased aircraft issuing Russian airworthiness certs.

I don't see it as retaliation. It's just a result of the fact that the western aircraft belonging, or "belonging", to (ok, let's settle for "are operated by") these airlines are no longer maintained as per OEM manuals and instructions, and they cannot possibly use original spare parts.
All these airlines are operating are either western-built aircraft, or Russian aircraft with significant amount of western parts in them.

I think the EU have little choice given the sanctions. It’s almost irrelevant with Russian aircraft unable to fly over the EU and UK and most global countries bar a few like Israel, UAE, Belarus.

I wonder at what point Sky Team will drop Aeroflot and OneWorld will drop S7… they must be considering it?

As stated in the article, when Russian allowed the airlines to re-register aircraft, it effectively rendered their airworthiness certificates invalid. You can’t enter the airspace of a country without a valid certificate, and I guess it’s therefore only a matter time before every other non-pariah state will follow suit.

It's good that the EU did ban the carriers since their safety is now questionable, but this does nothing to harm the Russian airline industry. As long as countries like Turkey and the UAE continue to profit from the war by allowing Russian carriers to land at their airports and permit their own carriers to operate to Russia, none of what the EU are doing to block Russian carriers will significantly restrict the ability of Russians to travel.

usdcaguy wrote:

As long as countries like Turkey and the UAE continue to profit from the war by allowing Russian carriers to land at their airports and permit their own carriers to operate to Russia, none of what the EU are doing to block Russian carriers will significantly restrict the ability of Russians to travel.

Both Turkey and the UAE are signatories to the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment on Matters specific to Aircraft Equipment. Owners can have aircraft seized there through the local courts under that protocol.

Source https://www.icao.int/secretariat/legal/ ... rot_EN.pdf

zeke wrote:

usdcaguy wrote:

As long as countries like Turkey and the UAE continue to profit from the war by allowing Russian carriers to land at their airports and permit their own carriers to operate to Russia, none of what the EU are doing to block Russian carriers will significantly restrict the ability of Russians to travel.

Both Turkey and the UAE are signatories to the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment on Matters specific to Aircraft Equipment. Owners can have aircraft seized there through the local courts under that protocol.

Source https://www.icao.int/secretariat/legal/ ... rot_EN.pdf

They are, but all the Russian carriers have to do to avoid legal entanglements is to fly planes that belong to them or to Russian lessors on international trips. Additionally, if Turkey and the Emirates recognize the new Russian registration of aircraft "formerly" owned by EU or US lessors, there's no legal recourse, as the registrations will not show the leasing companies as the rightful owners.

usdcaguy wrote:

Additionally, if Turkey and the Emirates recognize the new Russian registration of aircraft "formerly" owned by EU or US lessors, there's no legal recourse, as the registrations will not show the leasing companies as the rightful owners.

The certificate of registration does not indicate ownership at all, that is basically the reason why the Capetown convection came about. Under the Capetown convention there is a single international registry for aircraft and engines, and that is done by serial number, the registration mark is not relevant.

Russia ratified the Capetown convention in 2011. If a Russian law or court was to nationalise the aircraft owned by foreign interests, as this has happened after Russia ratified the convention any such change would not change the priority for the original party on the international register.

Did you all see how Turkey is helping them circumvent this?

1.5 million seats.

https://simpleflying.com/turkish-airlin ... rists/amp/

Boof02671 wrote:

Did you all see how Turkey is helping them circumvent this?

1.5 million seats.

https://simpleflying.com/turkish-airlin ... rists/amp/

Per the article, Turkish has significantly reduced the number of flights into Russia. It has also stopped flying Russian nationals to destinations beyond Turkey. Sounds like it is limiting options for Russians.

RR757 wrote:

I think the EU have little choice given the sanctions. It’s almost irrelevant with Russian aircraft unable to fly over the EU and UK and most global countries bar a few like Israel, UAE, Belarus.

The only regions that have banned Russian planes are the EU and the Anglosphere, and possibly restrictions in South Korea, Taiwan and Japan to a limited degree in accordance with their traditional mantra of following whatever the US does. The rest of the world allows Russian planes to go freely and continue to serve the market.

TokyoImperialPa wrote:

RR757 wrote:

I think the EU have little choice given the sanctions. It’s almost irrelevant with Russian aircraft unable to fly over the EU and UK and most global countries bar a few like Israel, UAE, Belarus.

The only regions that have banned Russian planes are the EU and the Anglosphere, and possibly restrictions in South Korea, Taiwan and Japan to a limited degree in accordance with their traditional mantra of following whatever the US does. The rest of the world allows Russian planes to go freely and continue to serve the market.

Sure, but a quick filter for Russian airlines on flightradar24 will give you a good picture of the effect... right now, no plane belonging to a Russian airline is outside Russia or Belarus... not one...

casperCA wrote:

Boof02671 wrote:

Did you all see how Turkey is helping them circumvent this?

1.5 million seats.

https://simpleflying.com/turkish-airlin ... rists/amp/

Per the article, Turkish has significantly reduced the number of flights into Russia. It has also stopped flying Russian nationals to destinations beyond Turkey. Sounds like it is limiting options for Russians.

Turkey is also supplying Ukraine with Bayraktar drones, which seem to be rather handy at destroying Russian military equipment. Not that long ago, they shot down a Russian fighter, so to paint Turkey as "pro Russian" is disingenuous.

zeke wrote:

usdcaguy wrote:

Additionally, if Turkey and the Emirates recognize the new Russian registration of aircraft "formerly" owned by EU or US lessors, there's no legal recourse, as the registrations will not show the leasing companies as the rightful owners.

The certificate of registration does not indicate ownership at all, that is basically the reason why the Capetown convection came about. Under the Capetown convention there is a single international registry for aircraft and engines, and that is done by serial number, the registration mark is not relevant.

Russia ratified the Capetown convention in 2011. If a Russian law or court was to nationalise the aircraft owned by foreign interests, as this has happened after Russia ratified the convention any such change would not change the priority for the original party on the international register.

From what I have read, the leasing companies were able to seize only a few aircraft last month as they flew into other countries. Being legally prepared with the right resources at the time the targeted aircraft is in the country must be very difficult. Meanwhile, I imagine the Russians are also trying to avoid seizure by only flying owned aircraft or those held by Russian lessors into those countries. There have been a number of Sukhois making the trip to Turkey lately.

Is this new action actually different than the business ban on Russian airlines and flights to/from Russia in response to the invasion, and more in line with the EASA restriction applied to third world and dubious operators based on actual safety compliance? This would address the aircraft illicitly reregistered as Russian owned. Denies them overflight and landing rights in the EU, separately from the ownership and repossession issue. As support and parts are cut off, these birds will indeed be out of compliance and less safe. And it could go on indefinitely even if the politics change.
A second way of stifling the economics.

Do some of the countries turning a blind eye now to the embargo accept EASA rules for their own airworthiness policies, possibly now tightening up with that? Türkiye comes to mind.

usdcaguy wrote:

Meanwhile, I imagine the Russians are also trying to avoid seizure by only flying owned aircraft or those held by Russian lessors into those countries.

I suspect any asset of a defaulting airline could be seized, especially if owned, and used as collateral against debts. Obviously that requires proper court approvals and the assistance of the 3rd country.

scbriml wrote:

usdcaguy wrote:

Meanwhile, I imagine the Russians are also trying to avoid seizure by only flying owned aircraft or those held by Russian lessors into those countries.

I suspect any asset of a defaulting airline could be seized, especially if owned, and used as collateral against debts. Obviously that requires proper court approvals and the assistance of the 3rd country.

Even if that’s the case, are the Russian airlines sending planes that lessors would be able to monetize? I’ven’t looked, but I’ve read here that there is a priority to fly Russian built and designed jets to destinations outside the country. Even if a non Russian airline wants to fly one of those, they couldn’t get parts in many countries, making plane unflyable and more or less worthless.

USAirKid wrote:

scbriml wrote:

usdcaguy wrote:

Meanwhile, I imagine the Russians are also trying to avoid seizure by only flying owned aircraft or those held by Russian lessors into those countries.

I suspect any asset of a defaulting airline could be seized, especially if owned, and used as collateral against debts. Obviously that requires proper court approvals and the assistance of the 3rd country.

Even if that’s the case, are the Russian airlines sending planes that lessors would be able to monetize? I’ven’t looked, but I’ve read here that there is a priority to fly Russian built and designed jets to destinations outside the country. Even if a non Russian airline wants to fly one of those, they couldn’t get parts in many countries, making plane unflyable and more or less worthless.

It's still obviously worth something to the airline operating it. If the only plane Aeroflot could operate to Turkey was the SSJ and they were being seized as soon as they land, that's going to hurt Aeroflot one way or another. Yes, it may not be worth much in money terms to the aggrieved party, but it's more pressure and inconvenience on the airline.

scbriml wrote:

USAirKid wrote:

scbriml wrote:

I suspect any asset of a defaulting airline could be seized, especially if owned, and used as collateral against debts. Obviously that requires proper court approvals and the assistance of the 3rd country.

Even if that’s the case, are the Russian airlines sending planes that lessors would be able to monetize? I’ven’t looked, but I’ve read here that there is a priority to fly Russian built and designed jets to destinations outside the country. Even if a non Russian airline wants to fly one of those, they couldn’t get parts in many countries, making plane unflyable and more or less worthless.

It's still obviously worth something to the airline operating it. If the only plane Aeroflot could operate to Turkey was the SSJ and they were being seized as soon as they land, that's going to hurt Aeroflot one way or another. Yes, it may not be worth much in money terms to the aggrieved party, but it's more pressure and inconvenience on the airline.

The same problem financiers and lessors have seizing older aircraft, especially WB's. Cost of seizure and ongoing storage, quickly outweighs the aircraft's realisable value. Who wants to own and operate Russian built commercial aircraft? And would Russia block support and parts to a new operator?

Much better to make it impossible for these flights to pay operating costs outside Russia. Unpaid creditors will soon withdraw support.

fpetrutiu wrote:

Sure, but a quick filter for Russian airlines on flightradar24 will give you a good picture of the effect... right now, no plane belonging to a Russian airline is outside Russia or Belarus... not one...

They have a dozen or so flights in/out of EVN (Yerevan, Armenia) everyday, almost all exclusively on the Superjets, obviously. They are no longer sending B777s, A320s or B737s there, as one leased aircraft was seized at EVN last month.

As said previously, they also still fly to Turkey and some other CIS countries as well, like Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, etc. Armenia is the country that sees the most Russian activity, however.

Right now, on FR24 there are 6 flights airborne between EVN and MOW. 4 of them are Russian operators. 3 superjets and 1 B737-500. The 737 must be fully owned by the company.

From my contacts, a lot of Russian businessmen doing business with the EU are setting up shop in Armenia, as a way to get around sanctions.

scbriml wrote:

usdcaguy wrote:

Meanwhile, I imagine the Russians are also trying to avoid seizure by only flying owned aircraft or those held by Russian lessors into those countries.

I suspect any asset of a defaulting airline could be seized, especially if owned, and used as collateral against debts. Obviously that requires proper court approvals and the assistance of the 3rd country.

That would only work if that specific aircraft were used as collateral. You can’t just take something from someone because they owe you something. You would have to get the court with jurisdiction over the agreement to put a lean on the other aircraft due to nonpayment, and the courts in the country where the aircraft are to be confiscated would have to recognize the lean.

usdcaguy wrote:

scbriml wrote:

usdcaguy wrote:

Meanwhile, I imagine the Russians are also trying to avoid seizure by only flying owned aircraft or those held by Russian lessors into those countries.

I suspect any asset of a defaulting airline could be seized, especially if owned, and used as collateral against debts. Obviously that requires proper court approvals and the assistance of the 3rd country.

That would only work if that specific aircraft were used as collateral. You can’t just take something from someone because they owe you something. You would have to get the court with jurisdiction over the agreement to put a lean on the other aircraft due to nonpayment, and the courts in the country where the aircraft are to be confiscated would have to recognize the lean.

That’s exactly what bailiffs do and yes, I appreciate the legal requirements.

usdcaguy wrote:

scbriml wrote:

usdcaguy wrote:

Meanwhile, I imagine the Russians are also trying to avoid seizure by only flying owned aircraft or those held by Russian lessors into those countries.

I suspect any asset of a defaulting airline could be seized, especially if owned, and used as collateral against debts. Obviously that requires proper court approvals and the assistance of the 3rd country.

That would only work if that specific aircraft were used as collateral. You can’t just take something from someone because they owe you something. You would have to get the court with jurisdiction over the agreement to put a lean on the other aircraft due to nonpayment, and the courts in the country where the aircraft are to be confiscated would have to recognize the lean.

FYI, it's called a lien, not a lean.