Russian type in western airlines

[QUOTE]Originally posted by atc pal
[B]Very true, Il-62!
As I’ve been trying to say:
A Tu-134 is no BAC111
A Tu-154 is no B727
An Il-62 is no VC-10! 😉

As I said…………….They were never intended to be.

Very true, Il-62!
As I’ve been trying to say:
A Tu-134 is no BAC111
A Tu-154 is no B727
An Il-62 is no VC-10! 😉

(If two engines are too little and four too much – you’ll have three!)

True story from yesterday in Danish Parliament:
Debate on bills and charges for civil aviation.
The four Communists left were “against” (what?), as they “support railways”. (They have, as all MP’s, free travel on “planes, boats & trains”). The transport minister: “Very well, but who will build a railway to the United States?”:D
Next item.

In the days of the Soviet era air transport served an alloted purpose within the structures of a command economy, which like everything else in the command economy was subservient to the needs/interests of the state. As far as Aeroflot and the other flag carriers in the socialist states were concerned, this meant that these enterprises performed duties vastly greater than airlines in the west. The roles of passenger and freight transport ran alongside the roles of mapping and survey work, air ambulance flights, agricultural duties as well as weather and environmental reaserch flights. The destinations served by the communist airlines were by and large dictated by their governments on the basis of political suitabilty of the destination countries and by the ability of some routes to generate foreign currency, ie routes to capitalist countries. Most of the citizens of the socialist states were eligable for heavily subsidised fares, although these were still fairly expensive in relation to income. Most communist airlines, in particular Aeroflot, were obliged to provide cheap service on so called “socially essential services” at fares even more heavily subsidised. The aircraft flown were designed to operate from low standard airports/airfields and also to be easy and cheap to maintain as well as durable and where economics were not important then Soviet types fulfilled the bill perfectly. Which is why direct comparison between genuine Soviet era aircraft and “western” equivalents are not realistic or fair, as the design strategy behind both were very different

How does air travel works for Communism? It looks like the Russian types are very suitable for communism?:D

Originally posted by Interflug62M
Strictly my own opinion but I think that the Russian aircraft industry today still suffers from chronic under investment as well as the so called “Soviet Era Syndrome”. The shame of it is is that the very latest offerings from the likes of Tupolev, Antonov and Ilyushin are broadly comperable with “western” types of today. There always used to be the worry of after sales support from the Russian companies and the reliable supply of spare parts. Cubana has been having great problems of late keeping its IL62s airworthy because of this, although they have recently confirmed an order for IL96-300s. I gather that the situation is getting better on the support front, but it does not seem to be the same in the sphere of investment in the construction companies. However the recent news of the possible re-opening of the An124 production line may be the first real sign that things are beginning to change…I for one, certainly hope so.

agreed totally…but mainly because Russian economy is not letting enough investment into civil aviation industry of Russia. And Russia HAS to invest in air defence simply due to there countries sheer size.

Strictly my own opinion but I think that the Russian aircraft industry today still suffers from chronic under investment as well as the so called “Soviet Era Syndrome”. The shame of it is is that the very latest offerings from the likes of Tupolev, Antonov and Ilyushin are broadly comperable with “western” types of today. There always used to be the worry of after sales support from the Russian companies and the reliable supply of spare parts. Cubana has been having great problems of late keeping its IL62s airworthy because of this, although they have recently confirmed an order for IL96-300s. I gather that the situation is getting better on the support front, but it does not seem to be the same in the sphere of investment in the construction companies. However the recent news of the possible re-opening of the An124 production line may be the first real sign that things are beginning to change…I for one, certainly hope so.

There were a few in the past. Greenair of Turkey operated Tu154’s in the early 90’s. Also an Italian airline operated a few Yak 40’s in the 70’s. Of course Heavylift operated An124’s and IL76’s but they all remained RA or UR registered.
Actually there was a big russian sales drive in the 70’s. I remember both a Yak 40 and a Mil 2 on sales tour in the uk in the late 70’s.

the big thing is that the Russian government doesent give enough support to its civil aviation industry.

I think Western airlines don’t think it’s right to but these types. Chances will be bigger now however, because of the option of Western Avionics and Western engines. I think the TU334 has a big chance of coming outside of Russia and surrounding countries. It’s very efficient, even more efficient than the 717. The Embraer jets are still unbeatable. The Russian aircraft builders are trying to get orders from outside the country, but I think it’s not in the Western mentality to buy cheap aircraft that are expensive to operate. But I don’t see any obstacles for Western airlines to buy the newer Russian aircraft. It doesn’t feel very right, does it.

Hmmm strictly speaking Western countries i dont think any country does, but in freightor ops many wetsrern freghters use Russian aircrafts. But as for airlines Cuba can be said is in the western part of the world geographicaly speaking, and they operate IL 62s.