For all non-Virgin travel topics, with subforums for popular common themes.
#116331 by MarkJ
06 May 2006, 22:03
Does Tupolev ( sp) not produce planes any more? Its funny how this is seen as a direct reult of th US putting pressure on Russia in the WTO talks rather than the quality of product.

Good spot[y]
#116335 by VS045
06 May 2006, 22:10
Thanks for that:D

In the past, politics used to have loads to do with purchasing new aircraft although it has on the whole (AFAIK) settled down a bit.[:?]
Although I'm sure I'll stand to be corrected[:I]

VS.
#116336 by McCoy
06 May 2006, 22:13
Given the sums of money involved, and the aircraft manufacturers locations/nationalities, I would say that politics would always be involved. I doubt that when an airline orders planes, it is purely a commercial decision as to the type..
#116337 by Scrooge
06 May 2006, 22:14
Tu does,but it's more for the military,Ilyushin is still in the airliner biz,but only just some versions of the Il-96 are pretty good long haul aircraft,im kind of surprised that one of the budget long haul airlines hasn't snapped these up as they are priced very competitively with the western aircraft builder's.
#116343 by MarkJ
06 May 2006, 22:22
Im sure its completely unjustified paranoia but isnt there something that just puts you off flying in a TU or an Ilyshin - now Im sure there safety record is on a par with anyone elses - but I just have this idea of faliability![V]
#116349 by AerJohn
06 May 2006, 22:40
I think most people think that Russian aircraft aren't safe because they hear about all these crashes. There is nothing wrong with Russian aircraft. They are as advanced as Boeings and Airbuses. The main reasons for the crashes are that the opperators have poor maintaince or that the aircraft are overloaded and overweight.
#116379 by JAT74L
07 May 2006, 00:32
The Tuplolev TU-154M is currently the fastest civilian airliner now that Concorde is gone. As Aer John says, there is nothing inherently wrong with Eastern Bloc aircraft however, the advancements in recent years are entirely dependant on western avionics. Mark mentions the unjustified paranoia - unjustified or not, it exists so airlines will always go with the safe bet.

Pity cos some of those birds make a GREAT noise!!

Regards

John
#116431 by iforres1
07 May 2006, 12:16
Originally posted by JAT74L


Pity cos some of those birds make a GREAT noise!!

Regards

John


That is why most of them very rarely fly into Europe now. The TU134 was a right screamer.
Just watching the Russian news on the sputnik and there is a right who/ha over this decision to go from Boeing to Airbus. Mr Cheaney was in Latvia yesterday throwing his toys out of the box over this.

Russian press having a field day, especially a the G8 meeting is in St petes this July. A word of warning do not travel to St Petes whilst the meeting is on:D

Iain
#116432 by iforres1
07 May 2006, 12:20
Originally posted by MarkJ
Im sure its completely unjustified paranoia but isnt there something that just puts you off flying in a TU or an Ilyshin


Can't say it has ever bothered me but then I always carry a 1/2 litre of vodka or whisky with me, cures the paranoia easily:D

Iain
#116440 by willd
07 May 2006, 13:15
Not too surpised by the announcement due to Russias European ties, there airbus short haul fleet and by the way over recent years they have dropped boeing products- thye got rid of the 777 faster than you could say its name!
#116513 by Scrooge
07 May 2006, 19:41
While everyone else was snapping them up.

Though if memory serves me right these were older 777's with the GE-90 engine,the new GE-92/94's are better on the milage while kicking out more thrust.Though it does seem strange that they are using a 767 on the long haul route's and also DC-10's.

Edit: Just dawned on me that they are using the DC-10-40's for cargo op's not pax.
Virgin Atlantic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Itinerary Calendar