If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Have you ever been up close to a Russian aircraft? I have to many, as long as the crew promised not to start it I was happy to take a look. The AN-124 and the IL-176 look like they have instruments from a WWII submarine in them. The smell is usually the same as the porta-pottys at the fairgrounds. Our company was not allowed to have crew travel on any Russian aircraft or airline.
Ok, yes, it's a clean-sheet, entry level effort, it's buggy af and the Russians are sort of new to customer service, but they have state funding, they could still pull it together and get an NG together by the early 2020's, with the same PW1000G engine that is powering the A320NEO but at a fifth of the cost. That could make a serious dent in the Asian and South American markets, the ones that Boeing covets with their fly-by-piano-wire 737-Max. You could laugh at that suggestion, but some might call that arrogance...
I'm afraid you missed my point, it's not that they CAN'T make a dent out there, it's that they have other priorities, rightly or wrongly.
I wouldn't worry about that too terribly much, Evan. They're not even building enough for their own market, and there are reasons for that, some good, some not so good.
Ok, yes, it's a clean-sheet, entry level effort, it's buggy af and the Russians are sort of new to customer service, but they have state funding, they could still pull it together and get an NG together by the early 2020's, with the same PW1000G engine that is powering the A320NEO but at a fifth of the cost. That could make a serious dent in the Asian and South American markets, the ones that Boeing covets with their fly-by-piano-wire 737-Max. You could laugh at that suggestion, but some might call that arrogance...
In other words, Boeing needs to brush off the arrogance, get its head out of its ass and come up with a 21st-century design of their own. Before the Russian's invade.
I wouldn't worry about that too terribly much, Evan. They're not even building enough for their own market, and there are reasons for that, some good, some not so good.
Have you ever been up close to a Russian aircraft? I have to many, as long as the crew promised not to start it I was happy to take a look. The AN-124 and the IL-176 look like they have instruments from a WWII submarine in them. The smell is usually the same as the porta-pottys at the fairgrounds. Our company was not allowed to have crew travel on any Russian aircraft or airline.
No doubt, a lot of Russian aircraft look (and perhaps smell) much better on the outside. But the SJ-100 was a revolution in that respect. It was developed with guidance from western companies, including Boeing. It was intended to compete in western markets. There is no submarine wiring involved. The cockpit is a very modern affair. Some of the aerodynamic technology involved is downright impressive.
Again, I'm not calling it ultra-modern, but to call it sub-par is a disservice to the people who designed it and all the hard work that went into it. It is more modern than Boeing's single-aisle offering. It is a 21st-century airframe. We want the Russians to modernize. We need to encourage the efforts they are making.
Yes, it suffers from supply-chain problems, but that doesn't mean it's a sub-par aircraft. If the proposed NG variants come together with the PW1000G and they get the parts thing sorted out, they could be serious competitors.
In other words, Boeing needs to brush off the arrogance, get its head out of its ass and come up with a 21st-century design of their own. Before the Russian's invade.
I pointed out in the Ethiopian 302 thread that it is a 21st-century airframe. The planned 130-seat version will be able to safely mount the game-changing PW1000G without needing any spooky artificial stability software.
Have you ever been up close to a Russian aircraft? I have to many, as long as the crew promised not to start it I was happy to take a look. The AN-124 and the IL-176 look like they have instruments from a WWII submarine in them. The smell is usually the same as the porta-pottys at the fairgrounds. Our company was not allowed to have crew travel on any Russian aircraft or airline.
it was a light dig at evan for playing it up in the ethiopian thread.
I pointed out in the Ethiopian 302 thread that it is a 21st-century airframe. The planned 130-seat version will be able to safely mount the game-changing PW1000G without needing any spooky artificial stability software.
Ultra modern? I don't think anyone ever said that. It was clear from the beginning the plane was a bit behind even compared to the E-Jets and the CRJs, let alone when compared to the E2 or the CSeries (I mean the A220). It is built by a company that doesn't have any experience in commercial airplanes, and it relies heavily on western components. To be honest, it seems Sukhoi has been struggling with its latest military jet as well.
Then there is the sub-par dispatch reliability and the poor service and spare parts network.
The SSJ is just an attempt by the Russians to get back into the game. It was never going to be a state of the art game changer.
it was a light dig at evan for playing it up in the ethiopian thread.
Ultra modern? I don't think anyone ever said that. It was clear from the beginning the plane was a bit behind even compared to the E-Jets and the CRJs, let alone when compared to the E2 or the CSeries (I mean the A220). It is built by a company that doesn't have any experience in commercial airplanes, and it relies heavily on western components. To be honest, it seems Sukhoi has been struggling with its latest military jet as well.
Then there is the sub-par dispatch reliability and the poor service and spare parts network.
The SSJ is just an attempt by the Russians to get back into the game. It was never going to be a state of the art game changer.
Do a bit of research. There's a lot of high-tech development that went into the SSJ, particularly the 9.9 aspect ratio wings. The FBW is state-of-the-art and very robust, (using LLI (Liebherr Lindenberg) FCC's and Thales avionics, some purpose built from scratch). It is certified as a Protected Aircraft. It is also modern is its reduced complexity.
"Ultra-modern", maybe not, but definitely a modern, 21st century aircraft. Much more modern than the 737-Max. There may be some serious design issues that come to light as a result of the investigation, but otherwise, it's a pretty impressive aircraft for a first-time effort.
So much for the ultra modern up to date ssj..... hard landing and...
Ultra modern? I don't think anyone ever said that. It was clear from the beginning the plane was a bit behind even compared to the E-Jets and the CRJs, let alone when compared to the E2 or the CSeries (I mean the A220). It is built by a company that doesn't have any experience in commercial airplanes, and it relies heavily on western components. To be honest, it seems Sukhoi has been struggling with its latest military jet as well.
Then there is the sub-par dispatch reliability and the poor service and spare parts network.
The SSJ is just an attempt by the Russians to get back into the game. It was never going to be a state of the art game changer.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Leave a comment: