Turbulence Zone: Broken Wings of the Motherland

130
Turbulence Zone: Broken Wings of the Motherland


Currently, we, Russians, continue to fly on Boeing and Airbus, which form the basis of the fleet of domestic airlines. And at every step continues advertising "foreign" aircraft. But is it safe to fly them? Let's try to figure it out.

When Russian passengers, going on vacation or a business trip, board the western airliner, the first thought that naturally arises among them is whether the plane is working? Will he be able to fly to his destination?



It must be admitted that passengers' concerns about flight safety are more than justified - the West will never sell new aircraft to Russia! Our competitors will choke the Russian aviation industry! And in this article it is necessary to compare the flight-technical qualities and strength of domestic and foreign aircraft.

The first thing that catches the eye is the low location of the engines under the wings and the low ground clearance from the bottom of the engines to the ground in foreign aircraft. After all, during takeoff and landing, there is a high probability of foreign objects getting into the air intake, and this is fraught with catastrophe. In addition, given our harsh weather conditions, Russian liners are equipped with more reliable and unpretentious engines. There is no need to talk about the maximum speed of airplanes - so, at Tu-154 it is 950 km / h., An-148 - 870 km / h. In turn, the "Boeing" B-737-800 develops speed only up to 850 km / h., "Airbus" A-320neo - to 870 km / h.

Leaves much to be desired and the strength of Western aircraft. As you know, they cannot normally land on unprepared and unpaved airfields, of which there are plenty in Russia, and the safe landing of the Tu-154 in Izhme 7 September 2010, very eloquently shows that domestic aircraft are made conscientiously. Another incident involving the Tu-154M is still stubbornly ignored by the world media. So, on September 26, 2006, at the Manas airport (Kyrgyzstan), faced a Tu-154 taking off and an American tanker KS-135 blocking off a strip. Upon impact, the “American” immediately caught fire and was not subject to recovery after the fire. And the legendary "Tupolev" lost part of the plane of the wing, but managed to safely land on the airfield. And after the repair is still flying !.

In addition, we recall the April 2 catastrophe of the Franco-Italian ATU-2012 turboprop aircraft UTair, under Tyumen. This gentle, capricious machine can only be operated in southern latitudes, and, in fact, is not a competitor not only to the new Russian-Ukrainian An-72, but also to the good old An-140. The disasters that occurred with the participation of АТR-24 (72 machines were lost altogether) confirmed the danger of its operation in adverse weather conditions, since the main causes of accidents were problems with engines and icing of the structure. And after these incidents, ATR-19 is no longer being used abroad in northern latitudes.

A serious disadvantage of Western planes is their limitations in operation due to climate and air humidity. For example, during the tests, the Tu-334 in Iran, in the highlands in rarefied and hot air, and the domestic car took off even on one engine. At the same time, foreign aircraft fly in the heat only at night, as the engines do not have enough power. In addition, at temperatures below -30 degrees Celsius, Boeings, Bombardier and other Western airliners also cannot be used.
Also, the aerodynamics and strength of domestic aircraft allow them to react much less to external sources of disturbance: when they enter the zone of turbulence, there is almost no discomfort in them.

Many write about the "comfort" of foreign cars. For example, the air conditioning system functions so poorly that it is often not possible either to turn it off in flight or to turn on the air conditioning at all. On the cramped interior and can not speak. Here is a passenger review of the Embraer E-195 Brazilian aircraft manufactured by Saratov Airlines, which in August of this year applied to the management of the air carrier with a request to improve the technical condition of the air fleet:
“... We flew from Moscow on the“ 6W-775 ”flight of the company“ Saratov Airlines ”to Saratov. I was late for the plane, the bus arrived for the latecomers, we were four people when we arrived at the plane, it was obvious that they were checking it, but the plane was already very stuffy. So this stuffiness remained throughout the flight, the man in the tail told the flight attendant to turn on the air conditioner, because he got bad because of the climb and descent, he also felt bad, as if there was not enough air, and because of the height differences pressure has risen greatly.

When the takeoff began, we fell into a zone of strong turbulence. The plane began to shake violently. And he was shaking for a long time. I understand that for so long the plane cannot shake. Suddenly, he began to decline. As a result, we flew not in the clouds, but under them. All passengers could see the ground. We were told that we closed all the windows, and did not go through the cabin. We were very shaken. It was clear to us, especially the commander himself announced it to us!

After that, all passengers began to complain about turning on the air conditioner. The stewardess promised to fix it, but in the end no one included anything. The whole flight in the cabin was hot, there was an impossible stuffiness.

We still sat down. I want to thank for the professionalism of the commander of this flight, who very well landed the plane. And say "thanks for flying!". When we landed, no one clapped his hands, as is usually the case, because everyone was probably in a state of shock. Nobody got up and did not turn on the phones until the commander came out - all wet and pale - he said: “you can get up”, when the ladder was already fitted to the plane, and then everyone began to slowly leave. ”

In addition, the western liners have another “Achilles heel” - this is the control of the aircraft using a computer. In this case, it is likely that a malicious program will work for someone’s malicious team, a virus will thereby cut down the vital electronic unit and the aircraft will be doomed. History recalled that as early as 1980, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein bought air defense systems from the French. And before the start of the air phase of the NATO operation “Desert Storm” (1991 year) in Iraq, all these anti-aircraft systems were immediately destroyed by command from the satellite.

However, the fact that domestic An-148 aircraft (operated by Angara and Saratov Airlines), Yak-42D (Izhavia, Saratov Airlines, KrasAvia Airlines) are still being stubbornly ignored. ”And others), Tu-204-100 (Red Wings Airlines). Therefore, Russia must be great aviation power. Otherwise, the country will not be as such. Today we are the largest state with a weak transport infrastructure. Thus, the problems of domestic aviation from the economic plane develop into a problem of national security.

Thus, if Western aviation corporations declare an economic war to Russia, we, of course, will be able to restore the domestic civil aircraft industry. But not so fast paced as this is a high-tech innovation industry. Recall that the destruction of the Russian aviation industry began at the beginning of the 1990-s, Yegor Gaidar. As prime minister, he cynically stated that civilian aircraft manufacturing is supposedly too costly for the Russian economy. The results of this destructive policy are obvious ...

Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

130 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +13
    10 September 2017 07: 14
    Increased strength goes sideways overweight, just compare the Tu-204 and MS-21. And with service problems. For what the SSJ are fighting, due to which, by the way, it is much superior to the An-148. According to IL-96, it seems like it was decided to continue the movement, although due to 4 engines the cost of human hours will be more than the same Broiler-777. But the Tu-204, besides the military, can no longer be of interest to them, moreover, Tupolev himself pulled the rubber, out of habit, sewing away the customer as in the USSR. A reconnaissance or anti-submarine one would come out of it, as is often done in the West with outdated or commercially unsuccessful pax.
    1. avt
      +20
      10 September 2017 09: 34
      Quote: kugelblitz
      And with service problems. For what the SSJ are fighting, due to which, by the way, it is much superior to the An-148.

      Adherents of the Super Budget on the march! fool And poorly to name a figure - how many flight hours at the maximum per month were caught up on the Super Budget and An-148? Do not worry about glitches - the Super Budget was dispersed in Red Winds up to 300 hours, and, inferior in maintenance, An-148 to 500 hours the same per month. Then he was thrown out of ,, Russia as ,, not competitive, ”and“ Saratov Airlines ”was taken away and even restored to VASO and put on the line the one that was taken for cannibalism. That is, EVERYTHING written off as type of uselessness in view of the non-competitiveness of "from" Russia.
      Quote: kugelblitz
      Now the fashion trend is in the expansion of the salon, which Surzhik presses on before Embrair. It is really very convenient, but luggage to place is always not a problem.

      laughing Are you soooooooo ?! Trend means ??? bully But is it that BEFORE this expanding Super Budget trend we had a certified Tu-334 already designed in the trend? Yes, byad is a direct competitor in the development of the budget line for Po.
      Quote: kugelblitz
      Nipponians with MRJ because of this messed out specifically.

      Yes? They also promised to seize the “market segment” for mastering the crazy dough? And what about the japas? And they forgot about the Chinese? By the way! How is it with the licensed Super Budget budget in China? Have you already started? Or have you decided to wait? Well, they will start when the Super budget is the trend of the fuselage will expand. bully
      Quote: kugelblitz
      . But the Tu-204, except for the military, can no longer interest,

      Can not . And why not think hard? The cooperation of the airplane was DESTROYED, it was also a direct competitor to both watermelons with bobiks and the adventure of Poe with the Superbudget; And MO needs a mass-produced platform for PLO. And as a result, having raised 138 Superbudgets to date, they are being squeezed into the “segment”, however, for domestic companies that take watermelons and bobiki all the same, like Aeroflot. Moreover, Aeroflot takes NEWs, from direct competitors it’s MCs that are real on the wing. ”MS, as the SSI constantly recalls here, was late for 5 years at least.
      1. +2
        10 September 2017 10: 06
        Quote: avt
        Adherents of the Super Budget on the march!

        Hello to the followers of Eggplant! drinks

        Quote: avt
        The super budget was dispersed in Red Winds up to 300 hours, and inferior in maintenance of the An-148 to 500 hours a month.

        Just hinting at the total resource of the engine. To start.

        Quote: avt
        But nothing that BEFORE this expanding trend of the Super Budget we had a certified Tu-334

        Was (yes surfaced) with the unification of the fuselage with the Tu-204. What gave? In this case, nothing good because of the apparent overstrain. How to gain height in juchel full of articles. Unlike originally designed for a specific aircraft.

        Quote: avt
        Have you forgotten about the Chinese?

        The Chinese have a problem in the rear-wheel drive layout, there are a lot of problems with balancing, which means with modifications of different lengths, loading methods, plus plumage shading in certain modes.

        Quote: avt
        The cooperation of the airplane is DESTROYED,

        Well, of course, it means building a Tupolev Plaza and drawing concepts is normal, at the same time a competitor invested in real development. Tu-334 did not have a full flight certificate, how many years they were engaged in frank nonsense, scoring on real affairs. Those. had in fact a flight prototype; upon completion of testing, the aircraft required complete processing, comparable to the construction of a new one.
        1. avt
          0
          10 September 2017 10: 42
          Quote: kugelblitz
          Just hinting at the total resource of the engine. To start.

          That is, immediately after
          Quote: avt
          Red Windsch "up to 300 hours, and, inferior in maintenance" An-148 up to 500 hours the same per month

          Reluctance to tell? bully
          Quote: kugelblitz
          Well, of course, it means building a Tupolev Plaza and drawing concepts is normal, at the same time a competitor invested in real development.

          Yeah, for which he received a baa-alshoi order .... in Italy, where salons for Mexicans are doing. But if it were still possible to push the GSS shares on the London Stock Exchange, then probably some more ... the London order would have received. bully But then the raspberries were broken
          but DAM poured budget dough - ,, recapitalized "
          Quote: kugelblitz
          The Chinese have a problem in the rear-wheel drive layout, there are a lot of problems with balancing, which means with modifications of different lengths, loading methods, plus plumage shading in certain modes.

          This is the type of response to
          Quote: avt
          How is it with the licensed Super Budget budget in China? Already started?
          bully I didn’t know what the Chinese Super Budget was.
          Quote: kugelblitz
          the problem is in the rear-wheel drive layout, there are a lot of problems with balancing,
          bully
          1. +1
            10 September 2017 11: 07
            Quote: avt
            Red Windsch "up to 300 hours, and, inferior in maintenance" An-148 up to 500 hours the same per month

            If they cannot find use for it, what does the plane have to do with it? Why do other companies have no problems with him? Moreover, the An-148 is completely removed from production, the latter are being completed in Voronezh. One company renting is not an indicator. In general, it is enough to look at the list of operators of the 148th to understand that the cart is compared with a modern bus. Yes, and the main design bureau knows where it is, depending on their whims and political situation is not that stupid, natural idiocy. It is not worth doing anything with Ukraine.

            Quote: avt
            This is the type of response to

            ... frank nonsense when they try to level the plane for a purely domestic market against a Euro-certified one. Especially if the operators are spoiled by broilers and airbases.
            1. avt
              0
              10 September 2017 11: 28
              Quote: kugelblitz
              Quote: avt
              Red Windsch "up to 300 hours, and, inferior in maintenance" An-148 up to 500 hours the same per month
              If they cannot find use for it, what does the plane have to do with it?

              laughing good laughing ,, Red Wings "- did not find the same application bully , exactly after setting a raid record on Superbudgets, merged ALL of its Superbudgets into these same
              Quote: kugelblitz
              Why do other companies have no problems with him?

              bully In ,, Yakutia "it seems that they couldn’t refuse the offer they made. Yes! Well, and about
              Quote: kugelblitz
              other companies have no problems with him

              well, like this
              The list of airline operator certificate holders for commercial air transportation, which the Federal Air Transport Agency published in August 2017 (downloaded from this link), states that only 26 Sukhoi Superjet 100 regional aircraft (SSJ 100; factory designation - RRJ- are included in the Aeroflot certificate) 95). The press service of Aeroflot ATO.ru itself said that the airline has 30 vehicles of this type. This was confirmed by the Sukhoi Civil Aircraft manufacturing company (GSS).

              At the Federal Air Transport Agency, ATO.ru explained that the data on the number of aircraft that are published on its website are provided by the carriers themselves. They also added that in order to cross the side of the operator’s certificate, the airline itself must submit an application.

              At Aeroflot, a request to explain the origin of data on 26 sides was left unanswered.
              bully Let me guess the answer, yes actually already
              Quote: kugelblitz
              .. open nonsense when they try to level the plane for a purely domestic market against a Euro-certified one. Especially if the operators are spoiled by broilers and airbases.

              bully bullyOverall
              One company renting is not an indicator. In general, it is enough to look at the list of operators of the 148th to understand that the cart is compared with a modern bus.
              Toka is something that no one especially, in the segment "on this modern bus" in the World, doesn’t really want to go on autobahns. Savages "C. Even Laotians with Indonesians who returned the previous Super Budgets back bully Well, really -
              where does the plane
              ?? bully
              1. 0
                10 September 2017 11: 48
                Quote: avt
                In ,, Yakutia ", it seems that they couldn’t refuse the offer they made.

                “The suspension of operation of the An-148 is part of anti-crisis measures related to changes in the industry. In response to the situation on the air transportation market, Rossiya Airlines optimizes its operations. Due to the economic efficiency of the An-148 in terms of a combination of parameters, including the price of chair-kilometer, lower than that of other types of airliners in the company's fleet, the reduction in carrying capacity is achieved primarily by suspending the operation of this type of aircraft, "he said spruce company.

                https://bmpd.livejournal.com/1258997.html
                1. avt
                  +1
                  10 September 2017 12: 10
                  Quote: kugelblitz
                  Quote: avt
                  In ,, Yakutia ", it seems that they couldn’t refuse the offer they made.
                  "The suspension of operation of the An-148 is part of anti-crisis measures related to changes in the industry.
                  As I have not heard about them in ,, Yakutia "
                  bully Actually, well, if you look earlier, then
                  Quote: avt
                  , Red Wings "- they didn’t find any application, exactly after setting a raid record on Superbudgets, he merged ALL of his Superbudgets into these same
                  Quote: kugelblitz
                  Why do other companies have no problems with him?

                  And An-148, spawning from the Wings, WASN’T, from the word in general. bully
                2. +1
                  10 September 2017 12: 26
                  read your creations, and all the time I had the idea that you are either not familiar with articles that are regularly discussed on this topic or simply ignore the facts, but what about the policies of the Aeroflot managers who put the an-148 on the joke, right after the modernization , there is a bearded anecdote about traffic cops - "I’ll put him under a brick under a brick if I don’t share ..."
              2. 0
                12 September 2017 12: 27
                Quote: avt
                Toka is something that no one especially, in the segment "on this modern bus" in the World, doesn’t really want to go on autobahns. Savages "C. Even Laotians with Indonesians who returned the previous Super Budgets back

                Mexico: https://russianplanes.net/airline/Interjet
                Belgium: https://russianplanes.net/airline/Brussels_Airlin
                es
                Thailand: https://russianplanes.net/airline/Royal_Thai_Air_
                Strength

                Belgium finally savages, yeah ...
      2. +12
        10 September 2017 12: 13
        The author clearly went too far. Boeings and Airbases sat down many times with idle engines and nothing. Moreover, in terms of number they are not a couple of Tu or Superjet. As for comfort, I fly a lot on business. He flew on Boeing, Airbus, Embraers, Tu and Superjets. So the Superjets and Tu for flight comfort do not even stand close to Boeings, and especially Airbus! Why write fables? By doings and waving wooden pieces things are not done. You just need to work and do better and better. Then there will be results
        1. +5
          10 September 2017 12: 23
          Quote: xetai9977
          He flew on Boeing, Airbus, Embraers, Tu and Superj

          Recently I flew to Boeing 777 (Aeroflot) to Moscow - beyond all praise and from the point of view of service the same, then from Moscow to Riga to the Superjet --- there is only one review - DO NOT FLY.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. +14
            10 September 2017 14: 08
            Beautiful stuffing. It is simply not appropriate to compare a regional plane with a wide-body one for long-haul airlines in terms of service level. I flew on a Superjet and I really liked ... one review ... FLY.
            1. +3
              10 September 2017 20: 36
              Quote: cormorant
              It is simply not appropriate to compare a regional plane with a wide-body one for long-haul airlines in terms of service level.

              Why?
              It is no secret that airplanes with the highest possible level of service at the moment are business jets. So the level of comfort should not depend on the size of the aircraft, and on the flight range ...
              No, of course, it’s possible, like the famous Baltic “Ryanair”, to say “you don’t fly far anyway, but we need money, therefore we will clean the toilets and equip standing places” ... It’s interesting how European flight safety authorities reacted to such a business plan 8 )))
              1. +3
                10 September 2017 21: 28
                Dear, I judge the level of service as an ordinary, but very frequent user of this type of transport. Moreover, flights, as a rule, are very long and there is an opportunity to compare the service. The level of Lufthansa service at Boeing 747 between Singapore and Hamburg and, for example, at Airbus A320 between Copenhagen and Zurich, will vary by an order of magnitude. I understand that you only fly on business jets, and it’s hard for you to judge what kind of service ordinary airlines have ...
                In general, the article is complete nonsense.
                1. +1
                  11 September 2017 07: 56
                  Quote: cormorant
                  I understand that you only fly on business jets, and it’s hard for you to judge what kind of service ordinary airlines have ...

                  On the contrary, most of my flights took place in conditions of a very unobtrusive service from the Russian Air Force, and therefore I know what it means to "fly badly"

                  However, even so, with my high growth, the relationship between the greed of the carrier and the level of comfort is perfectly felt. Even a couple of hours of flight in conditions when you can stretch your legs only while going to the toilet are very, very annoying.
                2. FID
                  +4
                  11 September 2017 09: 01
                  Quote: cormorant
                  The level of Lufthansa service at Boeing 747 between Singapore and Hamburg and, for example, at Airbus A320 between Copenhagen and Zurich, will vary by an order of magnitude.

                  I apologize, but do not confuse short-haul flights (A-320) and long-haul flights (B-747) .... The level of service on them is VERY different ...
                  1. ZVO
                    0
                    11 September 2017 21: 23
                    Quote: SSI
                    Quote: cormorant
                    The level of Lufthansa service at Boeing 747 between Singapore and Hamburg and, for example, at Airbus A320 between Copenhagen and Zurich, will vary by an order of magnitude.

                    I apologize, but do not confuse short-haul flights (A-320) and long-haul flights (B-747) .... The level of service on them is VERY different ...


                    UPDATE.
                    If you remember the TransAero who died in the Bose, who bought the B-747 for long-distance flights ...
                    It seems to be cool, but nifiga.
                    Most likely Tranaero bought them from the "air bus" Shanghai-Taipei.
                    Which fly more often than in Moscow buses go.
                    to fly these planes to the countries of Southeast Asia was an extreme torment ....
                    4 hours after departure, half of the aircraft stood in the aisles all the time.
                    1. +1
                      12 September 2017 12: 07
                      Transaero flew many times. Nobody stood in the aisles. The planes are old, but the step of the seats in the house-keeper for 180 is normal. I also liked the service. Yes, and the prices were very reasonable
                      1. ZVO
                        0
                        12 September 2017 21: 33
                        Quote: notingem
                        Transaero flew many times. Nobody stood in the aisles. The planes are old, but the step of the seats in the house-keeper for 180 is normal. I also liked the service. Yes, and the prices were very reasonable


                        I flew 6 times on the B-747 ...
                        to the countries of Southeast Asia.
                        Always stood.
                        My height is 185, my knees never fit.
              2. +1
                11 September 2017 05: 08
                Shovels, did you fly the “Baltic” Ryanair? He’s generally Irish and everything is in it. Moreover, much is much better than that of domestic carriers.
                And the price is lower at times.
                1. +1
                  11 September 2017 07: 45
                  Did not fly. But the fact remains. The proposal to clean the toilets and sell the "standing room" was considered very seriously, and was voiced not at the level of rumors and OBS, but the company's management.
    2. FID
      +3
      11 September 2017 08: 57
      Quote: kugelblitz
      For what the SSJ are fighting, due to which, by the way, it is much superior to the An-148.

      I’m sorry, have you ever studied Russian?
    3. +1
      11 September 2017 18: 50
      Quote: kugelblitz
      Increased strength sideways overweight

      The fact is that the safety factor depends on the ability of the manufacturer to comply with the specified technical conditions of production. High technical culture in the USA allows to provide higher weight return of the structure without sacrificing durability and strength.
  2. +19
    10 September 2017 07: 18
    ... We recall that Yegor Gaidar began to destroy the Russian aircraft industry in the early 1990s. As prime minister, he cynically declared that civilian aircraft manufacturing was supposedly too costly for the Russian economy ...

    As soon as the deeds of all these Gaidars, Kokhov and Chubais surfaced, I immediately recall the words of F. Dostoevsky: “If anyone destroys Russia, it will not be communists, not anarchists, but damned liberals.” am You can’t say better! Yes
    1. +7
      10 September 2017 08: 49
      I. Jurgens (Institute for Contemporary Development)
      “What innovations are there, what an industry! The fate of Russia is to export oil and other raw materials! Forget the rest! ”
    2. +6
      10 September 2017 08: 52
      Gaidar is already in hell, but his business lives on. Too many powerful people are lobbying the interests of Western aircraft manufacturers. There should be economic incentives to produce our equipment, and airlines to buy ours. Accordingly, the equipment must be of the highest quality ..
      Quote: RusArmy235
      ... We recall that Yegor Gaidar began to destroy the Russian aircraft industry in the early 1990s. As prime minister, he cynically declared that civilian aircraft manufacturing was supposedly too costly for the Russian economy ...

      As soon as the deeds of all these Gaidars, Kokhov and Chubais surfaced, I immediately recall the words of F. Dostoevsky: “If anyone destroys Russia, it will not be communists, not anarchists, but damned liberals.” am You can’t say better! Yes
      1. +1
        10 September 2017 12: 33
        To begin with, of course, to uproot lobbyists, now, after the proposal, to return the tax on the supply of imported aircraft, the company is unfolding that the government wants to ban the purchase of foreign equipment, and the question is simple, at least to put our manufacturers on equal terms with the foreign ones, and here again, the “airport” and a certain analyte Olga Samofalova are already heard, her articles on our resource have already shone
    3. +4
      10 September 2017 10: 07
      This communists ruined civil proceedings. Comfort convenience functionality. Why if you take more then nowhere. Fly carcasses on your carcasses. And Airbus and Boeing appeared and immediately everything became clear. Now it seems they started to do focusing on the consumer. Thanks to the liberals. Yes ?
      1. +7
        10 September 2017 10: 39
        The comfort of an airplane does not depend on whether it is a Tu or a watermelon, but on the greed of the owners of airlines in Ukraine with a system of taxes and fees in the country.
        1. +3
          10 September 2017 13: 49
          Then why in the fairest state of the workers and peasants they did not care about comfort. That planes that cars that tape recorders and more. The masters of slaves were painfully greedy.
          1. +4
            11 September 2017 05: 17
            Very much taken care of. Soviet aircraft at the time of creation were usually world-class or even surpassed it. But the fleet was updated much more slowly. I don’t know if it’s worthless management or expenses for foreign friends of the union, but quite successful, but wildly outdated aircraft of the development of the 50-60s flew almost to the end of the 90s.
          2. 0
            12 September 2017 12: 12
            DO NOT LIE. The planes were comfortable. Drinks and on-board meals were provided.
    4. ZVO
      0
      11 September 2017 21: 31
      Quote: RusArmy235
      ... We recall that Yegor Gaidar began to destroy the Russian aircraft industry in the early 1990s. As prime minister, he cynically declared that civilian aircraft manufacturing was supposedly too costly for the Russian economy ...

      As soon as the deeds of all these Gaidars, Kokhov and Chubais surfaced, I immediately recall the words of F. Dostoevsky: “If anyone destroys Russia, it will not be communists, not anarchists, but damned liberals.” am You can’t say better! Yes


      This is not Dostoevsky ...
      The terms anarchism and communism during the years of Dostoevsky’s life were not common ...
      Yes, and in his works and letters this is not.
  3. +16
    10 September 2017 07: 23
    It is necessary to transfer to the "corn" then everything will be fine! Instead of unpaved airfields, normal ones must be built. Let's not do the roads either, but we will return the ZIL-157 and GAZ-66 to operation everywhere, including private individuals, and foreign cars under the press! The author decided to trample on a topic that only the lazy have not touched on for the past 20 years. It turned out badly, very badly. No serious analysis, not a word about the engines. Only "cry Yaroslavna" in the Soviet aircraft industry.
    1. +4
      10 September 2017 10: 54
      I agree with you in many ways. But can the Russian state also support in the form of direct and indirect subsidies, as theirs is supported by Boeing and Airbus? Or are the mutual claims of the USA and the EU on this subject unknown in Russia? Here the field is not plowed after liberal rulers. What collapsed after Yeltsin cannot be restored in a decade. I remember how in the year 2009, they were busting with one former GA pilot. On the radio, they started broadcasting about SSJ. He immediately said that this is done to form designers, then someday we will make another plane, and this one will not be assembled for more than ten. He, of course, was mistaken with the number, but he was right in terms of meaning. It was better not to do it? No! Another issue is that organizing a service with a guarantee is also difficult. But if we create here, then on the basis of experience it will go easier and much cheaper.
    2. 0
      4 October 2017 04: 53
      Quote: irazum
      Let's not do the roads either, but we will return the ZIL-157 and GAZ-66 to operation everywhere, including private individuals, and foreign cars under the press!


      So after all, they said not to ban and remove everything that is available. Even the communists did not do this, being largely pragmatists, and not just ideologists. They only said that import duties should be introduced new products. And let the old ones live out their allotted time as it should.
  4. +4
    10 September 2017 07: 24
    vinaigrette of strength, engines and the convenience of the cabin, and for different planes ... is it really so deplorable for a Boeing with a Eurobus? lol
    1. +2
      10 September 2017 07: 37
      Now the fashion trend is in the expansion of the salon, which Surzhik presses on before Embrair. It is really very convenient, but luggage to place is always not a problem. Nipponians with MRJ because of this messed out specifically.
  5. +14
    10 September 2017 07: 33
    Well, the author is also a specialist to me. Lizzy fart louder. He writes about landing in Tansy. I can give a couple of examples. When Boeings and Airbuses squeezed into idle airfields and even with an unreleased front desk, and nothing fell apart without casualties. With engines not working.
    The passenger comments. So here is the question. Who released the faulty plane on the line. Engines in the western 8 are weak. Damn how they go into the sky with a candle and like Tu 134. Damn it is not enough comfort. And in that more?
    In short, URAYA and all.
    1. FID
      +3
      11 September 2017 09: 10
      Quote: Heinrich Ruppert
      When Boeing and Airbus squandered at idle airfields

      I apologize, when did the Boeings and Airbuses COME to NON-OPERATING airfields? And what is the difference between an AIRPORT and an AIRDOM? And henceforth, if you are not an expert, but .... well, let's say, not very understanding, do not make hasty statements!
      1. +1
        11 September 2017 09: 38
        I apologize, but you have not heard about the Boeing landing, if I’m not mistaken, the 787 was refueled not in halons but in liters, which ran out of fuel and the pilots had to plan for the nearest airfield which did not work. On which car races were held. Then the Airbus 330 which, when replacing the engine, was supplied with the wrong fixture for the fuel supply pipeline. And all the kyrosin flew into the atmosphere and they planned with 11000 thousand to the airfield.
        Details and links will give you when I get home. Now I am in another country and the internet is very slow here.
        Sergey, I respect you as a specialist. But you are wrong with these questions.
        1. +1
          11 September 2017 10: 04
          Gimli glider.
        2. FID
          +1
          11 September 2017 10: 12
          Quote: Heinrich Ruppert
          Sergey, I respect you as a specialist. But you are wrong with these questions.

          Maybe you are right, maybe .... But even bobiks and watermelons are not ... very likely to land on AERODROMES ... Maybe you are right, then, accept my apologies!
          1. +2
            11 September 2017 10: 24
            Dear Sergey. It is magnanimously glad that you communicate with me. I must ask you for an apology. I forgot the differences between the port and the drome. But you must forgive me. I live in another country for 23 years. I wander around the world. I have to speak 4 languages. Therefore, I often spell confusion.
            1. FID
              +2
              11 September 2017 11: 26
              It is very nice to talk with a person who admits (maybe) his (or someone else's) mistakes! Very glad!
        3. 0
          15 October 2017 23: 33
          Boeing 767 landing in Canada
  6. 5:0
    +14
    10 September 2017 08: 00
    For a long time I have not read so many nonsense in one article.
    1. +8
      10 September 2017 08: 25
      I am joining. I don’t even want to comment on this nonsense.
  7. +17
    10 September 2017 08: 47
    When they like to poke to the West, for some reason they modestly forget ... and what prevents them from making their planes comfortable. The possibility of modernization in them is colossal. Yes, I understand the time is going on ... what prevents us from introducing new products to proven schemes. I also flew on the IL86, a good spacious car, the Yak42, quite comfortable, the carcasses ... but don’t put the seats more than they should and it will not be bad there. It's about engines ...?, So we lost 20 years trusting that the West will help us. It’s just that the development of the aviation industry is a good example ... that a private trader will not think startegically ... money is important to him now, but how much is earned by the drum. The state has enough leverage to make its own aviation industry, and there is no need to talk about the market and freedom of entrepreneurship ... in the West they wanted and banned the planes of the USSR / Russia and did it under false pretexts ... what prevents us from doing this ... the golden western Donkey ...? We have our own domestic air transportation market ... and our cars bought the same abroad, not everyone can afford Boeing and Airbus ... we sell weapons ... and we don’t want to restore our civilian positions, as we merged under Gorbachev. In the days of the USSR, it was simple ... everything was state ... it was necessary and the state bought licenses and if you need a finished factory for production ... and to whom to entrust it now ... ??? A good example of Western thinking ... building an E-mobile, even with a dough ... even a screwdriver production wasn’t enough for brains .. what can we say about the aviation industry, so a person of state thinking should manage it ... and not bureaucrats thinking how to make money retirement and blame the West.
  8. +5
    10 September 2017 09: 07
    I must admit that the fears of passengers about flight safety are more than justified - the West will never sell new aircraft to Russia!
    Oh well ... Aeroflot has PREFERREDLY bought NEW western-made aircraft, but our Sukhoi aircraft are only "out of hand" ... And this, of course, is NOT NORMAL. But at this stage, our aircraft cannot compete with a foreign fleet, especially on foreign routes. And something needs to be done with this, and not from year to year to declare "concern about the affairs and situation in the Russian aviation industry" and to fail one program after another. The problem is SIGNIFICANTly large, it’s not enough to create a good aircraft, it also needs EXCELLENT and economical engines, with which we have always had a problem, we need to create all the ground infrastructure for servicing these aircraft ... In the end, the State, at the first stage, MUST take care of the issue LEASING, otherwise no one will take these planes
    1. +4
      10 September 2017 09: 50
      Quote: svp67
      Of course NOT NORMAL.

      To this Aeroflot rightly answers that it is one 10 times larger than the factories in Ulyanovsk, Kazan and Voronezh combined. That this aircraft industry is an application to the airline business, and not the other way around. And there is nothing to offer the aviation industry. IL-96 everything, etops-180 killed all four-engine cars at once. From Tu-204 flies from a force of 50. Regional aircraft in Russia are not needed, because there is no regional aviation, and creating it is not Aeroflot's business. And not in his power.
      1. avt
        +4
        10 September 2017 10: 50
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Regional aircraft in Russia are not needed, because there is no regional aviation, and creating it is not Aeroflot's business.

        wassat bully DAM decided to duplicate ??? Or, for starters, to study, study and once again- LEARN! Then knowledge will come in knowing the difference in gradation back in the USSR introduced between REGIONAL aviation and SMALL. And then after
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Regional aircraft in Russia are not needed, because there is no regional aviation, and creating it is not Aeroflot's business.

        It is necessary to directly close the production of the Super Budget and the MS should not begin. bully
        1. +2
          10 September 2017 13: 20
          Quote: avt
          DAM decided to duplicate ???

          No idea who it is. Instagram blogger?
          Quote: avt
          between REGIONAL aviation and SMALL

          I talked about regional aviation.
          Quote: avt
          It’s necessary to directly close the production of the Super Budget and the MS should not start

          Before the sanctions it was possible to say that they did not cut both, but, like, a bold plan. Under sanctions - pure wrecking, no options.
          1. avt
            0
            10 September 2017 15: 04
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            I talked about regional aviation.

            request Then-bya-ah-ah! Well, in the happiness of this life-affirming
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            Regional aircraft in Russia are not needed, because there is no regional aviation, and creating it is not Aeroflot's business. And not in his power.

            Because it’s just the Super Budget and its watermelon bean analogues that carry out regional transportation. So that
            Quote: avt
            Study, study and study again ! Then knowledge will come in knowing the difference in gradation back in the USSR introduced between REGIONAL aviation and SMALL
            1. +1
              10 September 2017 15: 19
              Quote: avt
              Superbudget and its watermelon bean analogues and carry out regional transportation

              Carry out. But the market for dozens of aircraft is not enough even for the A380, not to mention RJ. Climbing on Brazilians and Canadians in such a scenario is suicide. In addition, these two just in time for 00-m overstocked the regional aircraft market.
    2. +3
      10 September 2017 10: 11
      Quote: svp67
      Aeroflot PREFERREDLY Purchased NEW Western-Made Aircraft

      Firstly, nobody has canceled kickbacks. This is a fact, and according to knowledgeable people. Secondly, Sukhoi only establishes a service network, unlike a debugged Boeing or Airbus. Not everything is so simple, even launching a beautiful airplane. Irish and Mexicans are satisfied, for example, with the operational properties of Surzhik, but distribution is limited by the problem with the branded service.
    3. 0
      10 September 2017 13: 08
      and the Trump administration recently acquired very profitable new Boeings, commissioned by the now defunct Transaero
    4. +2
      11 September 2017 09: 00
      Oh well ... Aeroflot PREFERREDLY bought NEW western-made aircraft, but our Sukhoi only from under the stick

      But nothing about buying a broiler, the buyer (official) gets a rollback about (lender showed at Karaulov) 8 lemons of greenery? So they buy broilers! Your pocket is closer! And you do not remember how in the days of Okulov (son-in-law of ebn) he was persuaded in the Duma to take our planes, and not foreign ones? And then they showed how many lyamas the Boeing rolled for him for every used ear plane ...
      1. FID
        +3
        11 September 2017 09: 15
        Quote: voffchik7691
        But nothing about buying a broiler, the buyer (official) gets a rollback about (lender showed at Karaulov) 8 lemons of greenery?

        10% of the transaction amount ... And Shaposhnikov started this business, then it continued ...
  9. +3
    10 September 2017 09: 26
    Our cars are overweight, due to the requirements of the USSR Air Force for the strength of the chassis and everything else. They wanted the planes to land where the front-line aircraft land. And all airport and air navigation fees are calculated from the weight of the aircraft. Plus, the crew is everywhere two people, we have three or four. As a result, the strongest loss of airline profits. So Soviet planes can no longer be reanimated. Need to do such aircraft, which are profitable. Like Superjet and MS-21.
    1. avt
      +6
      10 September 2017 09: 59
      Quote: Aspid 57
      Need to do such aircraft, which are profitable. Like Superjet and MS-21.

      bully What nesuna will bring that? Figures on 138 Superbudget cars poorly lead? Well, this same “profit” minus the invested dough from the budget for the capitalization of the GSS. bully I give an excuse from witnesses to the Super Budget from the Poe sect - profits will go after the release of the 200th car ...... maybe bully But subject to the state support of the project naturally. bully That is, in fact, more infusions from the budget.
      1. +1
        10 September 2017 21: 00
        We are talking about the profits of the airline, outside the aircraft factory or design bureau.
        1. FID
          +1
          11 September 2017 09: 17
          Can’t you voice the profit of the AFL? Or from Interjet, but excluding OUR losses?
  10. +5
    10 September 2017 10: 02
    This is this article. The author compares fighters according to their characteristics. For safety, there is only one criterion for the number of accidents per number of departures. And for comfort. I'm sorry. I flew. Even the IL-18 managed to hook. And do not compare. Ours are noisier. And Erbasov’s chairs cannot be compared for convenience at all. Superjet must certainly be tested.
  11. +1
    10 September 2017 11: 03
    Alas, for the time being, in fact, the aviation industry has nothing to do with engines, but civil aviation has nothing to catch.
  12. +9
    10 September 2017 11: 39
    the author is about nothing ...
    when I read that the Boeings, airbuses and bombardiers do not fly at temperatures below minus 30 I was very surprised, I live in Yakutsk - we have three months of the year the temperature is below and minus 40 and minus 50, sometimes it passes for minus 60 - and nothing, the Boeings fly and and airbases and bombardier
    Regarding the cramped space in the cabin, it’s not the plane’s matter, but in the airline - what distance between seats it wants and will do (well, very big claims against S7 in this regard, 6-7 hours to Moscow to fly on their 737-800 tram is a torture )
    regarding accident rate, so the author doesn’t remember a bunch of accidents with an24-26? for the simple reason that to these planes hell knows how many years already ...
    I do not defend the western aviation industry, I really liked flying on IL-62, IL-86, IL-96 - convenient, reliable cars, but their time has passed and there is no full-fledged replacement of domestic production for which you have to fly ...
    ,
    1. +6
      10 September 2017 15: 30
      Yes, here, and Yakutsk is not even necessary. Any aircraft even in Yakutsk, even at the equator having risen to a height of 9-10 km, has -50С overboard
      1. +1
        10 September 2017 20: 21
        Well, you never know, maybe the author believes that the plane can not take off or land at this temperature laughing
  13. +1
    10 September 2017 12: 43
    I remembered one flight last year on the A-310 from Riga to Leeds, when boarding kerosene on board it smelled, asked the neighbors if it seemed to me? it was all with a faint or something, but they looked at me like a weirdo. nevertheless, after about 10 minutes, directly by taxiing to take off, all the same they all kicked into the terminal. 2 hours they waited, I thought we’ll fly on another ... uh there! podshamanili a bit and flew on the same. It was a dicky feeling, of course, but flew by. Here's Airbus for you, used. Ryanair, if that. On WizzAir, by the way, the really killed Pepelians, too, had to fly. But cheap, gg
    1. +4
      10 September 2017 13: 34
      Ryan Air is operated ONLY by the Boeing 737-800. And nothing else)))) So it’s possible that it’s not kerosene, and the alcohol has not weathered from the hot head?))))
      1. 0
        10 September 2017 15: 34
        Ryan Air exploited Boeing 737-800 ONLY
        The number of 400 pieces.
    2. +1
      10 September 2017 13: 55
      Ryanair and Wizzair are buying new planes.
  14. +12
    10 September 2017 12: 48
    The whole world flies on Boeing and Airbus. 20 thousand ships on the move.
    And another 40 thousand pieces of orders. Conveyor. With a very low accident rate.
    But in Russia, they are, they say, dangerous. Make safe airfields, and deal with the end.
    And Russian companies themselves lease old planes to make it cheaper.
    Pay the full price and take new ones from the factory.
    And - op! - computers interfered. They may break, or the virus will eat them. belay
    1. +3
      10 September 2017 13: 13
      moreover, the old board, which was fully serviced, and the board, which the company and the company scored for servicing, are two completely different machines.
    2. 0
      12 September 2017 16: 02
      Quote: voyaka uh
      But in Russia, they are, they say, dangerous. Make safe airfields


      Outdated aeronautical equipment at airports is half the trouble.
      Half-pilots - such as "retrained" navigators and flight engineers with the Tu-154 - these are still the "flyers".
      Such ditched the B-737 in Kazan d 2013
      1. 0
        20 September 2017 11: 36
        Judging by the comment, you are not in the subject. Therefore, you cannot judge retrained navigators and engineers. Most of them are cool pros. Among pilots with an initial flight education, there are also a lot of fools. Probably watched some yellowish report and made conclusions? Oh well)))
      2. 0
        11 March 2018 19: 44
        Quote: DimerVladimer
        Such ditched the B-737 in Kazan d 2013

        The son of our president Minnikhanov ditched it
  15. +7
    10 September 2017 12: 49
    In aviation, the author does not take away from the word "completely", if judged by the above argument. But the topic is correct - the civil aviation industry is killed. It is absolutely necessary to restore. Only this work needs to be supplemented by changes in the Criminal Code. Theft in the defense industry and strategic sectors (space, aircraft, shipyards, etc.) is equated with state treason and punished accordingly. And how else to regard economic sabotage versus the state?
  16. 0
    10 September 2017 13: 15
    Well, one should not discount lobbying by Western aircraft manufacturers for their products through various contrived requirements of eco-ECUs and other n @ # $ images (yeah, Euro norms, noise and other insignificant nonsense). Not quite in the subject, but an eloquent example was recently with Kamaz-Master, when envy took that team all the time to the top winners. so in order to force the use of an imported engine (instead of the Perfectly worked out Tutaevsky V8), “suddenly” the engine displacement was limited to a miserable 16l. In fact, the problem with these very “euro” norms (what is the current 6,7th ??) is a stupid marketing move. After all, they do not affect the performance characteristics, and in the price of the products grows significantly.
  17. +9
    10 September 2017 13: 31
    Absolutely mediocre article, which has nothing to do with reality. Plus, the author is fairly mediocre in aviation. More precisely, he does not understand at all. Before the election, as an empty slogan, people shap. Operated both domestic aircraft and foreign. I know what I'm talking about. All soft landings!
    1. +2
      10 September 2017 13: 41
      I absolutely agree with you on everything! The article is worthy of the "Pioneer Truth" of Soviet times!
    2. +2
      10 September 2017 16: 24
      As for the weakness of the article I agree. Desires are more than knowledge, but the set of comments is very interesting. Apparently, those who are in the topic are not particularly willing to comment because they are repeated in scrap, and the set of stamps that throw themselves at one another is limited on both sides. In connection with the clumsy desire of Rogozin to eliminate tax preferences for imported aircraft introduced in the nineties and zero years, we are waiting for further publications.,
  18. +3
    10 September 2017 14: 22
    For fans of the western aviation industry. As of the mid-80s in the Ministry’s system
    the aviation industry employed at least 1 million (!!!) people. Million jobs in
    one of the most high-tech industries! And how many more jobs are there?
    industries related to the aviation industry. Another example. At the same time, a ticket on the routes
    Moscow-Tashkent, Moscow-Novosibirsk cost 56 domestic rubles (+50 kopecks commission
    collection). How much are tickets on these routes today? Especially compared to salary.
    So much for the economics of Western automotive technology.
    1. +9
      10 September 2017 15: 07
      Quote: borys
      Moscow-Novosibirsk cost 56 domestic rubles

      93 dollars at the official rate. 3 h 50 min
      Quote: borys
      How much are tickets on these routes today?

      As of September 30 - 4864 rubles, 84,86 dollars at the Central Bank rate. Given dollar inflation, at least half the price.
      Tashkent yes, 17 505 rub. But this is a question for the Uzbek airport.
      For comparison, on the same date
      Istanbul - London, 4 hours, 4 rubles.
      Chicago-LA, 4 h 36 min, 2 821 rub.
      Quote: borys
      Especially compared to salary.

      85th year, the average salary is 174 rubles. 1/3 salary.
      2016 the average salary of 35 thousand rubles. (for Moscow - 50, for Novosib - 32). 1/6 to 1/10.
      Quote: borys
      So much for the economics of Western automotive technology.

      Yeah. And she too.
      1. +2
        11 September 2017 02: 19
        This is where you got such an average salary, at 35 thousand found? In what dimension do you live, a disease. In most regions, even 20 thousand is considered
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Quote: borys
        Moscow-Novosibirsk cost 56 domestic rubles

        93 dollars at the official rate. 3 h 50 min
        Quote: borys
        How much are tickets on these routes today?

        As of September 30 - 4864 rubles, 84,86 dollars at the Central Bank rate. Given dollar inflation, at least half the price.
        Tashkent yes, 17 505 rub. But this is a question for the Uzbek airport.
        For comparison, on the same date
        Istanbul - London, 4 hours, 4 rubles.
        Chicago-LA, 4 h 36 min, 2 821 rub.
        Quote: borys
        Especially compared to salary.

        85th year, the average salary is 174 rubles. 1/3 salary.
        2016 the average salary of 35 thousand rubles. (for Moscow - 50, for Novosib - 32). 1/6 to 1/10.
        Quote: borys
        So much for the economics of Western automotive technology.

        Yeah. And she too.

        This is where you found such an average salary, you are sick. In most regions 20 thousand is considered VERY GOOD SALARY. And so, usually average -15 thousand. Do not you work in Rosstat, since you write here such nonsense? Go down from heaven to earth.
        1. +1
          11 September 2017 08: 19
          Quote: myobius59
          You are mine sick.

          Thank you for taking care of my health. But I didn’t drink with you on the Brudershaft.
          Quote: myobius59
          This is where you found such an average salary

          In Russia. You just need to understand how the average salary is considered.
          1. If in a university, for example, there are 49 teachers with a salary of 20 and one rector with a salary of 500, then the average salary of a university is 29,6. Another thing is the median salary (a salary less than half of the employees receive less). She yes, less than one and a half times and officially, NPT, in Russia is not considered at all.
          2. Salary on hand is 75-85% of the salary that is reported to the Federal State Statistics Service (minus personal income tax and the union, at least).

          Quote: myobius59
          Do not you work in Rosstat, since you write such nonsense here

          No, not at Rosstat.

          In the organization where I work, the average salary, for example, in the Volga region is just 20+ on hand. In Western Siberia, a little higher. At the head office in Moscow, it is exactly 5 times higher.

          But even from our salary a ticket to Novosibirsk costs less than 56 from 174
          1. +2
            11 September 2017 08: 39
            "Average" Soviet 174 rubles. in the same way calculated as the current 35.000 Russian. by the same methodology)
  19. +7
    10 September 2017 15: 02
    As you know, they cannot normally land on unprepared and unpaved airfields, of which there are enough in Russia, and the successful landing of the Tu-154M in Izhma on September 7, 2010, very eloquently shows that domestic planes are made to last.

    Tu-154 sat on a concrete strip, and only caved in the woods. And in the Boeing 737 states, they sat down (without engines - they died out and were damaged by hail) on the ground - on the earthen dam, and by chance it turned out that the territory belongs to the NASA factory! According to Natiuonal Geographic, they show a film from a series of plane crash investigations. But in that case, the disaster did not happen. Moreover, since after landing and all the fuss, its wheels immediately began to sink into the ground and were afraid that in a short time it would not be possible to move it, everything was removed from it in a few days, one of the engines was replaced, the second was temporarily revived, and he took off! From the same earthen mound!
    Another funny fact is about different attitudes towards people and different bureaucratization of society. The main pilot of this plane was ... one-eyed! He did not see one eye. We have one-eyed and auto-rights to the car will not give! In aviation, I imagine, he will not be allowed to enter. And they have no problems. Even a civilian airliner can be piloted! Moreover, it was this one-eyed one who made the landing! Ace!
  20. +1
    10 September 2017 15: 15
    It's a pity TU-204 and An-148, the planes are not bad.
  21. +8
    10 September 2017 15: 29
    ".... At the same time, foreign planes operate flights in the heat only at night, as the engines lack power. In addition, at temperatures below -30 degrees Celsius, Boeing, Bombardier and other Western airliners cannot be operated .... "





    Such a set of "revelations" even in Murzilka would not have been missed ....

    And what is the temperature overboard at cruising altitudes of 10-12.000 m? What in Africa and Siberia ...
  22. +3
    10 September 2017 17: 35
    Sly Cherry Nine. In 1985, the official dollar exchange rate had little to do with reality.
    By the way, therefore, the vast majority of Soviet citizens did not care. In reality for a dollar
    gave 4-5 rubles. Those for whom he was urgently needed. And another fact. By the end of the 80s, Aeroflot was
    carried more than 100 million passengers a year. How much today the heirs transport together
    Aeroflot?
    1. +5
      10 September 2017 17: 58
      And what economic indicators did Aeroflot have in those glorious times?
    2. +2
      10 September 2017 21: 25
      Quote: borys
      In 1985, the official dollar exchange rate had little to do with reality.

      It's true. Therefore, it is more correct to compare with the salary.
      Quote: borys
      In reality for a dollar
      gave 4-5 rubles

      I know. Therefore, the average wage (in terms of commodity saturation) was actually slightly higher than the African dollar per day in a European, in a formal sense, country.
      Quote: borys
      By the end of the 80s, Aeroflot was
      carried more than 100 million passengers a year. How much today the heirs transport together
      Aeroflot?

      About 88 million a year to the Crimea only in the RSFSR. Now less.
      Have you been banned in Google?
  23. +4
    10 September 2017 19: 38
    Mr. Usyk, I realized that you are a journalist, and at least such an article should be written by an Aviator. There are several mistakes in the article, for example - at night even Sovetskie airliners take off to save money, yet - during the day, take-off and landing service is more expensive than at night, but I’m completely silent about the accident, as your examples are ridiculous, and you also didn’t write about the resources of domestic and foreign liners and this is the most important thing. Article minus. And if we had competitive aircraft, I’m sure that the GDP would force airlines to buy ours.
    1. +2
      10 September 2017 22: 56
      Quote: mgero
      Mr. Usyk, I realized that you are a journalist

      He does not hear you. The article is written from another site.
  24. 0
    10 September 2017 20: 22
    The required material is nonsense, written by a completely non-aviation author ("journal", as always :(). I will not even comment.
  25. +3
    10 September 2017 20: 52
    Quote: xetai9977
    Superjets and Tu in terms of flight comfort do not even stand close to Boeings, and especially Airbus!

    The most comfortable plane, immediately inspiring calm and confidence - IL-86.
  26. +3
    10 September 2017 23: 19
    Incompetence is when people try to neutralize incomprehension or ignorance by doubling their efforts or referring to an extraneous example / experience.
    This is what our young reformers did, they graduated from our universities, then during perestroika they took a two-week / month-long course in Germany and after that they became "great" Economists.
    But even after they committed an abuse of the economy, they did not understand this. But they continue to be listed as smart, and they don’t know the concepts of multi-structured economies.
  27. +2
    11 September 2017 06: 44
    People, and whoever says it’s for sure, and the weaponry section is exactly
    1. +1
      11 September 2017 08: 01
      Quote: magirus401
      this is definitely VO, and the weaponry section is exactly

      Unfortunately, for sure.

      Have you been here a long time?
      1. 0
        11 September 2017 21: 46
        I visit every day, and this is not the first year, but the quality of articles, authors, and site workers surprise every day, the site went below the baseboard unfortunately
  28. exo
    +3
    11 September 2017 12: 01
    When an article is written by a person who does not know the subject of the article at all, you don’t know whether to cry or laugh.
    Firstly, if you have money, you can easily buy or lease a new plane. What many companies do. For example, S7, received from the factory A-320 NEO
    Secondly: with all due respect to the Soviet aviation industry and the strength of the aircraft, our aircraft carried "themselves."
    I’ll say right away about the TU-204: when compared even with western planes of the mid-80s, it loses in everything. Only the written performance characteristics are beautiful. Performance, terrible. About the PS-90 engine, you can say the Stone Age.
    An-148, not much better. Although, more modern in avionics. By the way, the An-158 was made taking into account all the identified shortcomings and is already more interesting. Could, occupy its own niche.
    Superjet is perhaps our most successful project. Cooperation with Western manufacturers was not in vain.
    The trick is that virtually no one in the world creates good planes and engines alone.
    It is possible to make an airplane for sale within the country by closing an external market for airlines to buy. But in the presence of competition, all Russian planes will lose much to the western ones. And most likely, they will try to change them right away.
  29. 0
    11 September 2017 14: 56
    In the north, better than the An-24 has not yet been invented
    1. 0
      11 September 2017 21: 48
      I think the AN-72, 74 will be better
  30. +5
    11 September 2017 14: 57
    I love such articles .. The quintessence of idiocy .. Also, how much work and perseverance you need to have to write such nonsense ..
  31. 0
    11 September 2017 15: 13
    Quote: Kashchenko
    I love such articles .. The quintessence of idiocy .. Also, how much work and perseverance you need to have to write such nonsense ..

    Quintessence. I apologize ..
  32. +3
    11 September 2017 16: 10
    Quote: Author: Oleg Usik
    The first thing that catches your eye is the low location of the engines under the wings and the low clearance from the bottom of the “engines” to the ground in foreign aircraft

    what
    yes

    not ... of course

    but

    The placement of engines on pylons under the wing is widely used on modern heavy subsonic aircraft.

    Such a scheme has the following advantages:

    - engines unload the wing structure in flight, reducing the bending moment from external loads;

    - engines are anti-flatter balancers and at the same time dampen wing vibrations when flying in a turbulent atmosphere;

    - provides ease of maintenance of the engine and its replacement (including a different size);

    - reliable isolation of the source of fire on the engine from the wing with the help of fire barriers in the pylon;

    - provides less noise from engines in the passenger compartment;

    - provides better than on engines installed in the root of the wing, the insulation of the aircraft structure from the sound effects of jet jets of engines;

    - favorable conditions are created for the installation of engines with reverse thrust and sound attenuation.
    +
    Service and control



    Along with the above advantages, the placement of engines on pylons under the wing has the following disadvantages:

    - in case of engine failure, especially the external one, a large turning moment is created in the horizontal plane;

    - when landing with a roll, the presence of a lower pylon engine mount (to avoid touching the ground) requires an increase in the transverse V wing, which affects the stability and controllability of the aircraft;

    - the low location of the engines relative to the surface of the aerodrome increases the possibility of foreign objects entering the air intakes;

    Quote: Author: Oleg Usik
    There is no need to talk about the maximum speed of airplanes - for example, the Tu-154 has 950 km / h and the An-148 has 870 km / h.


    look at the train (cruising altitude) and everything will become clear

    Quote: Author: Oleg Usik
    As you know, they cannot normally land on unprepared and unpaved airfields

    lol


    Quote: Author: Oleg Usik
    In addition, at temperatures below -30 degrees Celsius, Boeing, Bombardier and other Western liners also cannot be operated.

    fool
    1. Intercontinental flight for 7-15 hours
    Overboard about t -50 grs to -65 grs
    2.year norms
    Tu-134: from +45 to -50. In flight to -70.
    B737 from +54 to -54. In flight to -73.
    Cold-weather testing for the Airbus A350


    Airbus A350 XWB

    Well:
    1. +3
      12 September 2017 01: 04
      Such a scheme has the following advantages: ...

      These are advantages and disadvantages compared to engines at the root of the wing, for example, from http://lektsiopedia.org/lek-33244.html.
      Compared with a typical late-Soviet scheme, like the Tu-13 (5) 4, IL-62, there will be many other advantages and disadvantages - this scheme has an advantage in controllability when one of the engines fails and objects from the strip are usually not sucked, but difficulties with balancing, weight, controllability due to the shift of the center of gravity to the tail and others. The specified address has a lot about it. Apparently, the low wing with motors under the wing (which are usually also lower than the fuselage and quite durable) has an advantage in safety when landing without a chassis “on the belly”.
      1. 0
        12 September 2017 11: 13
        Quote: Falcon5555
        Compared with a typical late Soviet scheme

        this is a generic circuit


        Quote: Falcon5555
        and objects from the strip usually do not get sucked

        they are not sucked in anyway

        1. 0
          12 September 2017 21: 28
          this is a generic circuit

          What kind of "general type" scheme is this when in the 90s, in the zero, and I strongly suspect that in the 80s, and maybe in the 70s, only the USSR-Russia massively exploited such aircraft, and the West generally no longer used. The Americans quickly slipped through the Boeing 727 and apparently quickly got rid of them, and the Soviet Union stuck on a similar pattern. Apparently stagnation made itself felt. As in auto technology with its "Lada".
          Partial exception in the west is DC-10. There's one engine in the tail. Maybe this plane is still flying in the states now.
          they are not sucked in anyway

          I think - sucked. Not the splashes raised by the front wheel, but objects at not too high speed, at the beginning of acceleration - ice cream cups, etc.
          1. 0
            12 September 2017 22: 13
            Quote: Falcon5555
            as in the 80-x, and maybe in the 70-x, only the USSR-Russia massively exploited such aircraft,

            what
            Boeing 727, Years of production 1963 - 1984 (1800 units +) was the most popular airliner in the world

            McDonnell Douglas MD-80

            Years of production 1980 - 1999
            Units Produced 1 191
            Boeing 717 (MD-95)

            Years of production 1998 - 2006
            Units produced 156

            Fokker 100

            Years of production 1986 - 1997
            Units produced 283
            well, etc.
            Quote: Falcon5555
            at the beginning of acceleration - ice cream cups, etc.

            is


            resolved
            so-called "self-protected" engines.

            +
            Fighter MIG-29SMT with engines, closed protective panels

            +

            =
            Boeing-737. Regional airfield .....
            1. 0
              12 September 2017 22: 32
              Since the nineties, I personally have not seen any Boeing 727s at western airfields. Although from time to time any small thing similar in scheme to Tu-134 for short flights with a small number of passengers from hubs to small European airfields comes across. Fokker seems to have seen. Still there are similar Embraer. But all this is a rarity.
              PS: More business jets - everything is like a smaller Tu-134. But their chassis height does not allow placing engines under the wing.
              1. 0
                12 September 2017 23: 12
                Quote: Falcon5555
                Since the nineties, I personally have not seen any Boeing-727 on Western airfields

                1. the facts say otherwise
                Boeing 717 (MD-95)
                Quote: opus
                Years of production 1998 - 2006

                etc.
                2. Europa-do not have
                Quote: opus
                general type scheme


                to compare the EU and the United States (+ the rest of America) by aircraft fleet, which is not serious by the number of airfields. there it is like a bus
                McDonnell Douglas MD-80 is not very popular in Europe
                3. I met a lot / flew on what.
                It is enough to jump from Frankfurt-n-M to Zurich or Vienna, or from Munich to Sicily, and fly to Tenerife, but not from Russia
                1. +2
                  13 September 2017 00: 01
                  I believe my eyes, even if some supposedly "facts" allegedly "say" supposedly "the opposite." I also flew from Frankfurt, but I don’t remember McDonnell Douglas MD-80 seeing it live, although I probably saw some similar name among others in these booklet booklets describing the activities of airlines that are in the pockets of seats.
  33. exo
    +1
    11 September 2017 21: 16
    Quote: opus
    Quote: Author: Oleg Usik
    The first thing that catches your eye is the low location of the engines under the wings and the low clearance from the bottom of the “engines” to the ground in foreign aircraft

    what
    yes

    not ... of course

    but

    The placement of engines on pylons under the wing is widely used on modern heavy subsonic aircraft.

    Such a scheme has the following advantages:

    - engines unload the wing structure in flight, reducing the bending moment from external loads;

    - engines are anti-flatter balancers and at the same time dampen wing vibrations when flying in a turbulent atmosphere;

    - provides ease of maintenance of the engine and its replacement (including a different size);

    - reliable isolation of the source of fire on the engine from the wing with the help of fire barriers in the pylon;

    - provides less noise from engines in the passenger compartment;

    - provides better than on engines installed in the root of the wing, the insulation of the aircraft structure from the sound effects of jet jets of engines;

    - favorable conditions are created for the installation of engines with reverse thrust and sound attenuation.
    +
    Service and control



    Along with the above advantages, the placement of engines on pylons under the wing has the following disadvantages:

    - in case of engine failure, especially the external one, a large turning moment is created in the horizontal plane;

    - when landing with a roll, the presence of a lower pylon engine mount (to avoid touching the ground) requires an increase in the transverse V wing, which affects the stability and controllability of the aircraft;

    - the low location of the engines relative to the surface of the aerodrome increases the possibility of foreign objects entering the air intakes;

    Quote: Author: Oleg Usik
    There is no need to talk about the maximum speed of airplanes - for example, the Tu-154 has 950 km / h and the An-148 has 870 km / h.


    look at the train (cruising altitude) and everything will become clear

    Quote: Author: Oleg Usik
    As you know, they cannot normally land on unprepared and unpaved airfields

    lol


    Quote: Author: Oleg Usik
    In addition, at temperatures below -30 degrees Celsius, Boeing, Bombardier and other Western liners also cannot be operated.

    fool
    1. Intercontinental flight for 7-15 hours
    Overboard about t -50 grs to -65 grs
    2.year norms
    Tu-134: from +45 to -50. In flight to -70.
    B737 from +54 to -54. In flight to -73.
    Cold-weather testing for the Airbus A350


    Airbus A350 XWB

    Well:

    I will add: with the correctly designed form of the nacelle, the engine located on the wing (more precisely, under the wing) sucks in much less rubbish than the engines of the same Tu-154 and Tu-134. Which get their share of garbage from the chassis. Even the mud shield on the front support, it doesn’t help much. Here, only couch theorists are not aware of this.
    By the way, this does not apply to the Tu-204/214. This one really sucks all the muck. And for some reason the inkjet protection, the Design Bureau, decided to turn it off. Without explaining the reasons.
    1. +1
      12 September 2017 11: 09
      Quote: exo
      wing mounted engine

      Sometimes it happens

      but in general, I welcome this wink

      no problem at all



      Quote: exo
      .A jet protection, KB for some reason decided to disconnect. Without explaining the reasons.

      When starting or landing at a dusty airfield, the pilot covers the air channel in the air intake with a special deflector. This channel has a sharp turn to the entrance to the engine. Particles of dust and sand due to their inertia (the mass is still larger than that of the air) skip this turn and move further to the exit of the channel (usually through an ejector). And the purified air passes into the engine.

      these devices are 100 years old at lunch


      and this is a stupid statement
      Quote: Author: Oleg Usik
      The first thing that catches your eye is the low location of the engines under the wings and the low clearance from the bottom of the “engines” to the ground in foreign aircraft. Indeed, during take-off and landing, there is a high probability of foreign objects getting into the air intake, and this is fraught with disaster. In addition, given our severe weather conditions

      1. exo
        0
        13 September 2017 13: 13
        Well, I clarified further: under the wing :)
        The protection of the TV2 / 3-117 engines is somewhat different. This is happiness, I taught at the school. On the PS-90, this was implemented as on the NK-86. However, in both cases we are talking about power loss in certain modes.
        When I was teaching the PS-90, they told us about the defense in passing: they say it was, but they refused. The reasons were not voiced.
  34. 0
    12 September 2017 15: 47
    What amateurish nonsense ...
    You read this, the feeling that a person has no idea about civil aviation in general - that is, not even a loader.
    Tu-204 has trouble engines - frequent failures.
    The Tu-204 crashed in Vnukovo - the limit switches didn’t work: “On January 24, 2013, the IAC informed about the results of a preliminary analysis of the disaster information. During landing, both main landing gear bearings were not compressed at the same time, because of which there was no automatic release of air brakes and interceptors, and also, the flaps of the reversible engine shutters did not occur, despite the crew repeatedly moving the reverse control lever to the “maximum reverse” position. The crew did not release spoilers in manual mode The aircraft continued to move with alternating compression of the left and right landing gear legs, as if “shifting from one foot to another.” Wheel braking was ineffective - pressure was applied to the wheel brakes only during compression of the landing gear. "
    A familiar pilot flying a Tu-154B immediately named the cause of the accident - the trailer switches that didn’t work did it mean that the quality of the Tu-204?
  35. +1
    13 September 2017 08: 59
    What is the article not clear about at all? ... say that Boeings and Airbuses are bad planes? Stupidly, the vast majority of airlines in the world almost flies on these machines, and there are no ideal machines .. but they are made for the conditions for which they are bought, modern airports and the world are trying to create excellent tracks and coverings .. and our only to adapt under the conditions of soil surfaces .. to compare our aircraft industry with them does not make sense at all. there they make 20 cars a month .. and we have 12 a year with wild attempts
  36. +1
    13 September 2017 09: 53
    Oleg Usik, where do you live?
    How can you come and piss your face for this "article"?
    Of course, I wouldn’t give a damn about your chest, but shit is a pity. For the mat sorry
  37. +1
    13 September 2017 10: 25
    What bad planes are doing in Europe and the USA is even amazing.
    1. 0
      15 October 2017 23: 22
      They just don't know it. So they mold non-competitive products
  38. +2
    13 September 2017 10: 40
    Yes, probably not that we basically have bad planes. And the fact is that our marketers-economists-engineers-politicians cannot work in one bundle to make a balanced product and effectively market it. Our aircraft industry is a continuous chain of missed opportunities. For example, the An-2 modernization project, isn’t it good? Where have you been before? Well, there was no demand in Russia, but in the rest of the world there are dozens, if not hundreds, of AN-2s. The same with the Yak-42, Yak-40, Tu-154. The same with the IL-96. I’ll tell you the secret to the carrier, in fact, deeply do not give a damn about how many engines the plane has, at least 4 even 8. The carrier must earn money. He needs the efficiency of an airplane. If the IL-96 loses in fuel and downtime on the ground, then there should be an effective service system and a low lease payment that compensates for the shortcomings.
  39. 0
    13 September 2017 19: 43
    In 2016, Russia produced 30 civilian aircraft. While the Boeing is more than 700, and the Airbus is more than 500! Well, what cries about the formation of civil aviation can be!
    1. 0
      17 September 2017 22: 31
      MS 21 will re-compete. But they will buy these
  40. +1
    15 September 2017 21: 01
    The attack on the Russian aviation industry in the early 90s was deliberately and deliberately dealt, as well as in many other high-tech industries of our country. The goal is clear. To transform Russia from a country producing end-to-end modern products into a resource supplier country. Competitors in the form of TU, ​​IL, YAK are not needed in the West. Moreover, a sufficiently capacious market of the Russian Federation was cleared for Western manufacturers. Domestic large business was focused on obtaining super-profits from the sale of resources, and did not and does not show interest in the field of civil aircraft construction. And in truth, why invest a lot of money in long-term projects with returns incomparable with the sale of the same oil. For capitalists, this is normal, for the interests of our state in today's situation it is not permissible. I think no one needs to explain how important air transportation is for us, given the size and security of the country. Therefore, the restoration and further development of civil aircraft industry should be a priority. This is not only our economic independence. These are thousands of new jobs, this is the development of advanced technologies, this is the development of related industries, this is the renewal of the fleet. Well, you need to return the lost markets abroad. The task is difficult, but with the manifestation of the will of the state is quite feasible. We are not starting from scratch.
    1. exo
      +1
      21 September 2017 12: 59
      It’s not true, at least in civil aviation. Our design bureaus simply did not want to change anything in their work style. And they believed that the airlines would fly on what they were given. Until the last they did not believe that it was unlikely that anyone would decide to change the Soviet system. O., to the west. It is insanely expensive. All the staff had to be taught English. A new certification. Yes, and more stringent Western requirements, forced to buy airlines and technical centers, new expensive equipment.
      By the way, now the situation with Tupolev is no better.
      Talking about the advantages of the Soviet system of civil aviation, can only one who was not able to compare it with the West.
      But, from the point of view of the country's defense, Western planes are evil. Then, one must choose on which rails the country: military or peaceful. This is such a contradiction.
  41. +2
    17 September 2017 22: 23
    ZVO,
    I will not argue to no avail. I did not stand in the aisles. I fly economy class. I liked Transaero
  42. 0
    4 December 2017 09: 45
    There is nothing to expect that after this very clever and fair article, at least something will change. While at the helm these type of "economists" - nothing will happen. They will continue to spread rot on their own industry, so as to fill OUR money with the bourgeoisie in foreign countries, but they are ordered by puppeteers.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"