Military Review

I do not want to be an air carrier or a couple of words to domestic aviation officials

539
About two years ago I already performed with similar material. It is clear that this did not bring any result, but repetition is sometimes necessary. Especially in light of what is happening.




We have obvious problems in the air. And, unfortunately, not only in the military, but also in civil terms. One of our readers rightly remarked that if "Tu" had fallen, then there would have been a cry on the subject that we were flying to old ones. So raised. And the "carcass" was removed from the airline.

But instead of a normal program for the development of the domestic aircraft industry, for some reason, they rushed to buy Boeings and Airbuses. Naturally, used. Let's look at our Aeroflot for an example.

The first digit shows how many aircraft are in operation, the second - how many are ordered.

Airbus A319-100 - 4 / 0
Airbus A320-200 - 63 / 14
Airbus A321-200 - 26 / 8
Airbus A330-200 - 5 / 0
Airbus A330-300 - 17 / 0
Airbus A350-800 - 0 / 4
Airbus A350-900 - 0 / 18
Boeing 737-800-12- 17/0
Boeing 737-900ER- 0 / 15
Boeing 777-300ER- 13-3
Sukhoi Superjet 100 - 21 / 29
Irkut MC-21 - 0 / 50

Total 161 aircraft, of which domestic 21. Ordered 158, domestic 79. A bit better.

But this is Aeroflot. They started with him, they need to continue.

The problem is in our aviationrather, not even in airplanes, but in the organization of civil aviation in Russia.

When the Soviet Union was gone, the single Aeroflot was divided, by Primitisation, into dozens, if not hundreds, of airlines. It seems that everything should be like in the enlightened West, competition and everything else. But no one thought at the time whether these companies would be capable.

Our readers, who with the sky "on you", I think, will not be strongly against my opinion. Its essence is that the airline (if it is) is obliged not only to sell tickets and pay for fuel and services of dispatchers, but also to train specialists: pilots, engineers, technicians. That is, take care of the trouble-free operation of its equipment. On time and efficiently maintain and repair it. Improve repair and service bases.

And most importantly, in time to update the fleet.

With the destruction of civil aviation, aviation civil aircraft construction collapsed, and aircraft factories and design offices closed. Our VASO, a huge aircraft manufacturing plant, is in a state of "rather dead than alive."

In general, everything that happens reminds of a Soviet-era anecdote, when a grocery store asks a saleswoman if there is black caviar. She says no, because no one asks her.

So it is with our civil aircraft. Indeed, why deal with the Balashikha plant about the UG151 unit for IL-96? We will ban its operation, and buy new Boeing and Airbus. Who can. Thin reservation.

We have dozens of small carriers in our country, such as the airline Kogalymavia, whose plane crashed in Egypt, having up to 10 aircraft. And what? Journalists have already extracted the entire track record of this "Airbus". The A321 aircraft with the 663 tail number was released 18 a half years ago, and was operated by several foreign companies, including Malaysian Airlines, before entering Russia. And already had an accident in the same Cairo.

Can these pseudo carriers afford to buy new planes? We see the answer on the example of "Kogalymavia". Tragic example. But maybe, at least he will make our aviation officials think.

It is necessary to stop with a large variety of air carriers in Russia, ideally return to one state-owned airline, which Aeroflot has been for many years. Did the whole Union fly Aeroflot airplanes? And then let Russia fly. Enough to produce incomprehensible "low-cost airlines" and other figures from aviation.

The security of Russian citizens must be ensured at the state level. Now, of course, the relatives of the victims will be compensated. Will they help them a lot? Compensation is good, I agree, but isn't it better to compensate in advance the possibility of the need to pay compensation? Highlighting, for example, money for new aircraft.

Speaking of new aircraft. The question arises, why do our aviation guardians hate our aircraft builders so much? Why is it so easy to give up ours in favor of foreign? Is A320 so younger and more perfect than the IL-96 that the use of Ela is not at all? So it seems to be IL-96, even younger will be like a model. And none of my friends who flew on it said a word about the fact that there is no comfort. On the contrary.

Mr. Khristenko, the former Minister of Industry in 2009, decided to discontinue the Il-96-300 passenger aircraft, since the liner "not able to compete with the latest long-haul passenger aircraft of the companies Boeing and Airbus". Mr. Khristenko is no longer in the ministry, but the situation remains the same.

In general, nothing but another betrayal of national interests, I would not describe it.

Mr. Khristenko needed some kind of competition there. And so he with one stroke of the pen sentenced several factories building airplanes. And at the same time, a certain number of people in Russia who will break up in ancient aircraft.

Result: VASO, where the "Elah" was produced, is worth American workers in Detroit get paid, and I, as a potential client of the airline, have to risk my life in a twenty-four-year-old Boeing or Airbus, with tail baked after the accident and other amenities. Well, thanks.

Actually, after an emergency landing at Pulkovo, the flight Rostov-on-Don - Kaliningrad in 2003 on a Boeing-737, you can't drag me into a plane (especially Boeing, especially an ancient one). And my three friends, whom I picked up from Lipetsk, because the Saab flight from St. Petersburg - Voronezh to Voronezh clearly did not reach. And flopped in Lipetsk. Successfully, at least, thanks to the pilots.

The question arises: is the new IL uncompetitive compared to Boeing, which is slightly less years old than me? It is quite competitive. Because new.

The president talked a lot about import substitution. How about the necessary details of the development of the country in a crisis. Isn't it time to seriously think about the import substitution of used foreign aircraft to domestic ones? At VASO, paradoxically, for serial production of "IL-96-300" is everything. And machines, and tooling, and, most importantly, people. They have not fled yet, although many were called to Samara and to Ulyanovsk. They get mere pennies, but they don’t run away anywhere, because apart from collecting planes, they are no longer taught anything.

In addition, for all history the use of IL-96 was registered only one emergency when the Aeroflot plane burned down. For an unknown reason, in the parking lot. No casualties. Yes, all 28 aircraft were released, but this is still an indicator. Cubans, by the way, exploit the "IL-96" and do not cry. And Putin, by the way, too.

And the history of the use of the predecessor, "IL-86", which was made more than a hundred, is also remarkable. For 21 year of operation of the entire 4 PE. In which 22 (twenty-two) people died. In three, moreover, the fault was the gross mistakes of the crew, in the fourth case on the "Ela" fell "Boeing". That is, for the 21 year a single accident for technical reasons.

And compare with the data on the "Boeing" and "Airbus".

It is clear that they were released a lot more, but there are enough accidents for technical reasons. So there is something to think about.

I am sure that our planes are no worse than American and European ones. Comfort and other show-off are organized in the course of production. This is not the reason for the Russians to constantly risk their lives on ancient flying aircraft-cemeteries of foreign manufacture.

And one more consideration. Who do you think is easier, cheaper and better can be serviced / repaired? "Boeing" or "IL"? Rhetorical question in my opinion.

I will sum up some written.

1. Russia needs a state-owned airline and a state guarantee of our air safety.

2. Russia needs to revive not just a civilian fleet, as it was in the USSR, but to revive it in a pattern and likeness, to revive the system of personnel training, the system of training and maintenance of aircraft.

3. Russia needs a park new domestic aircraft. To be fed by updating the fleet should be Russian aircraft builders, and not officials involved in contracts for the supply of aviahlama from the bounty of the West.

But this requires a tough political will of the Russian leadership.

We wait. Sincerely hoping that this will not require another tragedy. Are looking forward to.
Author:
539 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. NKVD
    NKVD 1 November 2015 05: 31 New
    -179
    Author, do not run ahead of the cart! The investigation has just begun, there are still no conclusions.
    1. afdjhbn67
      afdjhbn67 1 November 2015 05: 53 New
      201
      Quote: NKVD
      Author, do not run forward carts!

      Yes, if I had run .. the problem has long existed and therefore, against the backdrop of the tragedy, the article is especially hard on the nerves ..
      1. Enot-poloskun
        Enot-poloskun 1 November 2015 07: 49 New
        89
        Sick !!!

        This is not the first plane to crash in recent years. I hope the last ...

        It is time to return the airline industry to state control. Leave 2-3 Airlines. State. One for domestic flights. Others are for foreign.

        What is this Kagalymavia? What the hell is this? And they are not the only ones ... Hired an old rotten plane, chopped loot, saving on security!

        18 years the plane was operated! And most of them are abroad!

        It is also necessary to refuse leasing of foreign junk. And do the production of their civilian aircraft.
        1. vladimirZ
          vladimirZ 1 November 2015 07: 58 New
          87
          The problem is in our aviation, rather not even in airplanes, but in the organization of Russian civil aviation.
          .
          It is necessary to stop with a large variety of air carriers in Russia, ideally to return to one state-owned airline, which Aeroflot has been for many years. Did the entire Union fly Aeroflot airplanes? And then let Russia fly. Enough to produce incomprehensible "low-cost airlines" and other figures from aviation.
          - from an article by Roman Skomorokhov

          That's right, Roman Skomorokhov !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
          For Russia, with its boundless expanses, on which very few people live, but where “it is only possible to fly by plane”, and flights there are obviously unprofitable, the presence of dozens, if not hundreds of private airline campaigns, is state stupidity.
          Therefore, in Russia, all inter-regional and intra-regional air transportation has practically ceased.
          Therefore, for the sake of profit, aviation safety is neglected in all air campaigns.
          Civil aviation in Russia is in a miserable state, there is practically no building of its own aircraft, and flight and engineering personnel are not being prepared in the right amount, ...
          It is time for the Russian leadership to discard all the liberal cracking and think, finally, about the revival of civil aviation on a planned state basis. By and large, the death of people in a plane crash last quarter century, on the conscience of Russian leaders.
          It is necessary to stop this criminal variety of private air carriers.

          And finally it came to Russian lawmakers.
          The head of the State Duma committee on international affairs, Alexei Pushkov, proposed reducing the number of air carriers in Russia to two or three. He said this on the air of the Russian News Service. According to him, "this is the area in which the state should intervene". - information Newspaper.Ru
          1. Enot-poloskun
            Enot-poloskun 1 November 2015 08: 36 New
            129
            I would like to add the following thesis.

            Transport for Russia (rail, air, etc.) is not just a branch, but in no small measure a means of ensuring economic growth and development of the country!

            Remember: in the USSR, the unprofitability of passenger rail transport was offset by the profitability of freight. No one thought about making profit from the trains! We thought that they provide mobility for people who can provide economic growth! Jobs and so on!

            And now we are fixated on making a profit! It is not right.

            It must be said once and for all: transport in Russia is for people and for the development of the economy. Transport in Russia - should be under state control.
            1. Vasilenko Vladimir
              Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 09: 03 New
              22
              Quote: Enot-poloskun
              Remember: in the USSR, the unprofitability of passenger rail transport was offset by the profitability of freight. No one thought about making profit from the trains! We thought that they provide mobility for people who can provide economic growth! Jobs and so on!

              And now we are fixated on making a profit! It is not right.

              it only works when everything is in one hand
              after all, it was like that everywhere that the children's assortment was subsidized, in Central Asia they set up enterprises that never went to industrial capacity but at the same time gave jobs to the local population
              1. Baikonur
                Baikonur 1 November 2015 09: 47 New
                25
                In fact, everything is simple: No matter how many airlines, shipowners, meat processing plants, etc.!
                It is important that the PERSONAL responsibility of directors, technologists (PHIZHLITS) with full confiscation of property is restored! Then they will tremble and do whatever is necessary for the safety and health of those for whom they work!
                1. Igor Nikonov
                  Igor Nikonov 1 November 2015 11: 11 New
                  +5
                  You will not find directors.
                  1. SAN31
                    SAN31 1 November 2015 20: 27 New
                    +5
                    We find, and worthy of their cause. Yes, we will not look for any trash.
                  2. Baikonur
                    Baikonur 1 November 2015 20: 45 New
                    +6
                    Quote: Igor Nikonov
                    You will not find directors.
                    It's Easy!
                    If a person is happy for his job, if it is important for him, he has the honor (and not money) to do his job correctly, without a hitch, without a hitch, then he is at least a locksmith, even a director! And the Shvets, and the reaper, and the igrets on the pipe, and the pilot on the plane, and the jailer on the tank and the swimmer on the steamer! And the Director - stoyets !!!
                    And then (when the PERSONAL, PERSONAL MATERIAL, MORAL responsibility of the locksmith who manufactured the part; the cleaners who washed the floors well / poorly; the director, managing 100 or 1000 or 10000 people), when it comes (albeit first by force), but eventually in the generations of the pope , mothers will be more and more children about conscience, honesty, professionalism, work,
                    ABOUT RESPONSIBILITY TO ENVIRONMENT, NEARBY, BROTHER, OWN, FRIENDS !!!
                    ACCEPT AND RELATE TO OTHERS AS WAY YOU WANT TO RELATE TO YOU !!!
                    And to write in the elevator - to harm others, neighbors - SHAME!
                    1. Baikonur
                      Baikonur 1 November 2015 21: 30 New
                      +1
                      Damn, I missed the comma!

                      GO AND RELAX TO OTHERS (,) AS YOU WANT TO RELATE TO YOU !!!

                      That is - the power of the RUSSIAN COMMAND !!!
                      Execution cannot be pardoned!
                      You can’t leave work!
                2. Cap.Morgan
                  Cap.Morgan 1 November 2015 11: 13 New
                  11
                  Hiring the Chairs.
                  Rewrite the property on the mother-in-law. But you never know ...
                3. Lenin
                  Lenin 1 November 2015 14: 06 New
                  10
                  It is also true, but in part. People from super-profits just tear the roof and they did not care about responsibility.
                4. asher
                  asher 1 November 2015 15: 30 New
                  10
                  True capitalists for the sake of profit and they will not spare their mother and they will climb into the loop themselves.
                5. SAN31
                  SAN31 1 November 2015 20: 25 New
                  +3
                  In principle, Yes, but not enough. For those in power, there must be a direct responsibility to people! Around like in Japan, or sepuco or went down.
                  1. boris117
                    boris117 1 November 2015 21: 33 New
                    +4
                    "Russia needs a state airline and a state guarantee of our air security." There are industries where the state should be the determining player. Aviation is a high-tech field that determines the technical level of a country. Hoping for a private trader or a foreign fleet of aircraft bought for petrodollars is naive, or rather a crime.
                6. dvg79
                  dvg79 2 November 2015 08: 51 New
                  +6
                  As IVS said, every mistake has a name, surname and patronymic. Responsibility must be restored in all areas of life, otherwise it will get worse.
                7. AlexeyL
                  AlexeyL 2 November 2015 13: 14 New
                  +3
                  My opinion is this: I, you and others elect the leaders of the state so that, in particular, they ensure our security, welfare, etc. But at the moment, or rather, since the 90s, the state has withdrawn, giving it all to private hands (such as the pension system). The same is true in aviation. How the state can be held accountable for that uncle. Only conditionally.
                  And airline executives have one goal - profit. And everything else is secondary, serves to serve the main purpose.
              2. asher
                asher 1 November 2015 15: 28 New
                25
                Central Asia is different. I worked for 7 years at the largest aviation association in Tashkent. Five IL-76 per month plan is much more powerful. And the local population is half Russian and 90% Russian-speaking. Now, in the place of the giant of the aviation industry, ruins, the population makes good money on shift and other earnings. And for the time being, the entire accident rate is yet to come. I’m now connected with a piece of iron and see how much has been done in recent years for collapse and destruction for the sake of the same superprofits.
              3. 44 World
                44 World 1 November 2015 22: 49 New
                +1
                In Russia 24 and Russia1 publish the names of 217 passengers who died in this disaster, I have a question why crew members are not being added to them ???
                1. TRex
                  TRex 2 November 2015 15: 53 New
                  +1
                  Crew members are being added because “Kogalymavia” paid their salary only for July ... So they are not “on the lists” yet in August, September and October. B ....! Pilots pay three months a salary !!! And what about the ground staff and the quality of its work with such bestiality ???
            2. Banshee
              1 November 2015 09: 14 New
              48
              Quote: Enot-poloskun
              Transport for Russia (rail, air, etc.) is not just a branch, but in no small measure a means of ensuring economic growth and development of the country!


              Just like that, subscribe to every word. Too long distances for transportation to be super profitable.

              In general, Russia is such a unique phenomenon that some things simply have to be under the control of the state. Otherwise, the beginning of lawlessness begins.
              1. stalkerwalker
                stalkerwalker 1 November 2015 12: 53 New
                32
                Quote: Banshee
                Otherwise, uniform chaos begins.

                Novel....
                It (lawlessness) began, and not even yesterday.
                I'm just too lazy to dig around and collect materials on the status of such an industry as the navy. There are problems everywhere - from the training system to local administration. Visible everywhere hand of Moscowno matter how loud it sounds.
                These Moscow managers from the main altar, equipped with enormous powers, money and arrogance, arrive in their places and begin to managering so that the howl rises.
                Short.
                There is no modern fleet. And nobody builds it, they don’t order abroad. Even in China.
                Nautical schools are only renamed.
                A former captain, one of the most competent specialists in the North-West of Russia, is working in the Arkhangelsk seafarer, for 18 tons per month - as an example.
                40% of graduates of naval schools in their specialty were not going to work initially, and the money was spent.
                The old fleet - the average age of the courts of the Russian Federation is more than 24 years.
                Etc. etc.
                hi
                1. navigator
                  navigator 1 November 2015 17: 40 New
                  10
                  Quote: stalkerwalker
                  There is no modern fleet. And nobody builds it, they don’t order abroad. Even in China. Nautical schools are only renaming. A former captain, one of the most competent specialists in the North-West of Russia, works in the Arkhangelsk seafarer for 18 tons a month - as an example. 40% of graduates of naval schools by profession did not intend to work initially, and the money was spent. The fleet is old - the average age of the courts of the Russian Federation - more than 24 years. etc. etc.


                  In Murmansk, the same thing. Yes, and throughout the country it would be strange if it were different. Everything collapsed at the same time.
                2. The comment was deleted.
                3. AlexeyL
                  AlexeyL 2 November 2015 13: 19 New
                  +4
                  In the river fleet, the situation is even worse. We can say that he disappears. You can write to the Red Book
              2. Lenin
                Lenin 1 November 2015 14: 14 New
                18
                It begins to put it mildly, the whole country has long been living in this lawlessness, already from the 90s. A simple example with the sale of US shares in the unique production of quartz in Gus-Khrustalny. The best quartz in the world were and the whole defense industry worked for them. Therefore, we have long been living in lawlessness. But a fresh example, in Pyatigorsk we decided to sell unique baleos and mud baths. Since tsarist times, no one has encroached on them, people from all over the country go for treatment, because it’s useful, affordable and there are no analogues in the world since the water is unique .. But what will happen now ... or is the nation’s health not the country's direct security?
              3. nikpwolf
                nikpwolf 1 November 2015 16: 52 New
                +5
                Quote: Banshee
                In general, Russia is such a unique phenomenon that some things simply have to be under the control of the state. Otherwise, the beginning of lawlessness begins.

                In fact, everything should be under state control. Here, however, control is control by discord. Everything rests on the identity of controllers, controllers of controllers and heads of controllers of controllers, as well as in those who control them. These personalities, from here to the "sky", all in all, form the structure of state control. State activities are determined by law. The state is the law. And how this law is observed is an indicator of the health and strength of the state. And what's the difference, in one airline the law will be violated (for whose benefit, it doesn’t matter) or in a dozen? In fact, we need a set of legislative measures aimed at ensuring the safety of transportation (limiting the life of ships, the admission of summer personnel, personal responsibility at all levels, including in permitting structures, etc., etc.), and not exclusively on the notorious "profitability" and profitability. First life and safety, then money. And compliance with the law. The bottom line is the duty of the state to stop ghouls (whoever they are) earning loot for the lives and health of citizens. You can’t organize it - don’t fly. Absolutely. You can - please. At least 10, at least 50 companies, public or private. And all this is not only in aviation.
            3. Nikolay K
              Nikolay K 1 November 2015 09: 38 New
              +5
              You do not understand that our market economy and the airline are not appointed by the state, but by PEOPLE voting by the ruble. Especially when it comes to charters. Well, make you airlines buy our new planes, but if they turn out to be uncompetitive, then passengers will still fly other planes, most likely foreign carriers. And our planes will rust, airlines will go bankrupt. The state should not be prohibited and forced, but stimulated. In order for companies to buy domestic aircraft, those must firstly be, not only modern, but also economical. But now the most important thing is not even that. We have crazy loan rates in our country. It is because of this that our companies operate old planes, because for them leasing an 15 summer airplane costs as much as leasing an 5 summer airplane for a European company. It is simply not affordable for us to operate new aircraft. Hence the high accident rate.
              1. Awaz
                Awaz 1 November 2015 10: 08 New
                23
                duck, the author correctly draws attention to the fact that the authorities are stimulating the leasing of foreign used aircraft, absolutely not stimulating their own manufacturer. A very recent topic with Transaero also showed a lot. Of course, the management worked there too, but at least they tried to lease new planes and generally collapsed because of this, but instead of supporting and helping somehow, they took and closed a huge one, which was not bad at all, comparing with the same Kogalymavia company.
                There should be no wild capitalism where everyone survives as best he can. In many industries, even in the west, the state participates in this very market struggle.
                It is a pity for people who die not only from a desire to save money, but also from a negligent attitude of the authorities towards their people.
                1. Nikolay K
                  Nikolay K 1 November 2015 10: 42 New
                  +8
                  Most aircraft are leased, it is a well-established international practice. Aeroflot's superjets are also leased. The state just does not stimulate anything, which is why the old Boeing are leased because the new ones are not affordable and because there are simply no domestic old planes. And new domestic ones are almost equivalent in value to imported ones. If the state wants to develop its own economy, it must solve the problem with credit rates, without which we are not competitive. Air transportation is a prime example.
              2. Igor Nikonov
                Igor Nikonov 1 November 2015 11: 52 New
                +1
                Quote: Cap.Morgan
                Hiring the Chairs.
                Rewrite the property on the mother-in-law. But you never know ...

                Well, yes. "Director of Technical Issues - Chief Engineer" - a seasoned layman will be.
              3. Igor Nikonov
                Igor Nikonov 1 November 2015 11: 59 New
                +2
                Nikolay K RU Today, 09:38 ↑
                "... We have crazy loan rates in the country. It is because of this that our companies operate old planes, because leasing a 15 year old plane costs them the same as leasing a 5 year old one for a European company ..." uh, what’s in rubles take a loan?
                1. SAN31
                  SAN31 1 November 2015 20: 34 New
                  +4
                  And you don’t have to buy a western one; you exchanged your aircraft industry for 30 pieces of silver.
                  They have their own planes, they do not allow to run into a series - corruptible skins. This can be understood, 3% of their ships in the sky and that is the legacy of the Great Motherland! Administrators dragged the country !!! Where did our oligarchs come from - Did the merchants inherit ??? Where is our IL-96 ????
                  1. doxtop
                    doxtop 2 November 2015 00: 41 New
                    0
                    Quote: SAN31
                    Where is our IL-96 ????

                    Dear!
                    I beg you, do not rush into the mass accusation of everyone and everything! This has long been clear to hedgehogs that in the real world, commercial profit means everything, well, or almost everything. And everyone seeks to earn more.
                    To the question "why abandoned our aircraft industry?" There is one banal (albeit unpleasant to me) answer - in the USSR, and then in Russia, the domestic engine industry always lagged behind the western one. Yes it is true, and yes, it is regrettable. If in the USSR this was not of particular importance (higher fuel consumption was always compensated by state subsidies), in modern Russia fuel economy came out on one of the first (if not first) place. In fact ... having the most beautiful, extremely reliable and unpretentious IL-96, we at the same time have 10-15% more fuel consumption, and that’s many, many thousands of "unsaved" money.
                    As a result ... after the collapse of the USSR, it became more profitable for passenger air carriers to buy a Boeing or Airbus, because a year on fuel economy it gave a significant article to the company's budget. No! I am not talking about the fact that there was no need to abandon attempts to modernize Ila. It just turned out that redesigning the same IL-96 under two more powerful and economical engines, like the B-757, or A-330 (than the 4th from the basic modification of Ilyusha) is not economically profitable for any company. Rather, the design bureau could carry out such modernization, only the cost of updating and reworking existing aircraft would have turned out in such a “penny” that no airline would have bought it.
                    And yet ... there is a way! And he has long been found! ;)
                    The IL-96s family, or rather, the experience in the production of these aircraft has not been lost and is now being used again. The existing fleet of the 96s began to be redone (according to the defense state order) from tanker planes for the needs of the East Kazakhstan region. The PS-90 engines currently available are being processed to meet increased requirements and meet modern conditions for cost-effectiveness (take at least the PS-90A-76 for the IL-76MD-90A) ... I don’t think in the not too distant future we will hear about the existence of modifications of this engine in the form of (let's say) - PS-90A-96, or whatever it may be. It may also become finite that one of the PD-96 variants will be installed on the IL-14e.
                    In addition ... the creation of a new long-haul airliner is a very troublesome and costly business (under current conditions) and in order to reduce financial costs it is simply necessary to cooperate with anyone. What we are already successfully implementing together with some representatives of other countries in the MS-21 project. In addition, an intergovernmental agreement was signed between Russia and China on the creation by 2020 of a new long-haul airliner with 250-320 seats. According to rumors :) not verified infa ... but having the right to exist ... Perm Aviadvigatel has already been entrusted with designing a new type of turbofan engine with an operational thrust of about 30-35 ton-forces (a direct competitor to Trent and GE-90 engines) .
                    So, even after the collapse of the Union, the acquisition of Western airliners was justified, but now the situation has nevertheless (albeit slowly, but still) begun to change.
                    In general ... "wait and see," as they say.
                    :)
                    1. mervino2007
                      mervino2007 3 November 2015 15: 36 New
                      +2
                      Quote: doxtop
                      An intergovernmental agreement was signed between Russia and China on the creation by 2020 of a new long-haul airliner with 250-320 seats.

                      Well, well, actually - we’ll give the Chinese the technology for building wide-body aircraft (IL96-300). And that’s all over.
                      doxtop, tell me, where did you get data on the low profitability of IL96-300? The man who once piloted the IL96-300 from Moscow to New York told me that when the American service staff at the New York Airport checked the remaining fuel in the tanks of the IL96-300, I was very surprised at this. These guys said that the Boeing is a classmate of the IL96-300, flies in on crumbs of fuel, and yours has a solid balance. It seems that the low efficiency of our aircraft is a myth that Boeing needs and is organized with their money.
                2. bornikrub
                  bornikrub 2 November 2015 07: 18 New
                  +1
                  This is true, the nationalization of the Central Bank is indispensable.
              4. Bayun
                Bayun 1 November 2015 12: 41 New
                28
                If your wife cooks a tasteless soup - this is not a reason to eat with a neighbor;) There are areas of life where the words "competition", "economy" are not applicable. ANY foreign technology with electronics can be turned off at the request of the manufacturer. What, at all, economy, when it comes to everyday security.
                1. dali
                  dali 1 November 2015 15: 03 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Bayun
                  If your wife cooks a tasteless soup - this is not a reason to eat with a neighbor;)
                  Well said ... add only:

                  If your wife cooks a tasteless soup - this is not a reason to eat with a neighbor, and a reason to find a way to teach how to cook delicious !!!
                  1. a housewife
                    a housewife 1 November 2015 19: 17 New
                    +3
                    Or cook yourself.
                    1. dali
                      dali 2 November 2015 00: 01 New
                      0
                      Quote: housewife
                      Or cook yourself.
                      As they say in taste and color ... so there are enough ways to solve the problem ...
                2. viktor561
                  viktor561 2 November 2015 01: 27 New
                  +1
                  About soup and wife - it's cool ++++
              5. perm23
                perm23 1 November 2015 13: 26 New
                0
                Maybe just the leaders of such companies need to think in their pocket how to fill it up thicker and faster, and about people. Then the cranes will not fall and planes.
                1. asher
                  asher 1 November 2015 15: 37 New
                  +3
                  And they just think about people, about themselves and their loved ones, that they will have a lot of due to saving on the safety of others, too, sort of like people.
                2. cuzmin.mihail2013
                  cuzmin.mihail2013 1 November 2015 21: 38 New
                  +3
                  The current "leaders" will never think about security. As well as reducing the cost of transportation.
                  They will not think of their immediate subordinates. There can be no talk of any TB or any kind of social support (well, if only, the promise of a social package of services when hiring). Argument one: "Do not like it - get out! There are others."
                  Here they are. And, then the crew did not undergo a pre-flight medical examination for alcohol, then the driver of the snow blower left the runway, then ...
                  In principle, even if there will be only one airline in Russia, I am sure that the similar style of work of managers will be the same. An example is Russian Railways !!!
                  The whole system of the current Russian state is a mixture of the worst principles of work under the tsarist, capitalist and socialist system. And without her cardinal change, not a damn good.
                  No references to examples of “developed” countries are good. This is Russia gentlemen !!!
              6. Lenin
                Lenin 1 November 2015 14: 16 New
                10
                Do not confuse a market economy with a selling one. In Russia there is no and there is no market economy, no where in the world there is no such pricing. hi
              7. asher
                asher 1 November 2015 15: 35 New
                0
                Yes yes - the invisible hand of the market, market economy and other delights. Not to mention democracy. We all vote, who ruble, who ass, and someone listening and eating does not get drunk. State regulation just cuts off the activities of such cheap and insecure companies. Let the planes be ours, let the tickets be more expensive, BUT security is higher.
            4. Nikolay K
              Nikolay K 1 November 2015 10: 53 New
              -4
              Monopolization of the market will lead to higher prices. You can certainly get airlines to buy new planes. But will you be willing to pay 3 times more for airline tickets? As you rightly said, for Russia with its territories, transport, especially aviation, is a priority. Now imagine if even now we have people hovering for several days in a reserved seat car or dying on our broken highways, because they cannot afford to fly by air, then what kind of “progress” will come if air tickets go up in price by three times? The problem is big, but you won’t solve it with a wave of checkers.
              1. Felix
                Felix 1 November 2015 12: 19 New
                +6
                Quote: Nikolai K
                Monopolization of the market will lead to higher prices. You can certainly get airlines to buy new planes. But will you be willing to pay 3 times more for airline tickets? As you rightly said, for Russia with its territories, transport, especially aviation, is a priority. Now imagine if even now we have people hovering for several days in a reserved seat car or dying on our broken highways, because they cannot afford to fly by air, then what kind of “progress” will come if air tickets go up in price by three times? The problem is big, but you won’t solve it with a wave of checkers.

                I agree. Russian Railways went along a similar path - they reduced the number of passenger trains, and they are struggling with an influx of passengers ... increasing the fare. The same, quite likely, can happen with Aeroflot ... With an insufficient number of aircraft, there will be a number of people who want to limit.
              2. Vasilenko Vladimir
                Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 12: 54 New
                +8
                Quote: Nikolai K
                Monopolization of the market will lead to higher prices.

                it all depends on the goal of monopolization, once again in the Union a 12-page notebook cost 2 kopecks even though the market was monopolized
                1. Your friend
                  Your friend 1 November 2015 13: 25 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                  Quote: Nikolai K
                  Monopolization of the market will lead to higher prices.

                  it all depends on the goal of monopolization, once again in the Union a 12-page notebook cost 2 kopecks even though the market was monopolized

                  Because no one else produced notebooks. But if you make a couple of state. companies just a few dozen as it is now, it will not save this pair of state. companies from competition with foreign airlines. And they will lose this competition. Look, even now, the price of Aeroflot’s flight, for example to Berlin, is much higher than that of Swiss or AirBerlin.
                  1. Vasilenko Vladimir
                    Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 13: 27 New
                    +3
                    Quote: Your friend
                    Because no one else produced notebooks.

                    why did you write this ?!
                    you yourself understood or most importantly blurt out?
                    1. Your friend
                      Your friend 1 November 2015 13: 34 New
                      -7
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Quote: Your friend
                      Because no one else produced notebooks.

                      why did you write this ?!
                      you yourself understood or most importantly blurt out?

                      This is if you did not understand that in the USSR there was only one manufacturer. If it were 4, 5, 100, then how do you know that 2 cents is not enough, maybe due to competition the price would drop? Maybe her price is 1 kopeck.
                      For the rest, have something to say? Do you distinguish the difference between monopolies in a planned economy and a market economy?
                      1. Vasilenko Vladimir
                        Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 13: 52 New
                        +8
                        Quote: Your friend
                        . If it were 4, 5, 100, then how do you know that 2 cents is not enough, maybe due to competition the price would drop? Maybe her price is 1 kopeck.

                        before writing, find out something on the topic, the cost was about 8 cents, it was simply more profitable for the state to lose here, but to win in another
                        but this can only happen when everything is in one hand, otherwise each owner thinks about the benefit and the benefits of others eat on the drum.
                        and the state was profitable to lose "6 cents" but win the "ruble"

                        what would you be aware of the monopolist (USSR) dated the entire range of children
                      2. Your friend
                        Your friend 1 November 2015 14: 05 New
                        -2
                        Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                        Quote: Your friend
                        . If it were 4, 5, 100, then how do you know that 2 cents is not enough, maybe due to competition the price would drop? Maybe her price is 1 kopeck.

                        before writing, find out something on the topic, the cost was about 8 cents, it was simply more profitable for the state to lose here, but to win in another
                        but this can only happen when everything is in one hand, otherwise each owner thinks about the benefit and the benefits of others eat on the drum.
                        and the state was profitable to lose "6 cents" but win the "ruble"

                        The link is to the cost of 8kop., I did not find?
                        And what does this prove? Only that no one was thinking about cutting costs because there were monopolies everywhere.
                        and it was profitable for the state to lose “6 kopecks” but to win the “ruble” so that you would be aware of the monopolist (USSR) dated the entire children's assortment

                        And the state would not be more profitable to pay people so much money that they have enough to pay 8 kopecks. for a notebook and undated "children's assortment"?
                      3. Vasilenko Vladimir
                        Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 14: 26 New
                        +4
                        Quote: Your friend
                        The link is to the cost of 8kop., I did not find?

                        from reliable sources laughing
                        you think that only info is posted here from neta, be surprised, but no
                        I don’t know how to give you a link to the knowledge gained in the USSR
                      4. Your friend
                        Your friend 1 November 2015 14: 32 New
                        -1
                        Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                        Quote: Your friend
                        The link is to the cost of 8kop., I did not find?

                        from reliable sources laughing
                        you think that only info is posted here from neta, be surprised, but no
                        I don’t know how to give you a link to the knowledge gained in the USSR

                        Clearly understood.
                        Give me knowledge not from the Internet, you write cleverness, in which book of the Soviet times there is information about the cost of notebooks?
                      5. Vasilenko Vladimir
                        Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 14: 45 New
                        +5
                        Quote: Your friend
                        Give me knowledge not from the Internet, you write cleverness, in which book of the Soviet times there is information about the cost of notebooks?

                        don’t play the fool, the uncle of the direct notebook factory in Almaty, the mother was engaged in the design of light industry enterprises, you will be surprised but the person receives knowledge from different sources
                      6. Your friend
                        Your friend 1 November 2015 14: 49 New
                        0
                        Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                        Quote: Your friend
                        Give me knowledge not from the Internet, you write cleverness, in which book of the Soviet times there is information about the cost of notebooks?

                        don’t play the fool, the uncle of the direct notebook factory in Almaty, the mother was engaged in the design of light industry enterprises, you will be surprised but the person receives knowledge from different sources

                        Clearly, there are no official data.
                        Seriously, I somewhere argued that only one source needs data to be taken? Rave
                    2. Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 14: 46 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Your friend
                      Is there information on the cost of notebooks?

                      Feasibility study polygraph enterprises, look
                    3. Your friend
                      Your friend 1 November 2015 14: 48 New
                      -3
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Feasibility study polygraph enterprises

                      What kind of TechEcObosn. polygraph enterprises? Is this a magazine? What year?
                    4. Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 15: 06 New
                      +2
                      you checkered or go?
                      The feasibility study is done for the projects of various enterprises, there they will find all the information you are interested in, including the cost of production
                      and please don’t turn on the fool.
                      By the way, you never said how old you are.
                    5. Your friend
                      Your friend 1 November 2015 15: 11 New
                      -1
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                      you checkered or go?
                      The feasibility study is done for the projects of various enterprises, there they will find all the information you are interested in, including the cost of production
                      and please don’t turn on the fool.
                      By the way, you never said how old you are.

                      Do you know how yap differs from a normal person? The fact that yap is not responsible for what he carries. (
                      You stated that the prime cost of the notebook is “8 kopecks.”, You haven’t brought any evidence, but I’m “turning on the fool”. Pretty.)
                      I will answer you again, why do you need to know how old I am?
                    6. Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 15: 13 New
                      +2
                      Quote: Your friend
                      Do you know how yap differs from a normal person? The fact that yap is not responsible for what he carries ...
                      You declare

                      Tell me, do you have anything to do with printing ?!
                      and all so how old are you I'm just wondering if you lived with the union or not
                    7. Your friend
                      Your friend 1 November 2015 15: 17 New
                      0
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Quote: Your friend
                      Do you know how yap differs from a normal person? The fact that yap is not responsible for what he carries ...
                      You declare

                      Tell me in relation to printing?
                      and all so how old are you I'm just wondering if you lived with the union or not

                      Oh my god, what do I have to do with printing or not. What does this have to do with data on the cost of a notebook of 8 kopecks?
                      Yes, I lived under the USSR, how will this information help you?
                    8. Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 15: 23 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Your friend

                      Oh my god, what do I have to do with printing or not. What does this have to do with data on the cost of a notebook of 8 kopecks?
                      Yes, I lived under the USSR, how will this information help you?

                      to the fact that, unlike you, I have worked in this industry for 20 years and I’m talking about it as if from the inside you can’t distinguish offset paper from newsprint, but at the same time you’re clever how old you are
                    9. Your friend
                      Your friend 1 November 2015 15: 32 New
                      -2
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Quote: Your friend

                      Oh my god, what do I have to do with printing or not. What does this have to do with data on the cost of a notebook of 8 kopecks?
                      Yes, I lived under the USSR, how will this information help you?

                      to the fact that, unlike you, I have worked in this industry for 20 years and I’m talking about it as if from the inside you can’t distinguish offset paper from newsprint, but at the same time you’re clever how old you are

                      This is a complete bdz, for the umpteenth time I’m writing, you didn’t provide evidence of YOUR data that the cost of the notebook is 8 kop, and I’m "clever" ???)))
                      “how old are you” - how do you perceive it? I answered you that I lived under the USSR. Why do you need my exact age? How will this help you?
                    10. Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 15: 41 New
                      +1
                      "respected"
                      once again find the design documentation of a profile enterprise of the USSR period
                      and you have a full bzdets or not at all somehow violet
                      our problem is that amateurs like you undertake to discuss topics that even by ear do not know
                    11. Your friend
                      Your friend 1 November 2015 15: 50 New
                      -3
                      No no. This is a real bzdets.))) Not amateurs, we can not give confirmation of their same data. Not amateurs, we believe that in the USSR they reduced the cost of goods by building "light industry and local industry enterprises whose main task was to ensure employment and not to obtain benefits."
                      But this is certainly not a problem, the patamushta is "violet.")))
                    12. Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 15: 53 New
                      +1
                      sorry, but you are stubborn like a ram
                      you will not find this data in nete personal knowledge of specific people you consider fiction
                      fat to be discus finished
                      if it’s very interesting, find the archives of the State Planning Commission
                      no, consider that the union had two varieties of sausages, etc.

                    13. Your friend
                      Your friend 1 November 2015 15: 59 New
                      -2
                      sorry but go to the ass

                      The post was changed, but I saw everything.
                      Ay-ay. Such an adult, an integral marshal, and so uncivilized. (((
                      But "not an amateur." lol
                      Twenty-five again, where did I think that “there are two varieties of sausage in the union”? Indicate where I wrote this?
                      sorry, but you are stubborn like a ram

                      Are you having a headache? I only ask you to bring me a source, a SPECIFIC source, where are these "8 kopecks." counted. What knowledge of specific people, well, what nonsense.
                    14. Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 16: 09 New
                      -1
                      Quote: Your friend
                      but I saw everything.
                      Ay-ay. Such an adult, an integral marshal, and so uncivilized. (((
                      But "not an amateur."

                      I'm happy
                      http://natribu.org
                    15. Your friend
                      Your friend 1 November 2015 16: 12 New
                      0
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Quote: Your friend
                      but I saw everything.
                      Ay-ay. Such an adult, an integral marshal, and so uncivilized. (((
                      But "not an amateur."

                      I'm happy
                      http://natribu.org

                      Ahahahaha ... but there is nothing about "8 kopecks." ?!
                      Hell, you screwed up with the source of your knowledge again, you are not our amateur.
                    16. Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 16: 31 New
                      0
                      for you have
                      The source of knowledge I told you, he will not suit you, all are free
                    17. Your friend
                      Your friend 1 November 2015 16: 45 New
                      -1
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                      for you have
                      The source of knowledge I told you, he will not suit you, all are free

                      What is “for you,” Marshal? Again rave. You indicated it to me, this is your source of knowledge. Again, from a sore head to a healthy throw. Not good.
                      The source, the grandmother in the yard said, and the site http://natribu.org, of course does not suit, somehow in amateurish, you are not an amateur.
                      "all free" - what a touchy marshal)))
                    18. Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 17: 30 New
                      0
                      factory director is a grandmother ?!
                      the person who designed the light industry enterprises is a grandmother ?!

                      Once again, you are talking to a person who knows this industry, but you can’t distinguish offset printing from high printing and at the same time try to be clever
                    19. Your friend
                      Your friend 1 November 2015 18: 46 New
                      -3
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                      factory director is a grandmother ?!
                      the person who designed the light industry enterprises is a grandmother ?!

                      Once again, you are talking to a person who knows this industry, but you can’t distinguish offset printing from high printing and at the same time try to be clever

                      Of course, a grandmother.) How can one trust a person who claims that in the USSR light industry and local industry enterprises were built to “provide employment”.)
                      Which writes that "unlike today's prices and salaries during the union, they were justified and calculated" - fucked up and calculated - that they had to sell notebooks 4 times cheaper than their cost.)
                      I have no doubt in your knowledge about the "difference between offset printing from high printing")))
                      By the way, please indicate where I am "clever."
                    20. Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Vasilenko Vladimir 2 November 2015 07: 50 New
                      +1
                      Who do you work for?
                    21. Your friend
                      Your friend 2 November 2015 11: 29 New
                      -1
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Who do you work for?

                      I’m waiting for everything when I answer my questions:
                      once again for those who in the tank the children's assortment in the USSR was dated ALL

                      where did I argue with you that the children's assortment was dated or not dated?
                      no, consider that the union had two varieties of sausages, etc.

                      Twenty-five again, where did I think that “there are two varieties of sausage in the union”? Indicate where I wrote this?
  2. viktor561
    viktor561 2 November 2015 01: 31 New
    +4
    "In what Soviet-era book is there information on the cost of notebooks?" - open any accounting department boom of the plant and you will understand - everything is transparent and clear there
  3. Your friend
    Your friend 2 November 2015 11: 22 New
    -4
    Quote: viktor561
    "In what Soviet-era book is there information on the cost of notebooks?" - open any accounting department boom of the plant and you will understand - everything is transparent and clear there

    Who are you to poke me?
    "any accounting boom of the plant" - do you have it, is there data on 8kop? If not, why are you poking around with your tips?)
  4. AlexeyL
    AlexeyL 2 November 2015 13: 41 New
    +1
    Attached to the "8 kopecks." discussion topic was completely gone !!!
  5. Your friend
    Your friend 2 November 2015 14: 48 New
    -1
    Quote: AlexeyL
    Attached to the "8 kopecks." discussion topic was completely gone !!!

    Those. the one who mentioned the first about 8 cops, he wrote on the topic, but I mean hooked. Ischo one wise guy.)
  6. Vasilenko Vladimir
    Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 14: 30 New
    +2
    Quote: Your friend
    And the state would not be more profitable to pay people so much money that they have enough to pay 8 kopecks.

    sorry write nonsense, I hope why you will understand for yourself, by the way, unlike today's prices and salaries at the union, they were justified and calculated
    another example in the SA were built enterprises of light industry and the local industry whose main task was to ensure employment and not profit
    as a result of losing on this in general the state won having employment and relieving social tension,
  7. Your friend
    Your friend 1 November 2015 14: 40 New
    -2
    Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
    Quote: Your friend
    And the state would not be more profitable to pay people so much money that they have enough to pay 8 kopecks.

    sorry write nonsense, I hope why you will understand for yourself, by the way, unlike today's prices and salaries at the union, they were justified and calculated
    another example in the SA were built enterprises of light industry and the local industry whose main task was to ensure employment and not profit
    as a result of losing on this in general the state won having employment and relieving social tension,

    Yes, yes, I already understood, "I'm stupid," you are smart.
    Seriously, enterprises were built to "provide employment", and not in order to produce goods necessary for the country ??? Just think what kind of leadership in the USSR was, truly Samaritans.
    Yeah, everything was calculated, social. the tension was removed, the state won - and as soon as the USSR collapsed, surprisingly. Oh yes, the traitors who sold themselves for cookies collapsed.
  8. Vasilenko Vladimir
    Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 14: 32 New
    +1
    Quote: Your friend
    and undated "children's assortment"?

    actually it was dated and not vice versa
    Quote: Your friend
    Just the fact that no one was thinking about cutting costs because there were monopolies everywhere.

    you will be surprised but just then thought
    how old are you?
  9. Your friend
    Your friend 1 November 2015 14: 44 New
    -1
    Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
    Quote: Your friend
    and undated "children's assortment"?

    actually it was dated and not vice versa
    Quote: Your friend
    Just the fact that no one was thinking about cutting costs because there were monopolies everywhere.

    you will be surprised but just then thought
    how old are you?

    You carefully read what I write to you. I wrote to you that maybe it was worth zp raise so that people can buy undated "children's assortment", what is not clear to you?
    We did not think about cost reduction. You yourself wrote:
    another example in the SA were built enterprises of light industry and the local industry whose main task was to ensure employment and not profit

    This is a super mega cost reduction)))) You wouldn’t contradict yourself.
    Why do you need my age?
  10. a housewife
    a housewife 1 November 2015 19: 48 New
    +4
    What kind of salary increase can we talk about if all the time prices were cut at enterprises? As soon as they started to produce something more than the notorious 102%, they reduced their prices - otherwise the workers would get too much money!
  11. 34 region
    34 region 3 November 2015 01: 05 New
    +1
    Well today, then, as I understand it, they raise prices! Or increase the rate?
  12. Vasilenko Vladimir
    Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 21: 09 New
    +2
    Quote: Your friend
    This is a super mega cost reduction)))) You wouldn’t contradict yourself.

    I understand with an understanding of the reading of the problem?
  13. Your friend
    Your friend 1 November 2015 21: 16 New
    -3
    Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
    Quote: Your friend
    This is a super mega cost reduction)))) You wouldn’t contradict yourself.

    I understand with an understanding of the reading of the problem?

    So yes, you have an "understanding reading problem."
  14. Vasilenko Vladimir
    Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 21: 17 New
    +4
    I’m typing into the blind, you understand what I’m talking about, but since you are just trolling, you cling to everything
    once again do not know the topic quietly unscrew
  15. Your friend
    Your friend 1 November 2015 21: 29 New
    -5
    Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
    I’m typing into the blind, you understand what I’m talking about, but since you are just trolling, you cling to everything
    once again do not know the topic quietly unscrew

    I’ll cheat on you, since you’re so slow-witted. Here is your phrase:
    enterprises of light industry and local industry were built in the SA, the main task of which was to ensure employment and not profit

    Those. according to your phrase, in the USSR the enterprise is built not where it is profitable and it is possible to produce goods that the country needs (where there is good transport accessibility, affordable prices and close raw materials, trained personnel - that is, the cost of goods is reduced), but where necessary " provide employment. " Thus, during the construction of these enterprises, cost reduction does not occur. Fershteyn?
    So what is there with "8 kopecks.", A connoisseur of the topic you are ours and not an amateur?)
    "quietly unscrew" - but what is it, Marshall, and behaving so badly, it’s bad.)

    PS. A cool person was the first to write - “as I understand it from the understanding of reading the problem?”, And when he gets the same answer - it’s trolling. What a person has with his head ...)
  16. Vasilenko Vladimir
    Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 21: 37 New
    +3
    Quote: Your friend
    Those. according to your phrase, in the USSR the enterprise is not built where it is profitable and it is possible to produce goods that the country needs

    excuse me, but you are really either stupid or stubborn, the lack of social tension is the same financial benefit on a statewide scale, only it is expressed not in the production of goods, but in the reduction of the criminal situation and the pressure on interethnic relations.
    goods were produced and at the same time a different task was being solved, but this is not possible in today's conditions
    Quote: Your friend
    So what is there with "8 kopecks.", A connoisseur of the topic you are ours and not an amateur?)

    no all the same are stupid and not stubborn
    these are two different topics, albeit from the same area
    once again for those who in the tank the assortment of children in the USSR was dated EVERYTHING and put me with a part, believe it or not, you can find the info or not, it's just an existing fact, the whole topic is closed to argue with a brow who really doesn’t understand a thing in the subject no
  17. Your friend
    Your friend 1 November 2015 21: 52 New
    -4
    Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
    Quote: Your friend
    Those. according to your phrase, in the USSR the enterprise is not built where it is profitable and it is possible to produce goods that the country needs

    excuse me, but you are really either stupid or stubborn, the lack of social tension is the same financial benefit on a statewide scale, only it is expressed not in the production of goods, but in the reduction of the criminal situation and the pressure on interethnic relations.
    goods were produced and at the same time a different task was being solved, but this is not possible in today's conditions
    Quote: Your friend
    So what is there with "8 kopecks.", A connoisseur of the topic you are ours and not an amateur?)

    no all the same are stupid and not stubborn
    these are two different topics, albeit from the same area
    once again for those who in the tank the assortment of children in the USSR was dated EVERYTHING and put me with a part, believe it or not, you can find the info or not, it's just an existing fact, the whole topic is closed to argue with a brow who really doesn’t understand a thing in the subject no


    Ahahahaha ... What ???? Are you raving ??? What are you talking about, what kind of criminogenic situation, what interethnic problems, what kind of social. tension ??? These were our specialists in light industry, which dealt with interethnic problems, and not light industry. Everything's clear with you.(
    Do you have something with your head, show me where I argued with you that the children's assortment was dated or not dated? You need to be seriously treated.
  18. Vasilenko Vladimir
    Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 21: 59 New
    +3
    Quote: Your friend
    Ahahahaha ... What ???? Are you raving ??? What are you talking about, what kind of criminogenic situation, what interethnic problems, what kind of social. tension ???

    stupid stupid
    Earlier, these same Uzbeks and Tajiks were employed, including at enterprises that were "unnecessary" in your understanding, and now they are all in Russia, including in the criminal space
    I'm generally interested in having you ever done a product cost calculation?
  19. Your friend
    Your friend 1 November 2015 22: 08 New
    -3
    Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
    Quote: Your friend
    Ahahahaha ... What ???? Are you raving ??? What are you talking about, what kind of criminogenic situation, what interethnic problems, what kind of social. tension ???

    stupid stupid
    Earlier, these same Uzbeks and Tajiks were employed, including at enterprises that were "unnecessary" in your understanding, and now they are all in Russia, including in the criminal space
    I'm generally interested in having you ever done a product cost calculation?

    Actually, you need to be treated, well, what Uzbeks, what Tajiks. What is my understanding? Where did I talk about "" unnecessary "in my understanding of the enterprise"? Are you raving again?)))
    You ignored this, as always:
    Do you have something with your head, show me where I argued with you that the children's assortment was dated or not dated?

    ALL the topic is closed to argue with the brow who really does not understand a damn topic does not make sense

    I'm generally interested in having you ever done a product cost calculation?

    You have big problems with your head, then you want one thing, and then you want the opposite)))
  20. nerd.su
    nerd.su 2 November 2015 21: 35 New
    +2
    Quote: Your friend
    And the state would not be more profitable to pay people so much money that they have enough to pay 8 kopecks. for a notebook and undated "children's assortment"?

    Not more profitable. Salary growth in those conditions was almost the only engine of inflation. Therefore, enterprises could not jump above the size of wage funds. But everyone who wanted this could live well, the rest could not be afraid of tomorrow.
  21. Your friend
    Your friend 2 November 2015 23: 54 New
    -2
    Quote: bot.su
    Quote: Your friend
    And the state would not be more profitable to pay people so much money that they have enough to pay 8 kopecks. for a notebook and undated "children's assortment"?

    Not more profitable. Salary growth in those conditions was almost the only engine of inflation. Therefore, enterprises could not jump above the size of wage funds. But everyone who wanted this could live well, the rest could not be afraid of tomorrow.

    Yes? But wasn’t the lack of consumer goods the driving force behind inflation?
    More profitable or not more profitable, nevertheless zp in the USSR grew.
  22. nerd.su
    nerd.su 3 November 2015 18: 00 New
    0
    Consumer Product Lack - Inflation? How?

    Salaries grew according to plan, the planned economy. But still, for each enterprise there was an approved (regularly approved) payroll.
  23. Your friend
    Your friend 3 November 2015 22: 44 New
    0
    Quote: bot.su
    Consumer Product Lack - Inflation? How?

    Salaries grew according to plan, the planned economy. But still, for each enterprise there was an approved (regularly approved) payroll.

    And where did they grow according to plan or did not grow. You wrote that it was not profitable for the state to raise the charge. fee due to inflation. And she was periodically raised. Although the term "inflation" itself looks oddly excruciating to a planned economy.)
    There is a lot of money - there is not enough goods. Remember these stores are “commissions.” What "commission" prices were there for scarce goods, and what state ones. prices were for this product, which was not available in ordinary stores or was quickly sold out. Remember the price of meat in the markets and in the state. stores. Remember the state. auto prices and auto sales prices for ads.
    http://afanarizm.livejournal.com/274525.html
  24. nerd.su
    nerd.su 4 November 2015 20: 09 New
    0
    Quote: Your friend
    Although the term "inflation" itself looks oddly excruciating to a planned economy.)

    Why is he strange?
    Quote: Your friend
    And where did they grow according to plan or did not grow. You wrote that it was not profitable for the state to raise the charge. fee due to inflation. And she was periodically raised

    The amount of cash on hand at the population was strictly regulated in accordance with the mass of cash goods and services.

    Quote: Your friend
    There is a lot of money - there is not enough goods.

    Once again, there was exactly as much money as goods. There are many people - there are few goods, here is the deficit formula. Due to distortions in the economy, but it is not fatal. Nobody was dying of hunger and lack of clothing and the range was growing. In commissions, as far as I remember - to Gorbachev, of course - prices were often even lower than in state trade. We thought it was a second-hand, in modern language. Perhaps in large cities it was not so, but then I lived in a small laughing With the collapse of the union, the situation began to change with us.
  25. Your friend
    Your friend 4 November 2015 21: 23 New
    0
    Why is he strange?

    Brrrr ... If as you say:
    The amount of cash on hand at the population was strictly regulated in accordance with the mass of cash goods and services.

    then how can it be that "Salary growth in those conditions was almost the only engine of inflation."? According to your statement, the increase in salaries should be compensated by an increase in the mass of goods and services, so "there was exactly as much money as there was goods." Inflation, based on your statements, should not be.
    Inflation (lat. Inflatio - bloating) - increasing the level of prices for goods and services. With inflation for the same amount of money after some time, it will be possible to buy less goods and services than before. In this case, they say that over the past time the purchasing power of money has decreased, money has depreciated - they have lost part of their real value.
    Once again, there was exactly as much money as goods.

    Of course of course. Now we have money of 100 rubles, and the amount of goods that we have is 5 carrots, tomorrow we printed another 900 rubles, but we still had carrots, and there were 5 left. But today and tomorrow we "had exactly as much money as goods." Just today one carrot costs 20 rubles, and tomorrow 200).
    Do you have any links that your statement is true?
    There are many people - there are few goods, here is the deficit formula.

    Are you seriously writing ??? And here are "a lot of people"? Deficit - excess of aggregate demand over aggregate supply. Although there will be a billiard of people and few goods, but if they have no money, then the goods will not become a deficit. According to your statement, it turns out that since there are few diamonds, but there are a lot of people and there are not enough diamonds for all, diamonds are in short supply. Here it is.)
    Due to distortions in the economy, but it is not fatal. Nobody was dying of hunger and lack of clothing and the range was growing. In commissions, as far as I remember - to Gorbachev, of course - prices were often even lower than in state trade. We thought it was a second-hand, in modern language. Perhaps in large cities it was not so, but then I lived in shallow laughing. With the collapse of the union, the situation began to change with us.

    This is all the lyrics, and starvation in the USSR was dying (famine of 32-33 years, and famine of 46-47 it is clear that after the war, however, it was), and in stores, with an "increase in assortment", there were sprats, matches and sea kale on the shelves .
  26. Nikolay K
    Nikolay K 1 November 2015 18: 56 New
    -1
    If you follow your logic, should the state subsidize air transportation? At whose expense, doctors, army, road construction? You understand that in this world nothing arises from emptiness, including money. Well, there is still the option to raise personal income tax. Will it become easier for you if the air tickets get cheaper, but your salary will decrease by the same amount?
  27. Vasilenko Vladimir
    Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 21: 11 New
    0
    Quote: Nikolai K
    You understand that in this world nothing arises from emptiness, including money

    in today's conditions it couldn’t be possible to do this only when there was a single owner and created the most optimal balance by redistributing financial flows
  28. Nikolay K
    Nikolay K 3 November 2015 13: 32 New
    0
    We have Gazprom a monopolist in the market for gas production (more than 90%), its transportation and export (100%). You want to say that Gazprom is working efficiently? Or, moreover, the company knows how to make money out of nothing, just like that and gas is free for everyone?
  29. Nikolay K
    Nikolay K 3 November 2015 13: 32 New
    0
    We have Gazprom a monopolist in the market for gas production (more than 90%), its transportation and export (100%). You want to say that Gazprom is working efficiently? Or, moreover, the company knows how to make money out of nothing, just like that and gas is free for everyone?
  30. 34 region
    34 region 3 November 2015 00: 51 New
    +1
    Your friend! Today, several oil companies. And gasoline is getting more expensive. Enlighten them about competition. They probably don’t know this.
  31. Your friend
    Your friend 3 November 2015 01: 36 New
    -1
    Quote: 34 region
    Your friend! Today, several oil companies. And gasoline is getting more expensive. Enlighten them about competition. They probably don’t know this.

    Hahahaha ... What? Today, Gazprom is a monopolist, and gas is getting more expensive. But you probably don’t know this.
    Did you consult a doctor on my advice? Do not tighten.)))
  • perm23
    perm23 1 November 2015 13: 53 New
    10
    For comparison, you need to know how many yachts and villas our leaders bought themselves and German. After all, we have always overstated both the cost of fuel, and the cost of airport services and the airline itself. The whole point is this, and then the economy is coming. The most important thing for our businessman is to quickly fill your pocket and spit on everything thicker.
    1. sabakina
      sabakina 1 November 2015 14: 19 New
      +1
      Matches in the USSR cost 1 kopeck. How much was the cost of 1 box of matches? About 10 kopecks.
      1. Your friend
        Your friend 1 November 2015 14: 29 New
        -7
        Quote: sabakina
        Matches in the USSR cost 1 kopeck. How much was the cost of 1 box of matches? About 10 kopecks.

        So what? It only says that the monopolist in the USSR set what price he wanted.
        "the cost of a VAZ car, which was in 1972..1975. This is not higher than 1950 rubles.
        The retail price for the buyer was about 5500 rubles ... 6000 rubles. "
        So what? It only says that the monopolist in the USSR set what price he wanted.
      2. nov_tech.vrn
        nov_tech.vrn 1 November 2015 19: 14 New
        +2
        The State Planning Commission calculated the cost of goods and services in the USSR, and despite the cost, socially significant products were sold cheaply, and what was equated with luxury and were not vital goods, they were sold much more expensive, but with the layout of the annual plan, indicators were always balanced, well, that those who are not able to decipher the feasibility study - a feasibility study, may not understand this and pour in full pseudo-economic terms.
      3. Your friend
        Your friend 1 November 2015 19: 53 New
        -2
        Quote: nov_tech.vrn
        The State Planning Commission calculated the cost of goods and services in the USSR, and despite the cost, socially significant products were sold cheaply, and what was equated with luxury and were not vital goods, they were sold much more expensive, but with the layout of the annual plan, indicators were always balanced, well, that those who are not able to decipher the feasibility study - a feasibility study, may not understand this and pour in full pseudo-economic terms.

        Are you talking to me? Where did I pour in "pseudo-economic terms", show? Where am I "unable to decipher the feasibility study," show? Let us not ascribe and invent to me what I did not say.
        What does your passage have to do with the topic of our discussion with the marshal?
  • GraveBezKresta
    GraveBezKresta 1 November 2015 22: 14 New
    +3
    Quote: sabakina
    How much was the cost of 1 box of matches? About 10 kopecks.

    Girl, what mushrooms did you eat? The cost of packing a match was less than 1 penny. The USSR produced them in hundreds of millions, so stop raving!
  • Your friend
    Your friend 1 November 2015 14: 25 New
    +1
    Quote: perm23
    For comparison, you need to know how many yachts and villas our leaders bought themselves and German. After all, we have always overstated both the cost of fuel, and the cost of airport services and the airline itself. The whole point is this, and then the economy is coming. The most important thing for our businessman is to quickly fill your pocket and spit on everything thicker.

    Do you think German leaders offend themselves?
    Strange, global airlines fly to our airports and no one overstates them and their prices are lower than those of Russian.
    So all the same, it’s not a matter of leasing and old planes, but of our “leaders”, you yourself wrote so.
    1. Mwg
      Mwg 1 November 2015 20: 20 New
      +2
      Yeah, they have lower prices. However, the Germans stopped feeding passengers on the airlines, and if you want some water, buy from a Stuart at their price. And you can’t carry with you - anti-terrorism security. And you want to take insurance, but you do not want to take it, but you want to take incomplete. But to put everything in a heap, it doesn’t turn out very cheaply and cheaply.
    2. Your friend
      Your friend 1 November 2015 21: 07 New
      0
      Quote: MVG
      Yeah, they have lower prices. However, the Germans stopped feeding passengers on the airlines, and if you want some water, buy from a Stuart at their price. And you can’t carry with you - anti-terrorism security. And you want to take insurance, but you do not want to take it, but you want to take incomplete. But to put everything in a heap, it doesn’t turn out very cheaply and cheaply.

      Seriously? Lufthansa flew to Barcelona last NG (with a change, it’s true, but by the way 2 times cheaper than direct Aeroflot). They fed and watered. I don’t know, maybe now what has changed. But we can’t carry water through the inspection either, what a claim to the Germans. By the way, we also have companies that do not feed and do not drink.
  • Nikolay K
    Nikolay K 1 November 2015 18: 49 New
    +2
    The declared goal of monopolization is to remove companies with an old fleet from the market. Accordingly, a monopoly with new (expensive) aircraft remains on the market. She will naturally raise ticket prices and quite reasonably, since she has a high cost price. There are no miracles.
    1. Your friend
      Your friend 1 November 2015 19: 05 New
      -2
      Quote: Nikolai K
      The declared goal of monopolization is to remove companies with an old fleet from the market. Accordingly, a monopoly with new (expensive) aircraft remains on the market. She will naturally raise ticket prices and quite reasonably, since she has a high cost price. There are no miracles.

      As if, if you make one company, then some other people will start working in it, who will stop stealing, those. service and repairs will rise to unattainable heights, and service will be at the level of Qatar Airways.
  • cuzmin.mihail2013
    cuzmin.mihail2013 1 November 2015 21: 52 New
    +2
    Maybe you will find out the current price for this notebook, and then you will calculate how much you could buy then and how much now, let’s say the salary of an engineer.
    But then the state was engaged in this, and now there are a lot of rather small companies making profit from the “privatized” paper mills and printing houses.
    1. Your friend
      Your friend 1 November 2015 21: 54 New
      -5
      Quote: cuzmin.mihail2013
      Maybe you will find out the current price for this notebook, and then you will calculate how much you could buy then and how much now, let’s say the salary of an engineer.

      One more. Why should I do this? What does this have to do with cost
      notebooks?
      But then the state was engaged in this, and now there are a lot of rather small companies making profit from the “privatized” paper mills and printing houses.

      Do you want to wipe yourself with a newspaper, as did most of the country then, and not with toilet paper?
      1. 34 region
        34 region 3 November 2015 01: 30 New
        +1
        Why paper? There is water!
        1. Your friend
          Your friend 3 November 2015 01: 37 New
          -1
          Quote: 34 region
          Why paper? There is water!

          To the doctor!)
    2. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 21: 57 New
      0
      then more if you take a salary of 30000 thousand
  • Nikolay K
    Nikolay K 3 November 2015 13: 43 New
    -1
    Do not confuse capitalist monopoly with the state economy of the USSR. In the first case, the company's goal is to maximize profits and in the vast majority of cases it is achieved by setting high prices. In the second case, the goal of the company is the production of what is prescribed above, the effectiveness or profitability of the production does not matter. Because notebooks can even be distributed free of charge, if ordered, and then they will heat the stoves. We in the USSR had stories when pigs were fed with cheap bread. And heads of state-owned companies strive to steal more, because again, personally, they don’t give a damn about the final financial result. If you have already forgotten the history of the Soviet era, you can look at the current Gazprom. What inevitably comes an economy built not on the principles of efficiency, but on the implementation of someone’s authoritative decisions, we have already seen on the example of the collapse of the USSR. Apparently you liked it, do you want to repeat it again?
  • Igor Nikonov
    Igor Nikonov 1 November 2015 11: 17 New
    +6
    You see, we managed to separate just (in railway transport at least) freight and passenger traffic. THIS IS NOW 2 DIFFERENT COMPANIES. When they were in one, yes, the transportation of 4 passengers in the village was compensated. "Conditional name" on an electric train of 4 cars. Now, the passenger part is very unprofitable. "Managers" do not know how differently and reduce routes. either pull state subsidies.
  • Strashila
    Strashila 1 November 2015 11: 49 New
    +4
    That's right ... they split up the branches ... they left only revenue parts for themselves, and subsidized and socially significant ones ... while there was one pocket it was not noticeable, expenses were compensated by incomes in other places.
    In Siberia, air travel that now a fixed-route taxi was ... not much more expensive than a bus ... but many times faster.
  • fennekRUS
    fennekRUS 1 November 2015 13: 36 New
    +3
    Quote: Enot-poloskun
    Transport for Russia (rail, air, etc.) is not just a branch, but in no small measure a means of ensuring economic growth and development of the country!

    Transport is everything! For any country. This was understood even in ancient Rome, paving the road wherever the legions passed. Efremov was right — without knowledge of history, humanity is doomed to repeat its mistakes.
  • Lenin
    Lenin 1 November 2015 14: 04 New
    +4
    Totally agree with you. And I want to add that not only transport, but also all enterprises and industries responsible for the direct security of the country should be under the strict control of the state other than the state - Russia will get tryndets.
  • Starik72
    Starik72 1 November 2015 14: 59 New
    +2
    Raccoon-strip. In the last sentence: Transport in Russia, should be under state control, I would add: AND BE STATE.
  • sssla
    sssla 1 November 2015 16: 04 New
    +3
    It must be said once and for all: transport in Russia is for people and for the development of the economy. Transport in Russia - should be under state control.

    Everything was --- collapsed with the same slogans only about the great "MARKET"!
    Now, too, but at 180 degrees!
  • 406ppm2gv
    406ppm2gv 1 November 2015 18: 33 New
    +4
    Enot-poloskun (3)I agree, in view of its peculiarity, Russia, railway, as well as air transport is strategic for the country and, therefore, should be only state!
  • PSih2097
    PSih2097 1 November 2015 21: 57 New
    +3
    Quote: Enot-poloskun
    Transport for Russia (rail, air, etc.) is not just a branch, but in no small measure a means of ensuring economic growth and development of the country!

    troops what are you lucky with? transport is a strategic industry under strict state control ...
  • Sirocco
    Sirocco 2 November 2015 04: 18 New
    +3
    Quote: Enot-poloskun
    It must be said once and for all: transport in Russia is for people and for the development of the economy. Transport in Russia - should be under state control.

    I would allow you to say a little differently, Transport, and its communications, should relate to strategic objects, because they provide national security. It is enough to recall the state of emergency with refueling (or rather, with failure) of the aircraft of the Russian Armed Forces during the exercises at one of the civil airfields in the Far East several years ago. This is what Entrepreneurship and Private Business leads to. Everything that is in the bowels should belong to the state, and not to a gang of swindlers, the same applies to transport and transportation.
    You look at least at the railway transportation, this is a complete scribe, the railway hires automobile transport companies to transport the foam, and rolls with the canvas, to replace the railway canvas. Scribe, insanity grows stronger. And what are wagons of any type belonging to such as Kagalymaviya? All on the "snot" and twists of wire. This is how gentlemen live, balancing over the abyss due to the greed of our businessmen.
    A familiar businessman told me somehow. I won’t get up from the couch if the profit is less than 50%.
  • Private Starley
    Private Starley 1 November 2015 13: 19 New
    +5
    Yes, for that matter, then everything must be returned to the state, not only the defense industry and aviation ...
    1. perm23
      perm23 1 November 2015 13: 54 New
      +1
      It's about time.
  • Starley from the south
    Starley from the south 1 November 2015 15: 53 New
    +3
    Perhaps the number of domestic flights does not need to be increased, but the fleet should be updated to domestic. The issue of the profitability of domestic air transportation, of course, cannot be resolved right away, but, finally, we need to start producing our own aircraft.
  • Evgeniy667b
    Evgeniy667b 4 November 2015 04: 01 New
    0
    Today, if you evaluate transport, and not only, even the military-industrial complex is guilty of this, profit-making at any cost is at the forefront. Not for nothing now, “Kagalymavia” with foam at the mouth is holding the idea that the plane died as a result of an external defeat. They also need to maintain their image, no matter how blasphemous it may look, otherwise the power structures should put an end to their activities. Although Aeroflot is not far ahead. Especially when he was CEO Saveliev (also a top manager), who really cares for Boeing, and naturally for his pocket. This is above all. The author of the article is absolutely right, domestic aircraft manufacturers should work, not Boeing and Airbus companies. I really want to see the presence of the navy, which was squandered by shipowners who escaped from "unwashed Russia", as one of them put it. Part of the former fleet of the USSR is waiting for its fate for cutting somewhere in Bangladesh, and the remnants have joined the Mongolian! sea ​​power. And once the fleet was the pride of the country and our flag was respected everywhere! Not everything is lost on the railway, but there are also unhealthy trends. It’s not too late to stop them. As for the military-industrial complex, I have a lot of opponents in the military, but still there is such a structure as Oboronexport, our army and navy will not become stronger. Elementaryly, replenishment of new armed forces with our armed forces is secondary, everything was left to export, all who were not lazy would be paid. I do not argue, a profitable place, for the layman the main thing is to savor the billions of the parish, he is not interested in the other. And the fact that instead of the planned Alligators that went to Egypt will have to extend the life of worn out crocodiles, almost not a word about it. Only then will everyone lament that the helicopter fall has begun again.
  • wicked pinnochio
    wicked pinnochio 13 November 2015 18: 33 New
    0
    Aeroflot killed transporter ahead and ticket prices for Vladivostok residents soared 3 times because of Aeroflot, and if he alone will carry all the money we have for tickets is not enough
  • Vasilenko Vladimir
    Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 08: 56 New
    +9
    Quote: Enot-poloskun
    18 years the plane was operated! And most of them are abroad!

    18 years is not much, but how the machine was monitored here and there is a question
    1. Banshee
      1 November 2015 09: 15 New
      +8
      If the car has changed the 4 owners for these 18 years ... Draw an analogy with the car. Maybe someone was courting as it should.
      1. Skiff_spb
        Skiff_spb 1 November 2015 09: 41 New
        +8
        Generally speaking, the analogy with the machine does not work here.

        But if you try, it will look like this: for an airplane 18 years old for a car for 5 years. Yes, old one, yes, soon to change, but still running and running.

        And the service - imagine that you MUST undergo repairs at the official. And on the slightest problem MUST be repaired.

        Yes, repairs can be substandard. But if there is a signature - the person is CRIMINALLY responsible for it.
        1. tomket
          tomket 1 November 2015 12: 42 New
          -1
          Quote: Skiff_spb
          And the service - imagine that you MUST undergo repairs at the official. And on the slightest problem MUST be repaired.

          But in practice, is that so? Far from it. Take at least scandals with spare parts from China and bu.
          Quote: Skiff_spb
          Yes, repairs can be substandard. But if there is a signature - the person is CRIMINALLY responsible for it.

          Well, now it will be possible to see firsthand the justice of the state of these matters ...
        2. region58
          region58 1 November 2015 17: 27 New
          0
          Quote: Skiff_spb
          And the service - imagine that you MUST undergo repairs at the official. And on the slightest problem MUST be repaired.

          Moreover, there are technical regulations after what time what units and systems to change, repair, do preventive maintenance, who has the right to do the corresponding work, etc. Everything is very detailed with signatures and seals, passed - accepted. Technique needs to be able to operate ... If you drive an absolutely new Merce in summer tires in winter, then the result is predictable (this is about supposedly bad equipment).
      2. Vasilenko Vladimir
        Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 10: 08 New
        +3
        the main thing is how they followed the equipment, but in general it is time to introduce limits on "bourgeois" aircraft
      3. Vadim237
        Vadim237 1 November 2015 12: 35 New
        0
        This aircraft recently underwent a heavy maintenance, it may be that during this check they screwed up.
      4. tomket
        tomket 1 November 2015 12: 40 New
        +1
        Quote: Banshee
        If the car has changed the 4 owners for these 18 years ... Draw an analogy with the car. Maybe someone was courting as it should.

        If we draw an analogy with a car, then I think it is not in vain that sellers consider it a duty to indicate one owner in auto sales announcements. I think this is an indicator.
    2. glasha3032
      glasha3032 1 November 2015 12: 47 New
      +3
      The 21-year-old IL-86s are written off in old age (a resource is exhausted), and the 18-year-old in your opinion is much younger?
      1. 16112014nk
        16112014nk 1 November 2015 15: 51 New
        +2
        They decommissioned due to the greed of airlines (high fuel consumption) and increased engine noise, which is why the IL-86 was not allowed into Europe, where the most profitable flights.
        And about the disaster, "Watermelon". What if this version: hackers got into the airplane’s control, because the computer controls it, and the engines turned on the reverse, then can we explain the sharp drop in speed to 180 km / h and the plane’s fall in the desert?
        1. glasha3032
          glasha3032 2 November 2015 00: 10 New
          +3
          Indeed, they were decommissioned because of the greed of the airlines — no one wanted to pay a design bureau for extending the resource to 40000 hours.
  • donavi49
    donavi49 1 November 2015 09: 42 New
    +7
    It is time to return the airline industry to state control. Leave 2-3 Airlines. State. One for domestic flights. Others are for foreign.


    And will it give something? Well, besides raising prices (monopoly) and closing unprofitable routes (that is, all small transportation)? For example, hundreds of companies work in the USA, but after a series of sensitive disasters, both due to the fault of pilots and poor maintenance of equipment (the worst catastrophe in the USA was before the 90's - the engine came off on take-off, we figured it out, the technicians optimized the process removed the engine from the wing with the loader together with the pylon, and then pushed the fasteners back - the fasteners cracked, a crack started to grow - the pylon came off, interrupted the hydraulic lines, the wing mechanization was pressed in and because of the distortion of the lifting force they crashed into the hangar), they significantly twisted the nut ki, more control, more reporting, sudden spot checks of both pilots and the technical process.

    It is also necessary to refuse leasing of foreign junk. And do the production of their civilian aircraft.


    This is a very global challenge. Now not a single country in the world (generally in everything) can provide itself with its aircraft. Companies in the USA fly on Embraers, Lierzhet and Airbuses with the Asia-Pacific Region, with a live Boeing. Companies in France fly on Boeing, Asia-Pacific, Embraers with live Airbus.

    Yes, and not the fact that the plane is to blame. Or he can be partially to blame. For example, the Turks crashed an absolutely serviceable plane - the reason was Wasp’s nest pit in the pipes (the technicians didn’t put the plugs), this gave the wrong speed, could not navigate in the clouds and went into a tailspin.
    1. Orionvit
      Orionvit 1 November 2015 13: 20 New
      +2
      In the states, with hundreds of airlines, only one organization deals with flight safety. And so that no one could put pressure on this structure, it is headed not by some average official, but by the US president. He also has such a position, maybe even a purely nominal one. It seems to be thought to him that there is nothing more to do? But they adopted such a law. And I think that this move had the best effect on flight safety.
  • bastard
    bastard 1 November 2015 11: 17 New
    +2
    Quote: Enot-poloskun
    What is this Kagalymavia? What the hell is this?

    This is probably a way for officials to dump responsibility on all sorts of Marmyzha-Avia, Kobelyaki-fly and Syktym Wings. Well, kickbacks with requisitions, of course.
  • Vladimir 1964
    Vladimir 1964 1 November 2015 12: 03 New
    +1
    Quote: Enot-poloskun
    It is time to return the airline industry to state control.


    Dear Enot-poloskun, the industry is officially under the control of the state, and there are several bodies implementing it. The question is how is this control implemented? In addition, everyone understands that airlines like Kagalym .. a priori are not able to organize transportation at a level that ensures safety, for the simple reason that its working capital is not enough for all necessary for this event. And the organization of air transportation at the appropriate safety level is an expensive and multifaceted event.
  • VSC
    VSC 1 November 2015 12: 16 New
    +1
    They ditched their aircraft industry in order to have a bribe from Boeing and Airbus. Now they say that 18 years for an airplane is not age (they don’t remember how they operated and serviced). But the Samara Aviation is even worse than in Voronezh: there are no orders, a little repair and updating of the old boards, people scattered, they generally wanted to cover the production and give the Bosh plant to warehouses.
  • SPLV
    SPLV 1 November 2015 12: 29 New
    +1
    Quote: Enot-poloskun
    It is also necessary to refuse leasing of foreign junk
    And you did not forget that in our country a legislative step has been taken that kills the training of domestic specialists? I mean permission to hire foreign pilots. Everything purposefully moves towards feudalism. Soon there will be no specialists left - there will be no one to educate. The teaching staff is being destroyed and not developing.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • andrey70179
    andrey70179 1 November 2015 13: 47 New
    +5
    Guys !!!! What to guess, just on TV in the news they said that the wreckage of the aircraft scattered over an area of ​​30 km. What is this talking about? Yes, the campaign that he was blown up at high altitude. Is it logical? If there was a malfunction, he would collectively fall to the ground in one “piece” (I apologize for the word), and so .... well, you understand me. One thing is bad .. to hell with it with this iron ..... people feel sorry for (((((((((((((.
    1. sabakina
      sabakina 1 November 2015 14: 27 New
      +2
      I also wanted to write about it. There was an opportunity to compare the crash of that Boeing, our 321 and just (damn it, sorry, I do not know how to correctly write) a plane crash.
      It sounds wild that he wrote, but life is life ...
    2. glasha3032
      glasha3032 2 November 2015 00: 14 New
      +1
      In life, everything happens - the plane could fall apart from overloads.
  • kot28.ru
    kot28.ru 1 November 2015 14: 52 New
    +2
    In the year 2012, he went on a business trip from Blagoveshchensk, the Transaero, Boeing, and so, flew away more than a day later due to a plane malfunction, it landed with difficulty, the third time, the landing gear was defective! I flew off as a result, which surpassed from Moscow during the night! In general, it’s better to develop and revive their work, and work for people and we are calmer! Transport workers are all domestic, military aircraft, too, and then caved in for the sake of someone’s business projects and just huckster in the ministries! their time with a broom! There is no Stalin on them!
  • soxantg39
    soxantg39 1 November 2015 16: 52 New
    +2
    Quote: Enot-poloskun
    Sick !!!

    This is not the first plane to crash in recent years. I hope the last ...

    It is time to return the airline industry to state control. Leave 2-3 Airlines. State. One for domestic flights. Others are for foreign.

    What is this Kagalymavia? What the hell is this? And they are not the only ones ... Hired an old rotten plane, chopped loot, saving on security!

    18 years the plane was operated! And most of them are abroad!

    It is also necessary to refuse leasing of foreign junk. And do the production of their civilian aircraft.


    Absolutely agree!!! Enough to "play" in a market economy, it is time to return the state to the main industries !!! A bunch of private airlines - this is nonsense !!!
  • tolan_petrovich
    tolan_petrovich 2 November 2015 11: 25 New
    +1
    Hello.
    Add: and not only aircraft, but also buses, at least.
  • Sasha_Sar
    Sasha_Sar 2 November 2015 12: 30 New
    +2
    It’s not so easy to build an airplane; it’s possible to ruin aircraft manufacturing in several years, for example, the Saratov Aviation Plant. There was a factory and there is no factory (thanks to Mr. Ermishin), for that there was a territory (land) almost in the center of the city. What we have on it, rightly, a hypermarket and skyscrapers and even zemlytsev are not left to measure for development, but there is also an airfield (or rather land). Well, if you wear pink glasses and imagine that the state gave the "dough" for the revival of the plant, where the human resource that will build these aircraft. Ulyanovsk AVIASTAR A-U. The whole city was built as a factory and where are 30 aircraft per year Tu 204 ?. Super jet vaunted, where? There are orders, but no planes ...
  • ism_ek
    ism_ek 2 November 2015 12: 55 New
    0
    Quote: Enot-poloskun
    It is time to return the airline industry to state control. Leave 2-3 Airlines. State. One for domestic flights. Others are for foreign.

    We have a monopolist in the field of railway transportation ....
    Suburban traffic is almost collapsed. Livestock is transported in the best conditions. Electric trains are massively closing .... Traveling to compartment cars is more expensive than flying on an airplane ...
    Destroying competition in aviation is very simple. Going back will be impossible.
  • volot-voin
    volot-voin 1 November 2015 08: 06 New
    +8
    Quote: afdjhbn67
    Yes, if I had run .. the problem has long existed and therefore, against the backdrop of the tragedy, the article is especially hard on the nerves ..

    Whatever it is, a terrorist attack or a breakdown, the problem does not disappear. We fly on imported junk, instead of developing our aircraft industry. They handed over such an important industry to hucksters, and they are used to saving on everything, including our security.
    It's time to announce sanctions to the Boeing.
    My deepest condolences to the relatives of the victims, unfortunately anyone can be in their place.
  • shtanko.49
    shtanko.49 1 November 2015 10: 54 New
    +4
    I wonder how many Khristenko got kickbacks on the paw for ditching our aircraft industry. And why our government is not doing anything, they would all be gathered on that plane, everyone would cross themselves with relief.
  • Koshak
    Koshak 1 November 2015 13: 35 New
    +3
    Quote: afdjhbn67
    the problem has long existed and therefore, against the backdrop of the tragedy, the article is especially hard on the nerves ..

    The article is good, it’s only a pity that things will not go further than discussion on this site. Those officials on whom it all depends are unlikely to enter VO.
  • Starley from the south
    Starley from the south 1 November 2015 15: 46 New
    +4
    One obvious conclusion can be drawn from this tragedy - it is necessary to produce and buy domestic aircraft. Of course, this will require significant funds. And the problem is not as simple as it seems (although setting up the production of our own aircraft on the right scale is an extremely complicated task). The problem is servicing our aircraft abroad. Foreign airlines will not let us into their own and service-controlled markets, as they have not allowed to do so far. Therefore, first of all, it is necessary to create favorable conditions (legislative, tax and others) for the operation of our aircraft with us. Our planes should fly on the domestic line and no Boeing and Watermelon! Yes, and domestic carriers need to be enlarged, then the money will be for new planes.
    R.S. Although I am not a supporter of the conspiracy theory, no one excludes the likelihood that during the production of Boeings and Watermelons programs are not sewn into their electronics that, upon signal from a satellite, can destroy some aircraft systems. You should not forget about this either.
  • Yars
    Yars 1 November 2015 18: 01 New
    +3
    Quote: afdjhbn67
    Quote: NKVD
    Author, do not run forward carts!

    Yes, if I had run .. the problem has long existed and therefore, against the backdrop of the tragedy, the article is especially hard on the nerves ..

    in the west, too, planes are falling, and what does it mean that they are out of date ?!
    This tragedy smacks of the provocation of the "friendly" Western partners to us, and the successful strikes of Russian aviation on the ISIS loyal west are very frustrating for them. It is in their style! ! !
  • Esso
    Esso 1 November 2015 20: 22 New
    +3
    I decided to speak, in fact the problem is acute. It so happened with the collapse of the Union that all of us beggars were blown up to rake in money, whoever can do it from wherever! Business does not count people, only profit. Medvedev and Putin fly to IL-96. The plane is good and it is often checked. We have a lot of lawlessness in the country, starting from counterfeiting of spare parts for aircraft (which I don’t hear about the last, they solved the problem in the process) to the old foreign rubbish. Our aviation industry has turned into the so-called, we can produce sell for the same hill! Sukhoysuperjet 100, Ms-21, tu-204.
    The tragedy in Tatarstan
    AIR TRAGEDY IN KAZAN. ALL DIED, INCLUDING THE SON OF THE PRESIDENT OF TATARSTAN
    An example of what happens when one of the officials' children dies.
    Epilogue According to the results of the audit conducted after this disaster, Rosaviatsia decided to revoke the certificate of the company’s operator.
    Aeroflot company (do not consider it advertising, the most reliable airline company at the moment, I do not take into account its subsidiaries) The pilot training base has been preserved there. I try to fly with this airline.
    What about other companies, they survive, practically make ends meet and they don’t have money for new planes! No! Everything eats away from taxes, payments of loans and salaries! The state doesn’t really support! There are of course those who just want to profit and shit on safety. As they say everything from leadership policy.
    We have the same circular problem with banks and their crazy interest on loans! Then the strings go to the Central Bank and Putin who was not allowed to privatize him!
    Abroad, banks give loans to residents and private owners within the country from 3-8%. That's where we returned to the money problem. The state should reduce small air carriers. Aeroflot should become a locomotive. (Refused to buy Transaero, it does not need crazy debts and pay on loans) Privatize the Central Bank! It’s strictly for banks: The interest on loans should be minimal, especially for government agencies, whose activities relate to the security of the country and its citizens, these are strategic untouchable things. We live on the economic problem of the West, that’s all the problems we have, starting from falling planes, ( it’s not profitable to produce ourselves), destroyed by agriculture (producing high-quality products is not profitable), stupid USE means poor education, hello Livanov!
    PS is ready to fly quietly with other companies on old airbuses and Boeing, if D.A. is sitting next to me Medvedev, I will be calmer if we die, at least something in our air transportation will change. I’m wildly afraid of flying, but my wife loves it! Why, in order for a small airline to close, an official’s relative or ordinary people should not die for their careless safety attitude .....!
    I really hope that the Petersburgers will not let this matter slip on the brakes. Let the earth be lost to the dead ..... Scary. of course!!!
  • tank64rus
    tank64rus 1 November 2015 21: 51 New
    +1
    Foreign planes buy similar small companies at aviakladishchi, where such small companies can buy a plane or, more precisely, auto rubbish at bargain prices. About five years ago after another disaster, even a documentary was shown. Then they forgot to another disaster. Lord, when Christians will be removed from power. After all, they harm as much as they can.
  • tank64rus
    tank64rus 1 November 2015 21: 51 New
    +1
    Foreign planes buy similar small companies at aviakladishchi, where such small companies can buy a plane or, more precisely, auto rubbish at bargain prices. About five years ago after another disaster, even a documentary was shown. Then they forgot to another disaster. Lord, when Christians will be removed from power. After all, they harm as much as they can.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • red_october
    red_october 2 November 2015 10: 43 New
    -1
    The specialized ministry of civil aviation is urgently needed, which would be entrusted with the solution of all the safety issues of air travel.
  • 89043515687
    89043515687 2 November 2015 19: 42 New
    +1
    It seems that the Americans about these falling planes said ****** our military females are not for them to slog. always these underdeveloped were vile freaks and besides ordinary citizens they have no strength to kill (But they will get an answer according to all the rules of international law ......
  • Ghenxnumx
    Ghenxnumx 2 November 2015 23: 18 New
    +1
    In the UAE, the only airline Emirate Airlines is a state airline and they will not let any of the private traders into this industry, and they see no monopoly in this.
    It would be nice for us to do so, and not just copy fountains from them.
  • Insurgent LC
    Insurgent LC 3 November 2015 22: 53 New
    0
    In my opinion, such a tragedy was already on August 12, 1985. Airliner Boeing 747SR-46 of Japan Airlines in Tokyo, one hundred percent coincidence also operated a Boeing with a damaged tail, but no one draws conclusions, the thirst for money overshadowed everything, and people and the hardest children die
  • Just BB
    Just BB 1 November 2015 06: 20 New
    -8
    smile
    You might think, fool what the true cause of the tragedy will tell you
    1. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 08: 58 New
      +4
      Quote: Just VV
      You might think that they will tell you the true cause of the tragedy

      personally, you personally and I personally could not say anything, neither you nor I have any relation to this, it’s important that the experts understand and draw conclusions
      1. Just BB
        Just BB 1 November 2015 12: 49 New
        +1
        Had for 15 years and I know how everything is made out ...
        Thank you for the "minus" - the level of competence of the audience good
        1. Vasilenko Vladimir
          Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 13: 04 New
          0
          what have you had for 15 years ?!
          1. Just BB
            Just BB 1 November 2015 15: 50 New
            0
            investigations of flight accidents and incidents - sorry, for some reason it was forwarded in a trimmed form
            1. Vasilenko Vladimir
              Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 18: 32 New
              0
              then you don’t need to bring it to me, well, if you’re in a “clip” you need to
        2. perm23
          perm23 1 November 2015 13: 57 New
          +2
          Put a plus. BUT all the same, since you have had the experience of fighting so that everything comes. Not like that. - that all the same deceive.
          1. sabakina
            sabakina 1 November 2015 14: 31 New
            +2
            Quote: Just VV
            Had for 15 years and I know how everything is made out ...
            Thank you for the "minus" - the level of competence of the audience good

            I think right now is not 2000 ... And the truth about the Kursk will still come up ...
            1. Just BB
              Just BB 1 November 2015 15: 53 New
              0
              "Honor uniform" - there is such a thing. Here it is "protected" by all sorts of methods
            2. Amurets
              Amurets 2 November 2015 05: 13 New
              0
              She surfaced a long time ago.
          2. Just BB
            Just BB 1 November 2015 15: 55 New
            0
            Already got out -"time is over"
  • dpu
    dpu 1 November 2015 06: 40 New
    30
    But DAM, said that the Yak-42 "the worst aircraft in the world", when the deceased near Yaroslavl "did not cool down." And no investigation has yet begun. Although the fault is at 100 %% of the airport, the company and then the crew. But what about the materiel? A.uper A-321 - old junk.
    1. Turkestan
      Turkestan 1 November 2015 09: 00 New
      +4
      Do you think that 18 years of operation is OLD JUNK ???
      WELL. WELL.
      1. vladimirZ
        vladimirZ 1 November 2015 09: 23 New
        +7
        Do you think that 18 years of operation is OLD JUNK ???
        WELL. WELL.
        - Turkestan

        You are probably not quite up to date. Yes, an airplane can be operated for more than 18 years, BUT everything depends on the strength and durability inherent in it, an hour raid, and the economic development of the state operating the aircraft, its economic power.
        There is an estimated life of the aircraft, which is appointed by the manufacturer, it is calculated in flight hours. Usually it is from 30 to 60 thousand hours. But the operation in our time is carried out according to the "actual state", after which aviation security is reduced.
        Usually, government agencies regulate aviation security. For example, in the United States, the Federal Aviation Agency banned the operation of passenger aircraft over the United States with a flying time of more than 60 thousand hours. But these planes are purchased in the United States on the cheap, many countries, including Russia.
        Well-established airlines usually get rid of airliners over 12-15 years old, but these machines continue to be used in third world countries, where airplanes that are 35-40 years old or more are not uncommon.
        So that it is possible to operate aircraft older than 18 years, and more than 35-40 years of operation, but this is the lot of the underdeveloped countries of the Third World, probably to which Russia can already be attributed, judging by the planes on which its citizens are transported.
        1. SPLV
          SPLV 1 November 2015 13: 00 New
          +4
          Quote: vladimirZ
          So that you can operate aircraft older than 18 years, and more than 35-40 years of operation, but this is the lot of underdeveloped third world countries

          The example is not from civil aviation, but indicative. Remember when the B-52 was produced. And nothing fly. Just the continuation of their operation is associated with a very significant investment. And the private owner does not want to go to great expenses.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. perm23
          perm23 1 November 2015 14: 00 New
          +2
          Thank you very much, it’s good when there is a knowledgeable person and can correctly explain.
          Yes, in normal countries they clean and in the 3 countries of the world they sell. Of course, a plane can fly a hundred years. With proper care. But best of all is proper care and a new plane.
      2. Stas157
        Stas157 1 November 2015 10: 16 New
        +4
        Quote: Turkestan
        Do you think that 18 years of operation is OLD JUNK ???
        WELL. WELL.

        So say the former A321 operators, Saudis, Turks, Syrians, who got rid of this junk, obviously in order to get yourself something newer!
      3. tomket
        tomket 1 November 2015 12: 46 New
        -1
        Quote: Turkestan
        Do you think that 18 years of operation is OLD JUNK ???
        WELL. WELL.

        It turns out falling brand new aircraft? Well then, it’s generally no way .....
    2. Amurets
      Amurets 1 November 2015 12: 42 New
      +7
      Quote: dpu
      But DAM, said that the Yak-42 "the worst aircraft in the world",

      But DAM understands aviation like a pig in oranges. A lawyer who does not have a penchant for technology, that he understands this. Let him learn how to password protect his iPhone. He would be dragged to court for such statements abroad.
    3. tomket
      tomket 1 November 2015 12: 45 New
      +5
      Quote: dpu
      But DAM, said that the Yak-42 "the worst aircraft in the world"

      And there that, charging for an iPhone was not found?
      1. sa-ag
        sa-ag 1 November 2015 13: 00 New
        +5
        Quote: tomket
        And there that, charging for an iPhone was not found?

        WiFi is missing there :-)
        1. sabakina
          sabakina 1 November 2015 14: 41 New
          +1
          Modern airplanes are not LI-2, not Cornfield ... Care and money are needed ...
          Chkalov proved with his flight that Russian planes are the most volatile.
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. saltickov.
      saltickov. 1 November 2015 07: 27 New
      +4
      here he is the sales functionary himself and whined on a truthful article.
    2. 89043515687
      89043515687 1 November 2015 08: 27 New
      +3
      Just whining and wheezing from your text rolls over))) laughing
    3. afdjhbn67
      afdjhbn67 1 November 2015 09: 16 New
      0
      Quote: EGOrkka
      how disgusting it becomes to read.

      So you do not read-the collective farm is voluntary .. wassat
  • Aksakal_07
    Aksakal_07 1 November 2015 07: 32 New
    +3
    You suggest to wait until the next plane crash? It turns out that among the authors of our forum there is a whole fan club of defenders of imported air junk!
    1. Down House
      Down House 1 November 2015 09: 00 New
      +3
      Quote: Aksakal_07
      It turns out that among the authors of our forum there is a whole fan club of defenders of imported air junk!

      I doubt that the "import trash" has fans, there are simply people who understand the obvious things: any aircraft should initially be profitable for the carrier.
      Therefore, our planes are absolutely necessary, but for them to be bought (including foreign carriers) they must not be inferior to Western competitors in the same noise / environmental friendliness, otherwise there will be no sense in them.
      1. Camel
        Camel 1 November 2015 09: 39 New
        +1
        they should not be inferior to Western competitors in the same noise / environmental friendliness otherwise they will not be of any use.

        On domestic routes, the Euroregulation is not valid, so the aircraft are not limited in noise and ecology. On external lines, yes, you can let quiet and "environmentally friendly."
        1. Down House
          Down House 1 November 2015 09: 47 New
          0
          Quote: Camel
          On domestic routes, the Euroregulation is not valid, so the aircraft are not limited in noise and ecology. On external lines, yes, you can let quiet and "environmentally friendly."

          That's exactly what:
          The volume of domestic traffic is not enough to pay off the development and production of a truly modern aircraft.
          It is initially not profitable for carriers to buy an aircraft capable of operating only in a single region.
          1. Vasilenko Vladimir
            Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 10: 18 New
            0
            Quote: Down House
            The volume of domestic traffic is not enough to pay off the development and production of a truly modern aircraft.
            and in numbers you can justify
            1. Down House
              Down House 1 November 2015 10: 41 New
              -1
              Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
              and in numbers you can justify

              They will not approve, but I read about 250 regional aircraft.
              This is only enough to recoup a single aircraft, and still need to make a profit, and we also have several manufacturers of these same aircraft.
              And this is the problem - they cannot sell so many planes to recoup their production - it is imperative to enter foreign markets.
              1. Vasilenko Vladimir
                Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 10: 59 New
                +1
                Quote: Down House
                They will not approve, but I read about 250 regional aircraft.
                This is only enough to recoup a single plane

                So what?!
                But how many planes are required in the domestic market? !!!
                Quote: Down House
                And this is the problem - they cannot sell so many planes to recoup their production - it is imperative to enter foreign markets.

                and what does this mean? !!!
                1. Down House
                  Down House 1 November 2015 12: 48 New
                  0
                  Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                  But how many planes are required in the domestic market? !!!

                  Wrote about 250.
                  Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                  and what does this mean? !!!

                  From the fact that the demand for aircraft in the domestic market is less than the amount needed for the development of a truly new aircraft to pay off.
                  1. Vasilenko Vladimir
                    Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 13: 13 New
                    0
                    Quote: Down House
                    Wrote about 250.

                    Are you seriously?! can source
                    1. Down House
                      Down House 1 November 2015 13: 47 New
                      0
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                      can source

                      Is Aeroflot suitable?
                      161 aircraft and 23,6 million passengers last year.
                      Of the 125 destinations, only 51 are located in the CIS.
                      Catch the logic?
              2. sa-ag
                sa-ag 1 November 2015 11: 02 New
                +2
                Quote: Down House
                in order to recoup their production, it is imperative to enter foreign markets.

                or can the manufacturer lease the airline, then the financial burden will not be as burdensome as with the purchase of a new plane
                1. Down House
                  Down House 1 November 2015 12: 51 New
                  0
                  Quote: sa-ag
                  can the manufacturer lease the airline

                  Well, this is already done for a long time.
          2. perm23
            perm23 1 November 2015 14: 03 New
            0
            Come on . Well, how much everything can be measured by profit. How long we will have it. Profitable not profitable. It is necessary. So you have to do it. And your planes and excellent pilots, and may I be foreign aircraft, but good and new.
            1. afdjhbn67
              afdjhbn67 2 November 2015 04: 02 New
              +1
              Quote: perm23
              Come on . Well, how much everything can be measured by profit.

              At least a strange question for those living under the capitalist system ...
        2. Vasilenko Vladimir
          Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 10: 10 New
          +6
          Quote: Camel
          On domestic lines, the European regulation is not valid

          it seems to me that the geo-regulation sought and achieved one goal: the destruction of our aircraft industry and the screwing of their equipment, to introduce reciprocal regulations
          1. sa-ag
            sa-ag 1 November 2015 10: 30 New
            +3
            Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
            it seems to me that the geo-regulation sought and achieved one goal: the destruction of our aircraft industry and the screwing of their equipment, to introduce reciprocal regulations

            But maybe something else? For example, a reduction in noise and emissions is associated with a more complete combustion of fuel and an increase in power, therefore, you can take more passengers, at a reduced fuel consumption, and hence get a big profit
            1. Vasilenko Vladimir
              Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 10: 33 New
              0
              Do you think that Europe cares about the profits of our airlines?
              1. sa-ag
                sa-ag 1 November 2015 10: 59 New
                +2
                Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                Do you think that Europe cares about the profits of our airlines?

                No, of course, they were concerned about the profit of their companies, which is why they introduced requirements, forcing manufacturers to improve technology, the USSR was behind in this regard, so its liners were forced to leave the European market
                1. Vasilenko Vladimir
                  Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 11: 08 New
                  +2
                  only with all this, the prices for air transportation in the USSR were several times lower
                  Alma-Ata Moscow 82 rubles
                  1. sa-ag
                    sa-ag 1 November 2015 11: 37 New
                    0
                    Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                    Alma-Ata Moscow 82 rubles

                    I would not say that this is a low price
                    1. afdjhbn67
                      afdjhbn67 1 November 2015 11: 53 New
                      -1
                      Quote: sa-ag
                      I would not say that this is a low price

                      I agree 86 rubles Ulan-Ude - Moscow .. I remember a tangible hit on a skinny wallet ..
                    2. Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 12: 16 New
                      +1
                      and how much is now and what is the real salary in Ulan Ude
                    3. afdjhbn67
                      afdjhbn67 1 November 2015 12: 44 New
                      0
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                      and how much is now and what is the real salary in Ulan Ude

                      Volodya, now he costs about 16 thousand rubles if one way Well, the average salary is declared 35 thousand, but for some reason no one believes and laughs nervously ... (the average temperature in the hospital is with the morgue)
                      Something then the site to hang began to overheat from emotions, it somehow broke through to answer hi
                    4. Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 12: 49 New
                      +4
                      that is, Aunt Dusya, a cleaner, will definitely not fly to Maaskwa with her child without it.

                      But after the Union, the student could fly off the discount was 30%, for schoolchildren 50
                      By the way, I asked not the middle one, but the real one
                    5. afdjhbn67
                      afdjhbn67 1 November 2015 13: 09 New
                      0
                      Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
                      By the way, I asked not the middle one, but the real one

                      My general is to blame, I am correcting myself - the average HBZ, probably 15-20 tr ... recourse
                    6. Vasilenko Vladimir
                      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 13: 28 New
                      +1
                      it turns out that with the union and one airline ticket prices were cheaper?
          2. Vasilenko Vladimir
            Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 12: 13 New
            0
            compare with today, by the way the school cost 40
          3. sa-ag
            sa-ag 1 November 2015 12: 20 New
            0
            Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
            compare with today

            What to compare with? For example, an EasyJet ticket from London to Rome costs an average of £ 60
          4. Vasilenko Vladimir
            Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 12: 50 New
            +1
            let's not compare buses with wings
    2. a housewife
      a housewife 1 November 2015 20: 21 New
      0
      Salary in the USSR postal operator or kindergarten teacher.
    3. a housewife
      a housewife 1 November 2015 20: 21 New
      0
      Salary in the USSR postal operator or kindergarten teacher.
      1. Vasilenko Vladimir
        Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 21: 15 New
        +1
        compare with the salary of a postal operator today
  • Down House
    Down House 1 November 2015 10: 44 New
    +1
    Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
    The regulation sought and achieved one goal: the destruction of our aviation industry

    No, this is a consequence of the global practice of the struggle for the environment.
    And these are not only such trends in the aircraft industry, but the same trends in the automotive industry.
    1. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 11: 00 New
      +3
      Quote: Down House
      global environmental practices.

      Are you seriously?!
      as a rule, grandmothers and not ecology stand behind all this struggle
      1. Down House
        Down House 1 November 2015 12: 56 New
        0
        Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
        as a rule, grandmothers and not ecology stand behind all this struggle

        And this too, but specifically aircraft manufacturers from this have not a penny.
        1. Vasilenko Vladimir
          Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 13: 29 New
          +1
          have more like they have, especially us swami
          1. Down House
            Down House 1 November 2015 13: 49 New
            -1
            Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
            especially us swami

            Us?!
            How?!
            They never even heard about us and don’t want to know anything! Calm down! ))))
            1. Vasilenko Vladimir
              Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 15: 47 New
              +1
              you see, they didn’t hear, but they have, but the technique reached the point
            2. Down House
              Down House 1 November 2015 16: 03 New
              +1
              Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
              you see, they didn’t hear, but they have, but the technique reached the point

              Well, tell the truck faster how exactly they do it, otherwise nobody knows except you.
  • complete zero
    complete zero 1 November 2015 11: 18 New
    +6
    - "initially it should be profitable" ... yes it should NOT be profitable but RELIABLE and SIMPLE, so that in the situation that arose suddenly the pilot would not rummage like a schoolboy in notebooks in search of reasons and their solutions but KNOW how to do it ... profitability the corpse does not need ... (reliability is the main criterion for all of our Ilov.Anov, Carcasses) reliability and simplicity
  • alekc73
    alekc73 1 November 2015 07: 41 New
    +8
    Roman is right. The problem is old. Where profit rules and money for human life rules. They will buy western auto trash instead of new domestic aircraft, because it’s profitable. Money in the first place is the law of the market.
    1. perm23
      perm23 1 November 2015 14: 06 New
      0
      That's right, not everything needs to be measured by profit.
  • vovanpain
    vovanpain 1 November 2015 09: 01 New
    14
    Quote: NKVD
    Author, do not run ahead of the cart! The investigation has just begun, there are still no conclusions.

    Nobody runs ahead of the engine, rather, on the contrary, the author beats all the bells and has long been beating at the position that now exists in civil aviation.
  • Alekseev
    Alekseev 1 November 2015 09: 09 New
    +7
    Quote: NKVD
    Author, do not run forward carts!

    The author does not run ahead of any carts.
    But the matter is somewhat more complicated. During the years of perestroika, we had a significant lag in the development of competitive commercial aviation. Yes, and organizational team. Indeed, why dozens of weak airlines that do not fully meet the requirements of this highly responsible industry?
    And IL-96, the plane is good, but outdated, alas. On the machines of this class now put not 4 engine, and two ... Here's your efficiency, and payload. We, unfortunately, do not produce engines of this class ...
    Tu-204 is more competitive. BUT and it is 5 tons heavier than the A-321 with the same passenger capacity. So much for the same end and the same place.
    Could this car be upgraded? In theory, probably yes. But in practice in the 90s - this is unlikely ...
    Now, as far as the fleet is concerned, we are trying to catch up.
    Our hopes are the MS-21 and Superjet, the development on the basis of IL-96 of a new range of composites with motors based on the technologies acquired when working on the PD-14 project.
    May God grant success.
    And airlines like the same “Flight” that had sat down at one time in Voronezh and the like should be driven into three necks.
    By the way, all over the world in such cases as the current airline must pay substantial compensation to relatives. Will it do Kalamavia, which does not have a dozen liners?
    1. Banshee
      1 November 2015 09: 20 New
      +1
      Quote: Alekseev
      And airlines like the same “Flight” that had sat down at one time in Voronezh and the like should be driven into three necks.


      "Flight" flew away. Already happy.

      Quote: Alekseev
      And IL-96, the plane is good, but outdated, alas. On the machines of this class now put not 4 engine, and two ... Here's your efficiency, and payload. We, unfortunately, do not produce engines of this class ...


      It's a shame that they do not. BUT: you can, of course, buy engines. It is still cheaper than the whole plane. And so much dough does not float abroad.
      1. evge-malyshev
        evge-malyshev 1 November 2015 11: 13 New
        +1
        Quote: Banshee
        You can, of course, engines and buy


        Better yet, develop. True, for the future.
    2. cesar65
      cesar65 1 November 2015 10: 13 New
      0
      Quote: Alekseev
      And IL-96, the plane is good, but outdated, alas.

      But the A-321 is not outdated? 18 flew for years, and when the first sample flew? The first flight of the 1987. How do you think the new one? If the IL-96 had been operated as much time, there would have been modifications as the Tu-154 had been modified at one time.
      1. Alekseev
        Alekseev 1 November 2015 10: 49 New
        +5
        Quote: cesar65
        But the A-321 is not out of date?

        You read a book, that is a comment, but, unfortunately, you don’t perceive. no
        Once again about the "outdated." Here, the years are not critical.
        Here is another. Tu-214 weighs about 60 tons (empty). A-321 about 50. Passengers take the same.
        Each ton of weight is extra kerosene, and now it costs 32-36 rubles. per liter.
        Why is that? However, the manufacturing technology is of varying degrees.
        The same applies to the IL-96.
        Four motors with systems can't weigh lighter than two
        But that's not all.
        MOT of our cars due to a number of reasons, including a small series, is by no means cheaper than Airbus and Boeing.
        In general, the problem is complex. It is not for nothing that only two companies massively produce mainline aircraft in the USA and the EU.
        This is not just the scandal and sabotage of "individual civilians." Here general level of development many industries need to raise. What they are trying to do now through the projects PD-14, MS-21 and, in part, the Superjet.
      2. evge-malyshev
        evge-malyshev 1 November 2015 11: 18 New
        0
        Quote: cesar65
        If the IL-96 was operated as much time, there would be modifications, as the Tu-154 was modified at one time.

        and IL-62
      3. Vadim237
        Vadim237 1 November 2015 12: 40 New
        0
        Actually, the A 321 that crashed was put into operation in 1996, and 18 years of operation for airliners is normal.
        1. perm23
          perm23 2 November 2015 12: 27 New
          0
          Only probably the director of this airline does not go to Merce who is 18 years old. A plane that has already been sold more than once before cannot be normal.
    3. Awaz
      Awaz 1 November 2015 10: 17 New
      +6
      I'm not a big specialist, of course, in aviation, but in the same TU 204, excess weight is most likely associated with safety and durability. As I recall, the Superjet project was drawn on a Boeing, but ours had to completely revise it due to lack of safety margin. That is, in the course there everything was "drawn" on the maximum possible minima of tolerances. But in the USSR they always knew how to make gliders for airplanes, and I don’t think that we could not bring the TU 204 or IL 96 to more or less decent indicators. About engines: even in the most difficult post-war years, when the Cold War broke out, the USSR was able to buy licenses for the production of Rolls Royce jet engines for the Mig .. There are probably enough engineers who would then be able to keep the quality and parameters of these units at the proper level and modernize them in accordance with the realities of progress.
      1. complete zero
        complete zero 1 November 2015 11: 13 New
        0
        Mikoyan did not buy them, but won billiards with a representative (or director Royce))))
        1. Awaz
          Awaz 1 November 2015 11: 57 New
          +1
          Well, I also heard such a version ... But still, we acted honestly, unlike the Americans, who not only steered the engines but also the plane itself ..
          1. complete zero
            complete zero 1 November 2015 12: 31 New
            0
            How much do I remember with the Me-262?
      2. aleksandrs95
        aleksandrs95 1 November 2015 11: 14 New
        0
        The main thing in our aircraft industry is avionics and engines. The glider is very good, and if you put the composite wing without assembly and hydraulics, it's just fantastic.
        1. complete zero
          complete zero 1 November 2015 12: 32 New
          0
          more (to your written) hydraulics
      3. aleksandrs95
        aleksandrs95 1 November 2015 11: 14 New
        0
        The main thing in our aircraft industry is avionics and engines. The glider is very good, and if you put the composite wing without assembly and hydraulics, it's just fantastic.
    4. glasha3032
      glasha3032 1 November 2015 13: 01 New
      +4
      4 engines "IL-96" give me, as a passenger, confidence in a happy ending, especially if you need to fly across the ocean. Examples of the crash of "Airbus" with 2 engines are plenty.
  • Banshee
    1 November 2015 09: 10 New
    +1
    Quote: NKVD
    Author, do not run forward carts!


    In your opinion, you have to wait until a couple of planes fall, right? Or hope that data about a terrorist attack or a rocket leaks from somewhere?
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 1 November 2015 09: 28 New
      +2
      In our opinion, it is necessary at the legislative level to introduce the responsibility of all those involved from below to the top. And the higher the position, the higher the measure of responsibility and the higher the level of punishment.
      1. gunya
        gunya 1 November 2015 15: 57 New
        +1
        Amur (2) RU

        In our opinion, it is necessary at the legislative level to introduce the responsibility of all those involved from below to the top. And the higher the position, the higher the measure of responsibility and the higher the level of punishment.


  • guzik007
    guzik007 1 November 2015 09: 37 New
    +1
    Actually, the author tried to say something completely different, if you didn’t understand.
  • Siberian1965
    Siberian1965 1 November 2015 09: 50 New
    +1
    The conclusion is long-standing and unequivocal - it is necessary to build YOUR aircraft, regardless of the results of the investigation !!
    1. Oprychnik
      Oprychnik 1 November 2015 09: 53 New
      +1
      100% agree with you, Roman! Yesterday, my son and I discussed this topic in the same vein.
  • gunya
    gunya 1 November 2015 10: 39 New
    +2
    NKVD (1) SU

    Author, do not run ahead of the cart! The investigation has just begun, there are still no conclusions.


    Is it too late to run, or will you deny that instead of reviving the domestic airfield, we feed a foreign one and actually fly on a charge?
    It's time to take up the mind!
  • evge-malyshev
    evge-malyshev 1 November 2015 10: 39 New
    +2
    Quote: NKVD
    no conclusions yet


    And what conclusions do you want to wait?
    The author has already made some conclusions, including: “Russia needs a fleet of new domestic airplanes. Russian aircraft builders should be fed by updating the fleet, and not officials who deal with contracts for the supply of air junk from the bounties of the West.”
  • evge-malyshev
    evge-malyshev 1 November 2015 10: 39 New
    0
    Quote: NKVD
    no conclusions yet


    And what conclusions do you want to wait?
    The author has already made some conclusions, including: “Russia needs a fleet of new domestic airplanes. Russian aircraft builders should be fed by updating the fleet, and not officials who deal with contracts for the supply of air junk from the bounties of the West.”
    1. BMW
      BMW 1 November 2015 12: 36 New
      +1
      A little off topic, but essentially.
      I also wanted to focus on the moral and ethical behavior during the disaster of our valiant media, and in particular the main news channel "Russia-24".
      The three previous hours, before the final submission of information about the crash of the aircraft, were broadcast on the air different versions of what was happening, sometimes contradicting each other. In particular, from the original about the loss of communication, to the collapse of what happened for various reasons. I was especially outraged by the information submitted 5-10 minutes before the finally confirmed information about the crash, which was that the plane was in Turkish airspace. Really it was impossible to refrain from "savoring" what had happened, moreover, having at this moment practically no reliable information.
      I’m just scared to imagine what was happening at that moment in the souls of loved ones, from complete despair to relief from joy, and vice versa.
      1. perm23
        perm23 1 November 2015 14: 08 New
        +1
        That's for sure. The main thing is to give info on all channels. And drive her. And how are they to people what.
  • go21zd45few
    go21zd45few 1 November 2015 12: 17 New
    +2
    The question is, will they bring the whole truth about the tragedy after the investigation, or will they be written off to the crew again. Smart people have long warned of the abandonment of foreign aircraft since maintenance personnel must undergo retraining, avionics and electronics all according to Western standards. Where is the guarantee that the equipment failure was not provoked by interested parties.
  • ArhipenkoAndrey
    ArhipenkoAndrey 1 November 2015 12: 23 New
    +3
    If it were a domestic-made cart, then it would have already been banned for use in Russia, the most powerful lobby in the Duma and the government, which is kept at the salary of Boeing and Airbus, will never miss domestic aircraft in sufficient quantities for release, one Serdyukov-Taburetkin in Rostec set to oversee aviation, which is worth it, and our machines are no worse than imported, and in some ways even better, timely modernization and improvement would put everything in their place, but in Russia there was no time for this, then perestroika, then the construction of a gloomy democracy, what kind of planes are there, Medvedev’s order alone after the Yak-42 crash was worth what, in general, the creation of a state-owned airline buying domestic cars with branches all over Russia is long overdue and there is no alternative to this, or flying in constantly decreasing fleets of aircraft with huge service life and no less enormous risk for passengers.
  • efimich41
    efimich41 1 November 2015 12: 39 New
    +2
    Author, do not run ahead of the cart! The investigation has just begun, there are still no conclusions.

    It seems that you are against the restoration of the Russian aircraft industry. The author raised the topic. Aircraft need to be built, ground aviation services must be provided with qualified technical personnel, pilots and navigators must be trained, etc. All this is possible only if there is a single carrier under the guidance and supervision of the state. To the author of the article "+".
  • Starik72
    Starik72 1 November 2015 14: 51 New
    +1
    Igor. The author is right for all 100%% !!! And I am not a specialist in this industry completely agree with him!
  • starshina78
    starshina78 1 November 2015 15: 07 New
    +3
    The author writes correctly, and he is in no hurry, but only supplements what he said earlier. What will happen now can be foreseen, and one does not have to be a visionary. We go through all this every time when Russian civilian vessels are broken. The meeting of the Government, where they will talk about the shortcomings in civil aviation, will be a halt. The second will be a meeting with the President, where once again it will be said about the release of Russian aircraft. That's it! It's over. They will talk a little more on the TV box, and then everything will go as before. There will again be reports on the purchase of the next Airbus and Boeing, and everyone will forget what they talked about at meetings in the Government and the President. Because - by this time, the ambassadors from the “Airbus” and “Boeing” will visit whoever they need, leave someone who needs a “diplomat” with a certain amount and again it turns out that our Ilyas and Tushki are of poor quality, consume a lot of fuel, etc., etc. .P. . Tired !!! How many more people need to be killed in order for the Government to finally start doing business, and not nonsense.
  • Vladimir65
    Vladimir65 1 November 2015 16: 28 New
    +1
    At one time, when the Yak-42 crashed in Yaroslavl and a whole sports team died, Mr. Medvedev, long before the end of the investigation, ordered to ban the use of these aircraft and organize the purchase of foreign abroad. And now, when the A-321 crashed, all the high-ranking bureaucrats hid their heads in the sand. Yes, we need our own aviation and domestic aircraft.
  • ishkovam
    ishkovam 1 November 2015 18: 22 New
    +1
    Yes?! The cart is generally long in the ditch. There is nothing to run before. These are the long-known FACTS. Boeings - goners of old people - are scared to sit in them. I remember (it’s good to remember) how calmly I flew our years that way 30 years ago It was reliable. I support the author as a whole.
  • Army1
    Army1 1 November 2015 20: 04 New
    0
    Kogalym (hunt. Kogym - black spot) That's why call it that
  • igor.borov775
    igor.borov775 2 November 2015 15: 24 New
    +1
    Hi!! You did not understand the author correctly. If you are in the know, please explain to everyone who reads the site. WHAT IT IS FOR ORDERING MAINTENANCE OF THE AIRCRAFT. A very clear prospect for the passenger who is buying a ticket hoping for quality service. And now a little about the accidents. Remember the drowned Bulgaria. How much noise and remember the result. How many court have been jailed. This is the situation in China. Twenty-five people sat in court, among them there were many officials from the Shipping Company. In addition, several articles were additionally added to river and sea transport, gaps in legislation were taken into account, and liability was clearly specified for what the official is responsible for what the company is .. And we have. Everything is fine. Now bankrupt is a big company, but now they are talking about the same with might and main. Leasing machines have non-native parts taken from other machines of the same company. But we, ordinary passengers, thought that there shouldn’t be such a thing in principle. And how then to trust our officials from transport. If this is news for them. In principle, we have a major catastrophe in transport that brings out many problems that clearly manifest blatant impunity. So how do you understand the service ordered. In Samara, they say the board went through those services now they say no it was not ordered. That's how they carry us.
  • cherkas.oe
    cherkas.oe 2 November 2015 15: 37 New
    0
    Quote: NKVD
    Author, do not run ahead of the cart! The investigation has just begun, there are still no conclusions.

    Run do not run. We are the second largest number of air crashes after the states, despite the fact that the flight intensity is several tens of times lower. Does this tell you something?
  • THE_SEAL
    THE_SEAL 2 November 2015 16: 58 New
    +1
    NKVD, the problem is complex. We, from the filing of such as Khristenko, buy air junk that flew off wherever possible. Small companies save on everything by squeezing all of their aircraft. Security is at stake.
    Still, air transportation should be completely under state control.
  • cyberhanter
    cyberhanter 2 November 2015 18: 13 New
    0
    The question is not in the investigation of the reasons, but in principle.
  • shinobi
    shinobi 1 November 2015 05: 46 New
    +6
    Reducing to one airline, however, is overkill. But to minimize, say, one company per region with tight control from the center. Well, or as regional units of Aeroflot. And your planes. Especially on domestic routes.
    1. TVM - 75
      TVM - 75 1 November 2015 06: 06 New
      11
      It was reduced to one company, so that there was someone to ask, so that it could organize aircraft maintenance and pilot training. At the regional level, this is not possible. Right now, higher education can be obtained at universities in every gateway. For aviation, such a training and service system is simply unacceptable.
      1. obskoyd
        obskoyd 1 November 2015 06: 57 New
        21
        The main problem is that current higher education is characterized by the presence of a piece of paper, and not by education itself.
        1. SSR
          SSR 1 November 2015 07: 34 New
          +7
          Quote: obskoyd
          The main problem is that current higher education is characterized by the presence of a piece of paper, and not by education itself.

          How many incidents do uzbekiston aba yullpri (fig. Pronounce the name) have turkmeniston, and kazakhstan have breebolt hub yulari? And Belarusians and ..... You can go on for a long time ... We must take our airline owners and their founders with a fingernail, and first of all, the law should punish not only directors but also the founders. Founders set the tone for the whole company.
          1. makarick
            makarick 1 November 2015 09: 20 New
            +3
            Uzbekistan Airways. Translation: air (havo) routes. Lines (yul-rub. Road. Line. Yullari-plural. Number. Uzbekistan is understandable. This is a state-owned company. Therefore, there is more to the order. By the way, only new planes are bought. I know for sure because brother ground engineer.
          2. makarick
            makarick 1 November 2015 09: 23 New
            +2
            I’ll add that airplanes (GVF) in Uzbekistan are based only in Tashkent.
      2. venaya
        venaya 1 November 2015 07: 09 New
        +1
        Quote: TBM - 75
        It is reduced to one company, so that there is someone to ask ...

        "Who to ask"- it will happen if there are hundreds of companies. Another thing is that the human psyche is so arranged that it remembers no more than six subjects and objects (remember the number of branches), then the optimal number of companies is desirable to have no more than six. And from this number one only company, you know, there is no one to ask either, since there is no competition, and in this case even more misunderstandings are possible.
      3. vitls
        vitls 1 November 2015 12: 26 New
        -5
        That's right, but sausages need 2 varieties - doctoral and cervelat. And cars - Lada and Volga, well, the military is still UAZ.
        Well, that was all, it was, we see the result. Competition is GOOD, but competition within the framework of the law with the control of state bodies over its implementation. No competition, no development. no quality service. What for? I am ONE in the market, all the same, everyone is FORCED to bring me money.
        1. Vasilenko Vladimir
          Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 13: 01 New
          +7
          Quote: vitls
          That's right, but sausages need 2 varieties - doctoral and cervelat.

          Apparently you know about sausage in the USSR only from the words of the "starving" dissidents then
          By the way, I agree on two varieties, the main thing is that of that quality
          Quote: vitls
          What for? I am ONE in the market, all the same, everyone is FORCED to bring me money.

          stupidity, a question in goals and objectives
          1. perm23
            perm23 1 November 2015 14: 12 New
            +7
            Better than 2 varieties of sausage than 100 varieties of incomprehensible what made. And about competition, no need to listen to the wise guys from the HSE. Competition is not a panacea.
        2. bastard
          bastard 1 November 2015 21: 56 New
          +6
          Quote: vitls
          That's right, but sausages need 2 varieties - doctoral and cervelat. And cars - Lada and Volga, well, the military is still UAZ.

          I personally do not need such a variety of sausages, as now. Better a little, but from meat. These are fairy tales of liberal majorities such as Shevchuk, Weller or Orlushi that dogs and cats did not eat Soviet sausage. They ate and how! In Soviet times, when I walked past the store, I could tell by smell whether they brought fresh sausage or not. And now you go to the store - there are hundreds of varieties of sausages, but there is no proper smell. By the way, in the 70s sausages in stores were free, they took 200-300 g and cut, the deficit of these products began 3-4 years before the death of Leonid Brezhnev, when the food program was adopted until the 90th year, and think sabotage or not. The bastard sellers used to drink real sour cream with real kefir, and powdered milk was sold in the form of only powder, from milk, by the way.
          As for foreign cervelates and salami: representatives of the Soviet trade mission bought only foodstuffs abroad, because they believed that it was not worth the Soviet man to eat the compound feed that Russians now feed, like cattle, this product naturally fell into the category of deficit and, as a result, became the subject of envy and corruption, because it was purchased a little. But I managed with Korean, ham and Ocean paste made from natural crab and shrimp meat (the state price is 52 kopecks / 0.5 kg or per kilo, I don’t remember). As for 2 varieties of sausages, you, dear sir, have been misinformed, loved, so to speak.
          The assortment of foreign (Western, non-socialist countries) cigarettes was not excessive, but it was real tobacco, and not what it is now: Pall Mall, Salem, Dunhill, Ambassador, Camel, Bond, Winston, Marlboro and other less well-known brands were on the shelves in cafes and bars, and even in our food store, but they were taken tight, the price is 1 rupee, from the beginning of the 80s - 1 rub. 50 kopecks About "Partagas" and "Ligeros" (Cuba) I will not say anything modestly, they were lying almost everywhere, they were even stronger, cigar tobacco, however. But in all the shops there were Cuban cigars in some kind of aluminum pencil cases, something 60-65 kopecks, a little expensive, but if you periodically forget, enough for a day. There were cigars of domestic production, I smoked Pogor Sokol and Pogar. Now this is the inheritance of the elect.
          Okay, enough about the eater and cigars. move on to the cars.
          "Lada" and "Muscovites" I did not particularly like, but went. I liked the Volga and, as soon as there was a moment, I got behind the wheel of the Volzhanka - 3102. The car is simple, like a bicycle, strong, enough for me. Repair can be made with pliers, a hammer, and, of course, with the magic word, no processors. UAZ, especially the “loaf” (not in the current Tyap-Lyapovsky version), I consider it a masterpiece of brilliant simplicity. If you do not suffer from a handshake and you know how to exploit correctly - enough for a living. I do not like to depend on services and the local razvodilov there. Now I’m without a car, circumstances, but I want to take the old “loaf”, the carburetor, comfort for me - the second thing, I have not been spoiled, although I also drove foreign cars not rotten and new (one thing was).
          Well, okay, boyars. Be healthy! hi
        3. perm23
          perm23 2 November 2015 12: 34 New
          +4
          You remembered the Soviet era. I also remembered - the competition is there. At the entrance to the market, 7-10 grandmothers were sitting and selling seeds and that someone was lowering the price of them. Not all of them sold at the same price. Businessmen will always agree. And an example when my grandmother went to sell the fish we caught and decided to sell cheaper, everyone around who sold flew, or sell at our price, or even get out of here. That’s all your good in competition. All this lies and the tales of false democrats about competition, so that we can powder our brains. For 20 years we have heard the market come and put everything in its place.
    2. obskoyd
      obskoyd 1 November 2015 06: 53 New
      16
      There is no search, in Soviet times Aeroflot existed and coped with all transportation, as did the Ministry of Railways (now the Russian Railways).
      1. Down House
        Down House 1 November 2015 09: 05 New
        -4
        Quote: obskoyd
        Aeroflot existed in Soviet times

        It existed, but it’s not Soviet time anymore, and no one will be able to launch airplanes flights “for free” - it is time to adopt new rules.
        1. BMW
          BMW 1 November 2015 13: 12 New
          +1
          Quote: Down House
          it's time to accept the new rules.

          Who establishes or imposes these rules?
          We live in our own country and we must establish the rules for ourselves and implement them. The issue is performance, not the number of companies. It makes no difference one company or several if the state sets the tariffs. You are not against the monopoly of energy production and energy sales.
          1. Down House
            Down House 1 November 2015 15: 25 New
            -3
            Quote: bmw
            Who establishes or imposes these rules?

            Constitution.
            We have a free capitalist state and we cannot de facto prohibit airlines from acquiring imported aircraft.
            Quote: bmw
            We live in our own country and we must establish the rules for ourselves and implement them.

            For God's sake.
            I’ll just repeat once again that the volumes of our domestic transportation are not enough to pay back the production of new equipment.
            1. perm23
              perm23 2 November 2015 12: 38 New
              0
              We have a huge volume of domestic traffic. We do not know our country. We do not travel on it due to the fact that there is no traffic. You can pay back. Just do not evaluate everything only profit. We must also think about people. there would be flights everywhere and inexpensively. people would fly with might and main. And so now.
              1. Down House
                Down House 3 November 2015 09: 03 New
                0
                Quote: perm23
                We do not travel on it due to the fact that there is no traffic

                I travel - but by car.
                I don’t travel by plane because it’s boring and expensive.
                And more expensive because no one flies. Either they are not interested, or they save on the train.
          2. sa-ag
            sa-ag 1 November 2015 17: 50 New
            +4
            Quote: bmw
            We live in our own country and we must establish the rules for ourselves and implement them. The issue is performance, not the number of companies.

            In the USSR there was one basic rule - everything for the people, everything in the name of the people, all other rules were built from here, now profit is the basis, hence all other rules
            1. Down House
              Down House 2 November 2015 00: 09 New
              -2
              Quote: sa-ag
              one basic rule - everything for the people, everything in the name of the people, from here all the other rules were built,

              Rules by rules, but something really was better then, something really better now.
              And if in general, there used to be more guarantees, now there are more opportunities.
              My parents were safer, but I live better, and you can not compare these 2 periods only in black and white - the truth is in semitones.
    3. Down House
      Down House 1 November 2015 09: 03 New
      0
      Quote: shinobi
      .But minimize

      You don’t need to reduce anything, you just need to properly regulate the quality of transport, control the quality of aircraft service, give priority to companies flying our planes.
      And how many carriers will be specific is already the second thing.
      1. BMW
        BMW 1 November 2015 13: 16 New
        0
        Quote: Down House
        give priority to companies flying our aircraft.

        If you care about market competition, then you need to give preferential concessions and preferential loans, they themselves will switch to our technology. The law is simple, "demand gives rise to supply", sort of like the mantra of marketers.
        1. perm23
          perm23 2 November 2015 12: 43 New
          +1
          Yes, understand YOU. Do not need business exemptions and loans. Because the business wants only one profit more and faster. And if tomorrow you give them zero credit and exempt from taxes, what do you think these directors will take care of new technology for airlines. No . Here, they will take care of new technology for themselves, about new castles, for themselves and their loved ones. It is necessary to ask them toughly, and if relief is given, then so that they answer for it, and that’s how the money will go to their own needs.
          1. Down House
            Down House 3 November 2015 09: 12 New
            0
            Quote: perm23
            Yes, understand YOU. Do not need business exemptions and loans

            Yes, YOU understand that there is such a word as Profitability in the capitalist world.
            I explain to you, if Pyotr Petrovich has a billion and he thinks where to invest it, then where will he invest it?
            In construction with 300% per annum or in air transportation at 30% per annum?
            In Moscow, we are now building new buildings on every corner - because it is profitable.
            And in aviation, the cat wept - it is not profitable!
            And you offer carriers to tighten the nuts even more, then there will be nothing to fly on - and the last enthusiasts will go to other areas.
        2. AlexeyL
          AlexeyL 2 November 2015 15: 08 New
          0
          Demand of course gives rise to an offer, but the offer from heaven will go down to earth and consider such an example. Buses and trolleybuses have always been public transport. They also performed a social mission and a commercial one. But then there was a demand and minibuses appeared - gazelles, and then imported minibuses. Good! Fast, convenient, though not entirely safe. As a result, the buses almost disappeared, and passenger traffic fell in trolleybuses. They have become unprofitable. But what about the social mission! And although there is a demand for it, there will be no supply. Not profitable. As a result, entrepreneurs remove foam (far from always worrying about security, because this is secondary, primary - profit), and the social mission - to the state. Something like this.
  • Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 1 November 2015 05: 48 New
    23
    Both civil aviation and railways should be only public and not private, which pursue profit neglecting everything! (this does not apply to the last crash, a serious investigation is needed) just my opinion as I work on the railway and see what was done to it after the MPS.
    1. yuriy55
      yuriy55 1 November 2015 07: 31 New
      +8
      ... only state-owned and not private, which pursue profit neglecting everything!

      The interesting thing is that you are not alone in your opinion.

      Why are local branches of one state company worse and wasteful of small companies? And as regards aviation, and transport in general, they cannot exist without state relations and support (of course, if the government is not in private hands ...) An example of love for passengers from private airlines we saw recently when tickets to Moscow began to cost 80 rubles. And the fragmentation of railway transport did not lead to healthy competition, but to an increase in transportation tariffs. On the sea and river transport entire enterprises (sites) disappeared ...
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 1 November 2015 08: 30 New
        +4
        And not only railways and air transportation - banking should also be a state monopoly. And then it was fruitful of garbage cans with only one idea: to cut the loot on the interest on the loan.
        1. BMW
          BMW 1 November 2015 13: 21 New
          -1
          Quote: Basarev
          And then it was fruitful of garbage cans with only one idea: to cut the loot on the interest on the loan.

          Oh come on, this is so a side run-in. The main earnings are speculation on the stock exchange and the carousel of state funds or large companies.
      2. perm23
        perm23 1 November 2015 14: 17 New
        +3
        Yes, they told everyone that there will be competition and all. Prices down, quality up. Yes, no. All this is a lie. That someone does not need an extra ruble. He will look at a neighbor and say, I will sell the best quality product at a low price, Why. It will make it easier. will set the same price. Why should he save up for 5 years on a new yacht, if it is possible for a year. And then the children need it, etc. Here in my city in a radius of 500 meters there are already 5 stores and what, the price has changed somewhere. No and no.
  • Zomanus
    Zomanus 1 November 2015 05: 56 New
    15
    Yes, they constantly talk about it. From one tragedy to another.
    Only now it is apparently more profitable to pay compensation to those who died in another plane crash every few years than to constantly invest in aircraft construction.
    So I think that this time too, everything will be limited to angry articles, speeches ... until the next catastrophe.
    1. igor.borov775
      igor.borov775 3 November 2015 05: 37 New
      0
      Yes, there is a whole field for our beloved deputies. After all, the state pays the bulk of the compensation. Why. There the German fell in the Alps where all payments were made by the carrier company. But there will be another trial. The company’s fault is complete and compensation for the dead is considered small. And the main thing is clear that this company will have to fork out again. All lawyers associated with this catastrophe unequivocally predict this. Here we are talking about something else. Jets produce only 35 pieces a year. This is very small, the cost will be high. Now they are trying to take the figure 40. Until there is a release of cars, the cost will be high. Two years they built one first IL-XNUMX in Ulyanovsk, too, the second two years. While production is still stalled. The fault of non-aircraft manufacturers is a much deeper problem. Related industries in a difficult situation. Instrument making, machine tool engineering, etc., etc. Breaking up with Ukraine is expensive for us. Helicopters of Russia feel better. Import substitution is faster here, since they took up this problem a little earlier. Only by the end of this year bottlenecks in the production of high-tech high-tech products were clarified. For a year they can’t be solved as soon as I would like. The sanctions highlighted a lot. Even the fact that we have product samples is much better than imported ones. But she was not needed, it was cheaper to buy and not bother. Of course, the liberal wing of the Government is in full swing to oppose the change of outlook on our native industry, they have to wait and all the sanctions will be lifted. But now it has come for a long time. The bulk of the confusion problems, but things are moving forward. And if the cash flow tracking system that was launched in the MO proves to be effective, then things will go even faster. The president wants to launch this system in the Government. Just imagine all the expenses in the budget country will work with the so-called colored money. That's where the dog is buried. This is for now in the Moscow Region and the military-industrial complex, she earned a lot of interesting translations in test mode. Competent organizations are now dealing with these issues. Only after a certain time, we will find out whether our authorities managed to cope with this disaster by producing new aircraft for passengers. It is useless to say anything now.
  • Amurets
    Amurets 1 November 2015 06: 00 New
    16
    Until they introduce protective duties on the operation of air junk in Russia and the import of air junk will not be of any use. I am not opposed to imported airplanes, but only new cars should be registered and 10 years are not required; this is not operation and the car should fly and fly. That’s why officials don’t take cars a year in operation, but they only take new ones? And another question? Why does the government want to allow foreign pilots to fly our flights? It will not be cheaper, only more expensive. The best will not go to Russia, they’re not bad at home, but the western ones will come companies that are not needed there. I have a proposal: to calculate all the pilots of the government squadron and replace them with the pilots of the West, recruited by the ads: "Looking for Work."
    1. Igor39
      Igor39 1 November 2015 07: 29 New
      +3
      It is necessary to do as with the auto industry, to produce our own and western and to ban the import of junk.
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 1 November 2015 08: 38 New
        +5
        I would prefer only domestic transport. There is nothing to feed the West, who are so unfriendly to us. That is to ban absolutely all imports, regardless of the fraternity of the people ... Yes, and the term fraternal people itself is forbidden. And then every time we throw billions into the next fraternal regime, and in return we get betrayal over and over again. And then calmly write off and forgive debts.
        1. Igor39
          Igor39 1 November 2015 11: 29 New
          0
          Then it is necessary to ban everything imported, cars, clothes, food, and most importantly, machines and equipment, we will carry out modernization at our domestic, if we can ...
          1. complete zero
            complete zero 1 November 2015 12: 36 New
            +1
            Well, why should such extremes (be forbidden) but how should rams follow everything be no better than prohibitions ... The West, for the sake of simplifying work (human labor), will automate everything as much as possible ... and by will not a person (driver or pilot) becomes a hostage get out of a situation that is sometimes incapable
      2. Greenwood
        Greenwood 1 November 2015 15: 55 New
        0
        Hey, don't touch the cars. Primorye against. The Japanese do not fail on the roads, unlike the domestic auto industry.
  • Alexander Romanov
    Alexander Romanov 1 November 2015 06: 07 New
    0
    Roma minus you for the article. Yesterday Zyuganov condoled, or rather PR on corpses.
    Your article is not PR, but. A321 aircraft with tail number 663 was released 18 and a half years agoFirst of all, you need to look at the raid in the watch. The average age of operation is 25-30 years.
    Quote: Siberia 9444
    Both civil aviation and railways should be only public and not private, which pursue profit neglecting everything!

    In the world in every country, piles of private carriers fly on different machines, including new ones, but sometimes planes crash in different countries.
    In the days of the USSR, there was one state-owned company, with a bunch of new planes, but the planes still crashed. This is a tragedy and there were and will be many more, simply because the equipment sometimes fails.
    And the same Finn Air for 34 did not have a single disaster, and the company is private.
    1. Platonich
      Platonich 1 November 2015 06: 32 New
      +4
      Have you looked where they fly? From a neighboring village to the city and back! So our "maize" has the same statistics!
      1. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 1 November 2015 06: 42 New
        +8
        Quote: Platonitch
        Have you looked where they fly? From a neighboring village to the city and back!

        Finn air from a neighboring village and back? The company flies around the world, for you a screen. And the link about flights it is lain http://www.finnair.com/en/en/flights/flightlist
        Qantas Airways also has not had a single crash in 34 years.
        All Nippon Airways
        Cathay pacifi

        You dear, it’s better to keep silent once again, it won’t leave you.
        1. SeregaBoss
          SeregaBoss 1 November 2015 07: 09 New
          +5
          Silence is gold, not I came up with. Finair is an excellent carrier, especially for Petersburgers
      2. Igor Nikonov
        Igor Nikonov 1 November 2015 11: 46 New
        0
        Corners could (and can) plan + to sit where more or less exactly.
        It seems to me from the experience of flying on modern airliners that modern mass planes cannot plan in principle (did they see the extended parts of the wings when the speed decreases? - obviously to increase the bearing capacity when the speed decreases (c) Bernoulli), there is no fuel dump system - in case of emergency landing - 100% explosion, no chance to survive.
    2. redeemer
      redeemer 1 November 2015 07: 49 New
      -3
      how infected you are with this idiocy ... you don’t even want to see facts through this veil. that hecate with his torch will illuminate that and are happy ...
      1. Vasilenko Vladimir
        Vasilenko Vladimir 1 November 2015 09: 06 New
        0
        and you can expand the idea?
    3. The comment was deleted.
  • venaya
    venaya 1 November 2015 06: 24 New
    12
    The problem is in our aviation, rather, not even in airplanes, but in the organization of Russian civil aviation. Russia needs a fleet of new domestic aircraft.

    We do not have that country to allow ourselves to be left without the domestic aviation industry. Apparently this is the main conclusion from this article.
    1. Banshee
      1 November 2015 09: 24 New
      +1
      Apparently so.
      1. BMW
        BMW 1 November 2015 13: 40 New
        0
        Quote: Banshee
        Apparently so.

        That's right. We have from conclusions to making decisions, as to the moon on foot. And from making a decision, to putting it into practice, a whole hollow. This is a systemic crisis, because the system is no longer able to support and reproduce itself. hi
  • Platonich
    Platonich 1 November 2015 06: 25 New
    22
    Very correct and timely article! Having ruined our own civilian fleet and, to some extent, military aviation, our “busmen” grabbers have gained some kind of junk and are squeezing maximum profit without worrying about hundreds of lives of their fellow citizens. They save on everything: on fuel, staff training, spare parts, maintenance, etc. My friend Boeing pilot plows just for wear and tear, since he’s still young and is already at the limit of human capabilities. There is merciless, in the name of enrichment, exploitation of both people and technology. So the author has a huge respect !!!
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 1 November 2015 06: 33 New
      +6
      Quote: Platonitch
      Very correct and timely article!

      After each plane crash, hundreds of such articles come out. After each fire in which people die, hundreds of articles go out. After each major accident involving buses, hundreds of articles are published.
      Dancing on blood-mourning today!
      1. venaya
        venaya 1 November 2015 06: 59 New
        +3
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        After each ... hundreds of articles come out.

        Only in this way, unfortunately, do people study on the blood. "Until the thunder strikes ...".
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 1 November 2015 11: 21 New
          +3
          Quote: venaya
          Only in this way, unfortunately, do people study on the blood.

          No, they don’t study, there will be slogans and inspections of companies all over the country, then everything will return to normal again. Until next time.
      2. Amurets
        Amurets 1 November 2015 07: 52 New
        13
        [quote = Alexander Romanov] Dancing in blood-mourning today!

        Yes! Mourning, and again no one will answer for this mourning. In Soviet times, two of my classmates sat down. One pilot was the commander of the Yak-40 - he sat down for an extra passenger, took pity on the lagging passenger and got caught. And the second sat down at the knot that was out of warranty, and there was nothing to replace. Here he succumbed to persuasion and received two years of probation with a wolf ticket. And then he worked as a mechanic, with a higher education, until his death. That's how they fought accident rate in Soviet Aeroflot.
        1. Basarev
          Basarev 1 November 2015 08: 48 New
          -1
          And I think more and more about airships. Think about it: even with the crash of Hindenburg, less than a third died, and yet it was filled with flammable hydrogen, and this was the case in the thirties, and since then the technology has taken great strides.
          1. Banshee
            1 November 2015 09: 28 New
            +4
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            Dancing on blood-mourning today!


            AND? What would change if the article came out tomorrow? Would you be less relevant?

            In general, each judge in moderation. To each his own.

            Alexander Romanov, for example, is being promoted on anti-flame. But this is Romanov, he can do almost everything here.
            1. Alexander Romanov
              Alexander Romanov 1 November 2015 11: 13 New
              -5
              Quote: Banshee
              . But this is Romanov, almost everything is possible for him here.

              Oh, how you got hooked, you write articles so be able to accept criticism or do not write at all.
              Especially when you write an article.
          2. venaya
            venaya 1 November 2015 10: 25 New
            +1
            Quote: Basarev
            during the Hindenburg crash, less than a third died, and yet it was filled with flammable hydrogen, and it was in the thirties, and since then technology has taken a big step forward.

            I’ll add a little: the Hindenburg airship is the first German airship that did not have the name Zeppelin, from the very beginning of its development it was designed for the first time under non-combustible helium, which at that time was produced exclusively in the USA, but because of the trivial competitive war, the Americans did not their contractual obligations did not deliver strategic helium to Germany. This was what became fatal for the airship so successful in designing and naturally ended in the biggest tragedy at that time. This could not have happened in principle if the Americans had delivered their helium to Germany. Only in this way was it possible to end the era of airship monopoly in commercial transatlantic transport and move on to the development of commercial use of vehicles heavier than air (aircraft) on this route.
      3. perm23
        perm23 1 November 2015 14: 20 New
        0
        You are wrong, we do not dance in the blood. We simply express our sorrow and think and reason that this should not happen. Therefore, we write here.
  • ia-ai00
    ia-ai00 1 November 2015 06: 39 New
    +5
    Platonich SU
    .... our grabbers - "businessmen" got some rubbish flying and squeeze max profit

    Hmm ... You are 100% right.
    As the saying goes - "nothing personal, only business ..." am
    The kingdom of heaven to the dead, condolences to the close.
  • Just BB
    Just BB 1 November 2015 06: 51 New
    17
    The author is completely right - both in terms of import substitution, and in the monopolization of air transportation.
    See how the country's leadership "rush" with the "auto industry" although the country has never been a leader in this industry and the prospects for such a change are very vague. But the rationale is that we keep jobs.
    The aircraft industry — where we have much more and we can use the forces of industry (already! For almost everything is worth it) you can do much more — the chemical industry, metallurgy, engine building, electronic industry, etc.) —this is how many jobs. That’s where the money is - and it’s own money, not oil dollars!.
    But for some reason it is more profitable for our carriers to use leasing equipment ("buying" is inappropriate here - as the hero of Papanov told his son-in-law in the movie "Watch out for the car": "There is nothing of yours here! You are a WAN-WOMAN!").
    Maybe because Western banks easily give loans for such leasing

    A sad example of Transaero and how many before that - such owners are very easy to take as a causal place and throw them to the sidelines.

    Air carrier today there should be one and the state - well, we are still under-grown to the private aviation market -

    The Kogalymavia airline, whose plane crashed in Egypt, is owned by private individuals.

    According to the SPARK system, in the early 2000s, its co-owner was Lukoil, but then it completely came under the control of the Western Aviation and Investment Company, registered in Moscow. Its owners are Hamit Bagan, Amirbek Gagaev, Buvaysar Khalidov. They also own travel companies, and Amirbek Gagaev owns the Moscow security company Almaz.

    In 2012, the airline rebranded and became known as Metrojet. In 2013, revenue amounted to 7,5 billion, profit - 10,6 million. In 2014, with the same revenue, profit was minimal - 43 thousand.

    The company's fleet consisted of five Airbus A 321.


    "Cooks" are not suitable for controlling the "sky" - no matter how rich or advanced they are
  • Stinger
    Stinger 1 November 2015 07: 02 New
    18
    I am ready to subscribe to all three points of the author’s conclusions. But this unfortunately will not happen. Our army is led by traders in furniture, energy and nanotechnology, Chubais, etc. But for some reason they don’t want to work as pilots. Dangerous for health.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. creak
      creak 1 November 2015 10: 35 New
      +2
      Quote: Stinger
      . We are taken by the army to manage furniture dealers,


      And now these merchants will also manage the production of civilian aircraft - I’m talking about the new appointment of Serdyukov to Rostec ...
      While at the forum, commentators shock the air with curses against them and give various advice, the country's leadership has already taken practical steps to rectify the situation and has entrusted Serdyukov with overseeing the civilian aircraft industry ..
      It seems above that they believe that now the civilian aircraft industry is in good hands and has no doubt in success ...
      He is a man already proven in business .. hi
      1. BMW
        BMW 1 November 2015 14: 10 New
        +1
        Quote: ranger
        He is a man already proven in business.

        Of course, it will destroy the corruption scheme, take away (save) billions. I realized that they put an end to Superjet and MS, we will definitely buy Airbus and Boeing.
  • Garis
    Garis 1 November 2015 07: 12 New
    +7
    I subscribe to every word of the author.
  • astronom1973n
    astronom1973n 1 November 2015 07: 16 New
    23
    I agree with the author! The IL-86 (96) in comfort is in no way inferior to its foreign counterparts, it flew on many aircraft of the USSR (of course, a passenger). The TU-204, when compared with charter purchased Boeing, is a palace! Legs can be pulled out without problems! And they don’t buy our planes are enemies of the people! There are various reasons not to take your own, but to buy and sponsor Americans and Germans with frogs! And then sit and talk that the economy is not growing and not developing am It's a shame for the motherland ..... We are not worthy of such a fate!
    Put minus fans of business class massage chairs!
    1. yuriy55
      yuriy55 1 November 2015 07: 39 New
      +2
      Do not treat cons as negatives. This is an indicator of your personal personality. The more there are, the sharper your person stands out in the crowd.

      It's a shame for the motherland ..... We are not worthy of such a fate!
      good
  • Aleksander
    Aleksander 1 November 2015 07: 22 New
    +9
    I absolutely support the author!
    As a passenger, I want and demand that I deal with air travel ONE STATE COMPANY-powerful and strong, using DOMESTIC aircraft — new and reliable, not foreign stuff!
    If you offer potential passengers to fly to a state-owned company or to a private flyfish, the answer, I think, will be obvious!
    1. Down House
      Down House 1 November 2015 09: 10 New
      -2
      Quote: Aleksander
      I want and demand that ONE STATE company, powerful and strong, using DOMESTIC aircraft, new and reliable, and not foreign stuff, is engaged in air transportation!

      Forgot to add - and to cheap, and even better almost free!
      And how many people will fly at normal prices, not really that people want to fly on expensive flights - they themselves buy tickets for 20-year old stuff because it is cheaper.
      1. donavi49
        donavi49 1 November 2015 09: 46 New
        +2
        One company is a monopoly. That is, prices you can draw whatever you want, all unprofitable routes for the knife and infrastructure for sale.
    2. Stas157
      Stas157 1 November 2015 10: 34 New
      +3
      Quote: Aleksander
      I demand that ONE STATE company, powerful and strong, using DOMESTIC aircraft, is new and reliable, and not foreign stuff, is engaged in air transportation!

      It was so in the USSR! One state-owned company acquired exclusively new aircraft and serviced them from start to finish. And now what? After the Turks, Saudis, Syrians, Lebanese got rid of the plane, it was acquired by the small private company Kogalym Aviya and registered in Ireland. How it was exploited, what problems were removed, why they sold it, they tell us everything is recorded in the documents. But, in life it often happens that: "It was smooth on paper, but forgot about the ravines!"
  • Neophyte
    Neophyte 1 November 2015 07: 23 New
    +5
    I agree with the author! For a long time there was an article about the airbus cemetery in America, and there they bought this trash-Russian huckster for a penny!
  • pts-m
    pts-m 1 November 2015 07: 26 New
    +2
    The author is right. We are talking about the independence of Russia, but in fact almost everything belongs to Western exploiters.
    1. Basarev
      Basarev 1 November 2015 08: 54 New
      +4
      The secret is that independence means responsibility, and this, by no means, fits into the worldview of the ruling elite.
  • Vovanfalcon
    Vovanfalcon 1 November 2015 07: 34 New
    +4
    I respect Roman very much, but the view on things is very amateurish. The problem does not lie on the surface .... if earlier, while Tu and Yak and An were still in operation, our average person (no worse than DAM) also shouted that we were flying in the trash, let's buy Bobiki and Watermelons, now the polarity has changed. And the matter is not in the manufacturer, not in the plane itself, and sales are not in the age of this VS. Specifically to yesterday's event - the plane does not fall so fast .... think further.
    1. Just BB
      Just BB 1 November 2015 07: 39 New
      +6
      Yesterday's event is an occasion to raise once again the problem that has developed in civil aviation - no planes, no pilots, no techies. Some ticket sellers !!!
    2. yuriy55
      yuriy55 1 November 2015 07: 46 New
      11
      And I respect any person who can compose correct, convincing phrases and express their thoughts with this ...
      About those who love Bobiks and Watermelons:
      I know there are more families
      Where our screaming and scolding,
      Where they look with emotion
      On foreign stickers ...
      And fat ... Russian eat!
      1. Vovanfalcon
        Vovanfalcon 1 November 2015 08: 14 New
        0
        I love planes !!!!! .... no need to juggle. And I meant that maintenance is always at the level !!!! ... damn, so I want to say disgusting ...
        1. Banshee
          1 November 2015 09: 34 New
          +1
          I love them too. And he had nothing against the planes (until a certain time). And pleading just for the fact that they were as written in the article. New and ours.

          And who (like Romanov, for example) likes 30-year-old Boeings, so what is the question?
    3. Banshee
      1 November 2015 09: 31 New
      +2
      Quote: VovanFalcon
      a look at things is very amateurish.


      Naturally. To write professionally, you need to at least work in the air transportation system. But those who work there are silent, silent and will be silent. For the street reluctance, and narrow specialization does not give a choice.

      Of course, the judgment is amateurish and purely consumer. But how many professionals were on that plane? I think that some consumers were.
      1. Vovanfalcon
        Vovanfalcon 1 November 2015 16: 10 New
        0
        Roman, I don’t know how to write professionally ..... and I will be silent. And it's not about the street .... I'm not Magomed Tolboev, I won’t draw conclusions ..... but I suggest thinking. A working plane does not crash quickly.
  • emercom1979
    emercom1979 1 November 2015 07: 39 New
    12
    Our aircraft industry was destroyed intentionally, according to the scenario. Like do not pass on noise and emissions. From 1999 to 2002 he worked in the fire department of VASO. So, with full maintenance, the IL-86 is disassembled almost completely and almost everything changes at it, at the factory. The question is, what complete maintenance can an airplane owner do in his own hangar in 30-40 days? They just said in the news that the plane had recently passed a “heavy maintenance”. And in quality. I saw how and in what modes the ILs are driven and I am sure of them. Comfort in them is at the level, and at the request of the customer (then the assembly was IL-96 presidential).
    1. Vovanfalcon
      Vovanfalcon 1 November 2015 07: 50 New
      0
      The "heavy form" of Watermelon and Bobik is no worse than it was on our technology. Sometimes it also seems to me that I can treat myself better than a doctor.
      1. Alekseits
        Alekseits 1 November 2015 11: 17 New
        +2
        There are many doctors, the treatment of which is better to prefer independent.
      2. Alekseits
        Alekseits 1 November 2015 11: 17 New
        0
        There are many doctors, the treatment of which is better to prefer independent.
    2. Just BB
      Just BB 1 November 2015 07: 54 New
      10
      Who would doubt - why on the Globe an extra competitor: enough Boeing and Airbus. The fact that our aircraft “became” non-competitive is “purely writer's” arguments.
      In Soviet times, designers "did not soar" with noise, efficiency - there was no question - airfields far beyond the city, and not in its center, kerosene was enough for everyone ...
      "Requirements" appeared; new engines appeared.
      But alas, the "new owners" quickly replaced the fleet of domestic cars with used foreign cars and the issue of replacing engines on domestic aircraft was dropped "as unnecessary."
      "As unnecessary," they plundered the Saratov Aviation Plant and the rest of the "pots riveted."

      And the fact that our aviation production is not a "factory of primus" - says the fact that the same Boeing places the production of its components at these enterprises
      1. Down House
        Down House 1 November 2015 09: 12 New
        +1
        Quote: Just VV
        the same Boeing places production of its components at these enterprises

        And this is good!
    3. Banshee
      1 November 2015 09: 36 New
      +1
      Here I am talking about! So that "IL", which was going to VASO. And THEN did people who knew him before the rivet!

      Would you do a Boeing on Vaso? Yes, hell there! Would make such repairs at the airport? Right now!
  • Billikid
    Billikid 1 November 2015 07: 47 New
    +3
    The author’s words are in the ears of GDP, although I think he does not solve much in the light of recent events.
  • olimpiada15
    olimpiada15 1 November 2015 07: 48 New
    +6
    Article plus. The problems outlined in the article exist, they must be addressed.
    The fact of silencing problems also takes place, and not only in aviation.
    Pilots carry a great emotional and psychological burden, and at a critical moment, people's lives depend on their decision. It is necessary that at such moments they should not be punished for undermining the commercial interests of the campaign, only then the decision will be unambiguously taken to reduce risks for passengers. Small passenger transportation companies do not have a sufficient technical base for operating such complex objects as airplanes. must be recognized and corrected. The fragmentation of aviation into many small companies has a negative imprint on the safety of aircraft operation, on the training of pilots.
    This is a national problem and I must admit that in this regard, the commercial interests of carriers, rather than passengers, still prevail, moreover, measures to revive domestic aircraft manufacturing, improve pilot training will have a beneficial effect on the country's economy and increase the safety of air transportation.
    Like everyone, I sincerely condolences to the relatives and friends of those killed in the plane crash. The eternal memory of people who died prematurely.
  • AIR-ZNAK
    AIR-ZNAK 1 November 2015 07: 49 New
    +2
    But the author is not right about privatization Trademark ** Aeroflot ** and all the consequences of this have been seized by Moscow internationals. And then, if you want, you don’t want to, ALL THE OTHERS. Out of need !!! If the author of an article from the Minaviaprom system, at least I didn’t even read about the topic and asked the civil aviation workers. As for Minaviaprom, put the men in order with counterfeit spare parts and increase the warranty resources of components and assemblies for domestic cars and then wash that there are no orders AvtoVAZ also cried that production was not working well, it didn’t improve anything, it hung on the neck of taxpayers and was engaged in eating state money without any progress in production And what? Ask yourself the author, what did you do in this direction except for the article on the site?
    1. Banshee
      1 November 2015 09: 39 New
      +3
      Quote: AIR-ZNAK
      If the author of the article from the system Minaviaproma


      Not. The author is purely consumer. No relation to the aviation industry.

      Quote: AIR-ZNAK
      Ask yourself the author and what have you done in this direction besides the article on the site?


      Asked. He published two materials in defense of the Voronezh Aircraft Building Association. Here and in other places. Even so.
  • Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 1 November 2015 07: 51 New
    +9
    The whole problem is money. More precisely, in the greed and complete immorality of the owners of the aviation market in Russia. They need only money, only profit and the lowest possible costs. It is for this reason that amendments to the RF flight code were lobbied and adopted allowing migrant workers to work in Russia on the basis of only national flight diplomas, etc. Look at what is being done in terms of aircraft maintenance in Russia. More recently, one of the leaders of our aviation industry complained that the planes are serviced by “hell-knows-how-hell-by whom”, that our airlines attract dousers with dubious qualifications for this and “invent” their schedules and maintenance standards — all for the sake of if only it were cheaper. The same with spare parts — what do you think of this junk that our air carriers exploit and put new spare parts for repairs? Yes, no matter how, many simply haven’t already made such spare parts because of the antiquity of aircraft brands, and therefore the market for used spare parts and illiquid assets from all kinds of air dumps is booming.
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 1 November 2015 08: 04 New
      +6
      In confirmation of your words. The truth is not an example from aviation. It was necessary to buy spare parts for equipment repair. Does the seller ask me? You for sale or for yourself? I was dumbfounded asking what is the difference? And the answer: for the sale is cheap and for several hours of work, for yourself more expensive, but for that, factory and high-quality.
      1. perm23
        perm23 1 November 2015 14: 22 New
        +1
        I had the same thing. One to one
    2. Just BB
      Just BB 1 November 2015 08: 21 New
      +2
      Any unit on an aircraft manufactured in the USSR had a passport. Even if this is a "duplicate", then it is not difficult for a specialist to establish the "normality" of the unit. Forms of the main units restored only after repair of the unit. I do not think that any of the leaders of the repair enterprise was found and "legitimized" such an assembly. Controllers are not sleeping. A trifle that does not affect flight safety can slip through, but you can’t do “business” for them (unless it’s “XXX - Avia”), but there’s a lot of stink.
      Although "lovers" are, as in urban landfills
    3. Down House
      Down House 1 November 2015 09: 15 New
      0
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      They need only money, only profit and the lowest possible costs.

      Yes, that's why people open their own business and this is a feature of any business.
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      amendments to the flight code of the Russian Federation allowing migrant workers to work in Russia

      But can you tell in more detail what kind of “migrant workers” they are?
      1. Monster_Fat
        Monster_Fat 1 November 2015 10: 01 New
        0
        Quote: Down House
        But can you tell in more detail what kind of “migrant workers” they are?

        And, the brains themselves do not have enough to think about who this “can be” (although, what am I talking about, what brains can be in Daun House)? Or is a crest with “temporary registration” not a “Gaster” anymore? I generally keep quiet about "outsourcing" ...
        1. Down House
          Down House 1 November 2015 10: 51 New
          -3
          Quote: Monster_Fat
          Or is a crest with “temporary registration” not a “Gaster” anymore?

          Do Ukrainians work on US lines? Or what exactly did you want to say ?!
          AAA - I realized that international law does not prohibit pilots who are citizens of other countries from flying over other countries!
          Well, this is so everywhere, and concerns not only pilots, but also sailors and truckers for example.
          Now it remains to clarify something else (more precisely, what I initially asked): why do you think this is bad ?!
          And most importantly, how are you going to fight this ?!
          1. Monster_Fat
            Monster_Fat 1 November 2015 11: 27 New
            +2
            I don’t need to include “Durku” ... Why “bad” ... I don’t even want to explain, you still don’t understand in your “Daun ...” you still don’t understand until today. And "how to fight" ... first, at the state level, prohibit "outsourcing" ..., then introduce the mandatory "licensing" of flight and technical personnel ...
            1. Down House
              Down House 1 November 2015 13: 12 New
              0
              Quote: Monster_Fat
              Why "bad" ... I don’t even want to explain, you still don’t understand

              Yes, I don’t understand.
              “migrant workers” and “outsourcing” are global practices and it is useless and pointless to fight against this, it is in the direct interests of air carriers.
              And they hire "guest workers" not because our "licensing" does not pass, but because our pilots often do not pass their "licensing"!
              1. Monster_Fat
                Monster_Fat 1 November 2015 14: 05 New
                +1
                There is nothing “meaningless” and “useless”, and one should not refer to some mythical “international practice”. You will tell German unions in the aviation industry about this "practice", they will tell you in detail about "outsourcing" in Germany. And the fact that this is in the "direct interests" of greedy carriers, I absolutely agree. Outsourcing and everything connected with it again brings me back to my very first post about the uncontrolled greed of our aircraft industry who want to quickly reduce whatever costs they think are by any means. So, it’s the direct duty of the state to control the “appetites” of greedy hucksters from the aviation industry and carriers without conscience, and to monitor compliance with all regulatory and regulatory rules and documents related to operation and safety, and not to be eliminated hoping for the notorious “self-regulating” “market hand”.
                1. Down House
                  Down House 1 November 2015 15: 41 New
                  0
                  Quote: Monster_Fat
                  monitor compliance with all regulatory and regulatory rules and documents related to operation and safety

                  And with this I completely agree!
                  But do not confuse the warm with the soft - any business will reduce costs and work to increase profits.
                  And if "outsourcing" makes a business more profitable and does not hit the security, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
                  Remember the same MTS on collective farms - the same "outsourcing".
                  And as the tractor was hung on the balance of collective farms, so immediately the small ones began to bend.
                  1. Monster_Fat
                    Monster_Fat 1 November 2015 16: 34 New
                    0
                    You say it is not true about MTS. Motor-tractor stations (MTS) were created by the state to help collective farms to facilitate the maintenance and cultivation of arable land. The MTS system assumed: full public service, including spare parts, but the collective farm paid for fuel. In fact, MTSs were the bases on which the equipment supplied by the state was located for FREE, but assigned to a particular collective farm or group of collective farms and it was serviced by the collective farmers themselves. Spare parts and other items were sent on request-order, which was issued on the collective farm. After consuming the resource, tractors and other machines were left on the farm as a source of spare parts. With "outsourcing" this system has nothing to do, it is more like not "gratuitous leasing". "Outsourcing" involves the withdrawal of labor from the jurisdiction of the direct employer and its transfer to another company, another employer, which exercises attention! operating this labor force on its own terms, in which the direct employer also “rents”, then, this labor force. “Outsourcing” was just created and is used for non-fulfillment by the primary hiring company of increased conditions for remuneration of labor, harmful payments, labor protection and safety conditions in certain “complex” industries and production. “Outsourcing” is an evil that the government needs to fight, and to stop the practice of “outsourcing” you can easily ban it and that’s all. But the state does not go for it, since "outsourcing" is lobbied at the very top by gas producing, oil producing and other companies.
                    1. Down House
                      Down House 1 November 2015 19: 46 New
                      0
                      Quote: Monster_Fat
                      Outsourcing involves the removal of labor from the jurisdiction of a direct employer and its transfer to another company, another employer

                      No.
                      Outsourcing is the initial transfer by an organization, on the basis of an agreement, of certain business processes or production functions.
                      And these functions are not limited to labor alone.
                      And what you are talking about is called outstaffing.
                      I explain briefly.
                      Taxi tractor rental - outsourcing.
                      Taxi service at OD, and not in its own workshop - outsourcing.
                      The contract with the private security company - outstaffing.
                      In all of this, initially there is nothing wrong, provided that the services are provided in a quality manner, to verify this, the state introduces licensing for certain types of activities.
                      Quote: Monster_Fat
                      You speak incorrectly about MTS

                      I initially spoke not about MTS (although this is also outsourcing) but about the fact that any even the most decent businessman will seek to save.
                      And initially there is nothing wrong with that.
    4. perm23
      perm23 1 November 2015 14: 25 New
      +1
      Everywhere and everything like that. And the dash knows what equipment. what specialists. a lot of illegal immigrants. Here are some of our friends driving buses. And that they monitor the machine, the safety. For the owner the main thing is profit, and everything else is not interesting to him.
    5. GAF
      GAF 1 November 2015 16: 00 New
      +1
      "The whole problem is money. Or rather, the greed and complete immorality of the owners of the aviation market in Russia. They need only money, only profit, and the lowest possible costs."
      In fact of the matter. Small private campaigns, the main concern of which is profit, violate the main requirement for ensuring flight safety: a unit that has exhausted a resource established by the technical regulation, for example, 500 hours, regardless of its condition !!! must be replaced with a new one or with a diagnosis after cap. Repair, with a certificate of validity for the nth number of hours.
  • RF92
    RF92 1 November 2015 07: 57 New
    +1
    I agree with the author
  • NACC
    NACC 1 November 2015 08: 04 New
    +1
    The author is a hundred times right. All foreign-made aircraft are not of the first freshness that have come to us through the tenth hands.
  • avia12005
    avia12005 1 November 2015 08: 06 New
    +6
    Who doubts that Boeing and Airbus bring kickbacks to the government for the airlines not to buy Russian planes, but to buy their troughs, and our Ilushin and Tupolev do not carry, because there is nothing to bear, you can bet me a minus ... am
    1. Awaz
      Awaz 1 November 2015 16: 39 New
      +3
      plus put. Although Ilyushin and Tupolev have a lot of problems with the characteristics, they could not be completely closed in any case. Who did this are criminals. They would be right now to find and punish.
      And since it is not with an armed look that it is clear that all these tricks with the pushing of the interests of Boeing and Airbus are made due to good infusions into the budget of the home of some officials. I even think that finding who it is not difficult, even I think that some still receive this money and feel good ...
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Siberian
    Siberian 1 November 2015 08: 35 New
    +2
    ..... The article is correct, it’s all too painful according to ours, according to Russian: we destroyed the whole Aeroflot world, to the ground, and then .. we will build our new Azroflot. And you think the planes will not fall .. will be, just as cars beat, ships sink, rockets fall ...... Remember ten to twenty years ago .... How many of them fell our TU-a lot ... a big scandal arose and shouted: = Russian everything for soap ... = .... Abandoned our technical specifications and that foreign planes appeared, by the way, not only old, but also new .... And in general, the concept of an old aircraft in aviation, the name is relative, no one will give rubbish carry passengers, and fly them, there are no suicidal pilots, so the concept of an old plane is a literary concept, but not a technical one ... and again an emergency ... But let's not judge everything based on initial information only. ..It is nevertheless necessary to wait for the results of the investigation. Moreover, it’s an international investigation and I'm sorry, you can’t hide the sewed bag in it ...... Although the author’s claims, I repeat, many people are forced to think .........
    1. sa-ag
      sa-ag 1 November 2015 08: 59 New
      +2
      Quote: Siberian
      The concept of an old airplane is a literary concept, but not a technical one ...

      In Singapore, if I’m not mistaken, after seven years of operation, the plane is written off, what they do with it then I don’t know, maybe it’s sold to those countries that believe that they bought a lot of aircraft for little money
  • velikoros-xnumx
    velikoros-xnumx 1 November 2015 08: 42 New
    +5
    I agree with the article by 100%. What is needed to ideally avoid such incidents, or to minimize the number of air accidents and as a consequence of the victims:

    The first is the creation of a single air carrier under the state wing (it is much easier to control one large company than dozens of “live fish” with a fleet of a couple of airplanes. The capabilities of a large company for servicing machines, training personnel, technological equipment, etc. are incommensurable with small companies (especially with the maximum unification of the fleet with the minimum required variety of cars by class). The combination of profitable destinations and flights with unprofitable minimizes losses and requires less subsidization of such flights by the state)

    The second is the ban on the purchase of used cars from abroad (as a minimum the maximum hours in hours for each model in accordance with its manufacturer-designated resource in the region of 20-25% of the use of the flight resource)

    Third, as the domestic civil aircraft industry develops (intensively) over a period of 7-10 years, it prohibits the purchase of new foreign-made aircraft that have an appropriate analogue to the main performance characteristics of domestic production (provided that they have comparable operational characteristics, such as the cost of the board, the assigned resource for the glider and engines, fuel efficiency). Of course, a capable state aircraft manufacturing program for manufacturers, and for a carrier a convenient mechanism for acquiring aircraft (leasing with state support or something else).
    1. cat hippopotamus
      cat hippopotamus 2 November 2015 23: 03 New
      +2
      The problem is that we have lost our technical support staff abroad. And the maintenance of our aircraft outside our ports is associated with these difficulties. At one time, we were squeezed in this way from their airports, citing the fact that Boeing and Airbus were unified in service. And for our board we need another service and stuff, here's another snag.
  • Down House
    Down House 1 November 2015 08: 46 New
    -2
    Why is it so easy to abandon ours in favor of a foreign one?

    Including because flying abroad (if I'm not mistaken of course) today can only Superjet - the rest are too noisy and environmentally friendly.
    Russian aircraft builders should be fed by updating the fleet, and not officials who deal with contracts for the supply of air junk from the bounty of the West.

    Strange, but for some reason I thought that the airlines themselves buy the aircraft - and not necessarily from the "generous west" and who will sell it cheaper))
    Russia needs a state airline and a state guarantee of our air security.

    First of all, Russia needs normal production, normal engines to start, which will be launched abroad and which will work there.
    The thing is that the capacity of the regional market of the Russian Federation is 200-250 aircraft maximum and this is not enough to recoup a plane flying only with regional flights.
    Therefore, of course, it is necessary to support production, it is necessary to support airlines flying with our new planes - but this will absolutely not help if it will be impossible to fly abroad.
    1. onix757
      onix757 1 November 2015 08: 56 New
      +1
      Including because flying abroad (if I'm not mistaken of course) today can only Superjet - the rest are too noisy and environmentally friendly.

      1) Abroad is not only EU requirements
      2) The issue is decided by the introduction of its own rules for them. I think the ES people are reasonable and would not aggravate the situation.
      PS In order to defend the domestic aviation industry, you need will, desire and eggs. Our rulers have problems with this.
      1. Down House
        Down House 1 November 2015 09: 25 New
        -1
        Quote: onix757
        1) Abroad is not only EU requirements

        Yeah, you might think the rest of the world is not interested in Kyoto and other protocols!
        Still as interesting - increasing the environmental friendliness of all that is possible is the global BOOM.
        And then, the number of countries where the plane can be sent and its environmental friendliness are important for any carrier - not only EU planes fly to the EU.
        Quote: onix757
        2) The issue is decided by the introduction of its own rules for them.

        This is, again, a global trend. And the tendency, to be honest, is that the environment needs to be protected.
        Quote: onix757
        In order to defend the domestic aviation industry, one needs will, desire and eggs

        First of all, you need to understand that a modern aircraft is very complex and very expensive - in order for its production to be profitable, sales are needed not of regional, but of world level.
        "Regional manufacturers" are not financially able to afford to produce modern aircraft.
        1. onix757
          onix757 1 November 2015 09: 41 New
          0
          Yeah, you might think the rest of the world is not interested in Kyoto and other protocols!

          No, they are not interesting if they see a major player in the global aviation market as a supplier.
          And then, the number of countries where the plane can be sent and its environmental friendliness are important for any carrier - not only EU planes fly to the EU.

          For any carrier from third countries that do not have influence in the global aviation market, they are important. The rest create rules and make them play see above.
          1. Down House
            Down House 1 November 2015 09: 55 New
            0
            Quote: onix757
            see in the supplier of a major player in the global aviation market.

            It is not entirely clear how exactly objective prohibitions and big expenses for exploitation are connected with the image of a “big game”. I think that if there is a dependency, it’s only inversely proportional to your logic.
            Quote: onix757
            For any carrier from third countries that do not have influence in the global aviation market, it is important.

            And this "any carrier" is likely to buy a BU plane.
            1. onix757
              onix757 1 November 2015 10: 13 New
              0
              It is not entirely clear how exactly objective prohibitions and big expenses for exploitation are connected with the image of a “big game”. I think that if there is a dependency, it’s only inversely proportional to your logic.

              “Objective” bans are created under the influence of large aviation manufacturers (today A and B), with the goal of preventing “flying” to their market. Previously, the USSR itself created bans, but now we use strangers.
              And this "any carrier" is likely to buy a BU plane.

              Well, if we are without claims on a major aviation manufacturer (which is so), then they do so, they buy BU-trash.
              1. Down House
                Down House 1 November 2015 10: 58 New
                0
                Quote: onix757
                "Objective" bans are created under the influence of large aviation manufacturers (today A and B), in order to prevent "vagrants" to their market

                What is it like?!
                Boeings are not allowed into the EU, and Airbases are in the USA ?! ))))
                And for carriers, what matters are the problems of these companies, their total turnover significantly exceeds the turnover of aircraft manufacturers!
                Do you understand?
                International carriers rule over national manufacturers and in no case vice versa.
                1. onix757
                  onix757 1 November 2015 11: 52 New
                  0
                  Boeings are not allowed into the EU, and Airbases are in the USA ?! ))))

                  Boeing and Busik with the collapse of the Union half the world in clients. Do you understand which market? There is no great reason for them to bite, because they get along well, complement each other and share profits.
                  And for carriers, what matters are the problems of these companies, their total turnover significantly exceeds the turnover of aircraft manufacturers!

                  Carriers really have little to do with manufacturers 'problems, which does not negate manufacturers' interest in carriers, who in turn are gentlemen sharing the market.
                  International carriers rule over national manufacturers and in no case vice versa.

                  And who are international carriers? Yes, there are mergers and acquisitions in the west, but in most cases the controlling stake remains with the national government, which in turn is subject to political and economic influence.
          2. sa-ag
            sa-ag 1 November 2015 10: 34 New
            0
            Quote: onix757
            No, not interesting

            Even as interesting, you can sell your quota to a country that pays good money for it
        2. onix757
          onix757 1 November 2015 09: 45 New
          +1
          First of all, you need to understand that a modern aircraft is very complex and very expensive - in order for its production to be profitable, sales are needed not of regional, but of world level.

          Yes, you at least make a spaceship, in the world they will not buy it without patronage. Nobody just lets anyone into their market. We gave our market and now we are on the verge of markets A and B and are waiting for the bone to be thrown.
          1. Down House
            Down House 1 November 2015 09: 58 New
            -2
            Quote: onix757
            in the world they will not buy it without patronage

            Without whose patronage?
            Private carriers are not interested in "patronage" - when buying aircraft, they are guided primarily by their benefit.
            1. onix757
              onix757 1 November 2015 10: 19 New
              0
              Without whose patronage?

              States or groups of states manufacturing aircraft.
              Private carriers are not interested in "patronage" - when buying aircraft, they are guided primarily by their benefit.

              Private carriers (read a trifle) uses the rules of the game that the state will establish. For example, the state will say that from today used A and B will cost as new and immediately all the benefits will come to naught.
              1. Down House
                Down House 1 November 2015 14: 00 New
                0
                Quote: onix757
                States or groups of states manufacturing aircraft.

                So you might think the heads of these states collect carriers from around the world in a circle and say what they should buy and when. And at the same time and what kind of cars to drive and in which house to live. Well, it's funny, well, it's not so simple!
                Quote: onix757
                Private carriers (read a trifle) uses the rules of the game that the state will establish.

                First of all, they use the rules of international law and the rules of doing business.
                If the state begins to twist the nuts excessively, the business goes either to another sphere or to another country.
                And do not think that you can just take it and make the business work in a way that is beneficial only to the state.
                If this is not beneficial to the business, it will simply go bankrupt.
    2. onix757
      onix757 1 November 2015 08: 57 New
      0
      Strange, but for some reason I thought that the airlines themselves buy the aircraft - and not necessarily from the "generous west" and who will sell it cheaper))

      The question of barrage duties on air junk was never resolved by the DAM cabinet
    3. glasha3032
      glasha3032 2 November 2015 01: 04 New
      +1
      Do you think the world market for regional airplanes is so large that it is very interested in Russian airplanes? Yes, it has long been shared by Brazilian and Canadian manufacturers, and the fact that Russia managed to squeeze into Superjets is already a fortune! A few TENS of sold airplanes for export will not make the weather, they will not be able to recoup production, only an emphasis on the domestic consumer will be able to turn the tide with the production of aircraft in a series (250-300 pieces are ALREADY much for us today!)
  • Valga
    Valga 1 November 2015 08: 59 New
    +2
    We must end with charter companies. And also with contractors, subcontractors, subcontractors and other parasites. If this is done away with, it will only be better for everyone.
    1. Down House
      Down House 1 November 2015 09: 31 New
      0
      Quote: Valga
      We must end with charter companies.

      Nobody is forcibly planting anyone in them, people voluntarily choose cheap carriers and infa for all of them from the fleet to the statistics of disasters is freely available.
      And you can end the "parasites" only by abandoning the Russian "maybe"!
  • tracer
    tracer 1 November 2015 09: 03 New
    +5
    Right people who speak out about the potential causes of the disaster. This terrible tragedy that claimed the lives of our compatriots. Eternal memory to them, the land rest in peace ....
    However, this is an occasion to stir up public consciousness to solve such an important problem in Russia as Flight Safety. this is a grandiose topic on the topic that you can and should talk about and even better SOLVE it using all available means. I think that many people understand that the main reason for the catastrophes of Russian aircraft is connected with the system of organizing air transportation. Everyone understands and knows that not a single small store or private store selling anything will NEVER be able to compete with large retail chains. Large retail chains (in this case, this is just a comparison) will always offer better quality products, more favorable prices, and provide the best service warranties and service. Since Russia today uses the capitalist economic model of economic development, this rule of the market economy can be extended to any type of activity, including air carriers. So why is this happening? Let's try to figure it out ..)))) The point is probably a much greater saturation (large companies) with capital, a sales and service network ramified across cities and regions, a single control and planning center .... These are at least a few main components. The "Unified Management and Planning Center" doesn’t seem to you that it was inspired by something familiar? Yes it is - the Soviet management style. Wow !! So it turns out under "that antediluvian socialism" we used the most advanced economic development models !!! What a surprise . The conclusion suggests itself. Until Russia regains, in one form or another, the “old” and it is already the “new” air transportation system that includes absolutely all the necessary components (airplanes are only part of this system), nothing will change in terms of air transportation safety. The constitution of the Russian Federation states that the source of power is the PEOPLE. So PEOPLE, it's time to do something about it. As if to whom it would be "unpleasant."
    1. sa-ag
      sa-ag 1 November 2015 09: 35 New
      0
      Quote: tracer
      The constitution of the Russian Federation states that the source of power is the PEOPLE.

      He - the people delegate power to the elect in the election, and this ends his role, and the chosen one starts a business game with his environment, which is his real pillar
  • F.Vastag
    F.Vastag 1 November 2015 09: 07 New
    +6
    Air Carrier - there should be only 1-one (like the Soviet "AEROFLOT") with Unified flight rules, unified regulations and technical service - as in the Civil Aviation of the USSR). The fleet of aircraft should also be purely domestic: TU-334, Tu-214, TU-204, IL-96-400 (in passenger version) - on which GDP flies, etc. For EVERYTHING (in Grazhd. Aviation), only ONE STRUCTURE should be responsible (and not tens, as it is now). All Rape (in other countries) Foreign BU-AVIA-KHLAM (Airbus, Boeing), which is now located in the Air Park of the Russian Federation - Under PRESS (on the crowbar).
    1. Down House
      Down House 1 November 2015 09: 34 New
      +1
      Quote: F. Vastag
      Air Carrier - there should be only 1-one with Unified flight rules, unified regulations and maintenance

      Here is the fact that transportation rules and services should be the same for everyone and should be controlled by the state - this is absolutely true.
      But how many companies / owners will be on the market is absolutely irrelevant if they all work according to general rules.
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 2 November 2015 06: 12 New
        0
        Quote: F. Vastag
        For EVERYTHING (in Grazhd. Aviation), only ONE STRUCTURE should be responsible (and not tens, as it is now).

        Quote: Down House
        But how many companies / owners will be on the market is absolutely irrelevant if they all work according to general rules.

        By combining both your proposals, there will be a way out of the impasse. You need a single service or structure for controlling air traffic, and not only, but for all traffic in the country. If you look, now in the country there are several hundred government agencies for all types of transport, which they’re not responsible for anything, but only regularly collect money for nothing, and those leaving do not know where. It’s better to be alone, but with which both the prime minister and the president can ask.
    2. donavi49
      donavi49 1 November 2015 09: 52 New
      -3
      Even in the USA and France they cannot make dominating the presence in the sky of their aircraft giants on their territory! Companies in the United States massively exploit different types of aircraft with live Boeing.

      Plus, and this is the main thing, the domestic is not taken at all not because of the harmfulness, but because of the market. For even take Il:
      - operation in Aeroflot is completely unprofitable. In other words, if you go to IL-96 have by a third raise ticket prices for Boeing / Airbus.

      - service efficiency is extremely low, simple for a similar breakdown of a Boeing and 96 differed by more than 5 times! In other words - more downtime, more loss, more expensive ticket!

      - the production itself, now only Sukhoi makes 30-40 boards per year. The rest of 1-2 and then not every year. Many hundreds of aircraft, hundreds of new service centers across the country are needed.
  • Support
    Support 1 November 2015 09: 28 New
    +5
    Ha, capitalism rules. At the head is profit and superprofit. The main thing is loot, the rest is nothing. And like children. Who will allow you to have one airline? At least to the state. Antitrust code will immediately run up, such as breaking the law. And in Kamchatka we raised the price of gas three times in two months - and this is within the framework of the law. it turns out.
  • Cook
    Cook 1 November 2015 09: 29 New
    +2
    Dear, or maybe you still need to wait for the conclusions of the commission of inquiry, and listen less to various "specialists" who, as a rule, have no direct relationship to maintenance or to flight operations. I share and understand the emotional state of compatriots, but with just calls to our industry, competitive aircraft in sufficient quantities for a short period of time, alas, will not be able to. The fact is that such aircraft are just beginning, with great difficulties, to enter the market. Dear, understand - the aircraft itself is just iron, and without normal after-sales support and built-in service and supply systems for spare parts, it will never become a successful project. Whatever opinion we had about its comfort and reliability. For the airline, an indicator of the cost of an hour of aircraft operation is very important, it consists of very many indicators. Believe me, no rollbacks can affect the decisions of the airline’s management, to operate a particular airplane model, if it is not able to recoup the operating costs, it’s just the road to nowhere. Air transportation is a very tough business, and the plane has a means of production in it. Here you also need to clearly understand that airlines do not buy airplanes in their property, they lease them and the cost of this lease does not particularly depend on the size of the carrier - the leasing rate is also a market, only between lessors and it is basically the same.
    1. Awaz
      Awaz 1 November 2015 10: 27 New
      0
      the authorities have many levers of pressure on the business and I think that they would find something to force all these small companies to merge into two or three large companies, which would also act according to the laws and regulations that do not allow the use of old aircraft. That is, it is not difficult to prohibit the purchase (or lease) of used aircraft at all, just as it is not difficult to prohibit the operation of aircraft older than a certain wear and tear on its territory.
      the author may be wrong in some approaches to the problem, but in general, everything is true.
      1. Cook
        Cook 1 November 2015 11: 39 New
        +1
        Yes, you finally understand that the aviation business is unprofitable in itself. Even with the current state of affairs, just think about it, 9% of the country's population uses air transport. By themselves, restrictions on the age of airplanes in an airline will only make tickets more expensive. We are now looking at the operational history of the crashed aircraft, but we don’t see the reasons why it was leased by this or that airline. But this may be not only obsolescence of the aircraft, it may be due to the economic problems of the airline returning the aircraft to the lessor. Unification of its fleet or change of business model. For example, the transition from scheduled to charter flights, or to someone specifically this model did not fit. So it’s impossible to blame everyone for everything in any way, here it is necessary to resolve it very carefully.
  • sevtrash
    sevtrash 1 November 2015 09: 30 New
    -1
    It seems that the author is not of this world - I forgot, probably, that everything determines the possibility of making a profit. The state-owned enterprise also, to say nothing of a private trader. Who will pay for a state-owned enterprise if it is inefficient and unprofitable? State budget? And how long will the unprofitable enterprise support the budget, and then who will fill this budget? And then what will happen to the state, which will spend the budget on unprofitable firms when it falls apart?
    Based on this, a simple question is how much / will foreign and domestic aircraft cost, how much will it work, how much will it cost to service it at different airfields, and train and support pilots. Evaluate the ratio of the costs of designing / creating an aircraft at the Boeing, Airbus level with the need to reimburse this money spent, make a profit and invest in the development of technologies.
    The economy is primary, no one forgot? The author does not remember.
    1. onix757
      onix757 1 November 2015 09: 36 New
      +1
      Profit conditional, because it all depends on the "mood" of the state. You can create the conditions for profit (at least on the old Yak), but you can on the contrary rot.
      1. Cook
        Cook 1 November 2015 10: 16 New
        +2
        You forget about external competition, we are no longer as closed as under the Union. Foreign companies fly to us in large numbers, there is a choice. To do as you say, you need to close the borders and fly only within the country, entrusting any one company to fly abroad, subsidizing it at the same time. All this has already happened, TsUMVS Aeroflotv, etc. Meanwhile, the state does not take VAT from Russian airlines, only for international flights, so as not to make them uncompetitive in comparison with foreign ones. And for domestic transportation, take out and put 18%, and then we say our companies are fucked up, such prices are tearing.
      2. sevtrash
        sevtrash 1 November 2015 12: 25 New
        0
        Quote: onix757
        You can create the conditions for profit (at least on the old Yak), but you can on the contrary rot.

        Gorgeous, is it like issuing an order - should everyone make a profit next month? Issue an order - do aircraft manufacturers sell aircraft cheaper? And what kind of bucks will they pay salaries, purchase components, develop equipment? For airlines - stop servicing aircraft because it's expensive? And raise ticket prices, by itself?
        Accidentally did not forget - the crisis in the yard? The filling of the budget from oil and gas dollars collapsed, and this is at least 50% of the budget. The dollar jumped, incomes on the contrary, those wishing to fly abroad and generally fly became smaller. Travel agencies collapsed that year, in this airline. This is a crisis.
  • Fonmeg
    Fonmeg 1 November 2015 09: 34 New
    0
    But this requires a tough political will of the Russian leadership.


    Something needs to be changed in the country and this requires a tough stance by the authorities. But you need to change a lot and, first of all, responsibility for your affairs with hard demand, regardless of ranks and ranks! The stable that the country has been converted into over the past 20 years must be thoroughly cleaned of the accumulated shit!
  • Geosun
    Geosun 1 November 2015 09: 35 New
    0
    The author’s anger is fair and I share it, but seriously:
    A state airline will always be more expensive. Take, for example, the Vostochny spaceport or a construction site in Sochi, or an Elbrus processor, or IL-96. These are wonderful products, but insanely expensive. Well, state-owned enterprises lose at the price of private. Fuel consumption on IL is 2 times higher than Boeing. And abroad such rules that with our avionics and engines are not allowed there. Even if you do everything according to their rules. they’ll come up with new ones and cut us off. The Soviet Union didn’t give a damn about fuel consumption and economic efficiency of air transportation, Russia cannot afford it. And if you create only the airplane’s body, and put everything else imported, then the engine and avionics are the most important thing.
    But to oblige oil producers to send 10% of oil for processing to aviation kerosene for domestic aircraft would not be bad.
    1. sa-ag
      sa-ag 1 November 2015 10: 49 New
      +2
      Quote: Geosun
      But to oblige oil producers to send 10% of oil for processing to aviation kerosene for domestic aircraft would not be bad.

      Or "..As reported in early February 1999, RAO Gazprom ordered one Tu-156 for 104 passenger seats for air transportation of workers working on a rotational basis.

      At the same time, negotiations were held with Gazprom and Lentransgae on the development of options for operating the Tu-156 cryogenic fuel aircraft and the creation of the necessary infrastructure for gas liquefaction. According to Tu-156, design documentation is being processed according to the new requirements of Gazprom with its planned completion at the end of 1999. Previously, Gazprom demanded a cargo-passenger plane, now it is only a passenger car.

      The first flight of the Tu-156 should take place in 2001.

      An agreement was reached with Gazprom on advance payments for the work being done, the cost of which was previously estimated at 100 billion rubles, or about more than $ 10 million. Now this amount is revalued, it is clear that, in the opinion of the chief designer of ANTK im. Tupolev Vladimir Andreev, will increase. NK-89 engines, created on the basis of NK-8-2U for operation on kerosene and liquefied natural gas, have successfully passed bench tests at a stand in Samara. According to some reports, the NK-89 engine also successfully completed the entire flight test program of 100 flights.

      In mid-February 1999, it was reported that technical problems at the Aviation Scientific and Technical Complex (ANTK) named after Tupolev to create the world's first commercial aircraft Tu-156, operating on liquefied natural gas (LNG), does not exist. The documentation for the construction of the first sample worked out by 70%.

      According to the chief designer of this machine, Vladimir Andreev, intensive negotiations were held with Gazprom on the issue of lending to this work: the preparation of a contract for the supply of Gazprom Tu-156 aircraft with engines operating on liquefied natural gas (LNG) was at the final stage. "http://aftershock.su/?q=node/302166
    2. mervino2007
      mervino2007 3 November 2015 17: 39 New
      0
      Quote: Geosun
      Fuel consumption on IL is 2 times higher than Boeing

      And where did you get these numbers? There are facts that suggest that Boeing’s economy is not higher than IL96-300. And the opposite opinion is imposed and paid by the same Boeing. The government family is not without a freak. The bribe rules the ball.
  • donavi49
    donavi49 1 November 2015 09: 58 New
    +1
    You have to wait for the results before blaming the plane. The model is very popular by the way and tenacious. The overwhelming majority of accidents with him is a pilot's mistake (9 from 13 with human casualties, the pilot’s mistake, intentional crash or gross violations of maintenance / pre-flight training).
  • fazayek
    fazayek 1 November 2015 10: 01 New
    +1
    Compare IL96 and A320 is strong. I don’t understand how to compare and propose replacing planes of two completely different classes and destinations. Further, to revive the aircraft industry is not 1 year, and not 5, but all 10-20. And then, at first, the hated Boeings and Airbases will be better for you, both in terms of security and in terms of operating costs. And before that? Do you offer to fly old carcasses?
    The problem is not in airplanes, the problem is in airlines. When coffins fly without maintenance, because there’s a saving. When pilots are forced to continue flying with problems, fly through a thunderstorm, because there is fuel consumption, and this is a fine and loss of premium. When some homeless companies cannot even afford dispatch services. These "businessmen" should be judged for attempted mass murder.
  • Cook
    Cook 1 November 2015 10: 02 New
    +3
    To everyone who advocates tough actions against the so-called air junk, I will ask one question: in which of the latest catastrophes is the equipment specifically to blame?
    It is the equipment, its failure or violation during maintenance. For those who like to draw analogies with road transport, I also suggest recalling the most resonant car crashes associated with failures. Only one comes to mind where the brakes failed on an overloaded KAMAZ. Technique is now only to blame for a quarter of events, the rest one way or another, unfortunately, is done by man.
  • tracer
    tracer 1 November 2015 10: 03 New
    0
    Quote: Geosun
    And if you create only the airplane’s body, and put everything else imported, then the engine and avionics are the most important thing.

    I am very glad that I saw our Russian Superjets at Sheremetyevo Airport yesterday. It is very joyful for me that this is the first machine created and lifted into the sky after the collapse of the USSR. The aircraft is a small, direct competitor to Embriere and General Electric. Others say that supposedly FUU, Boeing helped to create a plane. Where they look .... The guard .... Avionics, engines are all based on "theirs" and not "ours." Such citizens would like to remind what is the most important thing in air transportation. So the most important thing is to get a stable profit. Deliver passengers and cargo to various points of the globe. And these points are Airports. Russian airports in quantitative comparison with world meager. In addition, the idea of ​​profit from transportation by itself implies constant visits to anywhere in the world’s airports. So all of these airports are standardized (electronic support, maintenance, technical service, etc.) for the main types of aircraft. These "main types" are products of Boeing and Airbas companies. I hope there is no need to explain that a "competitive" aircraft should contain the most worn out parts and adhere to standards from "well-known manufacturers." Otherwise ... Sorry, such costs for the forces were only the USSR and then within the Union. That is why the latest passenger aircraft must and will contain the standards of equipment and components that are most common in this type of business. Even with all this, foreign "independent" organizations will in every way slow down the spread of our modern and promising aircraft equipment under the most contrived pretexts. No one needs competitors.
    1. aviator65
      aviator65 1 November 2015 20: 06 New
      0
      Quote: tracer
      So all of these airports are standardized (electronic support, maintenance, technical service, etc.) for the main types of aircraft. These "main types" are products of Boeing and Airbas companies.

      But what, our domestic planes do not fly to foreign airports? Even if you do not take passenger air transportation. Under the Union, Aeroflot also flew around the world by no means on Boeing, and did it have problems at foreign airports?
      Quote: tracer
      Such citizens would like to remind what is the most important thing in air transportation. So the most important thing is to get a stable profit. Deliver passengers and cargo to various points of the globe.

      Here, in the first place should be transport safetybut it’s worth writing about profit at the very end. Boarding a plane, I want to think about the fact that I will safely reach my destination, and not about the fact that I got on an expensive attraction with an unpredictable end.
  • AlNick
    AlNick 1 November 2015 10: 04 New
    +5
    Quote: Enot-poloskun
    And now we are fixated on making a profit! It is not right.

    A classmate worked for a while in a small airline (just a few Mi-8s).
    He had to argue with the leading "effective manager" about flight safety, the frequency of maintenance and the legality of minor repairs.
    In response, as a result, he heard: "Do not stop us from making money!"
    The next day, quit ...
  • tracer
    tracer 1 November 2015 10: 11 New
    0
    Quote: tracer
    The author’s anger is fair and I share it, but seriously: The state airline will always be more expensive

    Sorry, but you never noticed that good things are always more expensive. And this applies to everything, even cosmodromes. Well, there are no good and cheap Mercedes, even though you burst. It happens cheaply, only a plastic bucket on plastic wheels is made in India. You have to pay for all the good.
  • Simple
    Simple 1 November 2015 10: 12 New
    0
    The nature of the destruction suggests that the pilots still brought the aircraft to the horizontal.
    But because of the unacceptably high vertical speed, the plane simply “took shape”. IMHO.
    1. asher
      asher 1 November 2015 15: 41 New
      0
      And why wouldn’t it be so super-economical, semi-plastic and as light as possible. I suspect that with backup and protection of control systems there were entirely economical solutions. All for profit.
      1. Simple
        Simple 1 November 2015 18: 05 New
        0
        Quote: asher
        And why wouldn’t it be so super-economical, semi-plastic and as light as possible. I suspect that with backup and protection of control systems there were entirely economical solutions.



        The design of ANY aircraft manned by humans is not designed for such overloads - it makes no sense.

        And do not judge the design of aircraft for civil aviation by the level of their education - from the outside it looks ridiculous.