Rrj

[lowecur]

Take a look at the competition for EMB in 2007. It's the Russian Regional Jet being developed jointly by companies in Russia, France, and the US. Boeing is heavily involved. The plane will feature Western Avionics, Snemca Engines, and lots of Boeing engineering. It will be available in 55, 75, and 95 seat versions.

http://www.janes.com/aerospace/military/gallery/maks/gallery/rrj_55.shtml

I can just see this in Southwest Colors

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

'07.......

With my ADHD, can you repost sometime in '06??

I'm focused on more immediate issues like the Great Fare War of '05

 

[OakRBust]

awwwwwwkkkkkkkkk


Look for the Order



aaaaaawwwwwwwkkkkk

 

[lowecur]

-another WN F/O parrot heard from-

Okay!

 

[void]

Why would anyone order a 55 seat jet? It would require a second flight attendant for those five extra people. I would imagine that would drive costs up too high to operate it effectivly.

 

[jarhead]

55 seats

It may be that the aircraft is not intended for thr U.S, Market. The extra 5 seats and the need for another F/A is a U.S. (FAA) requirement.....not universal over the globe.

I would speculate, that any U.S. carrier would have a huge problem filling any Russian built airliner, given the horrid safety record of Russian aircraft flown by Aeroflot and other carriers over the globe who bought them. Might be different now.....can't say, but you'd never get me setting foot in a Russian built airplane, until I saw at least 25 years or more of safety history. Look at the Russian built space vehicles and space station as well. The Russians always had enormous engines and lift capacity, but reliability and safety has never been their forte. I think the U.S. carriers would avoid them like the plague, given the perception that most Americans have over anything built in Russia. Vodka and caviar are about the only things I can think of that come out of Russia that Americans will buy. Mabe a Kalishnikov military rifle or two as well, but not for hunting.

 

[jhill]

<<Might be different now.....can't say, but you'd never get me setting foot in a Russian built airplane, until I saw at least 25 years or more of safety history. >>

Until you need a ride to work in it anyway

 

[lowecur]

jarhead

I think you're right on the 55 seater. I have my doubts that the 55 seater will be the first production. The demand in Russia and Europe will be for the 95 seater first. We'll have to see how this plays out.

The safety and reliability record is certainly poor. I would bet that a large percentage of this problem is the lack of money and enforcement of safety procedures. Russia and many of the Soviet block carriers bought and flew these a/c on the cheap. Also, the Russian version of an FAA certification I'll bet has been filled with bribes and payoff's.

The Russian's will have a tremendous amount of engineering input from their partner Boeing. Couple that with a proven track record of Snemca for a poweplant, western avionics, and you could have a proven winner in Europe and Russia. The real key will be their ability to mass produce a reliable and safe aircraft. If they listen to Boeing on the manufacturing process, they will have the beginning of a viable industry. Acceptance from the US will take years. Of course if they allowed this a/c to be produced in Renton, then they just may have a marketing angle.

 

[jhill]

If it will be flown by US carriers it will be certified by FAA and JAA criteria. Same as Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier, Embraer etc. Its all the same stuff just cheap Russian labor

 

[jarhead]

Don't bet the farm on that, Jhill. I stand by what I said before; the American public will not fly on a Russian built airplane, no matter how well it is designed, made, or certified. The Russian aircraft have too much "baggage" on safety issues for Americans to get on them, and American carriers know that. They will not buy a "cheap" airplane, because they know that no matter how much the cost would be reduced, if people will not get on board, they will have purchased (or leased) an albatross. That plane will be for Russian citizens and eastern Europeans. End of story!

 

[jhill]

The general public doesn't know a Russian jet from an Airbus. They'll fly it don't worry. They fly frickin' jungle jets all day and 99% have no idea what it is or can even tell the difference between that and a Boeing. US carriers will by it if it fits their plans and is cost effective.

 

[jarhead]

Well, we'll just have to agree to dis-agree on that. I believe you sell the general public short on the knowledge of aircraft and carriers. More and more people buy their tickets on line now, and not through a Travel agency that mails the ticket to them. When one looks up information on-line, they can see what aircraft they are booking, and they can even tell if it is a "mainline" carrier, or a regional wholly owned. When I fly, I do it Via Delta, and I always book myself on a 737, MD-88, etc, vs an RJ due to the comfort factor. I am 6'3" tall......ever tried to take a leak in the toilet of a 50 seat CRJ? Ya gotta be a contorsionist, and usually pee on your trousers or shoes. For a long trip, I'd rather be in a Boeing or a mad dog. If its 90 minutes or less, then a CRJ is OK. Most of the public that I know, is fully aware of what aircraft are made by whom, and what aircraft they buy their tickets to board. The public (IMO) will never accept flying stuff made by the people who put together MIGs and Tupelov airplanes. And Yes, if Boeing designs etc, it will be safer, but the PUBLIC will not buy into it. Just too much safety baggage, and running an airline business is risky enough for the Delta's, United's and NWA, without sticking their neck WAAAY out to get whacked of on that type of speculative business mis-adventure.

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

Jarhead,

I agree the public is better informed, but they will trust a Russian plane. Their memories are too short and marketing will beat all.

The public looks for leather seats, comfort and new plane smell (just like they shop for cars). They will be impressed by the "Boeing" engineering and will like flying on a "new" airplane. The public will trust FAA certification and American engineering/manufacturing scrutiny. Remember how the Japanese name was synonymous with cheap? Lexus is now the car quality standard.

Consider Embraer. Who would have thought a South American company would be beating out Boeing for airplane contracts???

Times change.

 

[jarhead]

FlyBoeingJets

You and I are in agreement on one thing you said in your post. But, in a way, you kind of reinforce my point. Yes, I do definately remember how at one time, anything made in Japan was synonomous with 'junk'. Earlier in this thread, I made the statement that it would be 25 years before I ever set foot in a Russian built airlplane, to allow time for a credible safety record to be established. The greatest engineering in the world, cannot overcome manufacturing shortcuts, inferior materials, faulty welds, and political corruption. The point about Japans quality. That Phoenix took many, many years to rise from the ash heap, before the Lexus was made. As I also said before, name one thing beyond Vodka and caviar, that Americans will buy that comes from Russia?

 

[Falconjet]

?

Most normal people I talk to after they flew in from somewhere are vaquely aware that they walked onto somekind of aircraft when they left the concourse. Very few even notice if it is a jet or a prop job, except that most of the time they have to walk across the ramp for a prop job (and sometimes for theRJs). Even fewer seem to actually be able to identify the type of aircraft they flew on. I don't think too many will actually have any idea the country of origin of the aircraft they fly on, particularly considering most people have no idea (or really care) where the products they buy are made. That's why Levis are going to stop making jeans in USA, because there is no consumer backlash for shipping their assembly jobs overseas.

I just don't see the average Jon and Joan Q. Public worrying about flying on Russian made aircraft.

Should prove interesting to put it to the test though.

FJ

 

[jarhead]

FalconJet.....

You and I definately travel with different crowds. EVERYONE I associate and work with are accutley aware of what kind of airplane they fly on, whos brand it is, and even where the final assembly plants are located. I am sure there are a few who are out there in some kind of stupor who get on planes....drugged out hippies, and some geriatric grey haired grandmothers. But, then again, perhaps my experiences and the crowd I travel with see a different scenerio.

 

[Falconjet]

My crowd

Jarhead: Are you trying to say that there is something wrong with my posse of drugged out hippies and geriatric grey haired grandmothers? Man, those are my friends. We're free to move about the country too!

 

[jarhead]

Very good :^)

 

[jarhead]

I guess it's all about observation and situational awareness. Everyone I know when they get into a car or mini-van, knows what make it is. If they don't recognize if it's a Ford, Toyota, or Volvo, can see the logo all over the vehicle. I am just aware of my surroundings,

When you get on a 121 carrier, and are ready to leave, the F/A always introduces you to the safety features of "our Boeing 737, or our "Canadair Regional Jet" Even if you are not listening, the placard in the seat back cushion tells anyone who is bored (and we all are) picks up to read. That placard also identifies the airplane make and model. If I pick up a camera that I am not familiar with, I see right away if its a Nikon, Olympus or Kodak. I don't see how anyone can help not knowing what they are riding in; car or airplane.

 

[Vladimir Lenin]

somehow korean carmakers are thriving in the US

I doubt russians will have trouble selling their planes here, esp. considering the fact that everyone knows they were first in space

 

[jarhead]

North Korean Cameras?????

As far as I know, a camera can't kill ya.

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

Re: FlyBoeingJets

You and I are in agreement on one thing you said in your post. But, in a way, you kind of reinforce my point. Yes, I do definately remember how at one time, anything made in Japan was synonomous with 'junk'. Earlier in this thread, I made the statement that it would be 25 years before I ever set foot in a Russian built airlplane, to allow time for a credible safety record to be established. The greatest engineering in the world, cannot overcome manufacturing shortcuts, inferior materials, faulty welds, and political corruption. The point about Japans quality. That Phoenix took many, many years to rise from the ash heap, before the Lexus was made. As I also said before, name one thing beyond Vodka and caviar, that Americans will buy that comes from Russia?

I see now. You may be right about the 25 years. I think the limiting factor would be Boeing. Boeing would not support the project if it would tarnish their name. I wonder what respected aerospace company will be the first to take the risk?

 

[jarhead]

I don't have all the answers by a long shot, but I can speculate. Not sure Boeing has anything at all to "risk" by assisting the Russians with their engineering expertise. If you consider the International Space Station, Boeing is actually a contractor for a lot of what's going into it. Many problems with that venture, have been brought about by the Russians not holding up their end of the log. Huge delays from Russian made components, many of those delays due to Russia not having the money to get stuff delivered on time.

The other question that pops into my mind, is that if this is such a viable venture, why is Boeing not doing it all; why are the Russians needed at all? How will Boeing be paid? Russia has some big money problems. This whole thing really sounds screwy to me, from a business standpoint. Why is Russia needed at all, if there is a viable market for this Russian RJ project. Could it be, that Boeing recognizes this as well, that this thing "won't fly" (pun intended) Perhaps Boeing has secured some sort of irrevocable letter of credit, and international bank assets backing up payment for milestone incremental payments for services delivered. Then there is no risk to Boeing, they can just take the money and run.

Again, just speculation and questions on my part. Just as I wont stay in a hotel in a floor higher than a fire truck's ladder will reach, I also will not tempt fate by an airplane built by a former soviet block country. I would never buy a car from the former East Germans (the wonderful piece of crap called the Trablat), and I won't fly in an airplane built with factories that turn out the likes of 1950's refrigerators and TV's. Russia is not generally known as producing any quality industrial product. They can stick to Vodka as far as I am concerned.

 

[lowecur]

jarhead

I love to speculate too.

I think BA is in this because the profit margins are much better in Russia than they would be anywhere else. I think they feel that if they are going to get involved in this type a/c it will have to be on a basis where they won't lose a ton of money. The R&D on this size a/c is still enormous, and the profit margins are probably too small to produce it in the US. To develop this type of a/c can cost a billion dollars, so if you split the costs between many different contributors it makes it much more viable.

There is a thread on another board where they are discussing flying in the former Soviet block. Surprisingly there were many posters who enjoyed the flying experience. They mentioned the IL62, IL86, TU134, TU154, TU204, and YAK40's as type of a/c flown. The planes were for the most part comfortable and service was pleasant. Some of the airlines flown were Aeroflot, Ukranian, Saravin, and Samara. I wasn't aware that Aeroflot flys the BA 777. Considering the 1000's of daily flights that still operate in the former Soviet Union, they have done a fairly decent job on the safety issue (although, not up to Western standards).

I have also read threads about US military pilots who have flown the newest Migs and would put them in a performance catagory with our best fighters. The only thing lacking was our sophisticated military avionics and weaponry. Another great engineering success is the largest a/c in the world, the AN-225.

Don't sell the Russians short, BA hasn't.