Share your experiences about your latest flights: details and pictures are highly appreciated by our community. How do you rate airlines, in-flight meals, frequent flyer programs, etc... join this forum now!
There's some brilliant reports here! Love the sound of the An124, I always keep a look for that when I go to MAN (and see if the one in BRU is still there).
C117 - it is fascinating to hear about flights in such remote places. I saw a TV programme once about Aeroflot, but I didn't know if alot was tongue in cheek because some of it sounded so way out, but reading of your experiences with the YAK brings it all back.
Nice to see photos of the Tu134, I last saw one of those in Helsinki back in 1994. We were waiting to take off to Heathrow in a Finnair MD82, and the Estonian Tu134 landed from Tallin and I got a photo of it as it passed by. It's a poor quality photo because I was not in a position to get a good shot, but I kept it to remind me of the only time I saw and bagged a 134
Sabena and Sobelair - gone but never forgotten.
Louise
Here's another hoot: on a recent flight from Almaty to Astana, I noticed that the interior of the YAK-40 seemed brighter than usual. When I took a closer look at the cabin walls, the rips and raggedy places had been covered with duct tape, and the entire cabin PAINTED over with what seemed to be an oil-based paint! YIKES!
Hi everybody
I flew with some of them in Congo Like 26,32,etc...
This are very good planes and also fast.
Also before we had this Russian planes we had to fly with very very old planes like the viscount or HS 748 etc...
I feel better with those,somethimes they are not 10 jears old.
It's a big differens with a Viscount that has 35 or 40 jears!!!
Regards
Pat
The Il-62M is in fact a kind of a 787, or a A350!
Small planes that go fast and far....
Companies should buy cheap old Il-62M's instead of these expensive new airplanes...
even Fidel is flying it
Ovostar wrote:Did one of you ever go in a Ilyushin-62 ?
Yes.
It is funny to see that for balance the passengers of the front section must board first (if not, the plane would fall on its tail!).
talking about the Il-62M, i found this video on Flight Level 350, maybe you know this video already.
It's an impressive video of someone travelling in a Air Koryo Il-62M from from Pyongyang (North Korea) to Beijing.
Here's the link: http://www.flightlevel350.com/viewer.ph ... rating=yes
i flew many times on a tupolev 154 (aeroflot,kmv,siberian airlines) it is great and flies much farther up than most aircraft when i was two and still in a diaper the russian pilots let me in the cockpit and i was told that i played with the controls i pooped in my diaper and to the pilots it smelled so bad they left the cockpit and left me in to be pilot my mom was ebaressed also the noise of the aircraft idling outside is like music to me.
That's a good story russianboy. I would love to see the controls of a Russian aircraft (the only ones I've seen closely are those of the 747-400). I don't think I'll see a 154 this year, last year we saw the Bulgarian one in MAN but I don't know if it goes to BHX. If it does I'll get a photo and post it in here because it is a beautiful aircraft and very colourful.
Sabena and Sobelair - gone but never forgotten.
Louise
I flew a few times on board russian aircraft
like : Air Via TU154M, Tarom AN.24RV YR.BMM, Tarom IL.62 YR.IRB, Balkan Bulgarian IL.18V, Balkan Bulgarian TU.134 and 154B ...
I remember that a small window, a dome was installed in the roof the toilets situated in the rear part of the cabin, just near the engines of the Tu134 ... Very noisy place but nice view to sky !
I flew also with a Mil Mi8 during a few hours in Africa.
I am a novice here but will take part in this conversation because I am frequent flyer and can compare a little bit different types of aurliners. I fully understand your cricicism in respect of aircraft made in Russia but I want you to know: they were made in USSR. Only a few Tu154m, IL96 and several Tu204/214 have been built in Russia after the USSR collapse. Russian (Soviet) airliners have both advantages and desadvantages as well as every machinery nevermind where it was manufactured. The biggest desadvantages are as follows: noise, lack of legspace and enormous fuel consumption. This is true. But why it's like this? I will try to explain.
1. Noise. Pay attention when all these birds have been designed. Tu 134 - in 1963, IL 62 - the same time, Tu 154 - early 70s, IL86 - 1982. Tell me please, if the Western liners designed during this period are less noisy? No, early 737, 727, Tristar, DC10, 747 are as noisy as those Soviets.
2. Lack of legspace. It doesn't depend of airplane, it depends of an airline operating this airplane. If Soviet "Aeroflot" supposed that there was no need to create comfortable conditions for passengers - it's Aeroflot's fault. By the way I've flown different domestic european airlines - comfort is the same. You are packed like haring in can.
3. Fuel consumption. Agree. Soviet types of aircraft engines were designed without paying attention on fuel consumption, because there was no free market in the country. "Aeroflot" of the Soviet era was not a commercial airline as it is nowadays. Soviet "Aeroflot" never paid market price for jet fuel.
Today the situation got changed completely. "Aeroflot", "Transaero" etc are buying fuel, competing to attract more clients, that's why the only way for them is to lease Airbuses/Boeings which are suitable for market economy. Russian airliners are not worse or less reliable than the Western ones. Most of them survived really crazy way of operation in early 1990s and still flying. This fact proves their reliability. So don't be afraid to fly them. The matter is that they are simply unable to compete the Western types due to economy reasons.
Comet wrote:I am surprised that more Western countries did not operate the YAK, or at least an equivalent. I suppose in their way they must be more environment-friendly with their ability to operate from places which do not even have a runway (no need to surface everything with tarmac).
jan_olieslagers wrote:
Comet wrote: I would love to see an aircraft operating from such rough surfaces. The benefits of the tougher Russian types have been immense , and the fact that they can operate into places where road vehicles and Western aircraft cannot reach can only be a positive one.
Yes, must be a great sight. I'd not be surprised if even the IL76 was designed for "soft" i.e. grass runways.
Actually, I have heard that even Tu-144 had such considerations!
But I suppose that the Russians would have had problems with fuel consumption. Not because of price - but the carrying capacity of a frame is limited, no matter how cheap the fuel.
How did the USSR serve Havana or Hanoi? Especially if they needed to detour around unfriendly airspaces?
