Reduce Passenger Popularity for Russian Aircraft

English Boards Suggestions and Ideas
21

Not exactly what the OP wanted, but I wonder if there are any chance of extending the popularity spectrum on both sides?

From what I observe, people pretty much prefer flying widebodies over narrowbodies for its extra stability in turbulence, less cramped interior, etc. However the current spectrum only goes from -5 to +5 for jets (-5 to +2 for props) and I think perhaps it could be widened so that the slight preference towards western aircrafts and widebodies can be reflected?

Here is an example that illustrates my idea.

+1 for older Non-western Turboprops

+2 for older ATRs and Q100-300, etc for their age and New Non-western Turboprops

+3 for ATR-42/72, Dash 8 Q400, etc (Max for Turboprops)

+4 for 737-300/400/500 for its age

+5 for MD-81/82/83 for their age, small RJs and Russian RJs

+6 for MD-87/88, Western Regional Jets (Max for Regional Jets)

+7 for 737-700/800/900, etc for being narrowbody (Max for Narrowbody) and widebodies made in 70s - early 90s (Classic 747, L1011, DC-10, earlier versions of A300)

+8 for Russian Widebodies and widebodies made in 90s (MD-11, newer versions of A300 and 747-300)

+9 for Western Widebodies (Max for widebodies)

+10 for jumbos (Max)

I am not sure as to Russian narrowbodies because AS seems to put them on par as western ones, similar reason for differentiating MDs and 737s (legit tho, because MDs are much quieter for most part of the cabin)

22

Haven’t you be chance reversed the popularity of MD88 and 737-300. I think you got it wrong.

23

I'm just wondering how AS will place MRJ when it comes out :)

24

The problem is gone anyway. (at least on Riem) 

The only russian A/C being able to do serious damage are the AN-148/158, Superjet and TU-204/TU-214. The LET-410 will plummet from the sky as soon as someone flies on the same route. Both the Antonov and the Sukhoi are interesting aircrafts. However both of them won't be able to make a huge difference on busy routes. 

The Tupolev are on the way to suffer the same fate as the IL-18 on Quimpy. Currently the order book stretches all the way to may. Anyone needing an aircraft quickly won't be bother to have his money taken away and waiting 2 long weeks to finally get the ordered aircraft.  

25

Anyone needing an aircraft quickly won't be bother to have his money taken away and waiting 2 long weeks to finally get the ordered aircraft.  

6 days, not two weeks. But a log time indeed.

26

I did refer to the actual delivery time and not the minimal delivery time. Some poor guys ordered a Tupolev and has to wait until May to get it, thus making the waiting time nearly 2 weeks long. 

27

Comparing a 739 with a TU, although B739 has a higher entry fee, it gives you additional days to run, which can cover a significant part of extra money required for deposit. So I am not really inclined to order new TUs. However, I must admit that getting a 2nd hand TU is a bargain.

p.s. the wait is so long that you should feel vomit when you see the delivery date.

28

Haven't you be chance reversed the popularity of MD88 and 737-300. I think you got it wrong.

Thanks for your reminder :p

I double-checked just now at devau and nicosia

MD 81-82 are 3 bars

MD 83, 87-88 are 4 bars

MD 90 and 717 are 5 bars

Boeing 737-300/400/500 are 3 bars

Wonder if same logic should apply to non-enhanced A320 series (except A318 and 319) ? they should be comparable in terms of era to MD87 and 88, or even the 737 Classics

29

Comparing a 739 with a TU, although B739 has a higher entry fee, it gives you additional days to run, which can cover a significant part of extra money required for deposit. So I am not really inclined to order new TUs. However, I must admit that getting a 2nd hand TU is a bargain.

 

p.s. the wait is so long that you should feel vomit when you see the delivery date.


in fact getting any modern 2nd hand russian jets are a bargain. The acquisition cost is amazingly low

However, it seemed that SSJ is also suffering from high fuel costs?

On JFK - ATL, the fuel cost is even 40% greater than a CRK which is actually slightly larger in size (1354 vs 1908)

30

Thanks for your reminder :P

I double-checked just now at devau and nicosia

MD 81-82 are 3 bars

MD 83, 87-88 are 4 bars

MD 90 and 717 are 5 bars

Boeing 737-300/400/500 are 3 bars

Wonder if same logic should apply to non-enhanced A320 series (except A318 and 319) ? they should be comparable in terms of era to MD87 and 88, or even the 737 Classics

Not really becaue up until a few months ago, there was no A320 enhanced series in AS. You still have thousands of non-enhanced A320 flying around in AS that are relatively brand new. So no, they are not comparable to MD87/88 and 737 classics. Also in real life you could compare a 15- year old A320 to 15 year -ol 737-400. But you cannto compare a real life 5 year old A320 to 737-300 because there is no 5 year-old 737-400 flying in real life.

31

in fact getting any modern 2nd hand russian jets are a bargain. The acquisition cost is amazingly low

However, it seemed that SSJ is also suffering from high fuel costs?

On JFK - ATL, the fuel cost is even 40% greater than a CRK which is actually slightly larger in size (1354 vs 1908)

You are comparing a extremely short range (CRK) regional jet with a 2x2 configuration to a extremely long range regional jet with a 2x3 configuration. Of course the SSJ is going to eat more fuel since it has to carry around alot more airplane! CRK has a MTOW of 41,000 lbs vs 46,000 lbs!

For me, the SSJ flies DME-YKS at 3054 mi non-stop:

A fairer comparison would be to a 190 LR: (1818 vs 1908) - The 190 gives you a few more seats on shorter legs, but it still cannot fly nearly as far as the Sukhoi.

Here are the Max Useful Ranges of the SSJ and CRK ER: (The SSJ almost makes it to SNN, maybe it can since its 30 miles farther than my DME-YKS)

http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=&R=3054mi%40JFK,1862mi%40JFK&MS=wls&MR=900&MX=720x360&PM=*

P.S. You chose the Shorter Ranged CRK with a max useful range of 2500km, try comparing it to the CRK ER that uses 1608 fuel!


            


            

              
              
              
            


          

          

            

              



              
                  
                  
              32
              
            

            

              




You are comparing a extremely short range (CRK) regional jet with a 2x2 configuration to a extremely long range regional jet with a 2x3 configuration. Of course the SSJ is going to eat more fuel since it has to carry around alot more airplane! CRK has a MTOW of 41,000 lbs vs 46,000 lbs!


For me, the SSJ flies DME-YKS at 3054 mi non-stop:


A fairer comparison would be to a 190 LR: (1818 vs 1908) - The 190 gives you a few more seats on shorter legs, but it still cannot fly nearly as far as the Sukhoi.


Here are the Max Useful Ranges of the SSJ and CRK ER: (The SSJ almost makes it to SNN, maybe it can since its 30 miles farther than my DME-YKS)


http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=&R=3054mi%40JFK,1862mi%40JFK&MS=wls&MR=900&MX=720x360&PM=*


P.S. You chose the Shorter Ranged CRK with a max useful range of 2500km, try comparing it to the CRK ER that uses 1608 fuel!






I dont mean that russian planes are bad, in fact I love Tu-154s, IL-62s, Tu-134, Tu-144, Tu-114, Yak-42.... They are great designs that has a soul in it, only hampered by the not-so-positive image of the USSR regime.


Admittedly, the CRJ is the most fuel-efficient plane around that size (and the ERJ being the worst amongst 'western' RJs), but just for comparison, the An-158, also a 5-abreast plane still burns considerable less fuel (15%) than the SSJ (1646 vs 1908) on JFK - ATL leg notwithstanding that the An-158 is actually an older design and have a better short field performance.


The useful range of the An-158 is also better than the both LR and non-LR version of the SSJ


Yes the MTOW of the An-158 is less than the SSJ, but comparing MTOW is useless if you can never shove that many people (weight) into the plane.


That is why I am so disappointed when rumours began saying that Antonov is dropping An-148 series due to the conflict between Ukraine and Russia.


The difference is, of course, not as gaping as between A321 and Tu-204, but still, sizable because what it meant is that when flying short missions, the CRK can be up to 10% cheaper to operate than a SSJ, after taking the higher acquisition cost into account. (or 6.25% for An-158)

            


            

              
              
              
            


          

          

            

              



              
                  
                  
              33
              
            

            

              




Not really becaue up until a few months ago, there was no A320 enhanced series in AS. You still have thousands of non-enhanced A320 flying around in AS that are relatively brand new. So no, they are not comparable to MD87/88 and 737 classics. Also in real life you could compare a 15- year old A320 to 15 year -ol 737-400. But you cannto compare a real life 5 year old A320 to 737-300 because there is no 5 year-old 737-400 flying in real life.






Speaking of abnormalities in terms of popularity...


The Valsan 727s should be comparable to MD-80s(because the noise level is actually comparable to the MD-80s) and DC-8-70s are converted in the same era as the 757 and used as an alternative to the 757 by Delta. Although both planes have undergone extensive modifications, their airframe is, nonetheless, older than MD-80s and 757s so I could understand if the popularity would be 1-2 bar below what the comparable planes have acheived, but they both have -2 bars, which is 6-7 bars less than their competitors in their days.


The Dornier 328 series is another example. It ended production more than 10 years ago but did not suffer from the '-1 symptoms' that Dash-8s and ATRs all suffer from. The Dornier RJ even still retain full bar when no other RJs smaller than CR7 (which is twice the size of the DRJ) can achieve this.


[joking] Perhaps it has something to do with AS being a German game?


F-28, again, somehow gets a +1 rating when comparable aircrafts have all gone into at least -2 rating. (F-28-1000 ended production before Yak-42 began production, but F-28-1000 still has +1 whereas Yak-42 has -3(!) bars)

            


            

              
              
              
            


          

          

            

              



              
                  
                  
              34
              
            

            

              
[deleted]

            


            

              
              
              
            


          

          

            

              



              
                  
                  
              35
              
            

            

              
I think I read this kind of topic half a dozen times within the last year or so. To me there are enough diasadvantages on non-Airbus/Boeing/Bombardier-Planes. Also there is often a discussion about aircraft age also which I really don't get. Which standard PAX can really distinguish between the different AC types (expecially if it's not an Airbus or Boing). Do you believe more than a small percentage do know the difference between a Tupolev, Bombardier, Sukhoi or Embraer?I don't believe that! And as we are talking about PAX, not managers, not enthusiast... I belive there are enough penalties. I know people personally who were shocked when they found out they were boarded on a Turboprop because they didn't believe this was a real aircraft and were in great distress. They even didn't want to fly at first.


The same goes for age. I would like to know how many people would have guessed how old the crashed Germanwings really was. And how many do know anything about what's a problem with aircraft age and what's not... Even the media focuses solely on age as long as they don't know anything else. And again: enthusiasts, managers etc. know more about that. We should keep that in mind if we are talking about PAX popularity. Most PAX do only evaluate how wide their seat is or how beautiful the stewardesses are. Come on.

            


            

              
              
              
            


          

          

            

              



              
                  
                  
              36
              
            

            

              
I think people can still recognize the difference between a Tupolev or Sukhoi and a Bombardier or Embraer, but it's true that the major public won't be able to recognize the difference Bombardier and Embraer. 


There is no reason to talk about age on this topic because it has been already evaluated as another separated parameter in AS. Also, no one knows how old the plane they are flying with unless it is an out of production model. The only thing will affect the popularity is the noise level, safety, and general cabin design. There are people who don't like to fly with Russian planes, but the recent evaluation is good enough.

            


            

              
              
              
            


          

          

            

              



              
                  
                  
              37
              
            

            

              
All the models i mentioned in my last post are actually out of production for at least 10 years, fyi.


And I think there are some arbitrariness as to the aircraft popularity ratings which needs to be addressed, tho not a top priority though.


I know its offtopic but I bet 99% of the general public cant tell the difference between a MRJ, ERJ and SSJ since they are all engine-under-wings attached to a tube of similar length.


(Well perhaps they will notice when reading safety card, but most people dont read it so...)


However, I guess most people would notice they are flying on a different plane when they swap from a CRJ or MD-80/90 series or F100 onto an ERJ or A320, etc

            


            

              
              
              
            


          

          

            

              



              
                  
                  
              38
              
            

            

              




I dont mean that russian planes are bad, in fact I love Tu-154s, IL-62s, Tu-134, Tu-144, Tu-114, Yak-42.... They are great designs that has a soul in it, only hampered by the not-so-positive image of the USSR regime.


Admittedly, the CRJ is the most fuel-efficient plane around that size (and the ERJ being the worst amongst 'western' RJs), but just for comparison, the An-158, also a 5-abreast plane still burns considerable less fuel (15%) than the SSJ (1646 vs 1908) on JFK - ATL leg notwithstanding that the An-158 is actually an older design and have a better short field performance.


The useful range of the An-158 is also better than the both LR and non-LR version of the SSJ


Yes the MTOW of the An-158 is less than the SSJ, but comparing MTOW is useless if you can never shove that many people (weight) into the plane.


That is why I am so disappointed when rumours began saying that Antonov is dropping An-148 series due to the conflict between Ukraine and Russia.


The difference is, of course, not as gaping as between A321 and Tu-204, but still, sizable because what it meant is that when flying short missions, the CRK can be up to 10% cheaper to operate than a SSJ, after taking the higher acquisition cost into account. (or 6.25% for An-158)






I agree with you 100%. The SSJ *should* have better fuel burn than the AN-148 since the SAM 146 is much more efficient than the D-436!


Furthermore, I feel the EMBs get too little love in the game compared to real life. Higher fuel burn, expensive acquisition, etc.


Right now, AS should devalue the AN-148 and SSJ purchase prices to account for the Hryvna's and Ruble's collapse. A slight decrease in Aibus cost since the Euro has also depreciated would be realisitic as well.


CRK is an awesome airplane, but I push the envelope with AN-148 and SSJ instead. 

http://pearls.airlinesim.aero/app/info/enterprises/37866

            


            

              
              
              
            


          

          

            

              



              
                  
                  
              39
              
            

            

              
Hehe we are working with as dollars who are virtual currency and bear no exchange rate relations to neither us dollar or euro. The whole world deals with ASD,  it’s the only currency around. That means production costs are constant. Also there is no inflation.

            


            

              
              
              
            


          

          

            

              



              
                  
                  
              40
              
            

            

              
Okay, I mentioned age only as a further example of the same problem.


But I still believe: Most people do not know what they are flying with. A friend mine works in AMS an lives nearby FRA. He didn't know nor care what plane he is travelling with twice a week. My girlfriend went to a conference in IAD and also didn't know nor care what plane she was in. Other friends only know or remember what they were in if it was "really good" or "really bad". I really think many of the AS players do have a lot of aircraft-affiliated friends and might misjudge public knowledge of aircraft types. But it's just my opinion, I also might be wrong.