Tupolev Tu204/214: No cargo income??

English Boards General
21

But you are well aware, I believe, that it’s impossible to limit plane usage to certain countries

in current AS. Moreover I think this problem will be resolved by time, as, hopefully soon,

Tu-204SM should put Tu-204-100 out of production.

Sorry, I’m really not that old, although Christ age come closer every month

Actually, the oldest plane I ever flew was a Tu-134A, built somewhere in mid 70-s

Well done! Very nice show-off. I disagree with some details and conclusion

from the facts you’ve posted, but we can discuss that later in this thread, if you wish so.

However, from your reaction I feel that you completely missed the point of my post.

[b]From all the things I was mostly interested in you reasoning to bring such "problems" now,

when you, probably, know that all those request would be shelved until new system is competed.[/b]

For me it looks like a customer, who wants to fiddle with colour-tone of wall paint at the time,

when the whole wall need to be torn down and replaced with the new one, of yet undefined look and structure.

22

Okay, I tried to do this subtly, but I guess I’m just gonna have to be blunt about it: Keep this discussion on topic (Tu204/214) or I’ll have to lock it. And most importantly, lay off the insults and flames towards each other. Again, should things continue here as they have in the last few posts, this thread will get closed…

23

Sorry peoples, I’ve been carried away a bit, edited my post.

Back to the container question: I remember I read somwhere(don’t have the link)

that Tu-214 was specially altered to hold LD3 containers in it’s bottom cargo

compartments, so I assumed, that Tu-214 can hold them and Tu-204 can’t.

Tupolev’s official web shows such differences for cargo version:

Tu-204C

http://www.tupolev.r.../komponovki.jpg

Tu-214C

http://tupolev.ru/im...D0�_214F2.jpg

24

Specifically, the TU-214 and the TU-204-120 are targeted at the international market and are thus equipped with the capability to handle the international LD3 containers.

However, the TU-204-100 is primarily targeted at CIS/domestic markets and thus are generally equipped with the AK-07 ULD container type.

Since the fuselage is essentially the same, one can deduce that whichever ULD system is adopted for an Aircraft will largely depend on what the customer/client specifies.

25

Not sure on that one. KAPO(Tu-214 manufacturer) claims on their

site, that Tu-214 fuselage was reworked, to accommodate larger

cargo compartments and other, not-specified changes. Must note,

that KAPO site is the only place I’ve seen such info.

26

[color="#284b72"]Little_Squirrel[/color],

If you modify the interior fittings of an Aircraft so that it is compatible with a different ULD, does that make it a different Fuselage???

It is a well known fact that the TU-204/214 family all share the same fuselage and dimension except for the TU-204-300 which has a shortened fuselage!

Perhaps it gives you great pleasure to misrepresent facts and manipulate information to achieve your own purpose!

  • To which I can only acknowledge the truth in the saying - "A man convinced against his will, is still of the same opinion!"

As far as I am concerned, the issues raised about Tu-204 family has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt and I do honestly hope it will be noted and implemented in the next version of the game!

27

huh, I’m tired of this.

Here is the link to official manufacturer web-page, claiming that

changes to fuselage were made.

In post above I gave links to official developer web-page, clearly showing

difference in cargo capacities of two models.

Believe what you want.

28

GOOGLE translation??? That …is your best shot??? Have you any idea how much meaning can be lost in a computer generated translation??

Anyhow, Am I suppose to fall and swoon all over you? Suddenly you are an advocate for truth??

A few days ago, you were of the myopic and bigoted opinion that the next Tu-204 that takes off will explode over the skies and kill all Americans!! (… a bit of an exaggeration, …I know!)

Anyhow that website does have an English variant - go read it …and a lot more material! Maybe in 6 months time, I may be willing to sit down and have a dialogue.

Perhaps then, you can make a suggestions about a Russian Aircraft, …and I will take it into consideration. Maybe?

For now… why don’t you go fly your Boeings and Dash-8s …and let us be!

PS: I have told you the facts about the Fuselage and the ULDs, however if you choose to remain misinformed that is your own cup of tea!

29

I assumed that not everyone can read russian, so I wrapped link into a google translate.

And it does a fine job, to my judgement. There are some pieces, that can be translated better,

but the notice in "Construction" paragraph about fuselage changes translated correctly,

at least to my humble knowledge of english.

English version of KAPO web is barren, if you compare, even visually, size of the given article in russian

and english you’ll see, that english article is at least twice shorter and lack a lot.

The problem with your ‘facts’ is that I don’t see them as such. You mostly referring to “common knowledge”

or absolutely unrelated facts, as it was with russian type certification standard. That’s why I keep disagreeing

with you. For example I would die for any link, showing that Tu 204-100 was certified to АП 25 standard.

30

Uuuuurghh!!! (yawns)… here we go again!!!

Even Wikipedia will give you that much!

I will advise you to spend the next 2 weeks reading all the links and URL that I dropped in the preceeding page. Have fun!

31

Hi,

I believe this topic started with the question why the (passenger version of the) Tu 204/214 series cannot carry cargo. According to the figures Midas has given, the cargo hold is comparable with other planes that can carry cargo. As far as the game is concerned, I remember that the plane can carry some cargo, that it is cheap, and that production rate is very slow.

Since then the discussion has strayed… do standard cargo units fit inside this Tupolev ? Do you speak about a different fuselage if only the inside is different ? Can you prove the plane is AP25 certified ? These questions may be interesting to the enthusiast, but they are less important in relevance to the original question.

By the way, JetPhotos.net has loads of photos of the 204-100 and 100C… in airports all over the world. So I guess they have a AP25/JAR25 certification ;)

Doing a quick search, I only found this link (Tu 204-120CE)

Jan

32

I’d love this to bee enthusiast discussion, one can always learn from such threads.

As to your questions: those things I’m trying to discuss. Since we haven’t reached any

consensus I can only explain my point of view, supported by few links I posted in this thread.

All Tu 204 family planes have roomy cargo compartments, but for what they call "bulky cargo".

Tu 214 had somehow modified fuselage structure (conversion of one emergency door to regular

and thinner upper cabin floor are often stated) and according to manufacturer and Tu204 family

type certificate can accommodate LD3 containers in it’s belly cargo pods.

I think those differences should evolve into 10-15 minute of additional turnaround time for

Tu 204-100.

Question about certification is more enthusiastic one, as there is no AS mechanism (and I don’t think

there will be such) to limit plane usage to certain countries on certification basis. I wrote it just

for example, originally, and when MIDAS02 disagreed with me so strongly I got anxious if

I’m missing some info. To my knowledge those early models(204 and 204-100) were certified only to НЛГС-3,

soviet standard preceding АП-25. I never seen any info on additional certification, and to my knowledge АП-25

introduction wasn’t retroactive.

Such lack of certification should limit not possible destination for plane, but whom can operate them. All 100

model planes are operated now under Russian, Cuban or North Korean flag (hopefully Iran will be added soon).

Egyptians use 120 version and Tu 204C in DHL colours is actually operated by russian Aviastar on some form

of wet leasing.

MIDAS02

Checked all(English) those link and haven’t found much, both on certification and cargo. Video in one of your post

shows container unload from Tu 214, at 6:08 you have plane’s registration, so you can check by yourself.

33

Sobelair,

You need not bother yourself over such trivial and unwarranted questionings! Has he asked for the JAR-25 certification of Airbus A-320?? Is it not well known that the A320 or the A300 were all certified before there was JAR-25?? Does that then render them useless or unusable?? Concerning this dude; I will give you the same advice I have given myself - It is time to move on!

Little_Squirrel,

Let this be my last entry into what is quickly becoming a pointless arguement!

I will leave you with one date - a date which happens to share my birthday - Jan 12, 1995! (Go figure!)

Another hint: Before the Russian Aviation Safety Commission’s standards was harmonised (before AP-25), it was known as - Russian standards NLGS-3

You will have to spend time researching and studying - I told you to study hard, didn’t I??

You may find it easier to retrace your steps and start reading every link that has been given in this thread rather than recklessly glancing over them!

With 900+ produced, TU-154s were produced to this same standards (stated above) and hundreds of them have flown for nearly 40 years in one of the harshest environments known to man!

Even today, very few aircrafts can boast of higher production figures, more widespread use or such length of faithful service! Should I then ask if TU-154 was certified to AP-25 standards?? (Whereas in truth, the only reason you even ask is becos you have just been told that AP-25 is harmonised with JAR-25 & FAR-25!!)

Finally, I wouldn’t hold my breath concerning your response! Nevertheless, I will conclude this session by reiterating what I have said earlier:

"A man convinced against his will, …is still of the same opinion!"

Thus the issue and question we are dealing with here is not about what is TRUE (you don’t care about that!), the real issue is that are you “willing” to accept the truth??? Ultimately, you are the only person that can answer and resolve your own questions and prejudice!

34

Hum…er… couldn’t resist, …had to bring it back up

36

Posting in a thread from September, 2012.

Your trolling is showing.

37

Especially this awesome mathematics... 1995 - 2011 = 14 years, yea. Normal people would say 16 but he made the right conclusion since 2001 is a black one in history and can't be counted, the same for 2000 which has almost only 0 what means it's no actual counted year. Good job on there, Denmark-Titanic! 

39

Why such a rude overreaction? I hope it is just a bad joke

It's a good joke and no overreaction at all. It was a sarcastic way to show that you are not any better... :D

41

ok - closed now!