Sukhoi Superjet 100 first commercial flight

[Vympel]

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... light.html

Still blows my mind that Sukhoi has built a civilian regional airliner and its got a fair number of confirmed orders (164 planes) plus more options - including one Australian operator. (Pearl Aviation)

[Pelranius]

It's a shame the Il-96 never really took off, so to speak.

[Vympel]

True- but with the Russians themselves saying it was inferior to Boeing/Airbus offerings, its hard to see how there could be another outcome (though the Il-96T cargo variant is still in production).

Still, the MS-21 is on the horizon, there's some potential there if they can find a market and make the same sort of arrangements they did with the Superjet.

[Sephirius]

It's a shapely looking thing, isn't it?

[K. A. Pital]

True- but with the Russians themselves saying it was inferior to Boeing/Airbus offerings, its hard to see how there could be another outcome (though the Il-96T cargo variant is still in production).

The Superjet is in any case inferior to analogues just like the Il-96 is. The plane is three years late, although that's still something.

[Pelranius]

It'll be a good starting point for learning what to do right with the MS-21.

People might not care so much about inferiority with something as relatively cheap as a regional airliner.

[K. A. Pital]

It's 2 tons overweight and 3 years late, cheapness is about the only thing that's saving the project.

[Vympel]

The Superjet is in any case inferior to analogues just like the Il-96 is. The plane is three years late, although that's still something.

I really don't see why that matters. When was the last time a new plane of anyones was on time?

[K. A. Pital]

The Superjet is in any case inferior to analogues just like the Il-96 is. The plane is three years late, although that's still something

I really don't see why that matters. When was the last time a new plane of anyones was on time?

The A380 and 787 are machines that incorporate lots of new technology, so it is natural for them to be late. The 777, by the way, which is a relatively new model, was commissioned without any delays (as far as I know). I think Embraer commissioned their models without delays, too, although I'm not sure on that.

[Vympel]

The A380 and 787 are machines that incorporate lots of new technology, so it is natural for them to be late. The 777, by the way, which is a relatively new model, was commissioned without any delays (as far as I know). I think Embraer commissioned their models without delays, too, although I'm not sure on that.

At the same time, no Russian aerospace manufacturer has never built a plane like the Superjet 100 before - in any event, delays really don't matter if it hasn't significantly (or at all) hampered the plane's order book.

The first 787s to enter service are going to be overweight too, btw.

The A380 and 787 are machines that incorporate lots of new technology, so it is natural for them to be late.

Actually a good deal of the 787 delays at least were caused by Boeing's incompetent decision to outsource production because they thought it would be cheaper. But in any event, a delay is a delay is a delay.

[K. A. Pital]

At the same time, no Russian aerospace manufacturer has never built a plane like the Superjet 100 before

"Like"? Any Tu modification from the 1990s beats the SSJ-100 hands down by max commercial load and flight range. Yeah, the SSJ engines have a slightly lower fuel consumption than Tu or Il-96's PS-90A (of any modification), but at a cost - the speed, range and commercial load are sharply lower on the SSJ 100 than any of the possible serial production models suggested in the 90s and 2000s by Russian factories.

What is unique about this plane? The fact that a military contractor manufactured a civilian plane, it's extremely niche usefulness because of pathetically small commercial load and range, or...?

[Vympel]

"Like"? Any Tu modification from the 1990s beats the SSJ-100 hands down by max commercial load and flight range.

Which Tu modifications from the 1990s were intended to do the same job (i.e. replace Tu-134s and Yak-42s) as the SSJ? The only one I know if is the Tu-334 - an underperforming program which was done away with precisely because the SSJ100 and An-148 were more promising.

As for the comparison between the two - the Tu-134 in its '100' modification seats 102 passengers, the Superjet 100 seats 83-103 depending on variant (i.e. 100-75 to 100-95). The Tu-334-100 flight range is 3,150km (no specification whether this is at full passenger load), the SSJ100 (at full passenger load) is 3,048km for the regular 100-95 or 4,578km for the 100-95LR. I'm not seeing the "hands down" advantage for the Tu.

Going from wikipedia, the estimated price of the business model of the Tu-334 was $43-44M - that's compared to $23-25M for the SSJ100.

In any event, I was referring to the SSJ100's construction and superior technology (in terms of composite materials, engines, and avionics - much of which are the product of joint ventures with Western companies) rather than whether they had tried to replace the Tu-134s and Yak-42s before. Heck, the Tu-334 program started in 1986.

[K. A. Pital]

"Like"? Any Tu modification from the 1990s beats the SSJ-100 hands down by max commercial load and flight range.

Which Tu modifications from the 1990s were intended to do the same job (i.e. replace Tu-134s and Yak-42s) as the SSJ? The only one I know if is the Tu-334 - an underperforming program which was done away with precisely because the SSJ100 and An-148 were more promising.

As for the comparison between the two - the Tu-134 in its '100' modification seats 102 passengers, the Superjet 100 seats 83-103 depending on variant (i.e. 100-75 to 100-95). The Tu-334-100 flight range is 3,150km (no specification whether this is at full passenger load), the SSJ100 (at full passenger load) is 3,048km for the regular 100-95 or 4,578km for the 100-95LR. I'm not seeing the "hands down" advantage for the Tu.

Going from wikipedia, the estimated price of the business model of the Tu-334 was $43-44M - that's compared to $23-25M for the SSJ100.

In any event, I was referring to the SSJ100's construction and superior technology (in terms of composite materials, engines, and avionics - much of which are the product of joint ventures with Western companies) rather than whether they had tried to replace the Tu-134s and Yak-42s before. Heck, the Tu-334 program started in 1986.

There's only 100 Tu-134s left functioning in Russia, and only half of those on regular lines, which means short-range liners are not even really necessary, there's no flight demand (except perhaps in the Far North, where short-range flights are still required and people earn enough money to afford them). On the other hand, a new plane to replace the main liner, Tu-154 is rather needed. The SSJ-100 does not cost "$23-25 million", the catalogue price for 2010 was $32 million. Considering the plane is chock-full of foreign parts, full service of the machine using only Russian hardware is simply impossible.

[Vympel]

Well, there's gotta be some demand, given the order book (and noting always the An-148 is also a factor, since they complement each other). And besides, its not just a question of demand within Russia, hence the Italian, Thai, Australian, Hungarian and Indonesian orders for the SSJ100. Its a very positive outcome when you consider that in the old days the most countries that bought the Tu-134 (or well, any plane in Soviet times) only did so because they were part of the Eastern Bloc.

As far as replacing the Tu-154 goes, the Tu-204 didn't do very well, but the initial outlook for the Tu-204SM looks more promising.