Tu-204 - wrong time, wrong place

[@carpediem6568]

For a system that was closed off for many years, Russia has done quite well with aircraft, tanks, rocket launchers, assault rifles, etc., helicopters and spacecraft. They must have a long history of emphasis on engineering and apparently still do. Good to see how well they have done....now that they are no longer the USSR.

[@stephenmeier4658]

Another comment that didn't age well. To be fair no one in the West truly knew how mediocre Russian military equipment was until February 2022

[@rapidfire111]

@@stephenmeier4658 too much western media has

[@donlove3741]

@@stephenmeier4658 more a matter of leadership than equpment.

[@Commentator541]

They were also spying on the West.

[@haroldaranda8042]

Not really; it is based on integrating foreign systems. The famed AK47 was originally a German WWII design, just modified to be stamped out in quantity.

[@kasunrajapaksha6651]

Your reviews are so accurate, I saw Tu-204 production rate is going to be increased. Indeed, not planned to be by huge numbers, but who knows what will happen. Since MC-21 is not ready yet with domestic components, Tu-204 might have a future.

[@danielwales7108]

Thank you. Well scripted, erudite and precise, told with obvious care and love of the subject industry and times. Well done.

[@conaly082]

I am probably one of the lucky few, that got the chance to fly aboard the Tu-204-100 and Tu-204-300. Thank you, Air Koryo!

[@123-x7u4q]

💀 ☠️ 🦴 💀

[@bradchoi9679]

This has got to be one of your best introductions!

[@BoomerKeith1]

Would have been interesting to see how the Tu-204 would have developed over time. We're approaching a time in civil aviation where the various classes of planes are becoming harder to distinguish from one another. Obviously, if you're an aviation fan you can tell the difference between a A-320 and a 737, but to the average person mid range planes world wide are starting to look and act the same. I miss the days when planes like the Tu 204, DC-10, 747 and other distinct airplanes flew regularly.

[@herohero-fw1vc]

In the old days, planes had originality, but today, they all look the same.

[@kasunrajapaksha6651]

Some newbie fans have a difficult time distinguishing between Boeing787 & A-350

[@BoomerKeith1]

@@kasunrajapaksha6651 lol. Yep, that's true.

[@hewhohasnoidentity4377]

The 737 landing gear wheels are exposed while in flight.

[@BoomerKeith1]

@@hewhohasnoidentity4377 That doesn't really help the novice plane spotter when the plane in on land, or landing/taking off.

[@thomashill4743]

sad it didn't work out for the Tu-204, good looking plane, would've loved to see it more

[@calpeninsularailfan]

Thomas Hill nah the A321 was better.

[@adamp.3739]

So it does! Although maybe it'd find a niche in the Japanese market - the Japanese love their aircraft to get around the country...

[@IgnoredAdviceProductions]

Better looking than the 757 for sure

[@canyounotmydude9155]

They still manufacture it

[@adamp.3739]

@@canyounotmydude9155 Well yeah, but nobody's giving that plane any love. An avionics upgrade, larger fuel tanks and new more efficient engines (like a downscaled GEnx or Trent 1000) would do the plane some good.

[@mgroh5564]

The Tupolev Tu-204-300/Tu-234 is what I imagine the 757-100 would’ve looked like had it been produced. Great video!

[@nomorebikes]

Hello my friend! Thank you for the thoughtful and informative video. As a former pilot and aviation buff, I love to hear about the history and development of different aircraft. Your video was interesting and enlightening. I for one, sincerely appreciate the time and effort you put into creating for those of us with our heads in the sky. Have a great New Year!

[@28ebdh3udnav]

We love your channel because you make unbiased videos.

[@macbomb]

I generally liked this video but you missed the real issue this aircraft did not succeed. Weight. The TU-204 was certified to 105 or 103 t, and seated 190 people or 210 in high density. The 737-900 is 85 t and the A321 is 93.5 t. The TU204-100/120 has a "book" range of 4,800 km, the A320 is over 6,000 km and the 737-900 is about 5,400 km. You kept comparing it to the 757, it is a 116 t. The 757-200 seats about 28 more in a standard 2 class layout and 29 more in a high density seating layout. The 757 also has 3,000 km longer range then all the TU-204s, other than the TU204-300. The TU204-300 lost about 30 seats, now nearly 60 less than the 757, and the 757 still has 1,500 km more range. The TU204-120 even uses the same power plant, Rolls Royce RB211, which powered some 757s. Those engines have considerable more power and have a higher fuel consumption then any of the 737/A320 power plants. The TU204 has the seating and range of the 737/A320 family's, but the fuel consumption of the 757. That is why it did not succeed. You called the 757 a "failure", I am sure that Tupolev and Ilyushin would love their "failures" to sell over 1000 aircraft. The US government bought a grand total of 5 Boeing 757s, one of them was used. Boeing sold 1046 to the retail market, the A310 Airbuses direct competitor to the 757, only sold 255 aircraft. The A300 more of a 767 competitor sold 560 aircraft. I understand Tupolev wanted to make a 757 competitor, but that is not what they ended up with.

[@BoB4jjjjs]

All good points, weight is a big issue.

[@gamirf]

That's not the main issue, "wrong time, wrong place". The plane was born in late 80s when Tupolev didnt have any money for R&D,hope u didnt miss the part about Tu-204 prototypes doing cargo flights for money. So it was built from some different ideas for different planes(widebody?narrow? crew of 3?), without any serious money for R&D, to have anything domesticly built for replacing aging tu-154.. or just to have anything flying.. Basicly it's the story how russian goverment(main and only owner of TU) decided, that it didnt need aviation industry anymore,so Tupolev trying to survive with almost no resources. Sad story for sad aircraft.

[@nyceyes]

@@gamirf You're correct... These severe economic factors (and the "do the best with what you have" result) legitimately makes comparison more complicated than just range, weight, style, and families.

[@FormulaOnePassion]

China uncensored ;)

[@nntflow7058]

In terms of length. TU204 sits between A321 and B757-200. BUT both A321 and B757-200 are now considered in the same category. B737-900ER comparison is quite bad since their capacity are quite different.

[@rapidthrash1964]

I still think this is an awesome jet, even with all of its negatives.

[@anasevi9456]

another great video, Skyships is a master of telling these rarely heard stories.

[@Colaholiker]

Thank you Sky for those informative videos! Growing up on the western side of the Iron Curtain when it still existed, I did not get to see many of the Soviet made planes, even though I live near one of Europe's largest airports. After the wall came down you saw a few Soviet made planes, but due to the high noise levels (and the airport charging more for loud aircraft) they were quickly withdrawn from those routes as soon as Aeroflot and other airlines from ex-Soviet countries had western-made alternatives at hand. It's sad that there are so many aircraft I never had a chance to fly on and I probably never will , and with all those Soviet or later Russian made planes the list gets longer and longer. большое спасибо

[@csk4j]

Its worth repeating..a beautiful plane!

[@greateraviationgl91]

757 & A321: *Laughs* Also 757 & A321: Your aircraft is like us but a bit different, Tupolev! Tupolev Aircraft Company: *Laughs*

[@Pop_cat1140]

Like the Boeing 757 mixed with the Airbus A321

[@Horizoneng]

Awesome new video!

[@Shadowfax-1980]

This is your most creative video, yet. Keep up the great work.

[@atatexan]

Good narrative. I worked at IAE AG which had Rolls-Royce and Pratt & Whitney as majority partners. I heard about the struggles each was having with the Tu-204 funding.

[@ifpstopmotions9720]

Love your Channel! Love your historys

[@hadjipeejayaranda5126]

Since February 2022, things have changed. Perhaps you could make a new story about this that reflect the present situation

[@duncanmurphy8085]

Your videos have such good quality! Keep it up!

[@atomsmash100]

Great story, although you definitely had me fooled during the first minute!

[@anicahanica3853]

Right time, right place ..

[@Wario512]

5:28 a Beriev Be-200 in the background ♥

[@NEOM80]

In April of this year I had the opportunity to fly on the Tu-204 from Air Koryo in the PEK to FNJ route, the plane was comfortable, the leg room was better than other airlanes I fly, they served us a free hamburger that was good tbh, they give us too newspapers and magazines to read during the flight, there was too TVs that played some concerts of Morabong Band to entertain us but the flight was short and and most of the time you used it to fill out the customs papers that they gave you more than read something or watch the TV. The crew was pleasant Probably was the most rare flight I ever do, there was a lot of people from different countries in the plane, some North Koreans travel with us and I remember that they had a LOT of boxes in carts at the boarding queue, some of them with DPRK diplomatic passport. During the landing a baggage fell rolling around the airplane hallway, that was fun. Afterall it was a good flight, a bit rare but pleasant. I think that this airlane doesn't deserve a one start, I flought on worse airlanes.

[@emilkarpo]

I expect most westerners who've flown the TU-204 have flown Air Koryo's 204s. TU-204 landing at FNJ kzbin.info/www/bejne/mKCVYoOjmr2AkK8

[@vincesbardella3838]

"The plane was comfortable, the leg room was better than other planes". That says nothing about the aircraft itself. The same could be said of an American Airlines B737, A Jet Blue or Air France A320, or even a Chinese product, if the interior was configured the same. I'm continually amuse by the criteria by which passengers judge different aircraft.

[@aerlial360]

You created a new past tense word for flying! Flought! That's hilarious and it would work!

[@alibuolayyan9038]

Thanks for the valuable information

[@SkyshipsEng]

You are welcome)

[@billjones251]

Just found you channel. I highly appreciate the information. Keep up the good work!

[@Joliv23]

This a useful information. Greetings from Brazil.

[@jensalstrup8060]

I flew with one of them from Krasnoyarsk to Moscow in 1999. I very nice and comfortable plane!

[@TheEnthusiastOnYoutube]

I'd like to thank you so much for spending your time making these informative video's about Russian A/C.

[@TheEnthusiastOnYoutube]

Fraser Henderson Is that a deliberate pun about Russian A/C?

[@raphaelvildren7633]

Aircraft?

[@shawnw1291]

@@raphaelvildren7633 Yes, A/C is stand for Aircraft

[@bahardin3992]

@@shawnw1291 A/C can also mean Air Conditioning. it can also mean alternating current. But here, in this contax, it must have been Aircraft. just saying, you know.

[@rdab8101]

Thank you for this series on Tupolev. I really love those planes. For me the main issue faced by the Tu204 was the political and economical instability of USSR/Russia, because building an aircraft is a complex task which requires a lot of coordination from several industries, and after the collapse of the USSR the ex-soviet aircraft industry was scattered among many disorganized countries. Now, 30 years into a new social order and they are under sanctions again! Which is taking its toll in the industry as well. However I think they can make it with the MC, as well as the Chinese with the Comac, because there is a lot of demand for airplanes in the 150-250 seats market. Thanks again

[@devonnewest7990]

The. Best. Aviation. Channel. Period!

[@heinzwinter2626]

It seems this plane will have some sort of renaissance in the current aviation crises in Russia

[@bee2k01]

Tu-204 - wrong time, wrong place Le IPTN N250: Wrong timing eh? I think that title is for me... *cries in the corner of the hangar*

[@richardshiggins704]

Interesting . I knew little about this plane . I saw a cargo version of it in Ciampino , Rome . It was flown by TNT !

[@ronaldmessina4229]

I absolutely love flying and aircraft 😊

[@scroggins100]

Love your work, honest and interesting. Thanks

[@mrjomaled755]

Thank you for a very informative and interesting presentation. Keep it up!

[@petermaltha]

One of the best planes ever build. As a passager great !

[@artmilano1070]

The 757 was a success

[@ronjonnj01]

Yes and no , it failed to sell as well as boeing envisioned , but it was well received

[@Markle2k]

@@ronjonnj01 23 years of production with 1050 examples built. 33 years in operation. 8 have been lost, 6 of them to factors external to the crew and the aircraft. (3 hijackings, 1 ATC error, 2 from improper maintenance)

[@amayasnep]

It fell short of the original vision Boeing had for the aircraft, but was very successful as the market shifted and the planes that were built were used for flights it wasn’t really intended for, such as transatlantic budget flights. Icelandair loves their 757s to bits.

[@saints16o5o87]

@@amayasnep it wasnt a market change that allowed 757s to fly transatlantic it was US govt getting ETOPS rules changed that allowed twin jets to fly transoceanic routes as boeing would benefit greatly withonly there aircraft available in numbers to airlines wuo already had medium, range twins where as all trijets and 4 engine dc8 707 were now uneconomical for these routes when twins were available with higher capacity and half the fuel consumption.

[@Dom1xel]

Fucker there’s no reason to compare the 204 to the 757 other than to try to bring the 204 down, and why? Because it seems 95% of the aviation industry is biased toward Russia for no fucking reason

[@sougalahmed4769]

Love your vids keep it up😍😍

[@lolaerospace5257]

VERY NICE JET !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@socialtale7537]

Haven't posted for two weeks missing skyship eng videos

[@uncinarynin]

Cuba and North Korea probably have no choice because of embargos. So they are the niche for such planes. The two TU-204 were the only aircraft of Air Koryo allowed to fly to the European Union and did so in the early 2010s but currently only operate between Pyongyang and Chinese airports.

[@arthurbrax6561]

with the sanctions I wonder if the Tu-204 will be made in large numbers

[@adamp.3739]

TBH in the current era of small long-range aircraft, this plane actually looks promising. Maybe expand the fuel tanks and get some PD-14s/CFM LEAPs/PW1100s? Oh and BTW did you know Transport Fever 2 - an OpenTTD-esque 3D tycoon management game - included this aircraft in both passenger and cargo variants?

[@alvarocamblor9808]

thanks for the video. As the B757 I think the TU204 is one of the most balanced aircraft ever made.

[@petermendoza1170]

Yes,it was sad as the TU- 204 is a beautiful plane. If there hadn't been squabbling it could have been available sooner.

[@dodoubleg2356]

I don’t know why, but I’ve always had a thing for short, wide-bodied aircraft like the A310, 767/777-200, etc…Great vid as always Sky. ✈️👍✌️

[@arlongkingngoma3749]

Great video and thank you

[@mikemontgomery2654]

For starters, I wouldn’t classify the DC-10, L-1011 as failures. They lasted a long time. I’m happy I got to see one 204, at least. A Cubana cargo bird at Toronto. Was not convinced I’d ever see one, prior to that.

[@tededwards4618]

Good work. Sounds well researched and quite objective.

[@maxsmodels]

I got the cockpit tour of a Cubana TU-204 cockpit. Neat plane.

[@maxart3392]

Unfortunately Russians provide little or no maintenance and spare parts to foreign customers (the same goes for Superjet). Cubana TU 204s haven't flown for many years, though Cubana would need them badly: they only have a couple of Il96, a bunch of (grounded) AN158, and a few (operational) ATR 42/72.

[@maxsmodels]

@@maxart3392 yup

[@jacobzimmermann59]

You made a very good point about the aircraft families that Airbus & Boeing have developed. Yet it seems that the Russian industry still doesn't understand it, even today. Case in point, the MC21. It's a very modern plane, it can absolutely be considered as the pride of Russian civilian aviation, but it exists in isolation. If you buy it but then you also need something smaller in your fleet, there is only the completely unrelated SSJ130, with zero commonality. If you also need something bigger, well... you need to ask Boeing or Airbus. Yet I would definitely love to see it succeed on the world's market. The A/B duopoly has gone complacent, especially in the single-aisle market, and it's time to give them a run for their money.

[@trash4cash454]

I heared, they are trying to nify the SSJ100 and the MC21 to make a family

[@jacobzimmermann59]

Interesting, are there any pointers you can share on that subject?

[@SkysurvCoNz]

The real issue, and the simple reason they wont be able to compete without billions in investment is they cant maintain or support these aircraft outside of Russia effectively. Here in New Zealand Air NZ have been operating Boeing for almost half a century, know them inside out and are involved directly in development and support/ maintenance. Many legacy airlines would be in a similar position. They may have an opportunity with new low cost carriers as Russian Aircraft are significantly cheaper than western alternatives, but your back to the support issue. The SSJs in Mexico have been a disaster, with some machines only a few years old being canabalised to keep other airframes in the air. I can't see this realistically changing. COMAC with the China market would likely have more success competing.

[@Markle2k]

Embraer might catch up from the bottom.

[@nottoday3817]

The thing with creating an aircraft familly is that first you need a basic aircraft. Russia does not have that. Economic uncertainty based on western politics puts a strain on their supply chain(MC-21 has just encountered a big set-back as it's composite components can no longer be aquired from the US-what a free market, heh) So they either need to buy it from somewhere else, or wait until Russia has the capability to produce them.

[@fuzzylogic5507]

This plane could have had a better fate, had not fallen the soviet union in the middle of its developing process. Now with most of the Russian budget with the ongoing project, the MC-21, so this tupolev could be sold for cargo purpouses or serving in the military. For its future, it could be refitted with new engines and more range to make it possible to compite for the future middle in the market plane, which boeing calls the 797. But maybe this move could be costly, because it would have to be redesigned to benefit from composite materials. And according to sources that I have been reading, this place would be filled with the longer version of the MC-21 family, the MC-21-400

[@larryparks1999]

8 M

[@COIcultist]

Shyships. Sorry to post off topic but what has happened to your Airbus series? When I first looked through the series there was one deleted video. I'm guessing the A380 one. I've just looked now to check before I post and the are now two deleted videos, I'm guessing the A350 has also being deleted. Why? I realise you are not working in your first language but for me it doesn't matter you're as good as any aviation media I've seen, you are very informative and concise.

[@sergevivier2861]

COIcultist, your guess is as good as mine, just look at the motive to take the Airbus video down. The A350 was titled "the most advance plane...) My guess is that KZbin was asked by someone to take them down.

[@COIcultist]

@@sergevivier2861. Serge that does seem a bit to "Dark Forces" conspiratorial to me. Who knows though. I'd have guessed use of copyrighted images or film that ironically would be subject to "Fair Use" if the video had been uploaded from a source in the USA. I'll wait to see if Skyships Eng tells us why the 2 videos were deleted. That is if YT have even bothered telling him.

[@QuarioQuario54321]

Both say that someone had copyright claim, each from a different person.

[@albanbros7210]

It is all about propaganda. I have found that BOEING is given first priority and no one talks about shortcomings/negativity of various boeing products. All videos concerning AIRBUS have been deleted. What I have learnt is BOEING fears of AIRBUS a lot.

[@Norman92151]

Nice aircraft. It's a very competitive and saturated market with experienced players. Thanks

[@turbofan450]

That troll at the beginning of the video got me.... twice

[@junreysonajo2934]

Tu204 is my favorite Soviet plane

[@forestmcneir3325]

Now airlines want the B-757 to link US East Coast airports with smaller airports in Western Europe. But B-757 has been out of production for many years. The TU-204 could be a serviceable stop gap option for this market niche were it not for sanctions.

[@augusth2212]

After Tupolev Planes Marathon, Could You Continue Another Marathon Russian Plane Like Ilyushin or Yakolev?

[@RadioactiveSaddam]

And Antonov

[@xylitebenado]

you could check his russian channel to see some series he will translate to english soon)

[@simonrobert9858]

And Beriev

[@luiul1]

the landing gear is backwards from boring/airbut. the trailing wheels strike first in western aircraft. the leading wheels strike first in this model of tupolev. i never noticed that until this video. the rooskies just have to be different.

[@landryabraham642]

Beautiful aircraft love it

[@BlownMacTruck]

What's the background instrumental music you use starting at 9:31? It sounds familiar, like a cover of a song I know…

[@gregmesemondo1401]

Best channel for Russian airplane lovers. Nothing beats it. Of course Russian planes themselves are interesting. Wish they are purchased by western airlines as they deserve to be recognized.

[@raymondjones7489]

I find it very interesting..thank you very much for your hard work and research!! 😊😊

[@nunuaprihadi3931]

1:22 that twin engine tu-154 is beautiful actually😁

[@Giorgiamelonitiamo]

your videos are great

[@matadorman78]

I read somewhere that the TU 204 was the first plane certified not needing de icing. That the wings deiced themselves.. Is this true?

[@cluelessbeekeeping1322]

Such a pretty jet, hopefully there will be some market for it.

[@peetz6301]

I’ve never felt sad for an aircraft before, well until now...

[@FriendlyMarmot]

It really is a sad story. I really like the middle of the market, twin-engine, narrow body "flying pencils". The 757 and A321 have really grown on me, so I know I would like the TU-204 too. But it looks like the A321 NEO will be our only flying pencil of the future. These are all fine aircraft though.

[@grzegorzm1277]

Colin Powell with a vial ... priceless!

[@tededwards4618]

Learned a lot.

[@maxbspqr]

Oтлично! As always a great video!

[@paullewis770]

I literally watched one and a half seconds and I subscribed...

[@User0000000000000004]

Literally? Not figuratively or virtually?

[@zalgin_6473]

Its wonderfull aircraft and engine RR...

[@ervandrush3116]

Awesome video)

[@Semper_Iratus]

that plane looks like an airbus a 320 and a boeing 737 loved each other very much

[@kleineb334]

Watching your video was very interesting. We’re working to launch a airline here in the United States and the tu204 is one of the aircraft were eyeing along with the ssj100 and be200.

[@mavrick351]

Interesting.... serious?

[@kleineb334]

ramon tubbs yes though currently our focus is shifting towards launching with cargo ops and hopefully down the road move into the passenger field

[@mavrick351]

@@kleineb334 I was thinking the same but low cost passenger.... possibly a way to produce the aircraft here so parts availability wouldn't be a problem...just a thought

[@nottoday3817]

Good luck trying to get a russian plane flying over the US. Politics are going to kill you

[@johnstuartsmith]

A Mexican airline, Interjet, purchased a fleet of Sukhoi SSJ100s. The aircraft are low priced, but Sukhoi and the engine manufacturer have major problems in providing maintenance support, even inside Russia.

[@csk4j]

I heard they just got an order for 200 units due to the embargo?

[@rogerrendzak8055]

I like how, the narrator says (@06:53); "The average person who would hardly distinguish this plane, from foreign models". Brother, you ain't kidding!!! The average person has trouble, just telling if it's a jet, or propeller plane🙄🤭, heh-heh!!!

[@bobbypaluga4346]

Excellent

[@mad2477]

thanks sky!

[@khapho]

That plane is that at 2:31? Is that a Tu-154 with 2 engine with wingtip or is that a fotoshot ?

[@flyboysaviation8822]

Nice one!

[@djlondon7956]

Very interesting video

[@Markle2k]

With a nearly 25 year production life and over 1000 examples built, is it really reasonable to call the 757 not really a success?

[@gravelking2.071]

Who calls the 757 otherwise?

[@jayvanasten6238]

The Tu-204 and the Il-96........I really Love this generation of aircraft! The very last designs from the old Sovjet era.... Despite the knowledge Boeing's 757 is technically superior, I like the Tupolev a lot more.......it's in every detail a way more elegant design. 6:47 Just look at it.......It's just gorgeous!!!! The A321 is in my opinion proportionately incorrect......almost everything looks like it's too small.....the fuselage on the other hand is much too long.......only the shorter A320 has the right design proportions in this Airbus family. Funny enough, in case of the A320/A321NEO my opinion is exactly the other way around ;) ;D.... I think because of the much bigger engines and new Wing sharklets. Thnx for the video!

[@ronjonnj01]

Like the 757 it became obsolete before it's time , at least it 204 is still in production in a limited fashion. The U.S. Air Force still uses a military version for Government transport and serves as Trump's Air Force One when he is stumping for Republicans in areas of the country that has airports with shorter runways

[@jayvanasten6238]

​@@ronjonnj01 I know.......indeed the 757 is pronounced as ''Overpowered''.... It is able to produce a terrifying load of engine power to defy short runways.........a real Popeye on kerosine!!! Resulting it has a gigantic fan base in and out of the cockpit..... In mix of exploration costs and employability this Boeing type is still one of the best options for many type of airlines..

[@cytrynowy_melon6604]

Jesus Christ planes are not made to look good! Its not a car that has exterior design team

[@jayvanasten6238]

​@@cytrynowy_melon6604 Never knew Jesus Christ made planes.... ;)

[@jayvanasten6238]

@Zeksteve Yes,...........you're right.

[@jvillan94]

i love your content! can you please do one of these for the Ilyushin IL-62, please?? :D

[@abdullah3739]

Yes he did

[@snoopdogg9977]

1:54 What airport is that?

[@yoyohoolahoop3705]

Yerevan International airport, Armenia.

[@thetheatreorgan168]

Terminal no longer in operation. They have a new one. The old terminal is crumbling with threats of demolition. Some bridges to the central building got torn down since they were unsound.

[@bobbypaluga4346]

The 204 like the 757 had the same higher ground clearance, over the Yak-40/42 and other Soviet/Russian smaller jets. Many of the loyal 757 lovers failed to understand why Boeing decided to build the MAX 737 with the same profile rather than the greater clearance 757 profile. The clearance dictates the the engine diameter, the 320-321 can use the larger diameter LEAP engines while the 737 must use a smaller diameter LEAP or P&W geared fan engine. The larger the intake the greater bypass saving fuel

[@rodolfoayalajr.8589]

Great 👍 information.

[@agamemnon7461]

The world needs a trans-Atlantic aircraft of this size. A321-ER is now the only option while Boeing, as usual is very late in the the b797-xxx program. This airplane with new wings and engine could be a serious competitor

[@ricksadler797]

Good video

[@aerofoca]

Always thought the tu-204 was the best looking twin narrowbody. Even better than the MC-21

[@rext8949]

It's a simple yet straight forward axiom that airlines cos. make or break aircraft models ; and that applies particularly to large and successful corporations .In their customary due diligence they would automatically discount any aircraft model which originated from a company or country with doubtful antecedents .Even if the Tu was the best aircraft available it would not be chosen by airlines because of past reliability issues with the manufacturer . Buying a capital asset like an aircraft involves investing to the tune of billions of dollars and looking forward to atleast 25-30 years of service ; that's a lot of money to bet on a manufacturer with limited experience and reliability .So buying an aircraft is actually a leap of faith and not just a vote of confidence for that particular model .Airbus perhaps is the only example of a manufacturer which was able to successfully make the cut and challenge Boeing's monopoly with many successful models.

[@abandonedchannel281]

Imagine how many of these would be flying if they entered service just a few years before 1991...

[@Cowboybrian01]

Looks like an a320 and the 757 had a child