This is a translation of the original article in Russian
…on the other hand it would be interesting to know your opinion about SSJ's advantages over other similar planes, e.g. Embraer, Bombardie (it's better to postpone the comparison with Аn-148, until a serial version of Аn-158 appears — we will be able to compare planes of the same category
Engineer_2010 wrote:
Regarding the comparison SSJ vs EmB vs CRJ — it's probably better to address this question to marketing specialists, rather than me. I can give only a general assessment, based on official presentations and booklets I had a chance to see, and also some information from the Web.
Most similar in the category are EmB-190Std (first flight in 2004, 98 seats with 32’’ pitch) and CRJ-1000ER (first flight in 2008, 86 seats with the same 32’’). EmB's weight is closer to our plane's (MTOW – 47800 kg with OEW – 28080 kg), but EmB has a slightly longer range – 3330 km. CRJ is much lighter (MTOW – 41640 kg, with OEW – 23200 kg), the flight range is slightly shorter – 2830 km. SSJ's take-off distance (TOFL) is the shortest among these 3 planes – 1750m, vs 2050m for EmB, and 2100m for CRJ. Our block expenses are few percent lower than EmB has, and a little bit higher than CRJ's (keep this in mind — CRJ is way lighter than SSJ).
In general, taking specifications into account, all 3 planes are close to each other: in some ways one plane is better than another, and vice versa. SSJ is definitely the best among these 3 planes in terms of baggage/cargo compartment volume and loading comfort, capacity of luggage racks and, especially, comfort in passenger's cabin: SSJ's cabin width – 3.24м, height – 2.12м, aisle – 0.51м, while EmB's width — 2.74м, height — 2.0м, and CRJ width — 2.55м, height — 1.9м, and aisle width — 0.4м.
We had learned from our "Armavia" colleagues, that sometimes SSJ carried baggage for CRJ, because there were simply not enough space for all suitcases in the Canadian version of the luggage compartment. Apart from that, SSJ's flight deck is much more comfortable – it's bigger, with better visibility from the cockpit, better ergonomics including better indication and more comfortable instruments. Additionally – we have newer avionics (functionally this complex is closer to new generation B-737 and А-320) and much more reliable RCS (Remote Control System) – both for steering comfort and security level to prevent the aircraft from being handled dangerously by preventing pilots from exceeding preset limits (functionally it's closer to B-787 and А-380). It is also clear, in what area EmB and CRJ are certainly better than SSJ: during a long period of serial production and operation these planes and its documentation were cured from all so called «teething troubles», they have a well-established worldwide service.
Finally, we have a more modern and comfortable aircraft that is cheaper at the same time. EmB and CRJ are well-known trademarks, with high quality after-sales service, large number of produced planes and they are slightly more expensive. So it makes sense for us to compete.
Of course, this is a non-professional assessment, and real market specialists, for sure, use many other parameters I simply don't know. And, for sure, these parameters play an important role in such comparisons of one plane to another.
Have you seen our other pages about SSJ100 in English?
30 Jan 2014 14:14
You may use site content under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License
so called «childhood diseases» - это буквальный перевод обратно на английский перевода английской идиомы teething troubles
поменял, спасибо