Aeroflot

[Rinrada]

Bit of Information from our friends at Aeroflot:

New Offices in the Heart of London

Aeroflot UK & Ireland have opened new office in the heart of  London for a brand new Aeroflot.

The offices are at the same convenient location as before, but they highlight a streamlined, more efficient and friendly Aeroflot, where you still receive professional travel service and some of the lowest fares going.

South East Asia  Online Ticketing Enquiries

Return Flight Prices from London

DESTINATION

  from

Bangkok-£320

Beijing-£370

Hanoi-£410

Ho Chi Minn-£410

Hong Kong-£370

Aeroflot's safety systems among the most efficient in the world

Now, Aeroflot and Collins have combined efforts to open the first avionics center in the CIS. American-trained Aeroflot specialists are able to carry out all avionics operations on aircraft, including diagnostic and repair in state-of-the-art facilities.

The avionics center and trained specialists means Aeroflot's safety systems are among the best and most efficient in the international market

 :cool:

[Brian]

I was always under the impression that Aeroflot's safety record was a bit dodgy.. Anyone know where to find some stats?

[Rinrada]

I have always meant to have ago but as yet...

http://www.aeroflot.co.uk/index.asp

Babyflots

After the collapse of Communism, Aeroflot was broken-up and hundreds of "Babyflots" were created in the states of the former Soviet republics.

Aeroflot was able to get rid of most of its oldest planes. It has not crashed once in the past 10 years and its safety record is now considered equal to that of British Airways and Air France.

Despite Aeroflot's poor image the airline is profitable and is currently updating its ageing fleet.

This is a comment I found from a passenger....

(not me)

aeroflot....aeroflop....if you have ever travelled on this you will see such a variation in service. i flew bangkok to london via moscow, an the difference in the services was jeckle and hyde.

bangkok to moscow (via bombay)... antiquated ex-soviet airline...stewardesses as rejects fom previous soviet shot-putt teams and stewards as escapees from the local gulags. stop off at bomaby...'first class'; full of 'soviet' diplomats each with what appears to be a million tons of 'duty free' electrical goods. service apalliing , food ...if you like beetroot and dumplings...great.

moscow - london.....new airbuses, attractive stewardesses,meat for inflight meals!..a nice flight so long as you don't mind sharing it with umpteen indian illegal immigrants / asylum abusers.

overall...an experience...but really cheap!

[Brian]

I just found this table at http://aviation-safety.net/

Aeroflot appears too many times for my liking..

[Brian]

OK. The last incident in the table is 1995.

As I was looking for this table I stumbled across the following statement at www.safe-skies.com that shows that maybe we shouldn't rely on stats too much.

What is the meaning of statistical information?  

Well, here is a comparative example:

Before the Concorde and A320 accidents of July and August 2000, the fatal accident rates (data from Airsafe.com) for the Concorde, Airbus A320 and newer generation Boeing 737 (A320 contemporary design) were:

Concorde:    0 accidents per million departures (0 per 80,000 flights), perfect

A320:         .55 accidents per million departures (4 per 7.3 million)

737:           .33 accidents per million departures (10 per 30.8 million)

Now, after one accident each for the Concorde and A320, their accident rates became, respectively:

Concorde, 12.5 per million (1 per 80,000) - The worst safety record of all major aircraft in operation today

A320, .68 per million (5 per 7.3 million), a 24% change for the worse.  Still pretty good but now only HALF as good as the 737's

IF, heaven forbid, there were another 737 accident, their safety rate would go to:

.36 per million (11 per 30.8 million), a 9% change for the worse.

The lesson here is - The perception of safety can be far, far from the real numbers.  The Concorde was praised for it's safety record, when actually the small fleet and low usage now force the Concorde, statistically, to own the worst safety record in the world after one accident.  The Airbus A320 is indeed a very safe airplane but the Boeing 737 may appear, in some opinions, to have a worse safety reputation.  The public only sees the raw numbers:  There are almost twice as many 737 accidents as the A320, but departure numbers nearly four times higher than the A320 drive the 737 accident RATE (accidents per million departures) down dramatically, so the 737 safety statistics are in fact twice as GOOD as those of the A320.

This is to say that the 737 has received twice the press coverage than the A320, and probably more than that in the US because there has never (never) been a fatal A320 accident in the United States, and the press coverage in the US has just not been as damaging to the Airbus product.  The fact is, major accidents outside the US simply don't attract the attention of our press.

[Rinrada]

Interesting...but what about the others...

I seem to remember ....

a. A certain Aussie Jumbo going off the runway in LOS.(no Fats)

B. A Thai Inter.that did not quite make it either in LOS.

C. A Varig going down in West Africa (707)..I remember because I was on it about 2 years earlier.

D. Saudia in Riyadh (circa 76-77) again saw it.

E. KLM on the one of the Canary isles about?????with I think a US Jumbo.

F.A small VN job on landing at Poch.in Cambodia a couple of years ago (1 baby survived)-saw it.

and am sure there are lots more.