Talk:Sukhoi Superjet 100/Archive 2

Active discussions
Archive 1 Archive 2

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Sukhoi Superjet 100. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:48, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Sukhoi Superjet 100. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:19, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sukhoi Superjet 100. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:34, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Lead image change

I am replacing the lead image of the SSJ-100 with one under the Aeroflot brand since lead images of most civilian aircraft are under a commercial brand. The current lead image would be put under design and development. I hope this change gets accepted when this is implemented. If not, feel free to revert it. Thanks.

Image that will be used: File:Aeroflot Sukhoi Superjet 100-95 RA-89002 SVO 2012-4-6.png

- Josephua (talk) 01:44, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

You should gain consensus first as noted in the infobox :"Do not change lead image without talk page consensus". My POV is that the air to air pic is nicely unusual for airliner pics while the aeroflot pic is more bland. there is no need for any operator to show on the main pic, which only need to show the plane config.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 06:27, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Quality Improvement

I believe that it is now the time to have the article to be quality-checked and hopefully reach B status. Any time when this is going to happen? Josephua (talk) 22:27, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

New page for orders for Sukhoi Superjet?

I believe that Sukhoi Superjet should get a page with its orders on its own. I believe the article itself is a bit long than its counterparts due to its table in the orders section. The Superjet should have an article devoted to a list class like other tables on civilian aircraft, notably Airbus and Boeing related ones. In addition, the tables devoted to Airbus and Boeing aircraft have an attractive color hue, giving the list class articles a less boring feel. Do you agree? - Josephua (talk) 05:14, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Done.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 07:02, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Move to Sukhoi Superjet

@Marc Lacoste: Hey, do you think it is a good to move Sukhoi Superjet 100 to just Sukhoi Superjet. We can merge Sukhoi Superjet 130 with the page and make the page describe the family of Sukhoi Superjets: the Sukhoi Superjet 100 (original variant), the Sukhoi Superjet 75 (shrink variant), and the Sukhoi Superjet 130 (extended variant). The page would follow the steps of other airliners and their pages, with the main articles usually describing the families together. Or we could wait until the Sukhoi Superjet 75 goes into mass production and start the changes. What do you think? - Josephua (talk) 02:48, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

As it is just a project, I think Sukhoi Superjet 130 should not be a separate article and should be merged into this one. The Superjet 75 article may be separated when it had made its first flight, but even then I would prefer not having a separate article for a simple variant (eg there are no A220-100 and A220-300 separate articles). --Marc Lacoste (talk) 11:05, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
@Marc Lacoste: Understood. Also, just to let you know, I deleted the section that you kept back in the edit you made after because I thought Sukhoi already made its decision to go with the Sukhoi Superjet 75 rather than the Superjet Stretch in February 2018 (a part of Q1 2018). Just want to know your opinion on this matter. - Josephua (talk) 00:54, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Do not edit an article because you "thought" something, it is WP:OR. Use only refs and update tense if they are dated, they still have value to show development directions.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 05:51, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

@Marc Lacoste: I know this is a late response but to respond: okay, maybe it was poor choice of words, better to say "infer". I inferred Sukhoi made its decision to develop the 75 over the Stretch in the Q1 period.

February 2018 Singapore Air Show, Sukhoi launched a 75-seat shrink, investing several hundred million dollars to enter service in 2022. With a smaller, optimised aluminium or composite wing, it would be powered by 17,000 lbf (76 kN) Pratt & Whitney PW1200Gs, detuned SaM146s or Aviadvigatel PD-14 derived PD-7s.

- from Superjet 75 section. So Sukhoi already made a decision already in Q1 2018 (Feb 2018) with the launch of the SSJ 75 over the Stretch. In addition, you deleted the presorted sections in the list of deliveries and operation of the SSJ-100s, however, other airliners such as the Airbus A220 and the Airbus A320neo had kept these sections for a long period of time to the present as seen in List of Airbus A320neo family orders and deliveries and List of Airbus A220 orders and deliveries so I thought the SSJ100 list can base its design off of these. - Josephua (talk) 22:19, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

inferring ("deduce or conclude (something) from evidence and reasoning rather than from explicit statements.") is still WP:OR. I didn't deleted the bullet list orders section, it was moved to the relevant article, like the A320/A220 O&D articles.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 06:15, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
@Marc Lacoste: For the first point. Thank you for your reply. I did not know that. For the second point, I meant the 2 lists, one of which was presorted by date and the other presorted by customer. You deleted the list that was presorted by customer of which you thought it unnecessary and believed that people can use the sorting option of the list that categorizes by date to sort the aircraft. However, the two lists, presorted by date and presorted by customer, appear under the other aircraft such as the A220 and A320 O&D. - Josephua (talk) 10:58, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Having two tables with the same info just with the order varying while they are sortable does not make sense.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 14:37, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
@Marc Lacoste: So I'm guessing you disagree with the current layout of the tables in the A220 and A320 O&D articles. Also, congrats on helping Sukhoi Superjet 100 get from C-class to B-class status. - Josephua (talk) 19:48, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

price to interjet

@Rosbif73: Wikipedia:No_original_research#Routine_calculations : Routine calculations do not count as original research, provided there is consensus among editors that the result of the calculation is obvious, correct, and a meaningful reflection of the sources... but aggregating different sources is borderline, and $1.3-2.6M seems really low, even for a new entrant willing to have a western operator, while a new CRJ1000 discounted price is $24.8M. Maybe a misunderstanding for the order of magnitude.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 08:10, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

I suspect we need to be reading something into their choice of the term "capital cost" rather than price. Maybe they negotiated some sort of deal whereby only part of the price was actually paid out as an upfront capital cost (with the rest being some sort of lease perhaps)? That could also explain why they are "in talks with Sukhoi" [1] about selling the SSJs - whereas if they were already fully owned they could just sell them to a third party without involving Sukhoi. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:12, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Also note the Interjet aircraft purchase would have been with SuperJet International rather than the Russians. MilborneOne (talk) 14:52, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Here capital cost is opposed to operating cost, if they were leased it would not be hidden, like the Eastern Air Lines Airbus A300s. Multiple acquisition schemes could be envisioned though, like multiple payments over time and a return clause. But still "capital cost" would be explicit like "yearly payments for ten are equivalent to an A320 pre-delivery payment" or something like that. Maybe interjet is going to sell them to Sukhoi because nobody else is interested and Sukhoi don't want them to degrade the aircraft image, like Airbus taking back Singapore's A340-500s, or what they should have with Dr.Peters A380s. But I think it's too much suppositions for wikipedia.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 15:27, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Oh just to add I think we dont need to include the "price to Interjet" para, it is a good example of original research, synthesis and guess work as well as being of no relevance to the article. MilborneOne (talk) 15:12, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
I disagree, it shows the difficulties for Sukhoi to become accepted by Western operators, and by then the difficulties for new entrants like the MC-21 or by the biggest threat to A+B, the C919 and C929.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 15:28, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
I dont have a problem with showing the difficulties in being accepted in the west, just the made up figures could be misleading, perhaps just include the statement by Interjet and remove the made-up figures. MilborneOne (talk) 20:10, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
I removed the calculation but the Interjet's statement include "pre-delivery payment", which has to be explained, and then the explanation cite the "list price", which is available.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 04:44, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
I doubt the C919 is ever a threat to the Irkut MC-21. It has an introduction a year later than the Irkut MC-21 and it is an extremely obscure plane and the Chinese stereotype is stuck to it. The CR929 is a joint-venture project between the UAC and Comac and it is a different plane to the Irkut MC-21 as it has a larger capacity and is wide-body. The SSJ-100 currently at the moment does not need Western buyers now. Russian airliners like S7 are planning to buy it and a large customer could be Iran due to sanctions by Western countries. SSJ-100, yes, is probably losing its grip on the Western market but I believe Peru can help them cling on it. - Josephua (talk) 23:41, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Hot on the heels of Interjet's denial [2], Flight Global has published a rebuttal in the form of an opinion piece [3]. Perhaps safest to drop this whole paragraph until the truth becomes clearer?

Conversion to net orders

I think the orders in the orders and deliveries by year table in the orders and deliveries section should be converted to net orders. As a result, the table and the bar chart would have to omit orders from cancelled orders or bankrupt airlines. Deliveries would have to be changed as well. SSJ100s returned would subtract the deliveries. SSJ100s who are kept in an inventory and not delivered back can be kept in the table. This will as a result create a more accurate view by readers of the airliner of its success in the airliner market. Thoughts? - Josephua (talk) 04:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

the lack of a WP:Reliable source for orders should lead us to remove those per WP:OR.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 05:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

main picture

The current picture is great, but while browsing through other air-to-air SS100 pictures, I found the proposed one, which perhaps depicts more clearly its configuration (the current is taken with a wide angle lens, exaggerating the nose size) and has a less busy, less distracting background, but flies away from the text in wikipedia's default layout.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 14:04, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. - Josephua (talk) 04:03, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Replace sources for deliveries

I think we should replace the sources describing deliveries and number of aircraft produced with information by planespotters.net. Here is the link: https://www.planespotters.net/production-list/Sukhoi/Superjet-100. It is not a primary source, but a secondary source. It is more convenient as it is translated, and has the same information as the company-owned database, which is sketchy and not translated well. - Josephua (talk) 06:30, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Avoiding translation difficulties is better. Still a fan site, not a WP:RS from an established publisher. It doesn't show the number produced. Seems to get its data from Airlinerlist.com, again a fan site with no editorial review.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 07:41, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Return to "Sukhoi Superjet 100/Archive 2" page.