Cancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 11 Posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3715 times:
what would stop a military from buying new aircraft for roles that old ones currently perform. take subhunting for example. a B737 or A319 could be adapted to that role easily. in fact, boeing has already proposed it. why is it that we do not see more commercial aircraft performing more varied roles?
"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
Ikarus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 3524 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2954 times:
The problem is that there's not that many old uses for the A318. It's overly heavy, but without providing any real benefit. Mostly, cutting a plane short is a bad idea (747SP as classic example of such a failure). The A319 at least delivered an increased range and a seat number in the same range as its main competitor. The A318 simply does not provide the added incentive to overlook its performance issues.
Still, it may be too early to call it a commercial failure and a failed design. For now, at least.
Md11lover From Switzerland, joined Oct 2003, 444 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2939 times:
CO737800, the reason you dont see as many A310s and A300s anymore have nothing to do with what they are made out of. Nowadays, there are more efficient a/c which can replace their position in the market therfore lowering operating costs for airlines. As for your opinion regarding the A320 family, I think you should choose more appropriate language for a civilized forum because Airbuses are definitely not a piece of junk.
CO737800 From Canada, joined Dec 2003, 545 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2935 times:
Well slowbird you are right some 767 are in junk yards but most are in storage. We are in bad times and many Airlines are flying with fewer planes and they store many of the oldest ones in the fleet. Iam sure most of the 767 will be back in the air way before the 300 or 310. You still see hundreds of 737-200 and Dc 9's still flying around some 20-35 years old.
CanadianNorth From Canada, joined Aug 2002, 3404 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (11 years 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 2582 times:
Well I dont wanna argue, but i find it funny that at the moment yall are calling the old DC9s and 732s and A300s n all them junk, while at the same time alot of people are sayin it would be cool when people get oldies like 707s n Constelations n all that in the air. Just because it aint brand new dont mean it dont work no more. I've been in situations where the older stuff its just as usefull as the new equiptment.
Just think about it. Everything goes via the same set of titles. New - Used - Junk - Antique. Sometimes if you keep something long enough in good condition it becomes n antique and thus be worth something again.
UAL747DEN From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2392 posts, RR: 11
Reply 16, posted (11 years 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 2572 times:
I have a serious question, Why would anyone order the 318 and not just go with the 319? The 319 has more seats and from what I understand still has about the same specs as the 318......
Now personally I don't like the 318 at all... My opinion might change after I get to fly on it, but just from the factual information I don't like it... Ill let yall know what I think after my flight on Monday!
B2707SST From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 1373 posts, RR: 59
Reply 21, posted (11 years 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 2246 times:
The A318, like the 736, is only good for long, low-pax routes. Regional jets can fly shorter segments with far lower operating costs, or larger mainliners (73G, A319) can fly significantly more pax with only slightly higher DOCs. This leaves the A318 and 736 as niche players, as demonstrated by lackluster sales.
For a few airlines with large A319/A320 fleets that don't want to add a separate 100-seat RJ, the A318 is worth a look. I don't think it will be particularly successful, but then again, it probably didn't cost that much to develop. Ditto with the 736. The EMB 195 and possibly the FD728 and BRJ-X may shut the double-shrinks out of this market segment.
BTW, communism was never a good idea, theoretically or otherwise . Marx's assumptions were completely wrong.
PVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3421 posts, RR: 16
Reply 22, posted (11 years 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 2080 times:
If I was starting up an airline from scratch, I would not look at anything less than ten years old. With 733s in desert by the dozens and even the little 732s with decades on them would be so much more economical to run run as long as you get goods ones and take care of them. The A318 is a great idea. Unfortunately, those that have been targeted by the program have figured out a better way to do the same thing. NW is not going to get rid of the DC-9 anytime soon. jetBlue is not going smaller with their 'buses either. I also think the 764 is a better a/c the the 763. In theory then everyone should be getting rid of their older 767s for the new one just because it's new. Didn't think so.
BR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (11 years 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 1978 times:
Luisinho, CO737800: Will you both stop your bickering with who is better.
Airbus and Boeing are great aircraft builders or they wouldn't be around. Luisinho, I do not agree with your comments about the 717. It is a very fine aircraft, and you should not dis it until you fly it. One of the last aluminum aircraft you'll be seeing, enjoy it.
CO737800, What is this crap about you saying Airbuses will not be around in 30 years. They can last as long as any 737 providing the airline takes good care of them. There is some speculation how the fibers can come apart and separate, but it is not true. Power companies have started using Fiberglass and Kevlar for their streetlight posts, instead of the aluminum. Fiberglass is the future. So would both of you please stop your bickering, you are both right, and you are both wrong. So Drop it.