Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
New Airbus A340-500 "LR" Being Offered To Airlines  
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18038 times:

Any additional info on this one?

Emirates, which operates other 777 models, including the 777-300ER, is also evaluating an extended range A340-500 that Airbus is now offering customers.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/211255_air09.html

Would it be a good idea ? Seems to me the small A350/772LR market hardly justifies investments, or .. might Boeing have a viable selling point with the extra range ?

BTW how is ETOPS330 progressing, any news?



http://www.airbus.com/video/media/advertising/clouds.mpg

147 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 17831 times:

Continually.

Airbus just seems to want to be everything to everyone. Boeing has proved you can't really do that anymore. How many aircraft does this make for Airbus???? Who was saying not but a year or two that airlines want simplicity? Forgot their own lesson or what?

Airlines want simplification, not 10 different variants.


User currently offlineGkirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24947 posts, RR: 56
Reply 2, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 17820 times:

On a similar note, Whats going to happen to the SQ 345s when they are replaced by the 772LR anyway? Could AC or EK take some?


When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlinePlaneSmart From New Zealand, joined Dec 2004, 987 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 17756 times:

The A35 has greater underwing ground clearance for larger diameter engines. Perhaps the A36 has been discussed with existing A34 operators permitting new engine options.

User currently offlineCedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8142 posts, RR: 54
Reply 4, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 17599 times:

Boeing787: "Airbus just seems to want to be everything to everyone. Boeing has proved you can't really do that anymore." Yeah nice one - Airbus are everything to everyone (A318 to A380 and all sizes in between), and how exactly are Boeing proving you "can't really do that anymore"? By giving away market share, by going from being the uncontested leader to second place, with half of their remaining programmes winding down (one 767 being built every two months, no 747 orders for three years).


fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 5, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 17401 times:

This isn't a new plane. Its a 380t gross weight option, developed for the A340-600.

The 777 is available in a pretty wide range of MTOWs, hell, even 737s are.

As was previously mentioned, start contributing something valuable or stop posting so much.

N


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 6, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 17349 times:

Cedarjet, how does Airbus cover all the sizes in between the A340-600 and the A380-800? I think it takes a single deck aircraft with seating of more than 8 across to fill that size gap. I don't see Airbus developing anything in that size range, but who knows? Boeing could stretch either the B777 or the B747 to fill that gap. Or Boeing could develop a replacement for both the B777-300 and the B747 that could cover that gap.

That said, I'm glad Airbus is improving the A340-500. I've flown it with SQ and like the plane. I wouldn't want the B777-200LR to be free of competition because that would mean higher prices for me.


User currently offlineBuyantUkhaa From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2907 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 17322 times:

I suppose the key question is this one: will this A345HGW be able to fly LHR-SYD-LHR with significant payload? If yes, there is a good market. If not, well, the market is going to be tiny...


I scratch my head, therefore I am.
User currently offlineA350 From Germany, joined Nov 2004, 1101 posts, RR: 22
Reply 8, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 17177 times:

I suppose the key question is this one: will this A345HGW be able to fly LHR-SYD-LHR with significant payload? If yes, there is a good market. If not, well, the market is going to be tiny...

In any case, both the 772LR and the A345 are niche aircraft, but that's ok since they are simply shrinked versions of the 773ER and A346, respectively. Same applies for the A345HGW, for which Airbus only transferred technology from the A346. For those types you don't need high sales numbers to break even.

A350



Photography - the art of observing, not the art of arranging
User currently offlineCheekie747girl From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 17108 times:

A340-500 also has the option of an additional centre fuel tank located in the aircraft freight bay, fitted in a modular manner, similar to the removeable lower-deck main crew rest area (but obviously a permanent fitting!)

 Smile/happy/getting dizzy



User currently offlineDennys From France, joined May 2001, 894 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 17093 times:

Very true for LHR - SYD , but also for PAR - PPT !

denn


User currently offlineGreaser From Bahamas, joined Jan 2004, 1101 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 17071 times:

For those types you don't need high sales numbers to break even.
That's true. I believe the 777-200LR has already been covered by the 777-300ER sales.

However, with all these new toys Airbus has for their A345, by 2006 we'll be at Airbus A345LR ER PIP HGW...
Another reason for the -200LR to be pushed to 10000nm..



Now you're really flying
User currently offlinePHXinterrupted From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 474 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 17044 times:

"Yeah nice one - Airbus are everything to everyone (A318 to A380 and all sizes in between), and how exactly are Boeing proving you "can't really do that anymore"? By giving away market share, by going from being the uncontested leader to second place, with half of their remaining programmes winding down (one 767 being built every two months, no 747 orders for three years)."

Oh yeah, that 318 is a great aircraft. That can't even give it away. As for your beloved 380, the 787 has already outsold it in a third of the time.

And Cedarjet before you shoot your mouth off, you better keep a close eye on the order books this year.



Keepin' it real.
User currently offlineAgill From Sweden, joined Feb 2004, 1011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 16956 times:

"As for your beloved 380, the 787 has already outsold it in a third of the time"

Yes they are really comparable airplanes. Volvo V70 has outsold Boing 777...  Yeah sure


User currently offlineNA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10763 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 16927 times:

"As for your beloved 380, the 787 has already outsold it in a third of the time"

So what, the A380 has outsold the 773ER in shorter time...


User currently offlineTockeyhockey From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 952 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 16723 times:

Zvezda,

I agree completely with your view. airbus has a large gap between their mid and large sized planes. the a350 won't fill that gap, so what will? i think the 777 is now b's most important plane because of this gap, even more important than the 787.


User currently offlinePyroGX41487 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 280 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 16582 times:

the 787 has already outsold it [the A380] in a third of the time.

You say that as if your trying to start a flame war. The 787 and the A380 are in two _TOTALLY_ different markets. The 787 is a replacement for the 757 up through the 767. The A380 in direct competition with the 747. Compare how many airlines are looking for a 555 seat aircraft to those looking in the 200-300 seat market. Alot more common. That's a basic reason the the 787 is selling better. If you notice, there are fewer carriers ready to buy larger jets than smaller. If it was the other way around, I'm almost sure B6 would have chosen the B747 instead of the A320 to be in it's fleet.  Insane


As the the A340-500 -- I think there is only so much range that's needed for a commercial airliner. First of all, how many people would actually _FLY_ 18 hrs+ non stop? If they did up the A340-500, it would be so it could keep a similar range and carry a bigger payload. They could rate the engines higher or give it a little bit more fuel capacity. I love the A340-500 AND the 777NGs, don't get me wrong, but there is only so much airlines are going to invest in this niche market.


User currently offlinePyroGX41487 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 280 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 16550 times:

I agree completely with your view. airbus has a large gap between their mid and large sized planes. the a350 won't fill that gap, so what will? i think the 777 is now b's most important plane because of this gap, even more important than the 787.

I whole-heartedly agree with you here. The B777 was meant to fill the gap back in the early 90s when it was conceived and it's potential allowed it to expand into markets higher than the 4,500 nm market. As much as I love both companies as equally as I can, I do believe A needs a better gap-filling aircraft...



User currently offlineAvek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4405 posts, RR: 19
Reply 18, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 16438 times:

" First of all, how many people would actually _FLY_ 18 hrs+ non stop?"

Most anyone who currently flies over 18+ hours and has to endure connections and layovers which only add to the stresses of long-haul travel



Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineTockeyhockey From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 952 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 16439 times:

boeing just needs to find a way to make the 777 lighter, cheaper, and more flexible. i'm sure they're hard at work on that right now.

User currently offlineUdo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 16358 times:

Airbus just seems to want to be everything to everyone.

What’s wrong with adjusting aircraft to customers’ needs?  Confused


Boeing has proved you can't really do that anymore.

What exactly?


How many aircraft does this make for Airbus????

Who knows. At least it gives airlines a better choice.


Who was saying not but a year or two that airlines want simplicity? Forgot their own lesson or what?

Enhancing the A345 does not mean a loss of simplicity.


Airlines want simplification, not 10 different variants.

A340-500 and A340-500IGW makes two – that’s how I count. Don’t know how that is done elsewhere…  Wink/being sarcastic


However, with all these new toys Airbus has for their A345, by 2006 we'll be at Airbus A345LR ER PIP HGW...

Right now we have A340-500, then they might call it A340-500X – so where’s the problem? Sorry, you guys sound just childish…  Insane


Oh yeah, that 318 is a great aircraft

It does a good job for Air France, Frontier and Mexicana. What’s wrong with it?
.

That can't even give it away.

Can you please explain again WHAT cannot give WHAT away?


As for your beloved 380, the 787 has already outsold it in a third of the time.

Even the least aviation educated person should have realized by now that both types are for totally different markets and do not compete in one single category…  Nuts


I agree completely with your view. airbus has a large gap between their mid and large sized planes. the a350 won't fill that gap, so what will? i think the 777 is now b's most important plane because of this gap, even more important than the 787.

Oh, the B777 can fill that gap? Since when?



Regards
Udo


User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 16299 times:

The point of competition is to COMPETE and it will be interesting to see if Airbus does officially come out with this aircraft. They are simply trying to find out if they can meet a customer need while making a little money at the same time competing with 777/300-ER.

Hell, Boeing does it all the time. And yes, there is little cost (relatively speaking) to develop a variant than a new model, it makes perfect sense. I wish them luck with it, but no TOO much!!

So why all the squaking with Airbus v Boeing flames again?



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineMilan320 From Canada, joined Jan 2005, 869 posts, RR: 11
Reply 22, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 16290 times:

Boeing7E7: Airbus just seems to want to be everything to everyone. Boeing has proved you can't really do that anymore. How many aircraft does this make for Airbus???? Who was saying not but a year or two that airlines want simplicity? Forgot their own lesson or what?

Oh and Boeing hasn't made changes at customers' requests? It's listening to your customer ... something that obviously as you state, Boeing doesn't do then.

Airlines want simplification, not 10 different variants.

I'd say Boeing is the king of variants, just look at the 737 variants. Boring.....  Yawn

/Milan320



I accept bribes ... :-)
User currently offlineFlybyguy From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 1801 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 15969 times:

Airbus seems to be spreading itself thin... They should just concentrate on building quality products for their customers rather than mimicking everything Boeing does. This holds the possibility that Boeing will definitely have a stranglehold on certain markets, but airbus will most definitely have their own "strangle hold" markets as well.

Building the A350 as well as the A380 simultaneously can impact the overall quality of existing offerings. An increased range a340-500 should have been offered a while ago. Had it had met and surpassed the expectations of rich airlines like SQ, they wouldn't have planned to replace their a340-500s with 777LRs at the onset.



"Are you a pretender... or a thoroughbred?!" - Professor Matt Miller
User currently offlineUdo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (9 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 15844 times:

They should just concentrate on building quality products for their customers rather than mimicking everything Boeing does.

"Quality products"? Can't remember an Airbus falling apart due to poor quality. You should make clear what you mean with "quality".

Don't forget what Boeing has done over the years...B737NG as an answer to the A320, B764ER as a failed answer to the A332, now they are planning to match the A380 with what they call "B747 ADV". It goes both ways...


Had it had met and surpassed the expectations of rich airlines like SQ, they wouldn't have planned to replace their a340-500s with 777LRs at the onset.

First of all, SQ hasn't decided yet. Second, even a an earlier "better" A345 wouldn't rule out a possible B772LR choice at SQ - the simple reason is fleet commonality with existing B777 fleets.



Regards
Udo


25 PyroGX41487 : Airbus seems to be spreading itself thin... They should just concentrate on building quality products for their customers rather than mimicking everyt
26 Boeing7E7 : I'd say Boeing is the king of variants, just look at the 737 variants. Boring..... And what is the 320 line? 330/340 Line? "Quality products"? Can't r
27 Sebring : Neat trick since the A320 only began shipping in 1988, or was it 1989. You make an apples to oranges comparison.
28 ConcordeBoy : First of all, there's quite a few innaccuracies in that article: from orders to distances to specifications. Very unlike the SeattlePI! Anyways, lest
29 Boeing7E7 : Neat trick since the A320 only began shipping in 1988, or was it 1989. Launch date and a 737 is a 737. Furthermore, will the 320 be a 320 in 30 years?
30 Post contains images Keesje : In a few weeks (28 February) it will be five years since the Boeing board of directors authorized full production go-ahead for the 777-200LR. The airc
31 Post contains images Udo : Aircraft quality is proven with time. Much more time than Airbus has even existed. So quality starts when a company turns what – 40 years? 50 years?
32 ConcordeBoy : The aircraft was proposed to airlines (as 777-200X) from 1997 if I remember well. Not really. While a 772 is a 772, that offering had much more in com
33 M27 : "First of all, there's quite a few innaccuracies in that article: from orders to distances to specifications. Very unlike the SeattlePI!" Yes, I notic
34 ConcordeBoy : Yes, I noticed that the 300ER range is listed as 7940NM as opposed to the stated 7880NM Actually, that's correct... Boeing's site just has yet to upda
35 Post contains images Anxebla : Which ones airlines have currently the ETOPS-207' approved??? I understand all ETOPS-207' (which I think is ETOPS-180' +15%) are used over the Pacific
36 Gigneil : Ugh. This thread is stupid. I've seen monkeys with a better ability to stay on topic and act like adults. 1) This isn't a new plane, or a new variant.
37 Jacobin777 : " now they are planning to match the A380 with what they call "B747 ADV". It goes both ways..." Really? When? I can't recall Boeing saying they will b
38 Post contains links and images Keesje : I did a google & found this feb ´98 article, fragment : "A designated 777-200X would additionally have additional tanks in the aft fuselage, raising
39 Anxebla : Sometimes I think the ADV abbreviation means "advertising" instead "advanced". Boeing seems be not very interested about the 747 future
40 ConcordeBoy : Which ones airlines have currently the ETOPS-207' approved??? The 772ER is approved for ETOPS207... it depends on which airlines have been granted cer
41 Gigneil : AA may have been the first to use it, but the PW4000 powered 777 was the first to receive 207 minute certification. Doesn't matter much, but tis true.
42 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : a.net a/c stats ...that, being your first mistake gives 777-200LR a max range of 16,417km ...when it's actually 17,446km
43 ConcordeBoy : AA may have been the first to use it, but the PW4000 powered 777 was the first to receive 207 minute certification. How could it, when the Trent800 wa
44 Scorpio : PHXInterrupted, Oh yeah, that 318 is a great aircraft. That can't even give it away. As for your beloved 380, the 787 has already outsold it in a thir
45 Jetjack74 : Airbus just seems to want to be everything to everyone. What’s wrong with adjusting aircraft to customers’ needs? Nothing, as long as the needs of
46 Anxebla : >""...the USA airlines are only granted ETOPS207 certification onver the northen Pacific""< Then, the AF's 777-300ER's are certificed "only" with 180
47 Post contains links Gigneil : ConcordeQueer- I had another source, but this PW press release also stakes the claim: http://www.pratt-whitney.com/pr_061002.asp I will try and dig up
48 Gigneil : Then, the AF's 777-300ER's are certificed "only" with 180' ETOPS? (Maybe, just with the same minutes that its A-330's fleet?) That's correct. N
49 Udo : Really? When? I can't recall Boeing saying they will be competing on a 555-800 seater aircraft... The B747 ADV is likely to be stretched and therefore
50 PyroGX41487 : Jetjack, I see your point with the 787, but it's a pretty hefty gamble to assume. I just can't see Boeing creating competition for an aircraft twice i
51 PanAm330 : "Don't forget what Boeing has done over the years...B737NG as an answer to the A320, B764ER as a failed answer to the A332, now they are planning to m
52 Post contains images Udo : Whoa, Udo. Wrong. The B764ER was not to compete with the A332, it was developed as a DC10 replacement for two of their most loyal customers, CO and DL
53 Post contains images FriendlySkies : Boeing offered the B764ER and B764ERX to more airlines than just CO and DL but nobody cared about it. It had the increased capacity but not enough ran
54 Post contains images Anxebla : >""The B764ER was not to compete with the A332, it was developed as a DC10 replacement for two of their most loyal customers, CO and DL""
55 FriendlySkies : Anxebla, what the hell is the point of that post? That is exactly why Boeing created the 764. CO and DL both expressed interest in a 767 derivative to
56 Gigneil : Really do yourself believe this? Um, yes. The plane was developed specifically at the request of DL and CO. N
57 Post contains links and images Udo : Boeing never meant for this aircraft to be a true A330 competitor. I'm wondering why Boeing then praises the "savings" of the machine over the A330-20
58 Post contains images Daedaeg : Wow I'm amazed at how fast these threads become an A vs. B debate. I love it. Score: Airbus 1 Boeing 2 MVP for Airbus goes to Udo. MVP for Boeing goes
59 Anxebla : Sure? Maybe if you (both, FriendlySkies and Gigneil) are saying it can be true, but this info is new for me... Just one question-- When was the last D
60 Post contains images Udo : Wow I'm amazed at how fast these threads become an A vs. B debate. I love it. Score: Airbus 1 Boeing 2 That smells like a biased result! MVP for Airbu
61 FriendlySkies : Anxebla: OMG...you see, when an airplane is made, an airline likes to fly it for 20+ years (unless you're SQ). When CO and DL needed a replacement, th
62 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Range is what the airlines do want. Having to make stops to refuel and reload passengers is very costly. Perhaps you should tell that to SA Then, the
63 N1120A : >Most anyone who currently flies over 18+ hours and has to endure connections and layovers which only add to the stresses of long-haul travelSure? May
64 Post contains images Glideslope : Another "new" plane? I'd say people are getting nervous. 0
65 Keesje : I, and probably many others, believe that the Sonic Cruiser was nothing more than a ploy by Boeing to drive Airbus away from their true project, the 7
66 Avek00 : "I, and probably many others, believe that the Sonic Cruiser was nothing more than a ploy by Boeing to drive Airbus away from their true project, the
67 Post contains images Udo : Also, the difference between the 764/739 and the A350 is simple. Boeing simply stretched something to meet the demand of a few customers until they co
68 N1120A : >(but despite best efforts, the SC had a 20% operating CASM premium over the 767, sealing the SC's fate).
69 Scorpio : The B764ER was not to compete with the A332, it was developed as a DC10 replacement for two of their most loyal customers, CO and DL. Incorrect. The 7
70 Gigneil : Another "new" plane? I'd say people are getting nervous. 0 Smile/happy/getting dizzy ITS NOT ANOTHER NEW PLANE. Ugh. I wouldn't even go as far as Udo
71 Anxebla : >""The 767-400ER was meant to be Boeing's answer to the A330-200""
72 ConcordeBoy : Both CO and DL would have ordered the plane without them. In fact, at the time they ordered their 764s, it was still to be equipped with the classic 7
73 Scorpio : That's not true, they were indeed initially given the option, and they both chose the newer cockpit. The option was only introduced AFTER both CO and
74 N1120A : >This Scorpio's affirmation looks like more logic, suitable, appropriate and loyal to be true.
75 Scorpio : Given that Fred knows more about CO and DL than most everyone, he is right about this. Well, he's incorrect on this one. Whether he likes to admit it
76 N1120A : Okay then, prove it. Since DL basically dictated the bird to Boeing (gates at LaGuardia ring a bell??) you think they wouldn't have pushed for the old
77 Scorpio : OK, I looked up the answer to my previous question myself. Delta originally ordered the 764 on March 20, 1997. The decision to incorporate the new coc
78 Aerorobnz : Yay another sordid flagwaving session where we try in vain to justify our own opinions to other people trying to justify their own opinions - sounds l
79 Gigneil : It's pretty strange/odd saying 767-400 was a DC-10/L-1011 replacement. Why? They're the same size and feature the same range. Its a perfect one-for-on
80 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : The option was only introduced AFTER both CO and DL had already decided to order the plane. Um, that's what I was trying to tell YOU When they signed
81 Anxebla : >""same size and feature the same range""
82 Post contains images Scorpio : Um, that's what I was trying to tell YOU Then why did you find the need to argue with my original post, as it quite clearly stated, and I quote, "In f
83 Anxebla : and coming back to the original issue on this thread... what is your opinion about this: >""...But Baseler said Boeing is forecasting a market of arou
84 Gigneil : A DC-10 and a 767-400ER are totally differents "stories" ... It can be a replacement, but is not the most suitable replacement. No, they aren't diffe
85 Post contains images Anxebla : >""What would you suggest as an alternate?""
86 N1120A : >Well, IB replaced the DC-10 by A340-300... and IB is NOT regretful cos that change< They had a longer range mission in mind when they ordered it. >LH
87 Gigneil : Well, IB replaced the DC-10 by A340-300... and IB is NOT regretful cos that change Big grin LH did precisely the same thing... and also LA Delta repl
88 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Sometimes I think When you get around to it full time, let us know... perhaps we might take you halfway seriously then Then why did you find the need
89 N1120A : >It can be argued that CO could've chosen a more suitable replacement so far as performance goes... but you must also remember to factor in maintenanc
90 N1120A : >A DC-10 and a 767-400ER are totally differents "stories" ... It can be a replacement, but is not the most suitable replacement.It's like, for instanc
91 Anxebla : >""LH wasn't flying DC-10s from FRA to HAM, nor IB from MAD to BCN""""replaced their DC-10s long before the 764 existed""< And many airlines replaced
92 N1120A : >I don't know LH, but IB sometimes uses A340's and 747's between MAD and BCN as that route (MAD-BCN) is the most flown in Europe by demandThe last 727
93 Anxebla : That's curious! Seem I'm the only one who his posts are deleted. >""The 757 came out just before the 727 ended""< It was a bit before if my memory ser
94 N1120A : >>""The 757 came out just before the 727 ended""< It was a bit before if my memory serves me well.
95 PlaneSmart : If B launch the 747ADV there will almost certainly be an A36 version of the A35, to put the squeeze on the 747 niche. At least 4 airlines have receive
96 DfwRevolution : At least 4 airlines have received information on possible A36 derivatives as part of their A35 presentations. Where did you read this ? Increased grou
97 PlaneSmart : Dfw A client had presentation info on A35. I queried the wide variation in pricing, and was told thats for the 4 engined option. I thought it was the
98 Zvezda : Udo wrote: "Oh, the B777 can fill that gap [between the B777-300/A340-600 and the A380]? Since when?" A further stretch (by, say, six meters) of the B
99 Post contains images Lockheed1011 : http://777.newairplane.com/ Hello everyone! In a couple of days the 777LR is rolling out....... I can't wait to see it! Lets all celebrate the good st
100 777ER : An A345LR. Sounds like Airbus doesn't want Boeing to have the longest ranged airliner around.
101 DfwRevolution : An A345LR. Sounds like Airbus doesn't want Boeing to have the longest ranged airliner around. Boeing still will... by more than 400 nautical miles. Th
102 Baw716 : God, another "mine is better than yours" discussion. Some of you guys really need to get a grip. Airbus and Boeing BOTH make great airplanes. Yes I un
103 Zvezda : Does the 9420nm range estimate for the B777-200LR reflect the latest increase in range for the B777-300ER from 7880nm to 7940nm?
104 Post contains links B2707SST : Zvezda: No; on Boeing's web site, the -300ER is still at 7,880nm and the -200LR has 9,420nm range. http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/777techn
105 Co7772wuh : I have flown EWR to HKG on CO in a 7772ER .The airline says it's a 8,200 mile flight . Yet , boeing's web site says the range for their 7772ER is 7,73
106 Boeing7E7 : Wow, you mix up everything. The B737-300/400/500 wasn't’t able any longer at the beginning of the 90s to match the A320’s performance. Boeing was
107 Zvezda : I was involved in some negotiations between Airbus and UA. UA's decision to buy A319/20s over B737 was based on price, not aircraft capabilities.
108 Aerosol : I was involved in the decision as well. They flipped a coin!
109 BOSSAN : Co7772wuh, Boeing is quoting the aircraft range in nautical miles (6076 ft/nm) while Continental is quoting the straight-line distance between EWR and
110 SonicKidatBWI : Anxebla I have stated before about how you always seem to be the "clueless" one of the bunch and you never seem to have your information up to date. A
111 Aerosol : All it takes is a little bit of research. I'm not even a huge aviation buff like ConcordeBoy or DFWrevolution and even I know that the 767-400ER was b
112 Post contains images Keesje : All it takes is a little bit of research. I'm not even a huge aviation buff like ConcordeBoy or DFWrevolution and even I know that the 767-400ER was b
113 Singaporegirl : i know a lot of people believed that the a345 days are numbered with us (sq). one thing that i'm going to miss is the quietness of the cabin. i'm sure
114 Post contains images Greaser : but if i'm not mistaken ana's 773ers have ge engines. Ahh! The famous GE whine... rumour has it that for the long run, sq will only operate the b777s
115 Singaporegirl : unless SQ decides on a high density smaller plane (i.e 787) someone from the company was onboard one of my flights, and when we chatted he mentioned t
116 Post contains images Scbriml : as well as the a345s. c'est la vie, non? Is that you Concordeboy?
117 Singaporegirl : hahaha... what makes you think that i'm that c-boy bloke? i've read his posts before and i gathered that he's a 777 groupie. i kind of like the variet
118 Post contains images Scbriml : I've read his posts before and I gathered that he's a 777 groupie. I don't know how you came to that conclusion! Please don't take offense Singapore,
119 Widebodyphotog : Interesting how this thread has gone... I think Neil's cries for sanity have definitely gone unheeded. But to reiterate, the A340-500HGW is nothing ne
120 N1120A : >Maybe that explains why UA is the largest US operator of the 737-400/500 series?I have flown EWR to HKG on CO in a 7772ER .The airline says it's a 8,
121 Boeing7E7 : Well, UA does not fly the -400, and WN is the largest 737 Classic operator (UA does have more -500s though). The point was the family of 400/500.[Edit
122 N1120A : >Period. They were retired because the bought them vs. a favorable airbus lease and they were easier to unload.
123 Boeing7E7 : We're talking in circles on this anyway. The point isn't about the 737, it's about the notion that UA abandoned the 737 vs. the 320 completely, and th
124 Post contains images EGNR : The A340-500LR reportedly being offered to Emirates is a further upgrade, beyond the A340-500HGW. When the A340-500/-600 first came out, Singapore Air
125 Post contains images Keesje : Thnx EGNR, it took 10.000 views for someone to answer the first (and a half) question So you think Boeing has "a viable selling point with the extra r
126 Post contains images Udo : So when Boeing replaces the 737 with an E version should we stop counting 320 sales, or should we restart the 320 with the launch date of the NG famil
127 N1120A : >We're talking in circles on this anyway. The point isn't about the 737, it's about the notion that UA abandoned the 737 vs. the 320 completely, and t
128 Trex8 : >The differences in payload/range/cost performance will be pretty dramatic and the operating numbers are just too far apart to make the A340-500HGW a
129 Gigneil : Both 777s would also pick up extra range if the rumored upgrade of the GE90 to 125,000 lbs. ever materializes. No. The 777-300ER will not be picking u
130 Post contains images Udo : Well then, you have to compare the sales from something like 5-7 years only, as the NG was launched in 1993-1994 Doesn't sound a lot, but in these few
131 N1120A : >Doesn't sound a lot, but in these few years Boeing had to realize the B737 classic cannot compete any longer with the A320 series.Even worse, Boeing
132 Boeing7E7 : And again, you just do not get it. They already had the B737 classics prior to the Airbus decision. So your “counter question” is just senseless.
133 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Does the 9420nm range estimate for the B777-200LR reflect the latest increase in range for the B777-300ER from 7880nm to 7940nm? No The 777-300ER was
134 Gigneil : The PW4090 seems to be the first to op that certification I don't think so. I think the PW4077 did receive it from day one, even if they didn't use it
135 ConcordeBoy : I don't think so. I think the PW4077 did receive it from day one, even if they didn't use it. Damn, I need to read more carefully... yes, it was for 1
136 Post contains images Udo : And again, the numbers I provided were of 737 orders in a post 320 environment. Yeah, you provided numbers for the total post A320 environment, includ
137 N1120A : >in contrast to you I am able to remain objective on the whole issue.< Right Udo, at least he does not pretend to be objective >You share the same nar
138 Post contains images Udo : Right Udo, at least he does not pretend to be objective I'm in no need to pretend anything. I know your attitude towards me, so that makes me just . I
139 Post contains images Anxebla : >""Right Udo, at least he does not pretend to be objective""
140 OldAeroGuy : Gigneil, While the A340-600HGW has closed the range gap with the 773ER, it needs 28.5 tonne more takeoff wt and nearly 13% more fuel volume to do so.
141 SunriseValley : OldAeroGuy.. The currency spread between the $US and the Euro is doing this rather nicely I would say. A 50% change in 3-years in favour of Boeing has
142 Post contains images PyroGX41487 : I think based on the A346's success, Airbus shouldn't worry about stretching the A346's design limitations, and the same goes with the A340-500. And b
143 Post contains images N1120A : >The currency spread between the $US and the Euro is doing this rather nicely I would say. A 50% change in 3-years in favour of Boeing has to enhance
144 Dennys : Anyway I do hope seeing the next A345 "ERXLR" flying LHR - SYD NON STOP , or NYC - SYD NON STOP . ... And what about a SAO - NRT or SAO - HKG ? respon
145 N1120A : >Anyway I do hope seeing the next A345 "ERXLR" flying LHR - SYD NON STOP , or NYC - SYD NON STOP . ... And what about a SAO - NRT or SAO - HKG ? respo
146 Gigneil : Why is this thread still going on? N
147 N1120A : >Why is this thread still going on?< No, idea, but I think you just started the third or fourth subject the thread will comprehend as we have visited
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
The New Airbus A340-500/600 Is Beautiful! posted Sat Nov 3 2001 03:06:17 by BA
New Enhanced A340-500/600 posted Mon Nov 28 2005 21:08:41 by AeroPiggot
Air Canada Airbus A340-500 Info? posted Fri May 28 2004 11:31:02 by Fiedman
Airbus A340-500/600 Orders/Deliveries/Operators posted Sat Mar 6 2004 03:49:56 by Teahan
NWA Boeing 777-300ER Or Airbus A340-500/600? posted Fri Feb 27 2004 15:29:03 by KEESJE
Airbus A340-500 First Delivery posted Mon Nov 11 2002 17:38:53 by United777
Questions About The Airbus A340-500. posted Wed May 22 2002 09:53:59 by Flying Belgian
Can The Airbus A340-500 Fly SIN - Nyc? posted Tue Feb 26 2002 18:43:45 by Singapore_Air
Airbus A340-500 Made Maiden Flight Y'day posted Tue Feb 12 2002 21:58:52 by GF-A330
Takeoff-field-length For Airbus A340-500/-600? posted Fri Jul 27 2001 00:21:26 by A380-700R