Birdwatching From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2615 posts, RR: 58 Posted (4 years 10 months 19 hours ago) and read 10451 times:
I am wondering why this hasn't been discussed before, a search in the forums doesn't give me anything useful on this topic.
1) Basically, why would Airbus replace their A330 but not their A340, both being equally old?
2) Why will the new plane have a new type designation, and not just be 330-X? Is it reallt that different? Look at A318/319/320/321 families, or even more evident, B737 from the 100 to the NG. These families are much more diverse than 330 family would be if 350 was part of that same family. Or is it just for marketing purposes, so that it feels like a completely new plane?
3) Will there be an A360 to replace A340? Or is "4 engine 4 long haul" gone for good?
[S] [A] [L] [>] S U I D - A F R I K A A N S E L U G D I E N S
GLA MD11 From France, joined Mar 2000, 271 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (4 years 10 months 18 hours ago) and read 10398 times:
1) Because with the progresses of twins, no need for a 4-holer. The A-330 is currently taking all the market shares of older versions of the A 340 (see for example AF buying A 332).
2) I was also wondering that but I think they want to market it as a brand new aircraft and not a newer version of an older concept. Also it seems that despite the fact that the drawings we currently of the A 350 is basically an A 330 with different winglets, it will include a lot of modernity.
3) No, I believe not, until the time comes to replace the A 345-346.
LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 9541 posts, RR: 7 Reply 3, posted (4 years 10 months 18 hours ago) and read 10302 times:
The A330, and eventually the A350, really replaced the A300/310 series, competes with the 767, and to some extent, the 777. The A340 is more of the capacity of some 747's, old DC-10/MD-11 class a/c and has 4 engines which is more desirable for certain long haul routes where ETOPS is an issue. The A380 is really of very high demand, limited access and very long routes not dissimiar to those where some versions of the A340's are used now and will probably take some sales from them.
So why do they need a replacement for the A340's? Better to come up with a future replacement for the A 318/319/320 series.
Birdwatching From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2615 posts, RR: 58 Reply 4, posted (4 years 10 months 18 hours ago) and read 10200 times:
Wouldn't it be possible to "fool" the ETOPS system (AKA Engines Turn or Passengers Swim) by mounting 1 or 2 "dummy" engines on the wings of a twin engine plane? One with very weak power, but enough to "call it an engine"?
[S] [A] [L] [>] S U I D - A F R I K A A N S E L U G D I E N S
PlaneSmart From New Zealand, joined Dec 2004, 663 posts, RR: 13 Reply 6, posted (4 years 10 months 18 hours ago) and read 10091 times:
An updated A34 (=A36) was discussed with a number of A35 prospects late last year.
When drawings of the A35 wing become available, it may reveal provision for another pair of engines.
The A34 is a bit of an enigma. There is strong demand for used models, especially later versions (including a couple of prospective buyers for VIP conversions), but not enough cheque books coming out for new ones to ever satisfy that demand.
Many on this site seem less than charitable to the A34, with claims they do not perform, and that operators are dissatisfied. In contrast to a.net opinions, airlines with A34's seem keen to hold onto them / rollover leases, despite strong used demand providing the perfect opportunity for disposal.
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 24124 posts, RR: 86 Reply 7, posted (4 years 10 months 18 hours ago) and read 10092 times:
Quoting Rj111 (Reply 1): The A345/6 are in a different size catagory and are much newer, thus aren't being replaced.
The A345 is not in a different size category from the A359, it just has longer range.
Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 3): The A330, and eventually the A350, really replaced the A300/310 series
Not at all. The A350 is much larger than the A300, and definately much larger than the A310
Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 3): The A340 is more of the capacity of some 747's
Maybe the SP. The A346 is still smaller capacity wise from the 741/742, let alone the 744
Quoting Birdwatching (Reply 4): Wouldn't it be possible to "fool" the ETOPS system (AKA Engines Turn or Passengers Swim) by mounting 1 or 2 "dummy" engines on the wings of a twin engine plane? One with very weak power, but enough to "call it an engine"?
Not in any way shape or form. The added weight alone would be a reason to keep the thrust up.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
A350 From Germany, joined Nov 2004, 1096 posts, RR: 24 Reply 8, posted (4 years 10 months 18 hours ago) and read 10042 times:
The A343 is a goner, it will be replaced by the A359, although its not official and they might be offered in parallel some time. However, I think an upgrade of the A340NG with A350 technology is quite realistic. Imagine, you can use the A350s fuse, stretch it, and if you can invest 2 billions for new wings and add the hyper-efficient, big but weak* 783-engines, you have an absolutely awesome plane! The marketing has to decide if it's called A340-800 or A360. I'm convinced this plane will come.
A350
* big and not too strong is what makes the engines so efficient.
Photography - the art of observing, not the art of arranging
BoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1566 posts, RR: 18 Reply 9, posted (4 years 10 months 17 hours ago) and read 9865 times:
I dont think its going to happen. The A345/6 are not going to be updated anytime soon. The A350 will replace the A333, 332, and 343. The A380 will be the super jumbo of the fturue... and once Boeing is finished with the 787 and possibly the 747Adv... you will see Boeing work on the 737 line. Therefore, Airbus will work on the A320 once the A350 is complete, which I dont think it will be ready till 2012... I woudln't be surprised if they don't go bigger with the A350, it would be smart if they did.
The A345/6 will not be replaced until possibly 2015-18, if not later. Airbus will perdominatly sell the A320 and A350 in volume. All others are too complete a family but will never be big sellers to justify a replacement so soon.
Ozair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 486 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (4 years 10 months 12 hours ago) and read 8918 times:
Quoting Birdwatching (Thread starter): Will there be an A360 to replace A340? Or is "4 engine 4 long haul" gone for good?
To quote Randy Baseler, Boeing Vice Pres on Marketing, as said the day that Airbus decided to go ahead and offer the A350, " A great day for Boeing". This action justified the use of big twins for long range flight. Pure and simple, they are cheaper to run and use less fuel. 4 engines are destined to remain the area of huge aircraft such as the A380 and 747ADV only.
AGANX From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 27 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (4 years 10 months 10 hours ago) and read 7866 times:
There is a gap between the A340-600 and A380-800. Seems like A340-600 has been stretched to its limits and A380-700 is not going to be efficient (too heavy). Sooner or later Airbus will have to come up with something to fill the gap, especially to complete with the B744Adv and B773ER. Could be a new model with a new cross section and it could be A360 with four engines (as it will be beyond the abilities of two engines - at present).
N79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (4 years 10 months 10 hours ago) and read 7781 times:
I have wondered for a while why Airbus invested in the 4-engine A340 design. The only thing I have been able to conclude on my own is that they simply wanted to differentiate their product (marketing reasons)from Boeing's other than any compelling engineering reason. They sell ETOPS capable aircraft so I do not believe that Airbus was concerned primarily about safety when developing the 340.
I think the direction of the A350 program lends some credence to my guess. They can move the same amount of pax/cargo similar distances more efficiently with a 2 engine design.
If some iteration of the A350 actually is as large as the 345 as N1120 implies, then it is obviously signals the end of the 340 series and would be a great vindication for Boeing as Ozair points out.
Iwok From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 1100 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (4 years 10 months 8 hours ago) and read 7329 times:
Quoting N79969 (Reply 12): I have wondered for a while why Airbus invested in the 4-engine A340 design.
At the time, the A340 was the best that Airbus had to offer. Now it is pretty evident that the 340 has outlived its usefullness, especially with the 330 and soon to be 350. It may be that the 340 stays around just so that an ETOPS independant long-haul product can be offered to airlines who do not need the size of the 380.
Propulsion From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 294 posts, RR: 9 Reply 15, posted (4 years 10 months 8 hours ago) and read 7251 times:
Quoting Birdwatching (Thread starter): Will there be an A360 to replace A340? Or is "4 engine 4 long haul" gone for good?
Yes it will, except for very large aircraft. The technology and operating economics of twin jets are now so good that it makes no sense to have any more engines except on the very largest of aircraft.
A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.
AvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2372 posts, RR: 12 Reply 16, posted (4 years 10 months 6 hours ago) and read 6873 times:
Eventually the A340 series will be replaced but certainly not in the immediate future; there's not yet a need to do so. We could be looking at over 25 years before Airbus decides to supplant it with another similar-sized quad and only then if the market warrants a major revision of the design, which it might, given the need for ever increasing efficiency. It's possible that prior to that, in 10-15 years, the 340 will be given a major makeover ala what's being done with the A330 to create the A350. It's anyone's guess in here, however, since Airbus hasn't yet revealed long-range plans for this series or a successor. Safe to say, however, that the A340-500/600 will be around a good while, though the -300 model may well be supplanted by the A350 and enhanced A330's; too soon to tell on that last point.
StickShaker From Australia, joined Sep 2004, 300 posts, RR: 4 Reply 17, posted (4 years 10 months 3 hours ago) and read 5916 times:
Quoting PlaneSmart (Reply 6): An updated A34 (=A36) was discussed with a number of A35 prospects late last year.
When drawings of the A35 wing become available, it may reveal provision for another pair of engines.
In another thread detailing A350 specs it was stated that the 350 landing gear has "room for growth". This is a good indication that Airbus are considering higher gross weight versions of the 350 series. The higher weights could be used for longer range (more fuel) or for a stretched version with the same range.
I think any potential A360/A350 stretch would be a twin rather than a quad. This allows the maximum transfer of technology from the 350 design. Dont think Airbus would have any problem adopting Boeings philosophy if it sells aircraft - they are doing this already with the 350.
It makes a lot of sense to extend the 350 family (or whatever it may be called) further up into 773 territory. While the 787 can hold its own against the 350 its much harder for the heavy 777's to compete against Li-alloy aircraft with composite wings.
As has been pointed out - the 345/346 are still relatively new aircraft and the small number of sales would not have recouped the $3B or so it cost to develop them. Against that, Airbus has to develop a new wing for the 346HGW - it your already going to spend the $2B it costs to develop a new wing then why not introduce 350 technology and produce a twin instead ? There is no shortage of suitable engines available and a lightweight 360 would not need the massive 115k GE engines.
This is all pure speculation but it will be a fascinating area to watch. There has been very little public information about the 346HGW which is intended to be available around 2007. One problem would be diminished resale values for existing 345/346 aircraft.
It all depends on just how much the 350 is stretched and what sort of weights are involved. If Airbus are "building in" the capability for higher MTOW into the 350 design then no doubt the wing will be able to carry more.
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 28091 posts, RR: 60 Reply 18, posted (4 years 10 months 1 hour ago) and read 5110 times:
Quoting Birdwatching (Reply 4): Wouldn't it be possible to "fool" the ETOPS system (AKA Engines Turn or Passengers Swim) by mounting 1 or 2 "dummy" engines on the wings of a twin engine plane? One with very weak power, but enough to "call it an engine"?
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10347 posts, RR: 71 Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4135 times:
I hesitate to predict when Airbus will replace the A340-500 and A340-600, but it's clear that whenever the time comes, the replacement will be a twin. The WhaleJet is almost certainly the last all-new quad airliner.
Starlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 13702 posts, RR: 67 Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4077 times:
Quoting N79969 (Reply 12): I have wondered for a while why Airbus invested in the 4-engine A340 design. The only thing I have been able to conclude on my own is that they simply wanted to differentiate their product (marketing reasons)from Boeing's other than any compelling engineering reason. They sell ETOPS capable aircraft so I do not believe that Airbus was concerned primarily about safety when developing the
At the time when the 340 was developed, ETOPS and enormously powerful engines like the GE90 were still at the theoretical stage. For long haul (over 8-9 hours) with great efficiency, quads (and triplets) were the only thing going. There was no way, in the late 80s/early 90s, to develop a twin that could do what the 340 can.
Half a decade later, when Boeing developed the 777, things had changed completely. ETOPS and more powerful engines made it possible to build the plane.
Tact Is For People Who Aren't Witty Enough To Be Sarcastic
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2615 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 3147 posts, 
From France, joined Mar 2000, 271 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2004, 663 posts, 
From Germany, joined Nov 2004, 1096 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 486 posts, 
From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 27 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 1100 posts, 
From India, joined Jan 2001, 28091 posts, 
From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10347 posts, 
From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 13702 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
