Heavierthanair From Switzerland, joined Oct 2000, 697 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8385 times:
Someone should re-read the Thai statement:
This new A340-600 aircraft will be used to service passengers travelling to Europe, including Zurich, Switzerland, Milan, and Spain, and Tokyo, Japan in Asia. THAI received the two A340-600 aircraft in June and August 2005 respectively and will receive another three aircraft of this model from Airbus by the end of the year 2005, which will complete the order for five aircraft under the A340-600 aircraft type.
Well, in a nutshell (not as short as I'd like); They don't go anywhere near as far as Airbus said, they are simply too damn heavy on the wing. The engines shutdown in flight of their own accord, this is to do with the defective fuel system that doesn't transfer fuel. We have to turn the fuel management off and do it manually, which is actually quite fun, breaks the monotony of the automation. I feel like I'm in my 747 again. Airbus have supplied updated "bug fixed" software, but it still happens.
We also have a payload restriction on some of the longer routes. We've had to choose between cargo or slf and sometimes the cargo wins!
There are also regular issues with the onboard equipment such as the galley ovens, they'll often not work. The cabin lighting has also been iffy and on more than one occasion the entertainment refused to stay on. Our mechanical gods claim its the flex in the fuselage that's causing this, somthing to do with the wiring and connections. Airbus have been helping but insist the fuselage flex has nothing to do with it.
Mind you, tis a beaut to fly and the flightdeck is audibly quieter than the 747 and we have a little more room to move around.
You asked if I preferred the "game stick" or the yoke from my 747 days. Well, surprisingly I find the joystick is very neat and comfortable and affords me a great little table for my food and paperwork. However, I have to admit that the yoke on the 747 is much more tactile and intuitive.
Don't shoot the messenger now. This is the personal experience and observation from a pilot.
Quoting Solnabo (Reply 3): When it comes to pax qads a/c, is 744(ER) version "standing still"? Didnt find any orders in www.justplanes for the 744 Pax.
Heaps of airlines with B744 that are near their 'due by' date are replacing them with B773s and A346s. I think its because they don't need all of their B744s anymore due to less passengers and its cheaper to operate B777s and A340s
Ibhayi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (8 years 3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7591 times:
It is substantially to operate an aircraft if it is say not as efficient than a 773ER, than replace the existing 346's they have and then retrain and requip staff and maintenance for an entirely new product. If they are happy or not it is highly likely the best option and most economical would be more 346 than changing everything that is presently set up.
Eha From France, joined May 2005, 211 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (8 years 3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7554 times:
Quoting GARPD (Reply 13): Quoting A319114 (Reply 11):
If I'm not mistaken, CX uses an old version of the A346. All the newer A346 have new, lighter wings.
And CX are still unconvinced.
No way. The A346 delivered to CPA via ILFC have been built in 2002, 2003, which means one of the first ones delivered.
The new plan mentioned for A346 is still a plan imo.
Although A346 dispatch reliability is not exceptional so far, it is not good for CPA, vs the other operators. Any reason mentioned ? apart from the fact they got maybe the first A/C, with all the maturity pbs it may induce...
Thorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (8 years 3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7103 times:
I don't think this pilot report is that bad, after all. The trouble with the wings should be fixed on newer ones, CX has some of the first and they had too heavy wings (and were sold with discount). Besides, the galley ovens or the entertainment systems are not essential parts of the aircraft and they are probably build by a supplier, not by Airbus itself. So blame the suppliers.