Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A340 Enhanced To Take On 773ER/772LR  
User currently offlineEg777er From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 1837 posts, RR: 14
Posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 13189 times:

http://www.flightinternational.com/A...Enhanced+A340+to+take+on+777+.html

81 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBoeing767-300 From Australia, joined Sep 2001, 659 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 13080 times:

And the Translation equals, "Boeing has creamed us with the 300ER and 200LR in operating efficiency"

We will promise the customers everything to halt the shift to Boeing in the 777/A340 Battle.

I would be skeptical as to any claims made by A in this instance. Emirates has already made it known that they to azre skeptical regarding Airbus claims given their recent tardy record.

Do Leahy/Forgeard not think GE will be able to improve 115B efficiency therefore negating any 'proposed' improvement in the RR Trent.

Airbus needs to face the facts. A346 is too heavy and the quad as in RR Trent 500 too inefficient to compete with 300ER/200LR and Airlines have clearly voted with their ordering recently.

Airlines are not stupid and A is seriously lacking the 'twin knockout punch' that is 787/777X. A350/A346 is seriously lacking. Have you ever known a relatively new model outclassed and outdated so quickly. A380 and and 747-8 aside the market is moving from quads to twins and you have to admire Boeing's courage in pushing the concept so hard in 1990 (Aircraft Size/engine power to do it)

Does anybody actually believe this crap A puts out. They seem to be floundering around not really knowing what to do......  Wink


User currently offlineRJpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 13069 times:

Does anybody have firm numbers of orders to compare?

User currently offlineNA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10731 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 12969 times:

"Sources say the combination of weight-savings and new-generation engines should enable the A340-600E to offer significantly better operating cost and range performance than the 777-200LR/300ER – which is now regarded as the benchmark, long-range airliner family in the 300-400 seat sector. Industry estimates suggest the 777-300ER has an 8-9% fuel burn advantage over the A340-600, and the Enhanced’s upgraded engines alone should erode this by 6-7%."

While I guess Boeing won´t be sleeping until then its good to know that at least one Quad will still compete underneath the Jumbos.


User currently offlineTinkerBelle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 12899 times:

Quoting NA (Reply 3):
Industry estimates suggest the 777-300ER has an 8-9% fuel burn advantage over the A340-600, and the Enhanced’s upgraded engines alone should erode this by 6-7%."

At least A does agree A340 is getting creamed fuel-burn wise by the 773ER.

Airbus should have learned from Boeing's 764ER project and although B didn't lose money on it, it never worked the way they wanted it to contrary to many beliefs that the plane was meant for DL and CO only. My take is, give it up Leahy boys and concentrate on making the A350 better. You have bigger problems to worry about coz the quads will not be able to compete with B's twins.


User currently offlineNA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10731 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 12757 times:

Base price of an A346 is about 30 million bucks lower than the 773ER. You can buy a lot of fuel for that!

User currently offlineTinkerBelle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12720 times:

Quoting NA (Reply 5):
Base price of an A346 is about 30 million bucks lower than the 773ER. You can buy a lot of fuel for that!

That's the base price for the current A346. There's no price tag for the proposed one and you can bet it'll be more expensive than the current one. Tell that to all the 773ER operators  biggrin 


User currently offlineCruiser From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1001 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12671 times:

With all of the recent orders for the 773ER, you can bet that this version of the A340 was at least offered to the airlines. It didn't just happen overnight (well, maybe it did), but I suspect that the airlines looked at it and said that it isn't worth getting an extra 2% over the 773ER, because by then, then 773ER may have improved another 5%, and the numbers are very real for the 773ER.

With all of the additional orders from current operators of the 773ER, it is apparent that it is one heck of a plane, that all airlines love!

As other have said, it is a 15 year old design. It is time for Airbus to look to the future with the A350.

James



Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12627 times:

I am no aerospace engineer but I am a bit skeptical that Airbus revamp can the A340 enough to make it truly competitive with the 777 with the changes they propose.

Airbus also seems to assume that Boeing will stand still with respect to the B777...but Airbus has to do something about the beating that A340 is receiving.


User currently offlineKrisYYZ From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12541 times:

I really think that Airbus should slowly remove the A340 family from life support and let it die. Let’s face it, the A340s have had a good life, you could even say a successful career. But the A340 in my opinion has no future, even if you give it new engines and new wings.

Quoting Boeing767-300 (Reply 1):
Airbus needs to face the facts. A346 is too heavy and the quad as in RR Trent 500 too inefficient to compete with 300ER/200LR and Airlines have clearly voted with their ordering recently

Very true!! AC , hello B777 goodbye A333/343/345 and cancellation of the A346 order. I bet some airlines will follow this trend.


Krisyyz


User currently offlineJetMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12521 times:

Quoting Cruiser (Reply 7):
As other have said, it is a 15 year old design. It is time for Airbus to look to the future with the A350.

According to that logic, the B739ER would be a 38 year old design...  Wink

Anyways, Airbus has no choice but to enhance the A345/A346 because the A350 is not planned to compete with B772LR and B773ER.


Regards,
JM


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12464 times:

Quoting JetMaster (Reply 10):
Airbus has no choice but to enhance the A345/A346 because the A350 is not planned to compete with B772LR and B773ER.

Airbus could be trapped now with the A340. They will need a better long term solution.

Quoting JetMaster (Reply 10):
According to that logic, the B739ER would be a 38 year old design...

But it is not getting decimated by the competition.


User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13110 posts, RR: 100
Reply 12, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12449 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NA (Reply 3):
"Sources say the combination of weight-savings and new-generation engines should enable the A340-600E to offer significantly better operating cost and range performance than the 777-200LR/300ER – which is now regarded as the benchmark, long-range airliner family in the 300-400 seat sector. Industry estimates suggest the 777-300ER has an 8-9% fuel burn advantage over the A340-600, and the Enhanced’s upgraded engines alone should erode this by 6-7%."

I worked on a proposed engine for the A345/346 that had an 11% drop in fuel burn; we dropped the project as it wasn't seen as competitive with the 773ER! So I hope Airbus can come up with a better solution than 6 to 7%. Four engines are very expensive to maintain... If an engine with an 11 bypass ratio wasn't enough... I do not see how a 9.5 bypass ratio would be attractive.

Sorry to be so negative on the A340, but the aircraft would have to drop several tons of weight to compete. Also, do note that this new A340-600E is going to be competing agains a 772LR/773ER that has six more years of production experience behind it; thus that $30 million price gap will probably shrink.

Also, with that time Airbus readuce fuel burn by 6%! (Rule of thumb in the industry is airframe/engine efficiency should improve 1% per year.)

Quoting Cruiser (Reply 7):
As other have said, it is a 15 year old design. It is time for Airbus to look to the future with the A350.

 checkmark  Like it or not, Airbus needs to focus on a product that is significantly more economical.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineSabenapilot From Belgium, joined Feb 2000, 2714 posts, RR: 46
Reply 13, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12438 times:

There was a very interesting discussion a few days/weeks ago on how airbus could succesfully sex-up the A340 to make it compete with the 777.

For once this discussion didn't produce the regular blablabla like we usually get to read here

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 8):
Just more vaporware from the Toulouse crackhouse.

but actually gave us a good technical insight in what and how it could be done.

go to:
http://www.airliners.net/discussions...ion/read.main/2448360/6/#ID2448360
and scroll down abit till it get's started.... best discussion on the site in weeks in my view!

It might prove to be complicated to follow for those not used to work with performance formulae, but the bottom line was that is IS possible, although after some discussion back and forth on the interpretation and the importance of the different parameters in the formula, it was determined the A340Enhanced would need more than just an engine swap.

However, if Airbus can easily start with giving the A340 an equal fuel flow as its Boeing's competitor thanks to the much lower fuel burn of the next generation of medium thrust engines despite its higher Empty Operating Weight, lightens up the wing structure to reflex the reduced tank capacity needed AND incorporates A350 technology in the fuselage, the A340E seems to be an unbeatable product!

Ironically, what has been the main advantage of the 777 over the A340 for much of the past decade (i.e. : it being a twin) might now turn out to be its biggest handicap to succesfully react to this move from Airbus as there is will be no less thirsty alternative for its high thrust engines on the horizon ans a structural fix of the 777 alone would likely not do the trick...

Enjoy the reading!


User currently offlineCruiser From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1001 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12433 times:

Quoting JetMaster (Reply 10):
According to that logic, the B739ER would be a 38 year old design... Wink

Very true. I thought about this as I was typing it. However, the second the 777 entered service, the A340 was inferior, and I agree, my logic was not sound. However, every time the A340 has been updated, it has not been upgraded to the point where it is superior to the 777. In fact, Airbus always designs it based on the current 777 when in fact the A340 model will not fly for a few years. Airbus just thinks that the 777 will stand still.

Soon, we will see that Airbus will have a distinct gap in their lineup between the A359 and the A380. The A340 will no longer be competitive, and they will be forced to update the A320. It looks like the Airbus drought (well, I can hardly call it that!) will last for a number of years yet!

James



Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
User currently offlineJetMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12423 times:

Quoting N79969 (Reply 11):

But it is not getting decimated by the competition.

The point was to make clear that A345/A346 are not 15 year old designs.


Regards,
JM


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12369 times:

Quoting Boeing767-300 (Reply 1):
A380 and and 747-8 aside the market is moving from quads to twins and you have to admire Boeing's courage in pushing the concept so hard in 1990 (Aircraft Size/engine power to do it)

A very interesting historical development given that when Airbus first launched the A300, Boeing pooh pooh'd the whole wide-bodied twin concept.


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12347 times:

Quoting JetMaster (Reply 15):
The point was to make clear that A345/A346 are not 15 year old designs.


Jetzt ich verstehe...


User currently offline11Bravo From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1718 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12284 times:

Quoting JetMaster (Reply 10):
Anyways, Airbus has no choice but to enhance the A345/A346 because the A350 is not planned to compete with B772LR and B773ER.

Sure they have a choice. They can build a new aircraft to compete in this catagory. If Airbus goes with an enhanced A345/A346, Boeing will counter with improvements to the B772LR/B773ER, and Airbus will end up exactly where they are today having spent several billion euros in the process. The problem for Airbus here is weight. They cannot make the A345/A346 airframe lighter than the B772LR/B773ER by "enhancing" it. The only real prospect for beating the Boeing twins would be for Airbus to build a new aircraft.



WhaleJets Rule!
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21526 posts, RR: 59
Reply 19, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12283 times:

Quoting JetMaster (Reply 10):
According to that logic, the B739ER would be a 38 year old design...  

Just shows how they got it right by offering a small twin with in/under wing engines so long ago, while most of the competition was working tail mounted options.

Quoting Cruiser (Reply 14):
However, the second the 777 entered service, the A340 was inferior

That's the key. While I think the 737 is in dire need of a new design, it is still selling well because it has a modern wing (with optional advantageous winglets), a modern flight deck, and modern engines that keep it relatively on par with the A320, which has older wings at this point, a more modern flight deck (by design), and relatively equal engines. And because the A320 is also a twin, it doesn't have an inherent advantage in economics, especially due to it's weight, but does due to pax space and cargo for airlines who value those things (and for it's intended mission, not all do). There are enough factors for an airline to choose one or the other and not regret it later either way.

But the 777 does have an inherent advantage over the A340. 2 modern engines are more efficient than 4 modern engines when you factor in ALL costs. There's no way around it. Using more "efficient" engines to make it better is not a viable solution because the competition can always do the same to negate it. Lightening various components is not the answer either, as the competition can do the same. Those 2 extra engines will always be there, however.

Which is why the best solution for Airbus would be to "A350" the A340 by offering a 346 length A350 with 8000nm range, with the A350 wings and with 2 engines, not 4. My guess is they are just waiting on the right engines to make this a reality.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineKa From Switzerland, joined Apr 2000, 661 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12236 times:

Quoting KrisYYZ (Reply 9):
Let’s face it, the A340s have had a good life, you could even say a successful career. But the A340 in my opinion has no future, even if you give it new engines and new wings.

The same sentence could stand for the B747. Still B doesn´t want to stop the program, why should A end theirs??

KA.



Keep smiling - you might be on Radar!
User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10023 posts, RR: 96
Reply 21, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12222 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 20):
Airbus will end up exactly where they are today having spent several billion euros in the process

Airbus WON'T spend several billion Euros on the A346E!

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
Which is why the best solution for Airbus would be to "A350" the A340 by offering a 346 length A350 with 8000nm range, with the A350 wings and with 2 engines, not 4. My guess is they are just waiting on the right engines to make this a reality.

I suspect your comment regarding the engines is VERY relevant.  checkmark 


User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12541 posts, RR: 25
Reply 22, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12172 times:

Quoting NA (Reply 3):
Industry estimates suggest the 777-300ER has an 8-9% fuel burn advantage over the A340-600, and the Enhanced�s upgraded engines alone should erode this by 6-7%

But 6-7% of 8-9% is only 0.5%! Journalists!



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineJetMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12166 times:

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 20):
They can build a new aircraft to compete in this catagory.



Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 20):
The only real prospect for beating the Boeing twins would be for Airbus to build a new aircraft.

True, but Airbus is not in a position to develop a completely new design while working on the A350, A380/F and A400M projects.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
Just shows how they got it right by offering a small twin with in/under wing engines so long ago, while most of the competition was working tail mounted options.

Sure it shows a lot, but my point was another one. See reply 15.


Regards,
JM


User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 24, posted (8 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 12159 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 23):
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
Which is why the best solution for Airbus would be to "A350" the A340 by offering a 346 length A350 with 8000nm range, with the A350 wings and with 2 engines, not 4. My guess is they are just waiting on the right engines to make this a reality.

Those engines would be a very nice upgrade for 772ER operators.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
25 RayChuang : I think what Airbus is seriously looking at is an A340-500/600 model using derivatives of the Trent 1700 engine now in development for the A350. If Ro
26 Post contains images Mdsh00 : It's Solnabo! You could put an "Airbus" logo on a turd and he would sing praises of it. An A340E? I'm not sure. Like someone else said, A would proba
27 Post contains images Astuteman : It was only a matter of time... Nice one
28 Revelation : One could argue both programs are mistakes. They are probably being done to protect a market segment, rather than to make large profits. They will pr
29 N276AASTT : If that ends up to be true, then I can suspect that Boeing will do exactly the same, use the advances and technology of the 777 line and apply it to
30 Amy : I don't think Airbus is looking to set the world on fire with this project. The A350 is still their aircraft of the future, I don't think they are nai
31 Ikramerica : At the time, twins for that size planes were impractical for the kind of missions that companies were targeting. MD and Lockheed both thought of maki
32 Sabenapilot : I am afraid you are too convinced by the inherent superiority of the 777 and are underestimating the strenght of an attack on your beloved Boeing typ
33 Revelation : I guess the operative word is "several". In my book, it doesn't take many billions to get to "several", but of course, that may be different in your
34 JetMaster : But not all journalists are same, right? Regards, JM
35 Sabenapilot : Indeed, however, expect B to be the last one pushing any engine manufacturer to come up with such an product for their 772ER, because it would give w
36 Revelation : No, all journalists are not the same. Sorry, but I'm missing your point.
37 Ikramerica : Come now. You think the state of the art will stagnate in the GE90 class engine while advancing in all others to the point that by 2011, the GE90 can
38 Sabenapilot : A recertification program of an exisiting plane with new engines could cost anything from 200 to 400 million dollars... Not really SEVERAL BILLIONS,
39 Atmx2000 : It amuses me to no end that the Airbus fans here are putting all their hopes on a proposed derivative due in 2011 that may have a marginal advantage o
40 Post contains images Astuteman : It won't be me donning the tin helmet + flak jacket, Revelation. Much more significant changes to the 744 to create the 748 are widely touted on here
41 Revelation : Nope, with Sabenapilot aiming and you firing, I just took an 88mm hit to the chest, so it won't help! I have to agree, it seems to be a lot less than
42 N79969 : As apparently are actual purchasers of aircraft in this class who are willing to pay a premium for the B777 when faced with the decision of where to
43 Astuteman : Thanks Revelation. I can live with $1Bn - $1.5bn for the A345/6E because I believe the 748 to be nearer $3.5Bn - $4Bn. If it helps, speaking as an Ai
44 Sabenapilot : N79969- Its not like the A340-600Enhanced has been offered to any of the newest 777 customers! At present the plane is nothing more than a speadsheet
45 Sabenapilot : It can certainly be improved, but it will not incorporate much of the newly developed technologic improvement, simply because it would require too mu
46 N328KF : I'm still not following your logic again. How exactly can R-R bring Trent 1x00 improvements to the Trent 500 and GE can't make the same changes to th
47 Post contains images Cruiser : I love how everyone thinks that the GE90's are the weakest link of the 777. Maybe Boeing should take the 777 and make it a 4-engine plane Boeing keeps
48 Post contains links Sq212 : Boeing also enhanced their 773ER to improve overall fuel efficiency by 1.4 percent. This amount is in addition to the 2 percent fuel-burn improvement
49 N79969 : Sabenapilot, As far as WAGs go, your WAGs are not bad but not that good either. I think the limb that you are sitting on is pretty much touching the g
50 Sabenapilot : Go and check the technical forum, I am sure you will find several topics dealing in detail with the GEnx or the Trend 1000/1700 and what it is that wi
51 Sabenapilot : It's called competition, I don't think you can be against it, can you? Maybe, maybe not... But at present the plane is NOT offered, so even if a cust
52 N79969 : Of course not. Although many in the Airbus camp decry the very practice I describe as they do not view it as "competition." You don't think Airbus ca
53 Stitch : Why should Boeing just throw up their hands and say "well, if ya need more then 400 people, buy an A380"? And why should Airbus just throw up their h
54 Cruiser : Don't kid yourself. If an airline (e.g. Emirates) came to Airbus to say what have you got, do you think that they would be stupid enough to say that
55 Sabenapilot : Well, I probably won't surprise you by saying I definitely belong to the airbus camp, but unlike most this is not because of 'nationalistic reasons',
56 GQfluffy : True, but Airbus has already lost AC. And it looks like Emirates is a bit weary... Time will tell.
57 Post contains images Zvezda : That might not be the case if one had to pay for the environmental damage. I also would have thought that improving the A350 would have been a better
58 Cruiser : It would be on par with todays' 773ER. Boeing will make the 773ER more efficient, but you are right in that it would lessen the current gap. James
59 Stitch : #1 makes sense to improve the A346E vis-a-vis the B773ER (and, to a more limited extent, the B772LR). #2, while making it even more a threat to the B
60 Post contains links B2707SST : Don't forget that Boeing is proposing a light-weight cabin for QF's SYD-LHR 777-200LRs. This is supposed to include developments from the 787 program
61 OldAeroGuy : This statement is blatantly untrue. While the cross section and material may be the same as the A350, the A346E is much longer. Thus this change must
62 Post contains images Astuteman : It's amazing what a bit of interpretation does for you. It's the same shape looking from above, and fits to the aircraft in the same place - therefor
63 Glideslope : Could be? The 340 enhanced demonstates just that. Too little, WAY too late. Plus, who is going to believe their numbers? The long term solution is be
64 JetMaster : Have I missed a few? Regards, JM
65 B2707SST : No, he says it's an "essentially new wing," which is the same parlance Airbus uses to describe the A350's wing. Both are substantially modified, but
66 Zvezda : Astuteman, here's what you're missing: 1) the structure of the wing i.e. the spar, webbing, etc. is unchanged, and 2) the tooling needed to make the
67 N79969 : That is a good point. There are only a handful of die-hards though: Lufthansa, Virgin, Iberia, and China Eastern. Will they need new and more A346 by
68 Post contains images UAMAYBACH1239 : Correct but B is not having any trouble selling them or living up to perform the way it was promised.
69 Post contains images Hirnie : Seen from a passenger`s point of view I´d love to see a more competetive variant of the 340 so that more airlines choose it. I did a lot of trips on
70 Astuteman : 1) You don't know that - the forces acting on this wing are substantially different. The spars/webbing may be different thicknesses or different mate
71 LY777 : I flew both the 777 and the A340 and the 777 was far more comfortable, the flight was smoother, and it rides better in turbulences. And I would like t
72 Post contains images JetMaster : See reply 23, then 15. Regards, JM
73 USAF336TFS : Both the wife (LH employee) and I have also flown on both aircraft, and our opinions are just opposite of yours. It's much too subjective to make suc
74 AirFrnt : Because the 400+ market is very very small. They shouldn't, but that's effectivly what the A340/B777 battle has become. Umm. Arguably that was the 76
75 Areopagus : In boat building, lofting is the process of connecting the frames with smoothly curved stringers (or doing so mathematically) to fill out the 3-d sha
76 Stitch : It most likely is, which is why Boeing felt that launching a true "new-sheet" competitor to the A380 when their various 747 initiatives were met with
77 Post contains images Zone1 : Based on Airbus' current nomenclature, shouldn't this plane be called the A360???
78 Boeing767-300 : Whilst I'm no engineer this two engine concept versus four engine has always intriqued me. To put it in railroad terms back in the 70's and 80's when
79 B707Stu : For starters let me say I prefer the A320 over the 737 from a cabin and flight comfort perspective. Having said that I must completely disagree about
80 Post contains images Xkorpyoh : same here, if anybody is counting. ...but B757 wins over A321 (for me). The argument about A346-"Super-NG" vs 748 doesn't take in consideration that
81 Atmx2000 : Certainly, Airbus got this one right. The B787 is Boeing's admission of this 30 years later. Um, have you not forgotten the 767 and 777. Unless you w
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...
BA To Take On MAN-BOS? posted Fri Jul 22 2005 21:57:42 by GayrugbyMAN
Airbus Plans To Take On The 7E7! posted Tue Jul 27 2004 19:53:06 by VSFullThrottle
Tarom To Take On Some Four More NG Boeing 737-700? posted Fri Dec 12 2003 21:59:40 by Connector4you
QF To Take On SIA In Asia If SQ Gets Aus-US Rights posted Mon Aug 18 2003 08:20:45 by Marara
Air Canada To Take On 5 UAL 744's! posted Sun Nov 24 2002 23:07:40 by Slawko
Alliance To Take On The Big Boys SYD-BNE, SYD-Qld posted Sat Nov 9 2002 00:54:42 by Aussie_
United And Frontier Ready To Take On Alaska posted Fri Jan 11 2002 00:10:37 by BA
SK A340 Arrives To CPH On July 30th - Who Will... posted Wed Jul 25 2001 19:24:56 by SAS_A330-300
Qantas And Virgin Blue To Take On Accc posted Wed Jul 18 2001 07:23:19 by QantasAirways
14 Bis Ready To Take Off On The "Century Flight" posted Tue May 16 2006 04:35:27 by LipeGIG