Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is The A340 Cabin Sinking The A340 And A350!  
User currently offlineEugdog From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 518 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 21433 times:

The A340 cabin is significantly inferior to the Boeing 777. The floor is unusually high to improve cargo capacity. this makes the cabin rather cramped especially for window seated passengers. This is because the wall of the cabin curves inwards. It is like being in a small cylinder

The 777 cabin is much more spacious. As well as its it innovative cieling and the brilliantly designed overhead bins the walls are almost vertical.

These things matter on a long haul flight - I hope for Airbus sake that they can improve the sense of spaciousness on the A350. The 787 (if the Boeing pictures are to be believed) are going to ceiling leading to the top of the roof of the plane. The 787 could have a decisive edge on passenger appeal. Nornally this is not very important (the superior cabin of the a320 has not given it a decisive edge over the 737s). But for long haul flights the significantly better cabin of the 787 could be a huge selling point for Boeing. I also understand the the 787 will have a more humid atmosphere and lower cabin pressure. This could be very critcal for long haul especially for business travellers

The A330/340 seems to be a poor design choice - the fuselarge is too narrow making it useless as a frieghter. It also makes it difficult to stretched without significant strenghtening of the structure which causes a large wieght penalty- I think this is the reason why the economics of the stretched A340 cannot match that of the 777s

97 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29700 posts, RR: 84
Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 21414 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I just don't think most customers care what the inside of the plane looks like, to be honest. They care about seating, IFE, and service and in those areas, an A340 is as effective as a 777 and with some 1000 orders for the A330/A340/A50, the design is obviously not that bad.  Wink

User currently offlineHS748 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 21388 times:

How many passengers (other than a.netters) give a toss about what aircraft they fly? I certainly can't see any airline making multi-billion dollar investment decisions based on how window passengers in economy class feel.

User currently offlineEugdog From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 518 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 21311 times:

I agree that cabin size did not matter in the past. This is because cabins were very similar on Boeing and Airbus. This has all changed! The Boeing 787 having such a vastly superior cabin and the higher cabin temperature and humidiy this could really be a major selling point.

Imagine if you are business travellor facing a long haul flight - surely you would try to go on 787 then a more conventional aircraft with its low cabin pressure and very dry air. You would arrive at you business destination so much fresher and ready to do business!!!!

Cabin conditions do matter - why have airlines spend £1000s per seat on IFE it passengers did not give a toss


User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 21265 times:

Quoting HS748 (Reply 2):
How many passengers (other than a.netters) give a toss about what aircraft they fly? I certainly can't see any airline making multi-billion dollar investment decisions based on how window passengers in economy class feel.

It doesn't matter so much for the normal 8 across seating in an A340, but 9 across would be rather unpleasant because of the curvature of the fuselage.

It has been apparent for some time that the 787 cross section is a very smart design, particularly when combined with the reduced spacing between cabin wall and fuselage made possible by various characteristics of the composite barrell sections that make up the 787 fuselage.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineBA319-131 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 8430 posts, RR: 55
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 21234 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
The A330/340 seems to be a poor design choice - the fuselarge is too narrow making it useless as a frieghter

-What? The fuselage is the same width as the A300/A310 which are excellent freighters.........



111,732,3,4,5,7,8,BBJ,741,742,743,744,752,762,763,764,772,773,77W,L15,D10,30,40,AB3,AB6,A312.313,319,320,321,332,333,342
User currently offlineIRelayer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1073 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 21188 times:

It goes the other way too, let's remember. Airbus constantly touts the A32X's wider cabin width as an advantage over 737NG's. It is not an argument that is totally without merit...

-IR


User currently offlineZone1 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1034 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 21121 times:

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
especially for window seated passengers. This is because the wall of the cabin curves inwards. It is like being in a small cylinder

This is the price you have to pay for 2-3-2 versus 3-3-3 seating.



/// U N I T E D
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 21076 times:

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
The A340 cabin is significantly inferior to the Boeing 777. The floor is unusually high to improve cargo capacity

 covereyes 

It it the right size for economy class 2-4-2 (max. one passenger away from the aisle), business 2-2-2 (no middle seats) and first 1-2-1 (everyone an aisle seat).

The standard cargo containers fit in needly side by side.

Boeing first tried 7 abreast on the 767 then 9 abreast on the 777 and then developed the all new 787, 4 inch wider the A300/30/40/50..

Draw your conclusions.


User currently offlineBirdwatching From Germany, joined Sep 2003, 3769 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 21050 times:




All the things you probably hate about travelling are warm reminders that I'm home
User currently offlineTGV From France, joined Dec 2004, 874 posts, RR: 20
Reply 10, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 21045 times:

A340/330 : 2-4-2 seating,
B777: 3-3-3 seating.

For me there is no discussion: give me a A340/330 anyday. I like window seats, but "double excuse seat" are horrible.

Furthermore the larger the cabin, the more people, and the more noise ! So better to have rows of 8 than rows of 9.



Avoid 777 with 3-4-3 config in Y ! They are real sardine cans. (AF/KL for example)
User currently offlineTjr16698 From Italy, joined Feb 2004, 61 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 21012 times:

Must admit never to have felt particularly uncomfortable on A340s, and always aim for a window seat. There may be a difference compared to the 777, but to be honest I've not noticed.
Additionally, I agree with HS that the vast majority of passengers don't even know what they are flying in, so it's hardly likely to make a difference anyway. I recently asked someone, after they returned from a longhaul VIRGIN flight, what plane they flew on, and they said "not sure, had 2 engines"........

b.t.w. for someone feeling a little low on irony, i do know how many engines VS planes celebrate having..
all the best

TJR


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 21005 times:

Quoting Eugdog (Reply 3):
Imagine if you are business travellor facing a long haul flight - surely you would try to go on 787 then a more conventional aircraft with its low cabin pressure and very dry air. You would arrive at you business destination so much fresher and ready to do business!!!!

Tripe.

You base your travels on the airline, not the airplane. Your status with the carrier, its frequencies, and convenience. I doubt if the average Business traveller will switch from a BA 777 to say, for example, a Kuwait Airways 787 for the 1% higher cabin humidity, and the lofty airiness of the 787's ceiling.

As for economy passengers, I find the A340/A330s to be superior to the 777 in terms of creature comforts (all things like seat pitch especially, being equal). The 2-4-2 beats the 3-3-3 or the hideous 2-5-2 any day. I'm 6ft 2 and I sure as hell don't care if the ceiling slopes, but I find being trapped in a center 5 seat section, sheer torture.


User currently offlineBA319-131 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 8430 posts, RR: 55
Reply 13, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 20962 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Eugdog (Reply 3):
Imagine if you are business travellor facing a long haul flight - surely you would try to go on 787 then a more conventional aircraft with its low cabin pressure and very dry air. You would arrive at you business destination so much fresher and ready to do business!!!!

-Given the choice, most Business Travellers will travel the with the airline they prefer, not the airplane.

Quoting TGV (Reply 10):
For me there is no discussion: give me a A340/330 anyday. I like window seats, but "double excuse seat" are horrible.

-Same here! And the 777 is just a noisy plane, hopefully the 787 will be better.



111,732,3,4,5,7,8,BBJ,741,742,743,744,752,762,763,764,772,773,77W,L15,D10,30,40,AB3,AB6,A312.313,319,320,321,332,333,342
User currently offlineScorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4992 posts, RR: 44
Reply 14, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 20956 times:

What exactly was the intent of this thread, cause I don't get it?

Anyway..

The 777 indeed has a wider cabin, which may be important to some. But on the other hand, the A330/340's more narrow cabin means the chance of ending up in a middle seat is quite a bit lower, which also mean a great deal to many people, so I guess they pretty much cancel each other out.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
I also understand the the 787 will have a more humid atmosphere and lower cabin pressure.

So will the A350.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
The A330/340 seems to be a poor design choice

Yeah that explain why almost 1,000 of them have been sold  Yeah sure

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
the fuselarge is too narrow making it useless as a frieghter.

LOL! Useless as a freighter??? Have you taken a look at the bucketloads of A300s and A310s flying around as freighters? Well, they have the SAME 'useless' fuselage diameter...


User currently offlineUsa1984 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 37 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 20814 times:

i think the A340 cabin is great. it is actually my favorite cabin in the sky. the newer cabin version features many clever design choices that are distinctly european.

User currently offlineCxsjr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 20737 times:

I have to say that the first time I noticed this was earlier this week.

I flew out to JFK on a KLM 777 and sat in row 11, second row in economy. Getting a wing and engine view picture was quite easy with a wide angle lens.

However, coming back, we flew on KLM's latest A330, (... AOC, only 3 weeks old) and trying to get a wing and engine view form the front row of economy was a nightmare. I then realised that the windows in the A330 (and thus the A340) are more tilted upwards than the B777.

Thanks to you EugDog ... your thread now explains the reason for this - higher floors!

I have to say I'm on the wall with this one. 'A' seems to be far superior in terms of cabin noise but 'B' has a more comfortable cabin from the point of bins, windows etc, basically anything the airline doesn't influence.

I wonder why Airbus have copied Boeing with the contoured 777 style bins? - it certainly makes a vast improvement!


User currently offlineBoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 20734 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 8):
Boeing first tried 7 abreast on the 767 then 9 abreast on the 777 and then developed the all new 787, 4 inch wider the A300/30/40/50..

I thought it's 14 inches wider.


User currently offlineWdleiser From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 961 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 20722 times:

Quoting Eugdog (Reply 3):
I agree that cabin size did not matter in the past. This is because cabins were very similar on Boeing and Airbus. This has all changed! The Boeing 787 having such a vastly superior cabin and the higher cabin temperature and humidiy this could really be a major selling point.

I think it is absolutely insane to have a warmer cabin. I get hot easily, and it is very hard to get cooler in an aircraft without pissing off some of the other passengers. I dont believe 300 people want to see me sitting in the nude. When you have a cooler cabin you are able to put on a blanket to stay comfortable. Now warmer plus more humid.... if you want heat and humid I invite you to Houston during any time of the year. You will quickly see high humidy + heat = miserable!


User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 19, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 20694 times:

Quoting Wdleiser (Reply 18):
I think it is absolutely insane to have a warmer cabin. I get hot easily, and it is very hard to get cooler in an aircraft without pissing off some of the other passengers. I dont believe 300 people want to see me sitting in the nude. When you have a cooler cabin you are able to put on a blanket to stay comfortable. Now warmer plus more humid.... if you want heat and humid I invite you to Houston during any time of the year. You will quickly see high humidy + heat = miserable!

I agree we don't want to see you nude. However, since he incorrectly said higher cabin temperature when he should have said higher cabin pressure, we hopefully won't have to endure your nakedness.  Wink



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineBA319-131 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 8430 posts, RR: 55
Reply 20, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 20693 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Wdleiser (Reply 18):
I think it is absolutely insane to have a warmer cabin. I get hot easily

- I agree, and I also get hot easily. There is nothing worse than getting hot and sticky on a plane.



111,732,3,4,5,7,8,BBJ,741,742,743,744,752,762,763,764,772,773,77W,L15,D10,30,40,AB3,AB6,A312.313,319,320,321,332,333,342
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12046 posts, RR: 47
Reply 21, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 20633 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
some 1000 orders for the A330/A340/A50

Airbus has sold nearly 2,000 planes with this fuselage cross-section, so there's no way it can be considered a failure.



Hey AA, the 1960s called. They want their planes back!
User currently offlineKilljoy From Finland, joined Dec 1999, 646 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 20593 times:

Quoting BA319-131 (Reply 20):
There is nothing worse than getting hot and sticky on a plane.

Depends on the situation, of course...

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
The A330/340 seems to be a poor design choice - the fuselarge is too narrow making it useless as a frieghter.

I thought they were "bad" at carrying freight due to MTOW-limitations, not width issues?


User currently offlineAJRfromSYR From United States of America, joined May 2005, 454 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 20566 times:

Quoting Wdleiser (Reply 18):
Now warmer plus more humid.... if you want heat and humid I invite you to Houston during any time of the year. You will quickly see high humidy + heat = miserable!

I think we are comparing 0% humidity to 15% or so... your thinking 100%. Stop over reacting.



-AJR-
User currently offlineFanoftristars From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1601 posts, RR: 5
Reply 24, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 20531 times:

Here are some great photos of how the airframes compare. First, this is the photo of the 764 and how the shoulder room is compared to the Airbus. The second photo shows the 777 with the A340 cross section built inside. Very interesting.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Craig Murray



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Royal S King



I've only ever flown the Airbus in Business class, and to be honest, I never noticed any lack of room, but then again, it was business class...



"FLY DELTA JETS"
25 Atmx2000 : Well they made in 4 inch wider on the outside because they could make it much wider on the inside. The 787 is a plane designed to straddle the 8 acro
26 BoomBoom : The conclusion I draw is that Boeing optimizes the fuselage to fit the mission as opposed to Airbus' "one size fits all' approach. Which appraoch is
27 NorCal : I have never been in a 330/340 cabin so I won't pass judgement, but I think the proper statement should be that the 330 fuselage is sinking the 340-60
28 Post contains images Gr8Circle : Absolutely justified they are!! Airbus, I mean....the A320 is a MUCH more comfortable aircraft.....I've only flown on the 737-700 and I found it to b
29 DfwRevolution : With all due respect, it only takes a look at the A346 structural efficency to wonder why Boeing opted for a wider 777 fuselage. More to the point, B
30 Dalecary : 9 abreast in the 787 v 8 abreast in the 330/350 was a telling factor in the QF/JQ order. It's all about revenue potential for the airline.
31 BoomBoom : For years I flew on A320s without ever realizing they are a whopping 5 inches wider inside at seat level. Thats less than one inch per seat. It's not
32 Arcano : I care!, Although I define myself as very pro-boeing, the so famous curved cieling impressed me nothing, and it didn't feel any more room than the 34
33 Trex8 : I spend far more time in 777s than A330/340s by far as I am a UA regular but I can say that I prefer the A330/340 cabin. The height thing doesn't do a
34 NW727251ADV : Once again you have come to the rescue. I agree with you a lot more often than not. And to be honest, you are the FIRST person other than me that I c
35 Abba : I have been on a few flights where cabin temprature was a problem - not becaue it was too low.... And your next questions should be: "On each wing?"
36 Post contains links BoomBoom : Exactly right. And a lot of people seem to forget, it's the airlines who purchase the planes not the passengers. It's the airlines that configure the
37 Gigneil : Hah. Tell that to every freight operator in the world. It isn't. But at what cost? Airbus makes 3 fuse widths now. For the moment, Boeing is now maki
38 BoomBoom : And Boeing is dominating the widebody market. Losing these sales campaigns is a BIG cost for Airbus. I agree, Airbus planes are cheaper. I'm not so s
39 Sllevin : One thing I will say about 2-2-2 on the A330 is that you end up with wicked narrow aisles. An inch or two doesn't sound like much, but it's very notic
40 DarthRandall : It has, but not nearly as dramatically as all that. The next generation of aircraft will indeed be more comfortable, and people will notice. However,
41 Boeing nut : I am getting more and more convinced that the A350 is becoming a 787 copycat. Announcing that they are using more composites, etc, etc. The latest thi
42 N328KF : On what planet is the A350 cheaper than the 787?* * with the knowledge we currently possess
43 Gigneil : The A350-800 is cheaper than the 787-9, and the A350-900 is certainly cheaper than the 777-200ER. A340s are significantly cheaper than 777s. N
44 Gigneil : Where did you hear that? N
45 N1120A : Actually, the reason the A330 and A340 are crap freighters because their payload/weight ratio is horrid You can have a 2-5-2 777 and 777s and A340s a
46 Gigneil : The A330-200 is going to be a FANTASTIC freighter. N
47 TexasLonghorn : Thanks for the photos, Fanoftristars. Based on the picture comparing the A340 interior to the 777, I would much rather be on a 777. This talk of a wa
48 Nethkt : Oh, gosh, I just prefer the high ceiling on B777s. It gives me good feeling and nice atmosphere when flying longhaul. I don't mind 2-4-2 or 3-3-3. For
49 Condor24 : As a fare paying passenger, fortunately I mostly fly long haul in F Class with either CX or BA, and the 747 wins hands down. The front cabin has the g
50 PlaneDane : You do actually realize that the difference DfwRevolution was talking about is the internal dimensions between the Airbus fuselage and that of the B7
51 Jakob77 : You're right on!! The 777s with the new overhead bins that closes into the wall feels a lot roomier than the A330/340s. The spaciousness inside the A
52 Col220 : Sorry, but I do prefer the smaller cabin of Airbus! In every case you have only 2 middle seats compared to the 3 middle seats of the 777 (2-5-2 or 3-3
53 Astuteman : My last trip containted a Paris-Rio leg on an AF777, followed by a (long) Santiago-Aukland leg on a LAN A340, followed by a Brisbane-Singapore leg on
54 Post contains images Johnny : @ EUGDOG What the hell are you talking about?!? A330/340 a poor design choice?!? Tell that all the airlines around the world which have ordered more t
55 Post contains images TGV : I think very few 777 use the 2-5-2 seating (never been aboard one). But I don't understand how this could give more capacity, as in both cases it is
56 A333X : I really love the 777, but for the passengers, the A340 (A330) is simply a more comfortable plane (expect the overhead bins).For me, being in a "quiet
57 Post contains images Johnny : @ TGV Hi ,that Airbus-Figure 5,28m ist the floor width,which is NOT the widest point of the A330/340 cabin! The widest point (cabin width) is aproxima
58 Eugdog : I read that BA chose the 777 because of its superior cabin. It not so much the absolute width of the cabin but the high floor which makes the walls cu
59 Post contains links Killjoy : Because Airbus has never used composites before? And not because it yields a 0,25 % drag reduction? The info was here, btw, assuming you're referring
60 Icarus75 : I flown several times for loghaul on both planes (economy seat) and I disagree with you!!! I really like both a/c for their comfort but I prefer the
61 Joni : I understood the A350 will have even higher cabin pressure than the 787?
62 AJRfromSYR : where is this information on the A350 cabin pressure.
63 Kiwiandrew : Likewise - a few years ago when LH was briefly operating a daylight A340 SIN-FRA and again earlier this year HKG-MUC overnight - the great thing with
64 Eugdog : "and if the 787 is going to have higher humidity and a lower cabin altitude I am all for it - but how many people out there in the real non-Anet world
65 AirPacific747 : I would rather fly the 340 because of these reasons: on a 777 with a 3-3-3 seating, there are 5 seats where you have to pass other people if you need
66 NorCal : The cabin humidity is going to be boosted from around 7-8% which is in current aircraft, to somewhere in the range of 15-20% (don't remember the exact
67 Leskova : If there has ever been something that's a matter of personal views, this is it. Personally, I consider the A330/340's cabin to be superior to the B77
68 ACdreamliner : many peopel say this on here, but i honestly do think they care. maybe not abot its name, but at least what it looks like. forexample when i went to
69 Post contains links and images TGV : Well you may be right, but you should tell Airbus Because here they write: Maximum cabin width 5.28 m. 17 ft. 4 in.
70 Phollingsworth : Your going to have to support the claim that 3 vs. 6 different fuselage widths are the primary reason, otherwise it smacks of "It is so, because I sa
71 Post contains links Joni : Here: http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRheft/FRHeft05/FRH0512/FR0512f.htm Inside the A350 passenger cabin, which has been slightly enlarged due to th
72 NorCal : So about 6000 feet cabin pressure altitude, thanks for the info. Any idea how they are going to keep the airplane from corroding at 20% humidity? New
73 Geo772 : From my experience of flying longhaul economy (I think my experiences in business and first aren't representative of the aircraft type) here are the a
74 Post contains links Widebodyphotog : Here are the cabin diagrams and measurements from th respective manufactures: Boeing 777 Cabin Cross-Section Airbus A340 Cabin Cross Section As far a
75 Post contains images FlyAUA : That'd be because the B777 cabin has a larger diameter than the A340 cabin. Simple Oh dear... shall I even comment? Ok here I go... if the A340 was s
76 AirbusBoeing : Talk about customer preferences.Here is my recent pleasure trip detail: LAX to Atlanta - 767 Delta. 2 engines, crampy interiors, engine noise Atlanta
77 Richard28 : Thats sums it up for me, if I fly Y class I prefer the A340 over the 747 for this reason. Indeed, last time I flew to LAX on VS I chose the A343 serv
78 Post contains links and images NW727251ADV : And only your opinion was the most intelligent part of this response. By your logic ALL of you A330/340 fanatics should hate the A320 because they ha
79 MD80Nut : I've done long range flights in economy on the A330 (TAM), A340 (AR), 767 (AA, LAN, DL) and 777 (AA). I've enjoyed the flights on all of them. I can't
80 TexasLonghorn : So, the maximum cabin width of the A340 is at about your knee. The 787 is designed such that the maximum cabin width will be at shoulder level. This
81 BoomBoom : Isn't that because it flies slower?
82 Lehpron : LOL, whoa man if this was an opinion, you already experienced your ride. Is it possible to ask about the commonalities and/or differences between eit
83 AirPacific747 : I don't think so...
84 Post contains images Leskova : Not really, don't the A330 and A340 cruise at the same speed? And regarding the noise level, I'd guess thats because 50% of the noise is produced qui
85 Post contains images TGV : It di not occur to you that the needs are different for 2/3 hour flights, and for 10/12 hour flights ? So the inconvenient of a 3-3 cabin in a 320/73
86 Post contains images Boeing Nut : Statements like this remaind me of a saying,..... I may be drunk right now but you're a jerk. At least I'll be sober in the morning. My point for thi
87 Post contains images AirPacific747 : ofcourse you are
88 Gigneil : Um, duh? No it is not. Its mostly due to engine noise, but also due to the general aerodynamics of the plane. N
89 PlaneDane : You quoted external dimensions. Um, duh?
90 2000first : I have flown on 330 with Aer lingus(2-4-2) and MyTravel(3-3-3). The major factor that i feel is letting down the airbus cabin has less to do with cabi
91 Post contains images TGV : Hello! Did I hit a weak point with your A320/A340 reasoning (you did not answer on this one)? You seem very angry... Anyway you are right: I am not a
92 Post contains links and images Atmx2000 : It's somewhere around 5.5m or 217" as far as I can determine. But even though the the A340's cabin width is 5.28m or 208 inches, the standard seat co
93 Abba : I don't think that this matters as that will mean less material used. Abba
94 Joni : Boeing itself has stated that that rule isn't always true, there are new composites but also new metals developed all the time. Look at a quote I men
95 TGV : Very interesting analysis Atmx2000. And now I am fearing that the 787 will also have a 3-3-3 config. Until now I was in favour of 787/350 against the
96 Atmx2000 : I expect that airlines from affluent countries will be more likely to configure it with 8 across for many long routes, and airlines with business fro
97 Astuteman : Gigneil is right in this instance, and for a couple of reasons. Firstly, tooling used on the Airbus widebody series can be made virtually interchange
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...
Will The New A350 Mean The A340 Is Dead? posted Mon May 8 2006 20:53:16 by BoeingBus
Is The A340 Noisy (in The Cabin)? posted Mon Mar 25 2002 06:39:06 by Hkgspotter1
QR And The A340-600 posted Mon Jan 30 2006 17:11:28 by BHXDTW
Where Is The A340 - 500 VIP Qatar? posted Tue Aug 2 2005 09:42:07 by Dennys
Etihad And The A340-500? posted Sun May 15 2005 14:46:13 by B742
Continental And The A340 posted Sun May 8 2005 20:15:25 by Gg190
A340-300 - Is It's Production Nearing The End? posted Tue Jan 25 2005 16:50:09 by Gilesdavies
Northwest Airlines And The A340 posted Tue Jun 1 2004 01:31:33 by Panam64
QF And The A340-500 posted Thu Mar 25 2004 15:41:08 by ANstar
SQ And The A340-500? posted Sat Oct 19 2002 08:18:31 by KL808