Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Funny Old A3XX Project (mid-'80s)  
User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1735 posts, RR: 8
Posted (8 years 10 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 6554 times:

In the topic about the rumour: Af studying A340E, Whitehatter said:

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 22):
Airbus is quite fluid in its operation, and floats all kinds of projects before they become set in stone.

That reminds me of a "project" I saw in an old Air Transport World magazine. It was in the mid-eighties, and I no longer have it ( Sad )...

The project was named A3XX, I think, and it was mentioned as one of those ideas Airbus people would come up with at the end of long meetings: a twin-aisle narrowbody jet, and there was a sketch of a plane with single seats following each other through the length of the cabin, with aisles on both sides. The argument was that nobody would ever have to choose again between aisle and window seat, and that there would be very little, if any, jamming of the aisles.

The writer of ATW concluded by saying that this project, if it ever, would come after the A320 (which was yet to fly), A330, A340 and many other numbers...

Anybody has that old drawing, somewhere? Or, how about sharing other funny plans from other manufacturers?

11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1920 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 6142 times:

Quoting Aircellist (Thread starter):
The project was named A3XX,

May I remind you that A3XX was the code name of the A380 before it became A380?

Quoting Aircellist (Thread starter):
a plane with single seats following each other through the length of the cabin, with aisles on both sides.

I do not recall that design which is very un-economical as the plane is mainly transporting aisles, not passengers. Are you sure of your recollection?
One think for sure is that Airbus pioneered the idea that no passenger would seat more than a seat away from an aisle, hence the 2+3+2 configuration.


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9230 posts, RR: 76
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 6123 times:

Quoting Breiz (Reply 1):
2+3+2

2-4-2 ?



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineBreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1920 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 6116 times:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 2):
2-4-2 ?

Of course! Thanks Zeke.


User currently offlineLawnDart From United States of America, joined May 2005, 975 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5917 times:

Quoting Aircellist (Thread starter):
and there was a sketch of a plane with single seats following each other through the length of the cabin, with aisles on both sides. The argument was that nobody would ever have to choose again between aisle and window seat, and that there would be very little, if any, jamming of the aisles.

I do recall that sketch, but I also recall it being a possible layout for the upcoming A320 - the thought being that, since the cabin cross-section of the A320 was a little wider, some airlines might choose to configure the aircraft in a 2-1-2 layout, with twin aisles to speed boarding and deplaning.

It would seem the reduction in capacity would've done more to speed the process, however.


User currently offlineRedDragon From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2004, 1135 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5799 times:

Quoting Breiz (Reply 1):
One think for sure is that Airbus pioneered the idea that no passenger would seat more than a seat away from an aisle, hence the 2+3+2 configuration.

An ironic slip? Been dreaming about Boeings again?  Smile


User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1735 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5693 times:

Breiz, I know that A3XX is the name of the A380 project. I may be wrong about the project name of that old thing.

This sketch was obviously a joke from Airbus, reproduced in the last pages of an ATW magazine, probably in 1982 to 1984; around the time when the MD80 was advertised as "Fashion in flight from Long Beach". I was in High school, then, and moved quite a few times since, somewhere having to abandon many old magazines.

Lawn dart, I think I've seen the sketch you are talking about, but it was not the same.


User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3563 times:

Quoting Aircellist (Reply 6):
This sketch was obviously a joke from Airbus

All companies consider* all possible ideas before they come to a concept and then refine it to a final product -- there are not jokes. Unless that was your opinion, next time say so! Thhere are people coming into this forum that are not even aware 787 used to go by 7E7 -- could those older concepts be jokes too?  irked 




* Just like when Airbus considers an A380 stretch doesn't meant it will happen, it could be an obvious joke to someone in the future.



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1735 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 1 day ago) and read 2864 times:

I really am sorry that I've lost the magazine, but here, Lehpron, imagine two aisles and one row of seats, but not one row across, one row lengthwise...

If that ever was serious, then, I admit I do not understand anything at aviation, nor at humour.


User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 4 hours ago) and read 2582 times:

Quoting Aircellist (Reply 8):
I really am sorry that I've lost the magazine, but here, Lehpron, imagine two aisles and one row of seats, but not one row across, one row lengthwise...

If that ever was serious, then, I admit I do not understand anything at aviation, nor at humour.

I'm sorry if it appeared I went all postal on you. Nothing really to do with aviation, just in engineering, we do not drop ideas right off the bat. They are researched and either accepted or rejected. The methods of deciding what goes and what stays are cost and benefit analysis. Things looking right or cool are last in engineering, btw, along with politics. Big grin



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1735 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2225 times:

Quoting Lehpron (Reply 9):
Things looking right or cool are last in engineering, btw, along with politics. 

If you ever drop in Montréal, I would be glad to share a coffee.


User currently offlineEridanMan From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 121 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (8 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2128 times:

(disclaimer, my engineering degree has nothing to do with airplanes Wink)

As far as I understand, there is actually _some_ merit to the idea of 2-2-2 seating in a narrowbody...

The biggest use of this type of plane that I could imagine would be for airlines who value turn-around-time above all else... two ailes for the same number of seats means a _substantial_ embark/debark savings for the aircraft... (Good for both effeciancy and passenger comfort).

There is always the efficiancy issue regarding the wider fuselage cross section, but there are engineering methods around that... why not just "squash" the fuselage a bit, make it 14" wider than it is tall- you get the same frontal area, same drag, but a more useful distribution of space within the plane... Kind of like Embraer did with their 'double-bubble' on the E190.. As a plus- the extra width would probably give the impression of extra space, adding to the passenger comfort...

I dunno, the more I think about it, the more I like the idea...

I say again - I don't know what I'm talking about... but on the surface, it doesn't seem like _that_ bad of an idea...

Proceed to tell my why I'm wrong, please Wink


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...
L-1011's @ Yuma AZ In The Mid-80s? posted Sat Jun 1 2002 06:09:52 by Clickhappy
Abandoned CX L1011 At KUL In The Mid 80s posted Sat Jan 19 2002 11:08:58 by Digitalone
Major Airlines Express Pessimism On A3XX Project. posted Mon Jun 12 2000 18:39:52 by CX747
American May Replace Hundreds Of MD-80s posted Sat Dec 9 2006 01:40:57 by KarlB737
Old Airline Ads Added To Departflights.com posted Sat Dec 9 2006 01:38:50 by N702ML
Woman Delivers Baby Mid-Flight; GDL-ORD posted Fri Dec 8 2006 15:24:08 by SLCUT2777
AC Project XM Update posted Thu Dec 7 2006 23:47:56 by Spotter
YX To Get Two More MD-80s posted Thu Dec 7 2006 22:42:45 by JBo
EK Plans To Order Up To 50 Or More Mid-size Jets posted Thu Dec 7 2006 02:14:04 by T773ER
13 New Route Maps:Mid-East/Africa/Central Asia posted Mon Dec 4 2006 01:23:51 by Jimyvr