LY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2446 posts, RR: 2 Posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 11701 times:
The A340-300 has always had a bad reputation during turbulences.Now, I would like to know how the A340-500 and 600 ride during turbulences?Do we feel less turbulence on a 600 than on a 300?
777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2402 posts, RR: 3 Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 11578 times:
I've read this on other threads but haven't flown the A340 series to make a claim for myself. How/why would this be possible?!
Halibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 11544 times:
Quoting 777fan (Reply 1): I've read this on other threads but haven't flown the A340 series to make a claim for myself. How/why would this be possible?!
I am , by no means an aviation expert . However , I have read on a commercial pilot's blog or web page , that the Boeing 777 just has firmer -stronger or stiffer wings than its counterpart . He said he prefers piloting the 777 for that reason .
LY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2446 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 11440 times:
On the contrary,I think that the 747 Classics tend to be smooth during turbulences.
In 1995, I had an AWFUL flight on an AF A340-300, and now, I always try to avoid the A343.However, I would like to try the A346 (I would like to fly LH A346) on condition that it rides better than the A343 during turbulences
ReverseThrust From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 113 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 11375 times:
I've had some very bumpy rides in turbulence on both a Swissair A330 and a Qatar A330 - but nothing really notable when I've flown the 747 (Classic) and nothing on a Sri Lankan Airlines A340-300
The A300-600 can be quite bad in turbulence as can most airbus aircraft. But even recently, sitting in row 1 of a BMI A320 from LPA-EMA, we had some pretty rough turbulence for about 45 minutes, we couldn't go any higher to avoid it though due to heavy traffic flow on the route.
On the other hand, a ride on the 757-300 was very smooth in a short patch of turbulence we had on a flight from STR-SSH.
Alphonze From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2005, 49 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 11305 times:
All these differing opinions show one thing, I think, and that is that unless you ride two different planes through the same patch of turbulence, it's really hard to be objective in deciding whether any one make/model is worse or better than any other.
The worst turbulence I've experienced was in a VS A343 from HKG to LHR, but I have no idea what that same turbulence would have felt like in a 346, or a 744, or an MD-11. It may have been just as bad. I've also had horribly bumpy flights in 773s, A320s and 757s. Having said that, some of the smoothest flights I've taken have also been in A343s.
It seems odd to say that a rough turbulence experience in an A343 was because of the aeroplane, on the basis that other flights in 777s were smoother. Surely the simplest explanation would be that the turbulence wasn't so severe on the smoother flight?!
Barbro From Finland, joined Jun 2005, 60 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 11227 times:
Quoting Alphonze (Reply 7): It seems odd to say that a rough turbulence experience in an A343 was because of the aeroplane, on the basis that other flights in 777s were smoother. Surely the simplest explanation would be that the turbulence wasn't so severe on the smoother flight?!
I agree. Its like judging a car suspension by driving one car on asphalt and another on gravel. How do you compare??!?
Also, the stiffness of the wing is an odd thing. Wouldn't you think that a "more flexible" wing will dampen the smaller vibrations.
Off course, speed has got something to do with these things also. And where you sit on the plane, for example B747 is known to make very low-frequency oscillations during cruise, that can only be felt at the back.
Cloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2425 posts, RR: 9 Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 11121 times:
What is the point of this thread?
There were not/are not/will not be 2 identical instances of turbulence for anyone to make any meaningful comparisons. How do you know if this bumpiness is due to a bigger turbulence in the air or the aircraft reacting differently? There is no way you can measure the magnitude of turbulence up in the air.
MBJ2000 From Germany, joined Dec 2005, 426 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 10978 times:
I've flown twice on a A346 to South Africa, and was seated both times in the back of the plane and still slept like a baby. On the other hand I flew a couple of times over the Atlantic in AF's 773 and it felt much more uncomfortable, once in the back it was not possible to sleep as the aircraft was shaking extremely hard horizontally.
So from my humble experience, the T7 feels much worse in flight than the A346...
Like most of life's problems, this one can be solved with bending -- Bender Unit 22
FLALEFTY From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 390 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 10886 times:
A big, clean wing will produce the smoothest rides. The A330, 767 and 777 all have them and are the most comfortable rides IMHO.
That being said, a plane has yet to be invented that can completely overcome the effects of rough air.
GVWOW From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 168 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 10858 times:
The most turbulent flight I've been on was a BA 747-300, but I've always found McDonnell Douglas aircrafts more turbulent than Airbus.
TUSflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 27 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 10811 times:
Isn't this topic completely subjective? Everyone has different tolerances to turbulence. While I may think a flight is smooth, the person sitting next to me is gripping the seat for dear life....
I fly for business at least twice a week and firmly believe that you become desensitized to any issues in flight versus someone that flys once or twice a year.
FlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15 Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 10796 times:
Quoting GVWOW (Reply 13): The most turbulent flight I've been on was a BA 747-300, but I've always found McDonnell Douglas aircrafts more turbulent than Airbus.
I've flown a lot of flights on 737s, 757s, DC-9's/MD-80s, and A320's from the midwest to the west coast. There can pretty much consistently be expected to be turbulance over the Rockies, and what I've found is this:
The A319/A320 is probably the most comfortable of the 4 to fly on in smooth air, since it is quiet, and serene to fly in. Crossing the rockies though, it seems to get tossed around more. The MD-80s likewise are pretty easily tossed about. In my opinion, the 737-800s i've flown on are the best through the bad weather. The 757s are decent, but not great in chop, and in my opinion, can be fairly loud.
In terms of widebodies, I've always had smooth flights in the 763ER's across the pond, despite their modest size. I have to say the 744 has a definite feeling of isolation when you're flying in it. Even when it's bad, it's not as harsh feeling.
But that's just my seat of the pants feeling. My flight in an A333 was smooth as well, so I have no bad opinions there.
I would assume an A343 and A346, sharing much of the same wing design, would be similar, though it would go to reason an A346's additional weight would serve to dampen lighter chop.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
Comet4b From Canada, joined Jun 2006, 61 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 10788 times:
I have a question not totally related to turbulence.On a recent flight to z from MEXon a MExicana a319 I suddenly became aware of a very gentle oscillation of the plane along the longitudinal axis.I only noticed it because I was looking out at the horizon.I have flown quite a bit over the years and can honestly say I have never seen this before.Can someone please explain this to me .
Thanks
Captaink From Mexico, joined May 2001, 5093 posts, RR: 13 Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 10686 times:
Quoting TUSflyer (Reply 14): Isn't this topic completely subjective? Everyone has different tolerances to turbulence. While I may think a flight is smooth, the person sitting next to me is gripping the seat for dear life....
I fly for business at least twice a week and firmly believe that you become desensitized to any issues in flight versus someone that flys once or twice a year.
I was about to say this. Added to fact that the same turbulent air wouldn't be present on all flights. The 777 may give a smoother ride that the 346 but it just happened that on this day the 777 rider went through some extremly turbulent air, but his return flight on the 346 the turbulent air wasn't that bad. We can't truly deduce tha the 346 is the better flying plane.
Tancrede From Finland, joined May 2006, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 10652 times:
Quoting Comet4b (Reply 16): I have a question not totally related to turbulence.On a recent flight to z from MEXon a MExicana a319 I suddenly became aware of a very gentle oscillation of the plane along the longitudinal axis.I only noticed it because I was looking out at the horizon.I have flown quite a bit over the years and can honestly say I have never seen this before.Can someone please explain this to me .
Thanks
That's right, I experienced the same with a Finnair A320. It was not very fun, I think, worse than turbulences. But no idea about what it is.
Hb88 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 809 posts, RR: 32 Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 10630 times:
This is an extremely subjective topic, but for what it's worth, I've always noticed on 747 classics a slight 'wagging' side-to-side when seated in the rear section (where I travel the most) in anything from light turbulence and up. I've noticed this on 747s many times between several aircraft, different carriers and lots of flights. Not much to do on long haul sometimes I guess...
Generally, I find Airbus a/c to ride slightly smoother (although sometimes it will depend where I'm sitting) than in a Boeing. I believe this is due to the Boeing airfoil sections and wings being more suited to higher mach numbers and having a generally 'stiffer' wing construction. Having said that, it wouldn't deter me from travelling in any particular aircraft, apart from the triple 7. The 777 seems to have a horrible ride in turbulence - but I've only flown in one maybe a dozen times on long haul and it was hard to pin down - I just find it an very unpleasant aircraft for comfort in whatever configuration.
I've flown in A340s through the tropics many times and actually like the way they handle the rougher air at altitude, it's sort of a gentler sensation and usually sends me to sleep.
FlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15 Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 10583 times:
I can tell you without a doubt what the worst aircraft is in turbelance. The Saab 340......
The general concenus i believe is that the 777 rides well in turbulence, but everyone has their own opinions on that. The bulk of my turbelance experience being on narrowbodies, I have to say the A320 is bad in hard chop, whereas the 737NG's tend not to feel so jarring. I've always thought that while the 757s never felt like they got tossed around as violently, they did seem to be very easily bumped. 757s over the rockies are bumpy, whereas A320s can be very calm, and then hit an ugly patch and be pretty scary.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
Truant From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 25 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 10523 times:
Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 20): I can tell you without a doubt what the worst aircraft is in turbelance. The Saab 340
And in my opinion, closely followed by the ERJ-145. I never get ill on planes, but came close in November 2000 on a COEX ERJ-145 (IAH-HRL) flying through the usual Texas late fall soup.
Also had a wicked run in similar weather in a TWA 717 (STL-AUS) in March 2001.
As to whether this is a subjective thread (asphalt versus gravel), of course it is.
However, I also believe this thread is not pointless.
There are categories of turbulence reporting based upon observed effects (extreme, etc.), much like the Beaufort Scale for wind. Sure, our physical conditions (i.e. inner ear) and tolerances may play into our reports, but given enough data from many other observers in same conditions and aircraft, we can identify trends and tendencies.
Geo772 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2004, 497 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 10293 times:
Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 15): I would assume an A343 and A346, sharing much of the same wing design, would be similar, though it would go to reason an A346's additional weight would serve to dampen lighter chop.
I suspect that the A346 might actually be slightly worse due to the greater airframe flexing, being at one end or the other could be quite uncomfotable.
On another point I can't really see how anyone short of professional pilots can comment on one aircrafts ability to handle turbulence over another. They are all pretty good these days.
Flown on A300B4/600,A319/20/21,A332/3,A343,B727,B732/3/4/7/8,B741/2/4,B752,B762/3,B772/3,DC10,L1011-200,VC10,MD80,1-11
Okees From Canada, joined Sep 2005, 424 posts, RR: 6 Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9923 times:
I think that the best way to judge which is smoother during turbulence is to ask pilots who have flown both. I don think you will find that many! And to top that, the pilot must have flown each aircraft in similar turbulent conditions. I say fat chance.. but possible. In all cases, ive flown the 330, 340, 777, and 747 many times over the atlantic, and i havnt noticed much difference, simply because 95% of my flights did not have any heavy turbulent parts. So i dont think we are in the position of deciding. Just my opinion.
okees
ViasaMSY From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 90 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9811 times:
As a tip getting your back off the seat's back support really helps to reduce turbulence discomfort. Read this here on a.net and it really works. Well for me at least.
Rebuild New Orleans!!!
25 Cobra27: Really. try this site http://www.askcaptainlim.com/
26 AA61Hvy: Did you mean 200 or 400? BA never had the 300...
27 Gregarious119: Ya know, I've noticed that too, especially on approach it seemed. During our CVG-ORD-CVG trip, both times we were decending it felt like that thing w
28 777fan: Like many of you, I've read Captain Lim's page... ...and believe that the feeling of the ride is subjective. I won't, however, discount claims that o
29 UAL747: I think it depends. I personally think that the 747-400 and most likely the A380 will have the smoothest rides in the skies during turbulence. I say t
30 AutoThrust: True, altough i love the 747 Classic's, they behave very bad in turbulences. I had my smoothest ride in my life on a Swissair A332 ZRH-JFK. That was
31 GEnxPower: I have not read that page, or Capt Lim's page with this information, but this is contrary to what I understand. Stiffer wings cause the fuselage to m
32 GEnxPower: There are a few "modes" of turbulences. A common one is the see-saw motion. It would be felt most at the back and front of the plane. The theoretical
33 JAAlbert: I like a bit of turbulence! The wildest ride was the approach on America West's 747 into HNL several years back. We arrived in the the midst of a stor
34 Ncelhr: Over thousands of flight segments flown in all categories of aircraft, I generally have found that smaller aircraft get tossed around more than larger
35 GVWOW: This is sort of a side question, but when you say turbulence, does that always refer to the plane going through air pockets and shaking up and down/si
36 BuyantUkhaa: " target=_blank>http://www.askcaptainlim.com/ At the URL you provided there was nothing relevant, I suppose you more specifically mean this quote: "Yo
37 Adria: so were we on a LH B744 landing in Newark but to say that the 744 is worse in a turbulence than an A340 is to subjective.
38 BlueShamu330s: Well, this is news to me, and probably Airbus too. Personally, the main problem with a widebody airbus is getting the speed back if you encounter tur
39 ThrottleHold: When it starts to stall? Are you sure you don't mean something else?
40 LPLAspotter: Man I second that. Flown lots of them through turbulence and they take the cake with the 767 LPLAspotter
41 Starlionblue: The 777 needs stiffer wings since the 4 engines of the 340 enable the wing to be weaker. So you're basing your boycott of an aircraft type entirely o
42 BlueShamu330s: Please tell me which carrier tries to operate like this, and I'll eat my hat. Can't happen.....simple. Shamu
43 UAL747: In my theory, which could most likely be incorrect, eventually the wing HAS to stall and quit producing lift. This occurs on touchdown or rather, jus
44 BlueShamu330s: UAL747 I've sent you an IM on this matter. Regards Shamu
45 Aaron747: This thread and topic are absolute junk.
46 YULWinterSkies: I've never flown it in turbulence, but it is usually so smooth that you almost don't notice that you're taking off and landing... I don't think you s
47 OzGlobal: What on earth is this poppycock? How do you know you're in "heavy chop", if it "feels smooth"? How do you know, if it "feels rough", that it's because
48 Starlionblue: You are, indeed, incorrect (but don't feel bad ). Your scenario would mean the aircraft cannot descend from any altitude without stalling. For the ai
49 GVWOW: Aha, it was me that posted incorrect information in the first place. I asked a pilot about this, but I'm starting to think he was full of it. He said
50 AutoThrust: Yeah, Captain Lim is a great Source he never flown or piloted himself an Airbus from the A340 family but he knows the 777 behaves better in turbulenc
51 Starlionblue: Well, the pilot is entirely correct in that the A330 wing (and pretty much any airliner wing) is designed so that different sections stall at differe
52 Posti: I always thought you wanted the root of the wing to stall first to retain control of the ailerons at the tips. Isn't this why Cessna's and other light
54 Posti: Thanks for the confirmation Starlionblue. To add my 2 cents to the topic at hand, the worst turbulence I've ever experienced was on a LX A330 ZRH-ORD.
55 Starlionblue: Just to add to the statistically useless anectodes, one of my more memorable experiences was in a BA 757 circling over LHR in a stormcloud for 20 min
57 Starlionblue: To get a really accurate answer, you should post this question (not the otherone about turbulence) in tech_ops.
58 DTWAGENT: I have flown on both the B777 and the A343 and I could not feel the difference. I figure if their is turbulence you are going to feel it no matter wha
59 Starlionblue: Indeed you will. But in the hypothetical situation where different aircraft fly through exactly the same turbulence, the heavier ones will tend to be
60 Baron95: No, not completely. Next time you are on a flight flying through light chop or light turbulence, try to walk the length of the fuselage, stop and try
61 FiveMileFinal: This time last year I started flying to London for business a lot, and my first trip was on Airbus aircraft (A343 outbound, A333 inbound). I remember
63 Antskip: You should try a de Havilland Comet-4 in bad weather! - like a cork in ocean swells. Otherwise, go back before we flew above the weather - now that w
64 BuckFifty: This is from my general experience, as I fly both aircraft quite frequently (type rated for both). I can tell you that the 346 rides a lot worse than
Sponsor Message: 
From France, joined Nov 2005, 2446 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2402 posts, 
From South Africa, joined Jul 2006, 622 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 113 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2005, 49 posts, 
From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2778 posts, 
From Finland, joined Jun 2005, 60 posts, 
From Germany, joined Dec 2005, 426 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jun 2006, 61 posts, 
From Mexico, joined May 2001, 5093 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
