Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Do You Like The A340's?  
User currently offlineCliperb777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 60 posts, RR: 0
Posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 3531 times:

I have flown several times across the Atlantic on AF's A340's. However, I have been disappointed as far as the aircraft goes. They shake a lot and just don't feel as sturdy and comfortable as the B767. I much rather travel on a CO or DL 767-200's and 767-400's than on an A340. It just feels like, once I get into the 767, it WILL get me home safely and comfortably. A lot of you seem to like the A340's, and I am just wondering why. I am not comparing the 777 to the A340's simply because as far as comfort goes, I think the 777 is head and shoulders above the A340's. Please note that this is NOT a question regarding the looks or the technical performance of the aircraft (ETOPS included), but just mere comfort. Also, please answer ONLY if you have flown on both, the A340's and B767.

55 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineEg777er From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 1837 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 3349 times:

Never had the experiences you describe on the A340.

In my opinion, it's comfortable, quiet and the 2-4-2 layout in economy is a very good compromise between personal convenience and passenger numbers. And in seat 1A, let me tell you it's almost silent at the cruise...but a bit sluggish on the takeoff roll...

I haven't flown on a 767 very much in the last 5 years - just a 45 minute leg NCL-LHR in March...but have always liked them.

And the A340 is perfectly safe...as are most aircraft today.



User currently offlinePaulc From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1490 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 3333 times:

4 engines vs 2 engines - enough said

Found both A340 and 767 comfortable and quiet - maybe you should try a different airline  Smile



English First, British Second, european Never!
User currently offlineAmericawest123 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 3322 times:

It looks cool!

User currently offlineZauberfloete From Austria, joined Nov 2000, 302 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 3309 times:

I had been a lot of times on 767´s and a lot of times on A340´s. And guess what - I definitely prefer the A340.
Quieter, smoother, wider....what more can you expect.


User currently offlineSuperfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 40033 posts, RR: 74
Reply 5, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 3305 times:

It is the most beautiful modern aircraft!  Big thumbs up
It also looks fantastic in Olympic Airways livery.



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Craig Murray






Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Henry Jr Godding







Bring back the Concorde
User currently offlineCyril B From France, joined Jun 2001, 396 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 3288 times:

Feelings are not facts. With four engines, the A340 is definetly safer than a B767. And never an A340 have crashed, contrary to the 767 (even if i must admit that the 767 is older than the A340)

User currently offlineFritzi From United Arab Emirates, joined Jun 2001, 2762 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 3281 times:

I like the A 340 a lot more because the cabin feels more modern. Of course it may shake sometimes because it has two more engines than the 340. I've flown with the DL 767 twice from VIE-ATL and I didn't enjoy the flight so much because the A/C felt quite aged. I also feel alot safer with four engines on a long haul flight than only two.

User currently offlineBlatantEcho From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1920 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 3276 times:

Site one fact that points out that 4 engines are safer than 2.

Site a document, report, or anything, in which 4 engines are safer than 2. Put up or shut up. I am rather tired of comments like those that are based on no facts at all.

BlatantEcho



They're not handing trophies out today
User currently offlineSebolino From France, joined May 2001, 3682 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 3271 times:

It's just common sense guy.
If you have one engine out of order upon the ocean, it's better to have 3 left than only one.


User currently offlineUdo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 3259 times:

I have flown 340s of Cathay and SIA and B767s of Delta and BA and I can tell you I definitely prefer the A340. It's cabin noise is extremely low, it still feels good in turbulence (there were quite many near the Himalaya!), it's just comfortable. Better than the B767...and regarding your "unsafe" feeling aboard the A340: how many A340s have crashed so far, and how many B767s due to doubtful reasons (e.g. suicide or rudder...?)

Are you sure you mean the A340 and not the DC-3 of SAA's classic division?  Big grin

Regards
Udo


User currently offlineSabenapilot From Belgium, joined Feb 2000, 2724 posts, RR: 46
Reply 11, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 3262 times:

As a Sabena pilot myself (not on these ladies) I have flown numerous times on Sabena's A340 and 2 times on Sobelair's B767 (a Sabena subsidiary).
Although it is difficult to compare different aircraft on different flights, I think I can have a fair shot at it because both Sabena and Sobelair operate their planes in much the same way. (performance - time - speed - fuel - etc.) Comparing different planes from different companies is not really the way to do it since a lot of the differences might be caused by how the company wants its pilots to operate their planes.

Both the B767 and the A340 are very nice aircraft but I must say that I prefer the A340.
Why?
it is a more relaxing plane to fly on.


To me riding the B767 means:
a powerfull take-off pushing you into your seat,
a lot of bumping whilst climbing,
noisy flap and gear retraction.
frequent power changes during descent profile,
spoilers that cause vibrations during descent-decelerations.
abrupt deceleration on the RWY due to reverse and brakes.

On the A340 everything seems to be going much smoother.
Take-off is less powerfull,
configuration changes are very quiet.
descent is done at real idle setting.
smoother landings.
no abrupt stopping.
etc. etc.

I know much of this has to do with the guys flying but as said before, I have compared between the 2 planes operated within the same group of companies.


User currently offlineSQ325 From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 1453 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 3257 times:

I flow 767 from FRA to CVG and from TPA tp ATL
I flow A340 from SIN to DPS from MAD to MIA and back.
I prefer the Airbus. I feel more comfortable in the A340.
I know that the performance of the A340 is not that good, but I' ve to say that the noise inside the plane is tuely soft. softer then in any other plane I' ve flown.
that makes the A340 always a good choice for long haul flights during nights.


User currently offlineLewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3672 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 3249 times:

It looks so great especially wearing Olympic Airways colors! It has style.

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Craig Murray



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Craig Murray



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Felix Sieder



User currently offlineVoodoo From Niue, joined Mar 2001, 2098 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week ago) and read 3240 times:

I find the 777 noisy and every flight I have been on one someone has been sick....(search/see various news reports relating to 777 syndrome...especially BA).


` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 31
Reply 15, posted (13 years 4 months 1 week ago) and read 3233 times:

I definitely prefer the A340. But on the contrary to some here, I definitely count the Olympic livery as on the worst ever seen on an A340, sorry.

What about Air Tahiti Nui

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Konstantin von Wedelstaedt



or Cathay Pacific

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © PixAir



and others

Gerardo




dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineNa From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10805 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3209 times:

Strange post. My experience is different. I find the A340 extremely stable and the quietest aircraft I´ve ever been on, in fact ahead of the 777. That´s the complete opposite of what you´ve been posting and I absolutely cannot understand how you came to your conclusion. The 777 "head and shoulders" ahead of the A340? Untrue and partial. Are you one of these 777 maniacs on this forum?

User currently offlinePeter. From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3194 times:

I find the A340 the most comfortable plane to fly with. Compared to other Widebodies I have flown ( DC10,MD11,A330, B744 and L1011 ) it seems to have the most quiet cabin.
Also I like it´s seating configuration alot.
I am looking forward to the A346 and I hope that the new interior design will offer a bit more space at the sidewalls which are currently just ok but not as good as on the other widebodies.


User currently offlineNicolaki From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3188 times:

Right on Gerardo! Air Tahiti Nui livery is beautiful, while Olympic is less of an eye opener, anyways it's all a matter of taste.

I flew both on both the 767 and the A340. The 767 seems more powerful, but is also more noisy (especially gear retraction) while the A340 is less powerful but seems smoother.

As far as the number of engines goes it looks pretty simple to me.
For the 767 2 - 1 = 1 and 1 - 1 = 0
For the A340 4 - 1 = 3 and 3 - 1 = 2 and I could go on like this...
Keyword: redundancy

Regards,
Nicolas


User currently offlineLON-CHI From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3179 times:

On the flip side of the number of engines debate, a four-engine craft has more of a chance of experiencing engine problems (potentially catastrophic, no less)

Just playing devils advocate.


User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3180 times:

Can't wait to see a new long range RR Trent 553 powered SIA A340-500!!!

User currently offlineM27 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 314 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3179 times:

Cliperb777;

Its okay to have the feelings you have and the likes you have! You don't expect Sabenapilot, Voodoo, Gerardo, Na and the like to ever concede anything is anybetter than any Airbus, and anyone who does is a maniac, so don't worry about it and just consider the source. I think the maniac bit is a bit of a case of the Pot calling the Kettle black!

By the way, the AN 225 has to be the safest plane flying. It just makes common sense man, cause it has two more engines than even the wonderful A340.

Regards


User currently offlineM27 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 314 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3170 times:

By the way, do you think when the A340-500-600 comes out with their powerful RR Trents, that they will be as quite as the current 200-300 series?

If not, I guess the emphasis in this forum will switch to how the great power of the A340 makes it superb instead of the super quiet cabin. I look foward to the big switch in the A340 promotion!


User currently offlineNicolaki From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3164 times:

What about the B-52?
Boy, that thing must fall out of the sky every week since it has 8 engines!

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Don Boyd



LOL!  Laugh out loud

Nicolas


User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (13 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3161 times:

I like the A340 because asthetically (sp?) it looks like everything "fits". I think it's an impressive looking aircraft. I have not had the pleasure of flying on one, but I look forward to it.

As far as the 2 vs. 4 engine debate goes, I think it's blown out of proportion. In relation to ETOPS aircraft and the A340 & 747, the chances of two or more engines on todays airliners have seperate mechanical failures on the same flight is practically impossible. There has been only one instance of a simultaneous shutdown of two engines, and it would have happened to all four engines as well. Air Canada 767 glider. When you run out of go-go juice, it doesn't matter how many engines you've got, your goin' down. Another is volcanic ash. Grant it, technology has caught up with this phenomenon, so the chance of running into it anymore are slim to none. None the less, there have been four engine aircraft that have turned into gliders.

Cliperb777, maybe you should try to fly an A340 on another airline. Don't judge the aircraft with a flight you've had on one airline.


25 Cyril B : In fact, my last topic was too brief. A four engine aircraft is safer than a twin engine one not just because its higher number of engines. A four eng
26 Post contains links and images NW52 : I only flew once on a LH A340 from DTW to FRA and it was very comfortable. But I think the B767 seating arrangement is unbeatable. Click for large ver
27 Jaysit : The A340 has to be the quietest plane I've flown on. The shaking you experienced may have been a result of local weather patterns or other climb relat
28 ContinentalFan : I think the Olympic livery is cool, in that retrojet kinda way. The four engines make it gives me that 60's/70's 707/DC-8 vibe. BTW, on a slightly unr
29 BA : I flew on the A340 for the first time just 1 month ago and I was extremely impressed. Sure, it takes a while to reach cruising altitude, but it is cer
30 Post contains images Klaus : While I like good headroom (I´m 1.97m tall) I imagine that it can become a problem for shorter people to reach the overhead compartments. It´s just
31 FlyVS007 : "To me riding the B767 means: a powerfull take-off pushing you into your seat, a lot of bumping whilst climbing, noisy flap and gear retraction. frequ
32 BA : FlyVS007, First of all, how can you compare an A340 with the 767? The A340 is a MUCH MUCH MUCH heavier aircraft, and offcourse larger. Its like compar
33 Cliperb777 : Again, the only ones that can answer this question are those people that have flown BOTH, A340 and B767. And, as mentioned above, I do not care about
34 LON-CHI : I have flown on a LH & VS A340 and UA 767, 777, 747 several times. I never noticed that one was quieter than the others (I'm not doubting that the A34
35 Skystar : I've flown both the B767 and the A340, and I've flown the A340 on one of its shortest, and one of its longest routes. Personally, in terms of cabin sp
36 RayChuang : It'll be interesting to see what will the pilot and passenger reaction to the A340-500/600 series be when it becomes operational in the summer of 2002
37 Ttt : Every aircraft is the best. Everyone has their preferences as to what they like. Airbus or Boeing cant please everyone in this world. I personally lov
38 Boeing nut : Cyril B, Are you an aeronautical engineer? Why do you say that a four engined aircraft puts less stress on the wings of a two engined aircraft? With t
39 Caribb : I have flown both the 767 (Air Canada, KLM) and the A340 (Air Canada) several times over both short and long distances in both cases.. from my experie
40 Post contains images Whistler : About the Olympic A340... I think that livery makes it look like an Aeroflot IL86, that is NOT a good thing . I like Air Canada and Lufthansa's A340s.
41 Western737 : I never flew A340 so based on looking, I like -600 with big engines. It make it look real plane compare to older -200, -300 which I would prefer 707 o
42 Post contains links and images Superfly : Whistler: I think that livery makes it look like an Aeroflot IL86, that is NOT a good thing Why is that a bad thing? I think the IL-86 is great lookin
43 Post contains links and images Briboy : On this, I have flown both 767-200 and -300 along with A330 / A340 on the YYZ - YVR route many times in the last 18 months. I find that I aim for flig
44 Continental : I'd say that the Airbus A340 is far safer. It has four engines, so if an engine goes out, it can still fly perfectly. If the 777 or the 767's engine w
45 CV990A : I think it all depends on the airline- I just flew on VS's A340s and thought they were terrible- easily one of the most uncomfortable aircraft I've ev
46 Continental : It's not really that your bad experience happened because of Airbus's A340. See, the airline recieves the aircraft empty, it is then the airlines duty
47 AC_A340 : To answer somebody's question about stress on the airframe, here's th summary of why. When aan aircraft is flying, the entire weight is supported by t
48 Post contains links and images WiLdmanVzla : It's a really safe airplane... & so beautiful by the way!!!! Click for large versionPhoto © Frederic Orcival Click for large versionPhoto ©
49 Post contains images Adria : They shake a lot? Come on haven't you found a better reason for putting the A340 down. Well I have flown on a 767-300 Lauda air and the plane was real
50 Adria : And only for the record. The B767 is not even a widebody.
51 Superfly : What?!?!
52 Strickerje : I've got to agree with BlatantEcho. (If you want to reread his post, go back... waaaay up!) Back in the old days when the 747 first came out, having t
53 Post contains images Cyril B : Boeing nut, i'm not an aeronautical engineer, you don't have to worry Even if the structures of the 767 the wings are reinforced, the stress endured b
54 DeltaRNOmd-80 : Adria, I think you might have lost all credibility on that statement. The Boeing 767 is indeed a widebody. I know some 5 year olds that know that. She
55 Aussie_ : I just love the A340. For some reason I have always felt more comfortable on an A340 compared to a 777/747. That said, I also love the 767! However, A
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...
Why Do You Like To Go To The Airport And "Spot"? posted Mon Feb 7 2000 04:10:10 by ATA757
How Do You Like The New Jetstar Livery? posted Mon Dec 29 2003 02:05:14 by Q330
Wich Airline Do You Like The Best? posted Thu Aug 14 2003 02:56:13 by Ams
Why Do You Like Planes? (Essay Question) posted Mon Mar 3 2003 19:51:44 by Bigphilnyc
Do You Like The A320 posted Fri Dec 20 2002 16:18:50 by Nwa320
Do You Like The Look Of Winglets? posted Sun Jun 16 2002 13:53:33 by F.pier
Why Do People Like The MD-11 So Much? posted Mon Oct 29 2001 05:19:17 by JALBOY
Why Do You Like To Fly? posted Thu Oct 18 2001 16:05:17 by Rwy31R
Airplanes? Why Do You Like Them, Thats Stupid! posted Sun Oct 7 2001 22:40:13 by KLM672
Do You Like The Star Alliance And Which Airline? posted Wed Sep 19 2001 12:50:28 by A340-500