Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Crossair B-777?  
User currently offline717fan From Switzerland, joined Nov 2001, 2017 posts, RR: 6
Posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1281 times:

I heard that Crossair is evaluating the 343 and the 772.
I hope they go for the 772, but is there a chance for the 777? No comonality etc....
717fan

11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineElal106 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 975 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1190 times:

a 777 would be great but you know crossair will go with the airbuses

User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 32
Reply 2, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1172 times:

Swissair ruled out the B772, amongst others because of the fact, that, in case of a engine failure during take off on rwy 16 - the main rwy for starts with heavies at ZRH - , the B772 couldn't climb as required. I was told so about 2 years ago by a SR employees.

Add to that, that the B777 would cost a fortune to introduce: no commonality, no pilots so far, no infrastructure for Boeings and so on.

Last but not least, Crossair has only the A343 in the business plan, not any Boeing.

As a personal note: I hope, they go for the A340.

Gerardo



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineB747-4U3 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2002, 988 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks ago) and read 1126 times:

I think like Swissair and most other European Airlines they will opt for the A340.

User currently offlineM27 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 314 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1069 times:

Gerardo:

You say there is no way they will go for the Tripple Seven, or any Boeing for that matter. You say there is a problem with the 777's climbing ability, so I suspect that eliminates the A330 also, if your information is correct. Since you seem to know that they only have the A343 in their business plan, why the statement I HOPE THEY GO FOR THE A340? Where in does your doubt lie?






User currently offlineAirways From Switzerland, joined Mar 2001, 880 posts, RR: 12
Reply 5, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1052 times:

That info about the climbing rates with one engine "switched off" out of ZRH's RW16 is correct. I got that information from a former SR 747 pilot years ago, when the A340-600 order had been placed.

Michael
http://airways.ch



User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 6952 posts, RR: 57
Reply 6, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1042 times:

The Crossair business plan has no new long haul aircraft coming into the fleet for many years.

The long haul fleet will decrease over 2001 (pre 9-11).

The business plan makes excellent reading and is available here:

http://www.projekt-phoenix.ch/en/project/businessplan011206/businessplan011206.pdf






The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlineHamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2703 posts, RR: 58
Reply 7, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1031 times:

Gerardo,

The report you mention covered the competition that SR held at the time between the A340-600 and the 777-300X, the forerunner to today's 777-300ER. Indeed, with the -300X configuration Boeing was offering at the time, it would have had terrible take-off performance, and with an engine out, I could easily believe it wouldn't make it out of ZRH in one piece.

However, as I'm sure you know, that is old news. Boeing beefed up the -300X to make it the -300ER, slightly increasing the MTOW, but more importantly, going from the original spec 105K engines to the current 115K. They also added raked winglets, which further, although much less significantly, aid T.O. performance.

All that is rather beside the point, however, as this competion is between the A340-300 and the 777-200ER, which would have had no problems in the first place (at least, no more than the A330-200, which seems to have no problems negotiating ZRH). That being said, I can foresee no circumstances that would have Crossair choosing the 777 over the A340. As you said, there is no infrastructure at all to support the Boeing, as well as a lack of commonality. The only way they would go with the big twin would be if the price was too good to pass up. However, with a severe lack of demand for the A340, I doubt Boeing will be able to match Airbus' price, let alone beat it, especially in today's environment.

Hamlet69

P.S. - Would be nice to see a 777 in Crossair's colors though - that would be a good looking bird.



Honor the warriors, not the war.
User currently offlineAirplanetire From United States of America, joined May 2001, 1809 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 989 times:

I'm kind of split on the issue. I would think that the smart choice for Crossair would be the A340 because of commonality. I can't see them getting the 777. I don't know which one I would WANT them to get though. I really like both Boeing and Airbus, so it's not an issue for me of favoring one company over the other. The A343 is my favorite plane, so I would love to see that. I also really like the 777 and I would love to see Boeing get a sale in Europe, something that is not so common in most of Europe. Either way, I would be thrilled, so now I guess we just wait and see.

User currently offlineMr.BA From Singapore, joined Sep 2000, 3423 posts, RR: 22
Reply 9, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 969 times:

I believe SR would go for the A340, but in my personal opinion, I hope to see the B777.

alvin



Boeing747 万岁!
User currently offlineBoeing in pdx From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 945 times:

Airlines that go for the A340 over the 777 always meet a unfourtunate end. It is a bad omen to buy the A340.

User currently offlineTom_eddf From Germany, joined Apr 2000, 451 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 898 times:

>Airlines that go for the A340 over the 777 always
>meet a unfourtunate end. It is a bad omen to buy
>the A340.

Never heard such a nonsense... are you looking forward to see Lufthansa, Cathay, China, Iberia, TAP, Air Canada, Virgin and all the other A340 operators meeting an unfortunate end?

Financial success is a not a matter of flying airbus or boeings.


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...
Boeing Denies 787 Problems: Talks Of Replacing 777 posted Tue Jun 19 2007 08:01:32 by OyKIE
Delta 777 Crews At JFK posted Mon Jun 18 2007 06:03:23 by RJpieces
Is The B. 777's Width Useless? posted Sat Jun 16 2007 11:47:39 by Knightsofmalta
AA 777 Through MSY Today posted Sat Jun 16 2007 02:57:28 by 71Zulu
Could AA Have 4 Classes On 777? posted Fri Jun 15 2007 14:38:34 by Albird87
Odd 777 Colours At Boeing posted Thu Jun 14 2007 09:09:01 by CX flyboy
AC 777-300 Engines posted Tue Jun 12 2007 21:22:00 by Lorgem1
United 767/777? Cracked Windshield Lands In ND? posted Tue Jun 12 2007 05:37:40 by RJ777
Delta To Get Air India's 777? Any News? posted Sun Jun 10 2007 22:50:25 by ATLflyer
DL 777 Load Factors posted Sat Jun 9 2007 23:18:04 by DL767captain