Gerardo 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.
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
M27 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:
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?
Hamlet69 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:
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.
P.S. - Would be nice to see a 777 in Crossair's colors though - that would be a good looking bird.
Airplanetire 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.