Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Bwia Went With Airbus.  
User currently offlineBWIA 772 From Barbados, joined May 2002, 2200 posts, RR: 2
Posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1091 times:

Hi is there anyone in this forum that can tell me why BWIA picked the 340 over the 763er 764 and the 772, I would also like to find out if anyone knows if the airline made a loss as it relates to the refurbishment of the L1011 as I though the refurbishment of those would have made them last up to 2005.


Eagles Soar!
12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1055 times:

Since accountants make the final decision at most airlines I would say the price of the A340 vs 777. In other words, who gave the bigger discount.

User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1047 times:

I believe they could not meet the stringent maintenance requirements relating to ETOPS operations, and hence required a 4-engined aircraft.


I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineStaffan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1043 times:

I also wonder why they chose A340 when it is so underpowered, doesn't have a conventional yoke, has a flightcomputer that crashes every second flight, has bad FBW, is made of plastic, has 5 APU's, and landing gear that collapses all the time. Did I forget any?  Insane

Well, Airbus probably gave the a/c away and let the European taxpayers pay for all of it.  Yeah sure




User currently offlineBWIA 772 From Barbados, joined May 2002, 2200 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1019 times:

People in the civil forum said that the aircraft had commonality with the airlines 737 800s which have CFM 56s engines. The 340 has the same core as the 737.

Staffan so in you opinion the 340 is a bad aircraft and can anyone else agrees with this.



Eagles Soar!
User currently offlineStaffan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1022 times:

No, I like it, I was just being sarcastic and giving some of the many bullshit reasons on why the A340 is soooooooo bad, that have been posted here from people who think they know a lot about aviation.

Staffan  Smile/happy/getting dizzy



User currently offlineWilcharl From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1166 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1005 times:

This tech forum has gone so down hill in the last year.... :-(

User currently offlineBWIA 772 From Barbados, joined May 2002, 2200 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 992 times:

This is to Wilcharl.
If this tech forum has gone down in the last year why dont you do something to make it better instead of complaining and not helping people like me who are trying to gain knowledge.



Eagles Soar!
User currently offlineDonder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6660 posts, RR: 21
Reply 8, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 983 times:

ETOPS is the main reason I would have thought.Did they consider the M11 at all?

User currently offlineBWIA 772 From Barbados, joined May 2002, 2200 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 983 times:

I find that the fact the L1011 are being replaced is a waste of money. The airline said that the Tristars were refurbished infact the 3 that they owned were refurbished between 1999 and 2000. I think that the ETOPS is the main reason. Is it cheaper to maintain the quad jet 340 appose to the twin jet 764 and 772


Eagles Soar!
User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 983 times:

I find that the fact the L1011 are being replaced is a waste of money

The Tristars made very little money. They have very high fuel burn.


User currently offlineWilcharl From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1166 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 966 times:

BWIA 772,

I wasnt refering to your topic, its a great topic, and i was curious my self.. i was refering to Staffan's reply to your topic..


User currently offlineBWIA 772 From Barbados, joined May 2002, 2200 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (12 years 4 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 966 times:

To Wilcharl My bad sorry about that.

To 77236ER.
I made that statment because the airline spent money refurbishing those aircrafts. It therefore seems to me that money was wasted in the improvements of aircrafts which could have been utilised in the percurment of replacement aircrafts. Another reason for my making such a point is based on the fact that the airline only became viable in 98 after over 55 years of operating with out a profit thus they still have long term debts and the refurbishment of the L1011 seemed to be a waste of valuble cash resources.



Eagles Soar!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Why Bwia Went With Airbus.
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Not Supersonic With GE90s? posted Mon Nov 15 2004 23:00:49 by TheBigOne
Why No Aircraft With Flapping Wings? posted Thu Jan 22 2004 08:38:24 by UTA_FLYingHIGH
Taxiing With Airbus Efis Flightdecks posted Mon Jun 10 2002 03:08:10 by Soku39
Why Airbus For Start-ups? posted Mon Nov 13 2006 18:27:42 by AirWillie6475
Aircraft Taxiing With Spoilers Up? Why? posted Sat Sep 16 2006 22:29:32 by Airfly
Why The Airbus A380 Has Only Two Thrust Reverser? posted Sun Jul 2 2006 14:26:20 by 747400sp
Why Are Boeing Planes Lighter Than Airbus Planes? posted Sun Sep 18 2005 17:40:22 by A380900
Why The Up-Curve Of Windows On Airbus Widebodies? posted Mon Aug 29 2005 04:16:58 by Web
Why Does Airbus Not Have C/n Numbers? posted Sun Jan 2 2005 15:29:23 by DeltaWings
Seats With No Windows: Why? posted Wed Apr 7 2004 16:41:26 by Aguilo

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format