Konstantinos
Topic Author
Posts: 364
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2001 5:29 am

Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Mon Dec 31, 2001 11:54 pm

I would like to know how many of you here would choose a 777 and A340 to fly from LAX to SYD.
Please be honest about this.

Boeing 777-300

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Baldur Sveinsson



OR

Airbus 340-600

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Alfons Züllig



I would go on the A340 because I feel safer on it with 4 engines than the B777 with only 2. Why ? Say one engine fails, then only one more to go. So, both engines could fail, yes? No?
It's not an Airbus thing. If it was between the 777 and 747 I would again go on the 747.
 
ryanb741
Posts: 5058
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 6:36 pm

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Mon Dec 31, 2001 11:57 pm

I've never been on an A340, so would go with the Airbus for that reason.

In these days of ETOPS I wouldn't worry about the 2 engine factor. I have been on a 777 (300 and 200) and thought it was a nice plane to fly on.

Surely it depends on the airline. What are your options in this respect?
I used to think the brain is the most fascinating part of my body. But, hey, who is telling me that?
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Mon Dec 31, 2001 11:59 pm

Argh, not again!! The chances of two engines failing because of unrelated events is MATHEMATICALLY INSIGNIFICANT!! If they fail because of a related event (say fuel starvation) then all four engines on a four-engined plane would fail too!!

Infact, you may be safer on a ETOPS twin, thanks to ETOPS certification. ETOPS aircraft have more back ups and redundancies than non-ETOPS a/c (of which the A340 is one). Again, this isn't an A vs. B thing, just facts.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
UAL747
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 12:00 am

Just because it has 4 engines, doesn't mean it's safer. Anyone who says this has little knowledge of twin engine operations and their stringent safety measures. The 777 has one of the best safety ratings in the world. I would have no doubts in flying the 777 over water, and to say that I feel safer with 4 engines would be a little naive of me, considering all that I have learned from this site on aviation. In fact, you could almost say it is safer because you will be closer to an airport to divert to in a 777 due to ETOPS, whereas on a 747/A340, you could be much further away.

Be ready to see an A vs. B war.

UAL747
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
gerardo
Posts: 3372
Joined: Sun May 21, 2000 6:22 pm

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 12:39 am

I'd feel much safer on an A340-600. And as it seems to be quieter also, the ride might be more comfortable.

Gerardo
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
 
UAL747
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 12:46 am

Gerardo, so you mean to tell us that you have been on the A340-600? How do you know that it's quieter than the 777? I suggest you wait for a while before you start posting how good the ride is on the A346. And again, 4 engines is not safer than 2. To believe that is rediculous.

UAL747
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
KROC
Posts: 18919
Joined: Mon May 08, 2000 11:19 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 12:47 am

Gerardo. How can you say the A340-600 "seems to be quieter". Damn, you have already flown on one?
 
Novair_332
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 4:05 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 12:49 am

I would go with the a340-600 because it´s so looong =)
 
UAL747
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 12:50 am

Yeah, but the 777-300 is LOOONG and THIIIICK, besides, I hear its more about girth than length.
 Smile/happy/getting dizzy
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
Novair_332
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 4:05 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 12:53 am

Yeah it´s long to, so here´s what I would do: I would go with the a340-600 to SYD and the 777-300 back to LAX =)
 
UAL747
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 1:00 am

Hmm.....guess you didn't get it.......
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
Novair_332
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 4:05 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 1:01 am

What? You know I´m only 14... Yu can´t ask for to much..
 
racko
Posts: 4548
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 12:06 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 1:04 am

if a 777-300 is as noisy as a -200, I'd go with the A340-600 if it's as quite as a -300 .

2 "if's", because i've never been on the 773 neither on the A346  Smile But the A346 looks cooler
 
ejaymd11
Posts: 180
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 1:05 am

More engines might not be safer but it makes pax feel more comfortable knowing that the have extra engines so to speak. I personally would fly either. Two both great planes, but I perfer the 7 series cockpit computer lay-out better.

My Opinion
Ejay MD-11
 
cv640
Posts: 843
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2000 8:10 pm

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 1:21 am

Considering I have flown single engine aircraft over great distances of water, I'd have no problem with getting on a twin over a quad. Actually I think there is no difference in safety, any time a twin has lost all of its engines a quad would have too, fuel problems, so I don't think that argument holds up.
 
hkgspotter1
Posts: 5750
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:43 pm

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 1:23 am

I do have a friend that flew for more then 8 Hours in a A340-600. She does work for Airbus !!
 
Guest

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 2:37 am

I would feel comfortable in both aircraft as long as the engines whether GE, PW, or RR are reliable to get me to my destination safely.
 
Tbird
Posts: 801
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 3:09 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 2:53 am

Greetings:

I'm sure both are very safe and very comfortable to fly on. Having flown on neither both would be a treat. Although anything with "777" attached to it generally means a winner. Get it slot machines "777"  Laugh out loud

Happy New Year
Tom
 
gerardo
Posts: 3372
Joined: Sun May 21, 2000 6:22 pm

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 3:02 am

UAL747, I feel safer in a quad. ETOPS might be okay, but sometimes I trust my feelings. If one engine goes down, the aircraft will have a terrible time. Major incidents, which come into my mind, involving inflight engine shutdowns are all twins, as for example the Gimli Glider, or Air Transat A332.

Simple stats: while the chance, that two engines go down, are smaller on an ETOPS-aircraft, due to better maintenance, and so on, the result is way more dangerous on a twin.

As for the quieter aircraft, I based that on the fact, that the A343 is quieter, than the B777. So, PERHAPS (you're right, this can't be judged now) the A346 has the chance to be also quieter, than the B773.

That's it

Gerardo
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
 
Blueskies
Posts: 58
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2001 11:55 pm

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 3:08 am

If I could make the selection totally on my own (but I can't, my company selects the airline by comparing the prices), I would choose the airline which offers the most seat pitch in the economy and good service. So, the choice would be between airlines and not between airliners in my case.

In the hypothetical case where the seat pitch etc. would be equal, I would choose the A346 because of the more convenient seating (2-4-2) in the ecomony class.

Both Boeing and Airbus produce very safe planes, so no need to discuss about that.

Greetings,
Blueskies
 
Guest

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 3:26 am

I have never flown on the Boeing 777-300/300ER nor the Airbus A340-600. But based upon the 773's ETOPS certification and its stringent regulations I would fly on the 777-300 rather than the A340-600.
 
GunFighter 6
Posts: 401
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2001 6:05 pm

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 3:44 am

Its so funny that all the american's go for the triple seven ( almost all ).
why is that, because its an american plane ? American pride ?

 
LuckySevens
Posts: 186
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 6:51 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 3:46 am

Gerardo,

How will a twin have a "terrible" time if one engine goes out? They are certified to fly on one engine. The Air Canada (Gimli) and Transat episodes have to deal with fuel. If you don't have fuel, you could be on an eight engine aircraft and you're still the world's biggest glider.

Also, all of the hull-losses attributed to jet engine seperation are on 4 engine jets.
 
aamd11
Posts: 863
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2001 11:54 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 4:43 am

I love the triple 7, but i havent been on a 340.... i have been on a 330 and i loved that too...

Given the coice though the 7 does have a lot more bin space... it was a bit awkward getting my bags in the Airbus...
But im not really that bothered, they are both amazing aircraft and i dont mind flying either....
 
Guest

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 4:48 am

A four engine aircraft like the 747 or A340 can stay in the air longer if it loses an engine vs. a two engine aircraft like the A300/A310/A330 or 757/767/777 where in the event of an engine failure they must head for the nearest airstrip.
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 4:54 am

I personnally would try to fly both as I have not been on either aircraft. Even though I am a Boeing fan, I just may like the A346 better. I have this thought because of a story a friend told me once. (just bear with me)  Smile Another person told this friend,"I love living in Florida, I would rather live here than anywhere else in the world". Then my friend asked him, "where else in this world have you lived?". He said' "nowhere".

So the point is, just because you love one thing doesn't mean you won't love something else more.

P.S. I still love Boeing. ( LOL )

P.P.S. and no, I haven't been on an Airbus yet.

Happy New Year everyone. Be safe.

I'm not a real aeronautical engineer, I just play one on Airliners.net.
 
777kicksass
Posts: 648
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2000 9:52 pm

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 4:57 am

Please don't start this 4 is better than 2 bulls**t get it into your thick skulls: it isn't.

Yes it may have been 30 years ago but not now. A 777 or any other twin can fly for up to 270 minutes (according to ETOPS270 regulations) on one engine and that will get you about 2000 miles! It is plenty! There is just about no where where an airport is more than that away from a route.
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 4:58 am

P.P.S. In regarding the 2 vs. 4 issue, I don't think that there has been an episode of an aircraft losing more than one engine without them all going out at the same time. (ie. Canada glider, and KLM incident in volcanic ash incident) So I personnally wouldn't consider 2 vs. 4 an issue at all. But we are not the ones that need the convincing. We are a minority when it come to absolute confidence in the aircraft. It's the rest of the flying public that REALLY takes the 2 vs. 4 issue into consideration.

Kindest regards.
I'm not a real aeronautical engineer, I just play one on Airliners.net.
 
Guest

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 5:04 am

Think about it, many 2, 3, or 4 engine commerical airliners flying across the Atlantic to Europe fly near areas like Nova Scotia in Canada and Greenland, in case an unlikely problem like and engine failure or something else should occur where they must land immediately.
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 5:07 am

I honestly don't care as long as it gets me from point A to point B without emptying my bank account or causing me any inconviniences. Both aircraft look hot!

And again, 4 engines is not safer than 2. To believe that is rediculous.

So what safer than a twinjet, a monojet? I'll bet gliders are the safest, huh? Big grin

Consider the layperson, someone who is unaware of ETOPS or anything avaition related, they are the ones who dominate the composition of passengers and probably believe that 4 is better than 2, are they being ridiculous or is it their common sense?
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
Arsenal@LHR
Posts: 7510
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 2:55 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 5:08 am

Doesn't really matter if its got 2 engines 4 engines or 50 engines, if it not properly maintained, i ain't flying on it.

Best wishes
Arsenal@LHR
In Arsene we trust!!
 
B20XX
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 5:23 am

Several people on this thread are saying than the B777 is noisier than the A340. Does anyone has any figures to back-up this? I'm not saying this is inaccurate, I'm just wondering where I can find some numbers about the cabin noise level of different Airbus and Boeing planes.
 
174thfwff
Posts: 2831
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:47 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 5:40 am

I just like Airbus aircraft better...

My vote gots to A340-600

-Peace In-
174thfwff
Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, Staten, Uptown, what now? Lets make it happen.
 
gerardo
Posts: 3372
Joined: Sun May 21, 2000 6:22 pm

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 6:31 am

Look, my feeling says, 4 engines are safer, than 2. For those, who are convinced, that 2 engines are safer, than 4, trust statistics, but nor your feelings.

Add to that, that the B346 looks much better - in MY opinion - than the B773.

Gerardo
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
 
UAL747
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 6:45 am

Dude, nothing can beat the 777, other than the 747-400. Just look at it!


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Alan Tsui



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Chow Kai Chi



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © PixAir



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Barry Crawford



UAL747
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
flight152
Posts: 3211
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 8:04 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 7:11 am

Saying the 777-300 would have a "terrible" time flying on one engine is completly incorrect. The 777-300 is perfectly capable of even takeing off with only one engine, so don't say this incorrect garbage that it would have a "terrible" time.
 
Flying-Tiger
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 7:39 am

Flight152, you´re talking BS. EVERY Twin has to be capable of taking off with only one engine running, it is required to recieve certification. Every been on a twin and a quad with a shut-down engine? I have and I must say that while being on the twin with the shut down engine I didn´t really feel comforatble although we were already returning to the airport. The quad however (a B747) was a bit different, Here I was thinking that we still had three engines, not one lousy one. Just one question to you: how do you feel when suddenly your captain on board your T7 tells you that one engine had to be shut-down because of a failure and your 2,000 miles away from an airport ´cause you´re above the Pacific? Do YOU really feel safe? This is something everybody has to decide him/herself... ersonally I prefer the quad.

And extending ETOPS further and further is ridiculous from my point of view. As long as nothing happens it is okay but as soon as the child has fallen everyone complains...

777236ER: it hasn´t happened so far but it COULD happen... nobody thought that something like the Space Shuttle could explode but it did, the Titanic sank although it was said to be unsinkable... Just don´t rule something out becuase you think it can´t happen.

My 0.02 Euro-Cents... Happy new year to all!

Regards
Flying-Tiger
http://fly.to/rorders
Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8,B742/4,B762/763,B772,CR2,CR7,ER4,E70,E75,F50/70,M11,L15,S20
 
fly_emirates
Posts: 970
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 11:22 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 8:01 am

hey guys...

i would definetely take the A340-600. i work as a flight attendant on the 777-300 and taking the A340-600 will be a change and a new experience for me. I also work on the A330-200 and if compared with the 777-200, it is ok both of them are almost the same, but i would say that the A330 is more flight attendant's friendly. I have been on an A340-200 for lufthansa, the Cabin was more quieter than the 777, this also goes for the A330.

Boeing 777 fans, dont take me wrong, i also love the 777 and i can say that is has more smooth landings than the A330...

Ual 747,  Big thumbs up you might not be entirely correct about what beats the 777 but i like your love to the 777
 
flight152
Posts: 3211
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 8:04 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 8:14 am

Flying-Tiger-

Somehow, you read my entire post complectly incorrect.

As I said in my other post..

777-300 is perfectly capable of even takeing off with only one engine

Be more careful before you say things like Flight152, you're talking BS.
 
Dash8King
Posts: 2657
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2001 8:45 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 8:23 am

Yeah I was gonna correct him 152 but I thought you should have the honors.
 
RJ_Delta
Posts: 1391
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2000 4:17 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 8:27 am

Hi:

I would prfer the Boeing 777-300LR, because is most confortable (but this depends of the airline) and is faster then the A340.

The A340-600 is a good plane too for those routes.

Best regards,
RJ_Delta.
 
User avatar
juanchito
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2000 2:35 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 8:38 am

I haven't flown in either of those, but I would love to fly first the 777-300.

Juanchito
Fotografos de Aviacion de Guatemala. Spotter.
https://www.facebook.com/Fot%C3%B3grafo ... 661476921/
 
Guest

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 9:58 am

I totally agree with you, UAL747.
 
Mr.BA
Posts: 3310
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2000 12:26 pm

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 11:01 am

I personally prefer the B777. I don't believe in 4 engines is safer than 2. I don't feel that too. I like the B777 for some reasons. It is the first twin jet to be able to fly as far as the B747/A340 and i think the LR can fly further, burning only about 7 tons of fuel an hour, cruise at Mach.84, faster than any twin jet and the A342/3 flying today and it has a totally round cabin (so called tube). I find these unique. I flew in the B777 a couple of times and I really love it, it's much more comfortable than any plane. Maybe the A346 would be different. I think the B777 is liked by many airlines too.. just look at the B777 sales  Smile

However, I have some question and I would love to have my doubts answered by A340 experts here. What's the cruising mach of the A346? How much fuel does it burn an hour? Is the A346's cockpit similar to those of the A330/A320/A340?

Thanks everyone

alvin
Boeing747 万岁!
 
flight152
Posts: 3211
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 8:04 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 12:58 pm

Thanks Dash8King!  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
 
Areopagus
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 12:31 pm

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 5:38 pm

Major incidents, which come into my mind, involving inflight engine shutdowns are all twins, as for example the Gimli Glider, or Air Transat A332.

I could play your game by citing the Avianca 707 that crashed on Long Island due to fuel exhaustion. Darn, too bad it didn't have a 5th engine, eh?  Big grin

Do you remember the Eastern Airlines L-1011 that lost all 3 engines over the ocean? If it had been maintained according to ETOPS standards (different engines maintained by different crews), it would have lost at most one.

Has there ever been a twinjet airliner loss due to independent-mode loss of power in both engines?
 
Dash8King
Posts: 2657
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2001 8:45 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 5:52 pm

I would rather die in a plane then any other place in the world.
 
gerardo
Posts: 3372
Joined: Sun May 21, 2000 6:22 pm

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 5:59 pm

BTW, what's going on with SQ's ETOPS 180 certification? They had some major safety issues last year.

Gerardo
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
 
Flying-Tiger
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 7:12 pm

Flight 152, you made it sound if only the B777-300 is capabale of taking off with only one engine...

Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8,B742/4,B762/763,B772,CR2,CR7,ER4,E70,E75,F50/70,M11,L15,S20
 
twr75
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2001 1:31 pm

RE: Boeing777-300 Or Airbus340-600?

Tue Jan 01, 2002 10:10 pm

The one thing that hasn't been mentioned is that on the LAX-SYD route, a twin engined aricraft would have to fly a longer distance than the quad. The quad can fly direct (great circle) where the twin has to stay at most 207 minutes from a suitable diversion airfield. On the LAX-SYD route, this means a greater distance for the twin to fly.
Like a seagull on the MCG of life...