BA777
Topic Author
Posts: 2048
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2001 11:40 pm

AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 8:13 am

Guys,

Now that AF are using the 340 on the CDG-SXM run, anyone gonna go out there and get us some pics of the 340 strutting it's stuff??

BA777
 
Dazed767
Posts: 4967
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 11:55 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 8:23 am

Maybe this summer....(depending on work, and how much $$ I have)
 
boeing 747-311
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2001 10:29 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 8:42 am

Whatd id they operate before the a340?

thanks in advance

boeing 747-311
Come fly with US
 
BWIrwy4
Posts: 877
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2001 1:41 pm

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 8:44 am

They used a 747 before that.
 
boeing 747-311
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2001 10:29 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 8:52 am

Why did the down grade to the a340? Where they not filling the 747? or what was the deal? Thanks!

boieng 747-311
Come fly with US
 
Boeing727
Posts: 814
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 1:32 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 8:59 am

An A340 out of SXM!!! The aircraft must be basicly empty (only crew) to be able to manage the 7000 runway on its way back to Paris.
Any number of pax restrictions on this flight with the slowbus???

Boeing727
 
A388
Posts: 7178
Joined: Mon May 21, 2001 3:48 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 9:37 am

Boeing727,
AOM used the A340 on the St. Maarten route in the past so I assume it is possible to operate the A340 to St. Maarten as these flights have high passenger load factors especially in the summer season. Operating the A340 on the St. Maarten route is not unusual. If fully loaded 747's and 767's can operate in and out of St. Maarten, the A340 can as well.
 
artsyman
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 9:45 am

If fully loaded 747's and 767's can operate in and out of St. Maarten, the A340 can as well.

tell me you are not implying that the A340's take off performance rivals that of those two Boeings ? The A340 while a nice plane has a rather aknowledged poor take off stats.

Jeremy
 
747-600X
Posts: 2492
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2000 3:11 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 9:57 am

It would be very cool to see an A340 in these conditions:
Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Justin Cederholm - Orlando/Tampa Aviation Photography

 
BA777
Topic Author
Posts: 2048
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2001 11:40 pm

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 6:50 pm

Yeah  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

I think it'd be hard too :-(

BA777
 
too low
Posts: 55
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 2:15 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 8:35 pm

Previously it was a B747 CDG-SXM-SDQ-CDG.
Then AF split SXM and SDQ in 2 separate flights. Still a B747 to SDQ (7/7 I think) and a A340 (5/7) to SXM. It means a better service and less delays for passengers !
 
artsyman
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 9:35 pm

What most people don't seem to realise about SXM is that when you take off, you have a huge mountain in front of you, that you either have to clear, or turn to avoid. So the A340 will have a hard time both rotating in time and also clearing the mountain.

Obviously it can perform the function as they wouldnt schedule it if it couldnt, but I would be nervous with a full load

Jer
 
hkgspotter1
Posts: 5750
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:43 pm

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 9:55 pm

CI can do great departures with their A343's !

 Insane  Wow!  Insane  Wow!  Insane  Wow!
 
F+ Rouge
Posts: 207
Joined: Tue May 16, 2000 3:49 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 06, 2002 10:48 pm

It's just ridiculous to think an A340 could not do SXM-CDG with a full payload.

Regards,

F+ Rouge
 
LY744
Posts: 5185
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 11:55 pm

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sun Apr 07, 2002 1:34 am

SXM-CDG is about 6700km. That is half the max range of an A343. The reduced amount of fuel should translate into the a/c being at about 78% of it's MTOW (in comparison, a PW/GE powered 747 can T/O from SXM with about 82% of it's MTOW in zero wind conditions) weight penalties should reduce that even further. Don't forget the CI 343 that T/O on less than 6500' of taxiway in ANC a while ago.  Smile That a/c was probably heavier than the AF 343's that are going to fly from SXM. As for the mountain, they can always T/O the other way, unless the wind is too strong.

In any case, I'm sure AF has thought of all that before they decided to fly A340's to SXM, don't you think?  Big grin

LY744.
Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
 
BWIrwy4
Posts: 877
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2001 1:41 pm

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sun Apr 07, 2002 2:35 am

Wait a minute. I think I heard somewhere (I'm not sure where) that the flight goes from St. Maarten to Paris, with a stop in Antigua. So they wouldn't need to be very heavy at all in terms of fuel when taking off.
 
airsicknessbag
Posts: 4626
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2000 2:45 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sun Apr 07, 2002 3:00 am


Jeeze, the people at AF have certainly a little more insight into the question whether it´s feasible to operate a 340 into SXM or not, dontcha think? Stop making these ridiculous comments, if it wasn´t perfectly possible and safe to do it, they wouldn´t do it, full stop.

Daniel Smile
 
trintocan
Posts: 2726
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2000 6:02 pm

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sun Apr 07, 2002 9:55 am

SXM's runway is relatively short (7000 ft) with hills at the eastern end. Together, this means a sharp bank to right after take-off, which must itself necessarily be expedited due to the short runway. While the 747s fly into SXM they cannot take-off with full pax and fuel loads so the flights have to stop elsewhere to take on full fuel loads, in the most recent case SDQ (Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic). AF dropped Antigua 2 years ago. In any case ANU is also restricted to some extent as its runway is only 8000ft long.

So, with the A340 AF can actually fly nonstop to CDG for the first time. Nonetheless the long, slow upward climb characteristic of the A340 could be challenging unless, of course, the plane took off east to west.

On another note, St. Maarten actually has 2 airports - there is a small facility (Grand Case) on the French side. That airport has been upgraded and recently reopened. This St. Martin airport is served by flights from Guadeloupe and other French islands but there are no international ops - those all go to SXM.

Trintocan.
Hop to it, fly for life!
 
AM
Posts: 598
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 1999 8:49 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Thu Apr 11, 2002 3:07 am

As many of you have said, if Air France is flying to SXM with the 340, it's obvious it can take off out of there safely.

I'm just wondering how much of a weight restriction they have. I've read in many different sources that the A340 is known for its not-so-good take off and climb performances. So a 7000ft runway in an airport with warm temperatures for a flight to France (it's not too long, but the distance is considerable).

I bet they always take off with full TO/GA thrust (instead of a Flex Takeoff), using more flaps than usual as well (Flaps 2, if not Flaps 3). That should considerably reduce rotation speed.

"... for there you have been and there you will long to return."
 
John
Posts: 1253
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 1999 10:47 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Thu Apr 11, 2002 3:36 am

Are you kidding me? That flight operates NON-STOP now SXM-CDG? Are you SURE it doesn't make a tech stop and perhaps it isn't published in the schedule? I would think that would HAVE to be the case. I'm sorry, but I just find it a little hard to believe that thing takes off on that 7,056ft runway with a full load of psgrs, cargo and fuel NON-STOP to CDG! BTW, how many times a week does that flight operate? Do you have the flight number? I'm gonna do some research on this.
 
User avatar
Crosswind
Posts: 2536
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2000 4:34 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Thu Apr 11, 2002 3:51 am

For an SXM-CDG flight, and A340 will by flying with far less than a full load of fuel for an 8 hour flight by an aircraft that has an maximum endurance of around 14 hours.

While the A340 does have a reputation for having a slow rate of climb this relates more to time taken to reach initial cruise altitude, rather than initial climb performance on departure. The A340 may often take quite a long time to reach cruising altitude, but on departure it must meet the same obstacle clearance limits as other aircraft.

In fact, in determining takeoff performance the A340 will have a distinct advantage over twin-engine types.

For a 2-engine aircraft, maximum weight out of a particular runway is invariably limited by takeoff distance required in the event of an engine failiure at V1, from which point the aircarft must accelerate to VR and climb away on only half the available engines.

On the other hand 4-engine aircraft is much less likely to be limited by this, but by the normal all-engines takeoff distance required multiplied by a safety factor of 1.15 (1.15 is the JAR figure - the FAA may use a different one, just covering myself Smile)

In summary, a 4-engined aircraft is likely to be allowed to takeoff at a weight which reflects it's performance on the day, a 2-engined aircraft will have it's max allowable takeoffweight reduced from what it could thoretically handle on all engines to allow for the much more severe effect of an engine failiure on the twin.

As for the mountainous terrain, its again likely that the 4-engined aircraft has the advantage in obstacle clearance, whatever the normal situation, an A340 on 3 engines will outclimb a 777 on 1 engine, and this again affects the conditions under which the aircraft can operate.

Let's not also forget that St Maarten is also at sea-level which will also help with performance.

I hope this little explanation has given some insight into why the A340 operations out of St Maarten aren't really that big a deal...
 
Spaceman
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2000 3:28 pm

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Thu Apr 11, 2002 5:36 am

They switched to the A340 because the 747-200 they were using cannot takeoff in a fully loaded condition and had to stop at another island as mentioned above before they continue to Paris. With the A340 it can take off with a full load and does not need to stop on another island, and actually carrying more passenger than the 747 can. It makes alot of improvement for AF to switch to the A340.
 
njintern
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2001 6:14 am

Flight # And Routing

Thu Apr 11, 2002 6:31 am

Here's the AF CDG-SXM schedule. Aircraft arrives SXM at 1330 and departs at 1600.


11JULSXMCDG‡AF«
01JUL MON SXM/AST CDG/‡6
AF3661 SXMCDG 400P 615A‡1 343 MB 0 XTQ

01JUL MON CDG/Z‡2 SXM/AST-6
AF3668 CDGSXM 1050A 130P 343 MS 0 XTQ
 
dan330
Posts: 433
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2001 12:52 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Thu Apr 11, 2002 7:24 am

Heres the return flight from the oag website:

Flight AF 3661 - Air France Aircraft 343
Depart St Maarten, St Maarten Dep. Time 04:00pm Jul 01
Arrive Paris, Paris Charles de Gaulle Apt Arr. Time 06:15am Jul 02
Travel Time 8 hours 15 mins Total Stops None

Looks like it is definately non-stop!
 
John
Posts: 1253
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 1999 10:47 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Thu Apr 11, 2002 7:32 am

AMAZING, that's all I can say. When they switch to the shorter runway here at PBI, which by the way, is 6930ft, a fully loaded 737-300 to PHL, for instance, might incur a weight restriction, but yet I've seen Delta's 767-300s take off on it, no problem. So I guess a loaded AF A340 could probably operate NON-STOP PBI-CDG off runway 13/31, if it had to. Case and point, I'd be willing to bet that AF WILL take weight penalties, more times than not, operating that flight out of SXM. That's probably a given.
 
LY744
Posts: 5185
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 11:55 pm

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Thu Apr 11, 2002 7:46 am

"full load of psgrs, cargo and fuel NON-STOP to CDG!"

Well, like I said before, they will only need roughly half of the max fuel capacity because SXM-CDG is not very long for a 343 (fuel seems to account for a higher percentage of the MTOW on the A340 than other similar a/c). I doubt there is much cargo (except pax bags, of course) originating in the SXM area, it is a holiday island.

LY744.
Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
 
transswede
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 9:30 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Thu Apr 11, 2002 11:18 am

The performance of the A340 is repeatedly underrated by the majority of "experts" on this forum. This thread just further illustrates that.

Need I remind anyone of the incident where an A340 took off on a taxiway in Anchorage recently?
 
sxmarbury33
Posts: 405
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2000 5:41 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Thu Apr 11, 2002 11:40 am

Speaking of the ANC a340. Do you think that the crew might have overboosted the engiens. I only think this because looking at the transcript it seems they only found out after V1.
 
LY744
Posts: 5185
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 11:55 pm

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Thu Apr 11, 2002 8:23 pm

Where can one find the transcripts for the ANC CI A340?

LY744.
Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
 
lparky
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2001 1:42 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Fri Apr 12, 2002 12:10 am

I am going in September and I will take pictures and video of the damn thing taking off so you doubters can witness the event you say is impossible. I have to agree with Airsicknessbag, I would also think the AF folks know what their aircraft can do performance wise!
 
chepos
Posts: 5938
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 9:40 am

RE: AF A340 @ SXM

Sat Apr 20, 2002 10:22 am

Here is a pic of the A340 at SXM

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Del Laughery


Chepos
Fly the Flag!!!!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 727tiger, avi, BobPatterson, calpsafltskeds, Cubsrule, dabpit, dk44, dmstorm22, DTWPurserBoy, exunited, FAST Enterprise [Crawler], FergYVR, flyingclrs727, Google Adsense [Bot], iahcsr, iuwnaa, jco613, KarelXWB, medic610, Miguel1982, mmo, MrBren, reality, SInGAPORE_AIR, stevend08, usflyer123, VS11 and 401 guests