baec777
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 1999 5:01 am

Why No Airbus Trijets Built...?

Wed Jun 27, 2001 9:43 am

Can anyones tell me if Airbus will build any trijet, naming it as "Airbus 370" ...??

Rolls Royce engines can be best for that plane if Airbus plans any Tri-jet style plane .... We Don't Know Exactly Yet....

Baec777  Big thumbs up
 
D L X
Posts: 11638
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Why No Airbus Trijets Built...?

Wed Jun 27, 2001 11:55 am

Airbus will not build any tri-jets on a conventional airframe. Tri-jets are inherently uneconomical because they require very heavy, strong structure to support the third engine. Notice that all current tri-jets are being retired in the near future.
 
coboeing777
Posts: 677
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2001 10:21 am

RE: Why No Airbus Trijets Built...?

Wed Jun 27, 2001 12:04 pm

you will never see any more tri jets comes from either Boeing or Airbus. The only reason trijets were built was because in the first place was because they were heralded as being more economical than quad engined planes(namely the 747). This was before the world of ETOPS so obviously now a twin jet is more economical and can fly routes over water that it never could.
 
baec777
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 1999 5:01 am

RE: Why No Airbus Trijets Built...?

Wed Jun 27, 2001 12:06 pm

Thank you, I shouldnt have made up a topic on airbus building trijets.... way old type planes....  Sad

Baec777  Big thumbs up
 
coboeing777
Posts: 677
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2001 10:21 am

RE: Why No Airbus Trijets Built...?

Wed Jun 27, 2001 12:07 pm

no no no Baec777, dont say that. Remember, there is no such thing as a stupid question; just stupid people who ask questions  Smile
 
baec777
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 1999 5:01 am

RE: Coboeing777

Wed Jun 27, 2001 12:15 pm

are you sure about that...?

Baec777  Big thumbs up
 
D L X
Posts: 11638
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Why No Airbus Trijets Built...?

Wed Jun 27, 2001 12:35 pm

"are you sure about that...? "

Well, I always thought that there was no stupid question. Only stupid answers.  Smile

Keep on asking them!
 
baec777
Posts: 1232
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 1999 5:01 am

RE: DLX

Wed Jun 27, 2001 12:49 pm

Im not asking again.. I was just making sure if I wasnt asking stupid questions.. thats all

Baec777  Big thumbs up
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: Why No Airbus Trijets Built...?

Wed Jun 27, 2001 1:09 pm

The entire philosophy behind the Airbus movement in the 1970s was geared towards a widebody twin and the cost savings it signified during the oil crises of that time. The A300 was a huge breakthrough in that context. Similarly, the A310 was the first aircraft to gain ETOPS approval as a longhaul widebody. The only reason Airbus even has the A340 is to be able to play the ETOPS 207 card against the Boeing 777. If you look at the entire Airbus line, their only product that is below contemporary engineering standards is the A340 - their only non-twinjet product. Any Airbus attempt to develop a trijet would go counter to the bedrock principles they have built their engineering on, namely the design that makes the most sense from an economic (and now environmental) standpoint.

Additionally, with the advent of ETOPS and LROPS, the need for a trijet has now disappeared. You don't need a third engine for safety purposes and you don't need it for the thrust. So why throw in an extra variable, when the equation has already been solved for you?

"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
RAAFController
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed May 30, 2001 9:50 am

RE: B747-437B

Wed Jun 27, 2001 3:25 pm

Since there are no stupid questions, what is the 'ETOPS 207 card' ie whay did Airbus need the 4 engined A340 against the B777?

Sorry for the ignorance.

Cheers,

dave
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: Why No Airbus Trijets Built...?

Wed Jun 27, 2001 4:01 pm

RAAFController -

I think this site explains Airbus' position on the ETOPS 207 issue best.

http://www1.airbus.com/products/A330-A340_etops.asp
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
il75
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 7:35 pm

RE: B747-437B

Wed Jun 27, 2001 4:19 pm

Hi,

B747, would you mind developing your thougts about
"If you look at the entire Airbus line, their only product that is below contemporary engineering standards is the A340 - their only non-twinjet product"?
I followed you regarding Airbus original concept but: does it mean that the company is not able to build a state-of-the-art quad?
I am not a fan of the A340 at all but I never thought of that plane as less "modern" than other new aircrafts. Or is it just that the whole idea of four engined aircrafts is all fashioned?

Best regards
Erico
 
RAAFController
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed May 30, 2001 9:50 am

RE: B747-437B

Wed Jun 27, 2001 4:33 pm

Thanks for that B747-437B.

Now one more question for you....where did the 207 minutes come from? It sounds like a very arbitary number. i mean, why not 200, or 210 mins?

Also, why do you feel the A340 is not as contemporary/up to date etc?

Dave
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: Why No Airbus Trijets Built...?

Wed Jun 27, 2001 5:12 pm

II75 - The A340-200/300 is an afterthought to the A330 design. It uses the same fuselage, the same wing and the same avionics, with the only noticeable difference being 4 engines instead of 2. Ironically, the 4 CFM56 engines actually deliver LESS thrust than 2 RR Trents on the A330. The A340 is notoriously underpowered (although the A340-600 will change that) which pegs it below contemporary standards. In other words, what I am trying to say is that the A340 is not a design of its own - but rather a poor and hasty effort to modify the A330 design into a quad.

RAAFController - ETOPS 207 is 180 mins plus 15% leeway. On an atlantic crossing, ETOPS 138 (which is 120 mins plus 15%) is the applicable standard.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada