Red Panda
Topic Author
Posts: 1433
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2000 12:58 pm

Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Wed Aug 01, 2001 4:45 am

Just wanna know what you guys think about it especially for those who travel often and have been on many diff. types of acfts. I just have a feelings that airbuses have less powerful takeoff and less steep climb rate. Any experience out there?

let's share it // r panda  Wink/being sarcastic
 
kaitak
Posts: 8968
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Wed Aug 01, 2001 5:01 am

It depends on which aircraft you are talking about; twin engined widebody aircraft have very powerful t/offs, since the aircraft need to be prepared for an engine failure at V2, the most critical part of the climbout. Therefore you're unlikely to notice much of a difference between the 777 and A330; of course, a lighter A330 using a long runway will not find the same need for urgency as a heavy 777 taking off from a short runway (i.e. a DL 777 taking off from DUB n/s to ATL).

The A340, being a four engined aircraft, doesn't need to have that same reserve, in that if one engine fails, it still has 3 more. It is, by common consent, a fairly poor climber, but hell it's gorgeous, so I'll forgive it anything. (see the SAS/CAL/LAN/CX A340 pictures if you don't agree!)

Now, where you'll really notice a difference is between the 757 and A321. Heathrow is a good example. (I'm being rather tongue-in-cheek here, so don't be offended!) The RR powered BA 757s don't seem to understand that the runway is 2 miles long and they don't have to take off like a bat out of hell, but bless their little APUs, they're up in about 10-15 seconds on a good day! Then come the A321s, Aer Lingus, BMI, Swissair etc; sees 12,000' runway - why sweat it - nice derate and off we go! Still, I know which one I'd rather jumpseat in!

That, I hope, explains things to some extent!
 
aa61hvy
Posts: 13021
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 1999 9:21 am

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Wed Aug 01, 2001 6:05 am

haha Kai tak i like the "bat out of hell" regaurding the 757 taking off, but the biggest thing is because the engines are VERY powerfull.. its way over powered if you ask me... correct me if im wrong, but doesnt the 757 RR have the same engines as the 767 RR?
Go big or go home
 
Marrty
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 2:44 am

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Wed Aug 01, 2001 9:00 am

An Airbus aircraft may seem less powerful to a passenger on takeoff and climb if the pilot has selected the "FLEX" thrust setting. The Flex setting applies reduced thrust during the takeoff which reduces fuel consumption. A Flex thrust departure takes into consideration the runway length, aircraft weight, etc. Flex thrust also reduces wear on the engines.

You will feel the real power if the pilot selects the higher "TOGA" thrust setting, which is less fuel efficient.
 
delta-flyer
Posts: 2631
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2001 9:47 am

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Wed Aug 01, 2001 11:37 am

Perhaps if someone has the time, it would be interesting to see a thrust vs weght ratio for various aircraft. That may explain the reason for the difference in acceleration, which gives the sensation of power.
"In God we trust, everyone else bring data"
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Wed Aug 01, 2001 11:43 am

Delta-Flyer: Perhaps if someone has the time, it would be interesting to see a thrust vs weght ratio for various aircraft.

Indeed. Volunteers, anyone?  Smile

Marrty: An Airbus aircraft may seem less powerful to a passenger on takeoff and climb if the pilot has selected the "FLEX" thrust setting.

Seems like a sensible thing to do. (Not as much fun, though. Wink/being sarcastic)
 
spectre242
Posts: 134
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2001 10:46 am

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Wed Aug 01, 2001 2:01 pm

I had always been under the impression (indeed I have read a few references to this in books) that Airbuses (particulary the A320 family) were capible of very good takeoff performance in comparison to other similar aircraft.
I was at Belfast City Airport on a tour and guy taking me around said that they could take an A321 no problem, but as for the 757 - well it could land, but take off was a different story.
 
megatop
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 9:52 pm

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Wed Aug 01, 2001 3:24 pm

I agree that the B757 has a heigh power/weight ration, but if you look at ect. A300-600R, it has the same ration. I can tell you, that the takeoff in the A300-600R is very powerfull, and the climb is very steep.

A have flown:

A300-B4, A300-600, A310-200, A310-300, A330-300, A340-300, B720B, B727-200, B737-200 -300 -400 -500 -700, B747-200 -300 -400, B757-200, B767-200 -300, B777-200, L-1011, DC-10-30 -40, DC-9, MD-80, F70, Bae146, Caravelle, and Concorde.

The is not that big different in the takeoff power on the different types (except Concorde), as it also has to do with fuelload, wind, temperature ect ect.

So, Airbuses has NOT less powerfull takeoff.


Megatop
 
IndianGuy
Posts: 3126
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2000 3:14 pm

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Wed Aug 01, 2001 3:45 pm

Airbuses are not in any way "less" powerful than other aircraft, atleast not the narrowbodies. The A32X family has the "Flex" thrust setting which allows for lower thrust settings for longer rwy's.

As far as the A340 is concerned, it was built to serve specific routes (ie. medium gauge,ultra long range routes) which it does more efficiently than any competing airliners. The Fuel Burn per Seat is the LOWEST ever, so it is among the most economical aircraft out there. I heard from sources with a local carrier that they could make operational profits even with a 55% load if they used a A340. so it must be pretty economical.

The trade off made is performance wrt takeoff and climb. I hear it takes 20 minutes to reach cruise than say the A330 or the B777, and on a long route like say DEL-ORD ns, it can take an hour more than a 744 (if a 744 could fly that far that is!). But the economics of the operation is what makes the A340 a winner.

If a carrier is looking for pure economics then the A340 wins out hands down. But it does take a beating on the climb performance.

I hear that there are some airports like DEL from where the A340 cannot operate full-load during summers even though it has 11000 feet runway!
 
northstardc4m
Posts: 2724
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Wed Aug 01, 2001 4:28 pm

let me let you in on a little secret....

those BA 757s doing the rocket impressions at LHR are no where near their MTOW

now, head on over the LGW and watch an Air Transat 757 takeoff for Canada... you see what a near MTOW takeoff of a 757 looks like... it uses ALOT of runway.

As for the A320 series.... just watch an A319 sometime... POCKET ROCKET!

The a321 is less sprightly for sure, but still, it performs very well.
The a340 is a slow climber.... but then again it doesnt need a high rate fo climb, its going a long way. (yes i know it annoys ATC but still). A330s are fairly sprightly, somewhere between a 767 and a 747.... A310s and A300s are as sprightly as DC-10s and 767s....

Oh and BAs 757s use RB.211-535E4s
BAs 767-300ERs use RB.211-524H

the -524H is a much more powerful powerplant.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
TAA_Airbus
Posts: 491
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 1999 4:34 pm

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Wed Aug 01, 2001 8:13 pm

What do u mean by a steep climb rate?
Youve taken 2 different things and put them together when infact, they dont go together.

 
airmale
Posts: 7125
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 4:48 pm

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Thu Aug 02, 2001 8:46 pm

I Dont Think So! not only did I see two spectacular high speed and steep take offs, one a Gulf Air A340 and the other an Alitalia A300 at LondonHR in 1995, that very day I got to experience the same on an Emirates A300 which me and my family were travelling on, the experience was fantastic, never had such a take off ever before Smile
.....up there with the best!
 
Boeing757/767
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 11:05 pm

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Thu Aug 02, 2001 8:54 pm

Rolls 757 and 767 engines are not the same.
Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist
 
DatamanA340
Posts: 535
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 7:02 pm

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Thu Aug 02, 2001 9:50 pm

A330 is overpowered like 777. Don't u agree?

...But I couldn't feel that accelation than 340, even though that 330 was of KE!!!
 
757man
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2001 6:59 am

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Fri Aug 03, 2001 2:49 am

Have any of you people been on a 737-500? Mine was nowhere near MTOW, but I've never been on anything as good since! It was like being strapped to a rocket, and the engines made this really distinctive noise before full throttle was applied.

RE the BA Boeing 757 fleet. Most of the oldies (G-BIK-/G-BMR-) are powered by less powerful RB211-535C's, whilst most newer models use the more powerful RB211-535E4. However, both powerplants are very good performance wise, and I've seen plenty lift off from Heathrow pushing 15-20 degree climbouts.

My local airport is Birmingham, England (BHX/EGBB). We get loads of 757's here, as well as the A320 family. I flew on a 757 from BHX to Orlando via Bangor, Maine a few years ago and she was a fully loaded E4 powered bird. Despite operating near MTOW from a 2600m runway, this aircraft still had a very powerful take off role and rotated with plenty of runway to spare. At the other end of the spectrum, I see charter configured A321's trundle off the same runway on shorter intra-European routes and by the time they have lifted off the ground, they don't have much runway to spare. Now the A319....Well that is a different story.

I'm not saying airliner A performs better than airliner B, but these are just things I've noticed, that's all.
 
Red Panda
Topic Author
Posts: 1433
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2000 12:58 pm

RE: 777 Over Powered

Fri Aug 03, 2001 2:31 pm

I do think 777 is over-powered especially those powered by GE90. Each engine is more than 100 000lbs which adds up to more than 200 000lbs for two engines. A bigger and heavier 744 are only operated by 4 X 50 000 engines, which is the almost the same as 777 in terms of thrust. Keep in mind that 777 (not 773) is lighter and a bit smaller.

As for 737-500, I do believe that it is a rocket as someone mentioned in the above. -500 has the shortest fuselage out of the 737 family.

and I expect A332 and A318 are powerful too, but I am amazed to hear that A300-600R is a powerful acft too.

my two cents, enlight me if I am wrong
r panda
 
Guest

RE: Do Airbuses Have Less Powerful Takeoff?

Fri Aug 03, 2001 2:38 pm

We don't have 767s at LH, but when I've been on them, at start to roll, I always have been literally jerked back in my seat!