Lets keep this simple:
1) In the specs Airbus must have indicated which is the max. load forward permisible for
max, range flights. It is hardly believable that if let's say the aft economy section is
half empty, the premier class cannot be fully occupied only to maintain the CG in its range
2) It is also hardly believable that airlines have not consulted with Airbus the distribution
of weight in 1st/B class, as the momentum or arm must be considered. And of course.
this is more pertinent if AIRBUS itseld made the installation
3) If the 406 is compared with the 403,
it can be seen that that the additional lenght of 10 m was distributed 6.50m in front and
3.50m after the wing. This obviously, relatively speaking, shifted the CG forward.
4) I would assume thet that the CG is situated in front of the center of the wing.
Therefore, when the specs were changed by reducing the weight of the wing, the
CG was shifted forward again.
5) It is misleading to insist only on the weight of the 1st class (12 seats).
Much more important is the B-Class (54), where the difference compared
with E-class is by far lower, and as there are 6 B-seats in the same area as
12.5 E-seats, the difference should be not a big deal
6) The declaration of AIRBUS/ Mr. Leahy are again, as in the case of the
A380. not credible where he compares the 555 seat A380 with the discontinued
417 seat B747-400 , touting the 35% difference when the reality is 19%
compared with the competing 467 seat B747- 8 -I, telling that the fuel
consumption per seat is much better (true with the 400, but false with the 8-I) etc.
Another example: he compares the A350XWB -800 with the
much smaller B787-8, instead with the comparable B787-900.
7) Why the Airlines have not said nothing publicly for up to 4 1/2 years ??
Primarely, because several of them as LH
are precisely in the
countries where the A340 is build, and also becuse Mr. Leahy promised
them to fix the problem. As he did not, now some of them are furious !!
8) And has AIRBUS asked the certifying agencies to amend the original
certification, after the wing design change and the 5 Ton "advise" ???
If airlines were flying a potentially unstable aircraft for years under such
conditions, this would become an extremely serious matter !!