B772LR vs. A345

[beyond 1000]

Firstly, if this is an Airbus vs Boeing thread, I WANT IN!

ConcordeBoy, why is the A340 frame a sh*t frame? I'm sure everybody and his brother must know that the 777 is a better aircraft than Airbus's quick fix job. I just want to know your reasons out of curiosity.

Can the A340 be improved further to close the gap or equal it to the 777 or is that design just not where its at in improvement for a 777 equalizer?

BTW, I still like Airbus aircraft and I love the A380 but I think Boeing should concentrate on developing a faster aircraft and get a real jump on the aviation market.

[ConcordeBoy]

ConcordeBoy, why is the A340 frame a sh*t frame? I'm sure everybody and his brother must know that the 777 is a better aircraft than Airbus's quick fix job. I just want to know your reasons out of curiosity.

A thousand reasons that I've listed a million times...

...if you care that much, I'll find a link or two or ten for ya

Can the A340 be improved further to close the gap or equal it to the 777 or is that design just not where its at in improvement for a 777 equalizer?

It's heavy as crap and has already reached its maximum wing load. No way Airbus could give it much of an improvement without a massive expenditure.

I think Boeing should concentrate on developing a faster aircraft and get a real jump on the aviation market.

...in the event you missed the past two years; they tried that, no one seriously wanted it.

[pbateson]

Thanks for the info. I always thought that they were preety evenly matched, but that is a hell of a difference!

What airlines have "downstairs" on their A340s?

Lufthansa

[beyond 1000]

ConcordeBoy

I remember the Sonic Cruiser. That didn't go too well for them. What I meant was I hope Boeing does not totally give up on faster service for the future. Maybe the technology wasn't there two years ago but perhaps it will in the next five or ten.

If the A340s are so heavy, then AB needs to develop a successor to that aircraft or loose huge market share from now on.

[vojoboy]

If the A340s are so heavy, then AB needs to develop a successor to that aircraft or loose huge market share from now on.

AB could only focus on a few projects at the same time. With work on the A350 ramping up, it would be better for Airbus to work on the narrowbody replacement first before an A340NG successor. Also note that the A359 is slated to replace (dont believe any of the BS you hear from Leahy) the A343.

The A340NG's are here to stay in the short to medium term as Airbus had already spent around $3B in developing this derivative. Im sure that the investment costs havent been recouped yet (Personally, I dont even think they will breakeven). As far as the A340NG is concerned, AB might still get a few more orders for these planes (especially the A346HGW) especially from existing A340/A340NG operators. The A346HGW looks competitive on paper so it could win a few more orders but as far as the A345 is concerned, we'll probably see Airbus compete more through lower pricing (or availability as 777 slots are "gold" right now).

[AA 1818]

AB could only focus on a few projects at the same time. With work on the A350 ramping up, it would be better for Airbus to work on the narrowbody replacement first before an A340NG successor.

So this time around do you think that Airbus will eliminate anyone from the A318/319/320/321 family? Maybe they can do away with the A321 family and focus on an A319 and A320 replacement. What about the A318s? How are the orders coming? What was it meant to compete with? I love the plane, but I don't hear of it being ordered often, (IIRC, EgyptAir {...or Air Cairo} were the last to announce orders...). The A319s and A320s have been best sellers out of the family, and a replacement would guaranteed orders in the future for Airbus.

[vojoboy]

So this time around do you think that Airbus will eliminate anyone from the A318/319/320/321 family? Maybe they can do away with the A321 family and focus on an A319 and A320 replacement. What about the A318s? How are the orders coming? What was it meant to compete with? I love the plane, but I don't hear of it being ordered often, (IIRC, EgyptAir {...or Air Cairo} were the last to announce orders...). The A319s and A320s have been best sellers out of the family, and a replacement would guaranteed orders in the future for Airbus.

I think that they will still offer equivalents to all models. I assume that by the time the planes are finally built, Airbus will have the technology to reduce the OEW of the smallest model to near E-Jet/C-Series levels. If Airbus decides to use composites, they might be able to "lighten" the A318 replacement by possibly using thinner (or less) layers of Composites (which I believe is what Boeing is doing with the 783).

Another joker here is the common engine pylon interface. This will enable Airbus (or Boeing) to easily offer different engine variants to the different A32x/737 replacements variants. A smaller, lighter engine variant can be offered for the A318/736 replacement (which can also be used by reduced MTOW high frequency A319/73G's) while a heavier more powerful variant can be offered for the A321/739 replacement making it a suitable 752 replacement.

[uy707]

In terms of aestethics the four-holer 345 takes the cake.
Alain

[babypurin]

In terms of aestethics the four-holer 345 takes the cake.
Alain

Agreed, the A340NGs' are much nicer looking than the older A340-200/300. Not only does it prove to be better looking towards the eye but perfomance-wise too.

[Kadena_Troop]

Agreed, the A340NGs' are much nicer looking than the older A340-200/300. Not only does it prove to be better looking towards the eye but perfomance-wise too.

I agree as well. To me, I think the A346 is the best looking A340. But we all know which is the best looking long haul airplane...

[ConcordeBoy]

In terms of aestethics the four-holer 345 takes the cake.
Alain

compared to other fourholers perhaps...

...course, compared to the T7; A340s look like they fell outta the Ugly Tree and got b!tchslapped by every branch on the way down

[BOEING777X]

Firstly, if this is an Airbus vs Boeing thread, I WANT IN!

ConcordeBoy, why is the A340 frame a sh*t frame? I'm sure everybody and his brother must know that the 777 is a better aircraft than Airbus's quick fix job. I just want to know your reasons out of curiosity.

Can the A340 be improved further to close the gap or equal it to the 777 or is that design just not where its at in improvement for a 777 equalizer?

Hi All

Im new here and found a great topic.

AB has miled the A300 airframe for near 4 decades. Its going into a fifth decade using that same tube for the A350. For its designated mission profiles, the A340 family falls considerably short on all performance fronts vis a vis the 777 family.

With all the state handouts AB gets, you'd think they'd have more than just 3 fuselage widths.

Judging by the phenomenal EIS of the 777-300ER, AB should be very afraid at the terrifying potential of the 777-200LR and how mission fleixible it will be.

PS: I do have a forum of my own (see sig) but no one wants to join me!

[ConcordeBoy]

PS: I do have a forum of my own (see sig) but no one wants to join me!

...though you're probably going to get nailed here for the psuedo-spam advertisement; cute forum-- figured I'd join.

[Kwashiorkor]

What's the problem with Airbus only having three fuselage widths? I hear that quite often but can't figure out why this has to be a problem. I mean it's better production wise to have only three lines, isn't it? Furthermore it's also just Airbus' philosophy. In Le Bourget Boeing said that their wider 777 is far better and Airbus said that the A340 is better because it doesn't have so many seats side by side.

From a personal point of view I would rather fly an Airbus fuselage width (one of the A300/310/340 family types) than a 777 exactly for the reasons stated above: 2-4-2 is much more convenient in my opinion than 3-3-3 or even 3-4-3.

[BOEING777X]

What's the problem with Airbus only having three fuselage widths? I hear that quite often but can't figure out why this has to be a problem. I mean it's better production wise to have only three lines, isn't it? Furthermore it's also just Airbus' philosophy. In Le Bourget Boeing said that their wider 777 is far better and Airbus said that the A340 is better because it doesn't have so many seats side by side.

From a personal point of view I would rather fly an Airbus fuselage width (one of the A300/310/340 family types) than a 777 exactly for the reasons stated above: 2-4-2 is much more convenient in my opinion than 3-3-3 or even 3-4-3.

From an airline point of view, bums on seats is the crucial factor- then pax comfort.

Why else do you think AF passed over on the A346 when AB claims it has more seats that the 777-300ER, yet AF has commitments for near 30 airframes?

Do you know how many seats SIA has on the WSSS/KLAX run? Less than 190, and the A345 is supposed to fly (as AB claims) with 300 odd pax?

The fuselage is not optimal and on the A345/6, its evident its weight restricted too.

No such issue on the 777 family....