Jetliner Developements

From:         Tobias Henry Lutterodt <luterodt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Date:         04 Mar 93 01:53:31 PST
References:   1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

>While 180-minute ETOPS will allow the A330 (and 777) to do nearly the
>same job as the A340, the A340 may still prove more economical.  The
>number of engines isn't the only consideration -- witness the BAe-146
>which seems awfully silly with four engines on such a little plane,
>but has done fairly well.

But the A340's engines are generally operating at their extremes (thus
the lack of growth capability) while those of the 146 are relatively 
cooler.  This and other considerations must also be taken into account.
Most airline bosses will want the long life and reliability of two large
engines for all but the most extreme missions.  

>I think it's pretty far-fetched to consider safety
>as a liability for the A340 versus the A330 and its competitors.

I agree, it's not a liability...everything's relative.  Passengers always
like to see lots of engines out there, but I'd bet that in the long run 
the A330 beats its sister when it comes to dispatch reliability and IFSD's.

>And comfort has never been a word I would associate with
>any member of the DC-9 clan.
>Am I missing something on this one?

Well, the MD-80 series has about the same passenger comfort level
(seat width/ aisle width) as the A320 on a per passenger basis.  
Both are much better than the B737.  And, the MD-80/90's engines
are at the rear of the cabin.  The A320 especially, is noisy inside
the cabin.

(The Commercial Aviation Nut)

BTW, the MD-95 is not an MD-90 as such but rather a shortened, simpler MD-87.