Re: A3XX vs B747-600 (was: Airbus lawsuit coming?)

From:         Chuanga@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang)
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Date:         03 Sep 96 01:16:51 
References:   1 2 3 4
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1996.1693@ohare.Chicago.COM>,
andrew m. boardman <amb@bronze.lcs.mit.edu> wrote:
>In article <airliners.1996.1506@ohare.Chicago.COM>, Chuanga@cris.com (H
>Andrew Chuang) wrote:
>
>> Then, my question is will Boeing feel comfortable leaving the
>> over-600-seat market to Airbus?
>

Note: I was referring to over-600, tri-class seating.

>How much of a 600+ seat market is there, anyway?

Different people will give you different predictions.  If, and that's a
big if, people in China travel as much as US citizens as the Chinese
getting richer, then they will need very large planes.  (China's population
is about 5 times that of the US, and the US has slightly larger land area
than China.)  Nevertheless, that's at least twenty years down the road.

>In any case, the Jane's
>handbook in front of me indicates that a 747-400 will take up to 630 pax
>in a single-class layout.  Is this layout certifiable vis-a-vis
>evacuation specs, and does it really exist in service with anyone?
>Wouldn't this be just the thing for those oft-referenced "high-density
>Asian routes"?

JAL's and ANA's domestic B747s can carry some 500 passengers.  Even
in Asia, I'm not aware of any major carriers that use high-density
configurations on regular international B747 services.  On the Contrary,
Taiwan's China Airlines still has a lone B747 that has the nine-abreast
configuration in the regular economy class.  Also, EVA Airways'
eight-abreast Economy Deluxe seating on the B747s is quite popular among
people travelling between the US and Taiwan.