From: Chuanga@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang) Organization: Concentric Internet Services Date: 03 Sep 96 01:16:51 References: 1 2 3 4
View raw article or MIME structure
In article <airliners.1996.1693@ohare.Chicago.COM>, andrew m. boardman <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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.