Re: A330-300HGW & new gear

Date:         27 Jun 97 15:37:17 
From:         Ken Ishiguro <kenish@ix.netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom
References:   1 2 3 4 5 6
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

jla wrote:
>
> The advantages of the 777 vs A340/330 are glaring.  Airbus cannot just add
> centerline gear.  This has already been stated and acknowledged.  The 777
> was designed with the larger, heavier gear, even at the cost of the add'l
> weight and price, to allow for larger and heavier versions of the craft.
> The Airbus products, however, will need to redesign the gear to support the
> additional weight...a great and expensive $$$ undertaking.

I am surprised that none of the postings I looked at mentioned that the
330 and 340 use essentially the same wing.  It was designed to accept
the bending moments of either 2 or 4 engines.  As I recall from an
article in "Design News", there is a high degree of parts commonality.

Does anyone know how much commonality there is?

Yes, the 747 and 777 had teething pains and impairments to growth as
well.  A friend is an Air France 737 pilot, here are some interesting
problems with the 340:

1.  Range:  Not what was expected, Virgin Atlantic often leaves 10-20
pax behind in winter flights from HKG-LHR.

2.  Nose gear:  Somehow ended up 20" short. This causes all sorts of
wing and elevator incidence problems resulting in a long takeoff roll.
Personal experience is both the 330 and 340 sit at the gate nose-low.
The takeoff drill seems to be to accelerate to an abnormally high speed,
then yank the nose up once enough elevator authority is acheived.

3.  Pressurization:  Struggles to maintain 10000' cabin altitude, leaves
cabin crew fatigued and winded.

4.  ECS- Cabin zone temperatures can be individually selected for either
deep freeze or broil.

This conversation was several years ago, perhaps many of these problems
have been corrected.

Ken Ishiguro
Orange County, CA