Re: A330/340 vs. B777

Date:         21 Jan 97 01:32:24 
From:         niels@lofgren.demon.co.uk (Niels Sampath)
Organization: i b4 e xcept after c
References:   1 2 3 4 5
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1997.214@ohare.Chicago.COM>
           Chuanga@cris.com "H Andrew Chuang" writes:

>> >Nevertheless, comfort is a very subjective thing.  Also, some people will
>> >believe what they are told to believe.
>>
>> Your last comment is unclear.
>
>Some people won't assimilate the information that are given to them.
>They are told Airbus's 2-4-2 economy configuration is more comfortable
>than Boeing's 2-5-2.  They are also told Airbus's 2-2-2 business
>configuration is more comfortable than Boeing's 2-3-2.  Some will accept
>these statements without even analyzing the information.  That's what
>I meant by "some peple will believe what they are told to believe".
>
>IMHO, Airbus's claims are true only when the flight is more than 85-90%
>full.  Otherwise, the wider seats should win.

I re-address Boeing's skewing of the figures in another post.
Of course Airbus skews (see below), but you presented Boeing's Web page
not Airbus.

I will assume you are not snidely suggesting that -I- believe what I
have been told what to believe by AI. This would really not be the place
for personal innuendo.
My point about the middle seat was based on my own experience, much as
you enjoy a wider seat. The average load factor of ~60-70% is
merely an average.
One flight at mid-week may be 40% full. At weekends it may be 90-100%

As another poster in this thread points out, people will fly on
`uncomfortable' a/c as readily as `comfortable' ones.  If AA has
decided to replace its LHR-bound 767s with A300s, then no matter
which is more/less `comfortable', and we both now agree this is
highly subjective,  it doesn't apparently make a difference.
Even the wider seat wouldn't "win", as you suggest, with the majority.
Although analysts/enthusiasts such as you and I may have our
preferences, in economy class only price matters to most people.

Perhaps you have mistaken me as pro-Airbus and/or anti-Boeing.
In fact I am only anti-slick-marketing (whoever), even if it is `good
business', and anti-middle-seat of course B^).
e.g. I think the 767-400 is a -great- answer to the A330-200 ...again,
its the middle-seat issue for me.  If you will allow me some humor
not meant to be at your `expense' (or mine for that matter B^) ) :
Do you think Boeing will let that issue pass and not suggest to people
that they should believe 2-3-2 is better than 2-4-2?  I for one
-will- believe that! B^)

Airbus Industrie is IMHO simply still clumsy at being slick (whether by
words or by design/deed, I agree) and is easier to attack idealogically
(as is often the case here) with post-cold war victor's justice, or to
simply make into a straw-man (something one presents merely to knock
down to make oneself look `wise').  As such, AI, and Boeing,
lends themselves well to the sort of `sports team' (home-side vs. away-side)
debates which occasionally dominate these newsgroups.
Some will support the `underdog', some the `leading' side.
The rhetorical question is `which is which'? Given their various
characteristics, I see them as six-of-one, half-a-dozen of the other.
Two viciously big corporations. Coke or Pepsi? Your mileage may vary.

-Niels