Re: UA A321 ?

Date:         09 Sep 98 04:12:25 
From:         Evan McElravy <evanm@penn.com>
References:   1 2 3 4 5
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

>>On a typical run to Perth, an Ansett Australia Airbus A320-211 carrying
>>about 144 passengers can outrun a Qantas Boeing 737-400.  It cruises
>>higher, is much more comfortable, is faster (0.80 vs 0.74) and consumes
>>less fuel, while carrying 10 or more passengers + cargo.
>
>Which serves only to illustrate the point with which you were arguing,
>namely, that comparing the A320 family and the 737 Classics is an apples
>and oranges comparison.  Your example might have been interesting had
>Qantas been flying a 737-800.

It isn't apples and oranges: the 2nd gen 737s (or which the -400 is a
member) are the same design age (roughly) as the A320. AI, however, produced
a much more capable (if more tempremental) aircraft and it has taken 10
years for Boeing to put into service a comparable aircraft.

Among the modern offerings, however, the 737NG and A320, despite small
differences, are roughly equal in capability. The differences lie in
technology (FBW vs. cables) and comfort (the A320 is still quite a bit
wider). I've never been a fan of 737s, but, after a ride in a Continental
-700, I am forced to concede that it is an outstanding piece of equipment
and Boeing managed to fix most of the flaws of the 2nd gen. series, except
of course the narrow cabin, which is pretty much locked in.

Given Martin's example, though, I'm not sure that the A320 is really a step
forward: Ansett's old 727s would have blown both the 734 and the A320 by
like they were moving backwards.

Evan McElravy
evanm@penn.com