Date: 10 Sep 98 02:08:22 From: Chuanga@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang) Organization: Concentric Internet Services References: 1 2 3 Followups: 1
View raw article or MIME structure
In article <airliners.1998.1413@ohare.Chicago.COM>, Marc Schaeffer <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >The biggest disadvantage of the 753 compared with a widebody is for sure the >long handling time at the gate. Definite true if passengers are loaded and loaded using two doors. However, with one door, I think the difference will be minor. The B757-300 will most likely to have significant cost advantage over a twin-aisle aircraft that operators cannot ignore. >My initial question was mainly focussed on the fact that this would be >another compromised wing design (like on the 330/40). Having a short range >wing on the A305/P305 and putting it on a long range A322 wouldn't be >optimal. >If this P305 wing is -- say 4 frames larger at the fuselage/wing box but not >higher -- than today's A320 family wing, is the main requirement a fuselage >plug or do you have to redesign the whole area ?? It should be pretty similar >to the A340/A340NG and B737/B737NG wing upgrades. If the P305 is indeed a short-range aircraft, I can assure you the project will not fly! You initially mentioned Singapore (SQ) as a potential customer for the P305. I'm certain SQ will not be interested in anything that will have a range capability less than the existing A310. Just look back the history of European commercial jets before the A300-600, most of them (including the original A300) were short-range aircraft, and most of them were commercially failures.