Re: Airbus P305

Date:         10 Sep 98 02:08:22 
From:         Chuanga@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang)
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
References:   1 2 3
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1998.1413@ohare.Chicago.COM>, Marc Schaeffer  <marcmsc*@cmdnet.lu> 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.