I'm not rated in Boeing but in other types that have moving thrust levers, and for the life of me I just can't see how not having to look away from the PFD to know what the engines are doing is not going to be benefitial in bad weather, particularly when the A/T in Airbus is sometimes slow and inacurate maintaining the speed. You should look at the speed trend arrow on the PFD and the engine N1/EPR gauges anyway, so moving thrust levers tell you very little extra and add complications with TOGA etc.So, this is how it works? Have to look at the speed trend and the N1 display? Oh thank you Sir, I would have never figured that out on my own. Like the stuff i mentioned above, and pf course other design choices like the inability to use use managed vertical modes on heading, the inability to start a descent at TOD on its own or the impossibility to fly an RNAV or overlay approach without flIght directors.ĭon‘t get me wrong, i still like to operate an A320 as other aspects are quite nice, but it certainly lags behind others in some aspects.Īnd of course i would call any car with a manual clutch and gearbox dated, there are perfectly fine automated double clutch gearboxes out there if you really still want to drive a combustion engine, personally i switched to electric 8 or so years ago. In my view the airbus systems are not class leading in some regards. And yes, some physical attributes of those avionics as well, like those tiny and dim screens. No, i did not call the whole flight deck of the A320 dated, just some aspects of the avionics suite which is after all more than 30 years old without any major update. Personally i think SIA, Lufthansa and possibly other A330 operators would be interested.Oh my, reading comprehension seems to be a lost art for some. Wasn't the original idea was for a A330 fueslage with new wings ? What potential customers do you see? Last year, Airbus won no orders for the A300-600, though in 1998 it won a 30-plane order for the freighter version from United Parcel Service Inc. Mr Stuart said Airbus could have an A330-100 in service by 2003. He said it would be relatively small, and "60 to 70 per cent less expensive" than using the A300-600 as a basis.Īirbus plans to keep building the A300-600 for cargo use. Mr Stuart declined to estimate the cost of developing the plane. The plane would have a range similar to, or greater than, that of the A300-600, which flies a maximum of 4,150 nautical miles. It would have the same wings and engines as the A330-200, but Airbus would shorten the fuselage to eliminate 30 or 40 seats. The aircraft, if it goes ahead, would be called the A330-100. He said no final decision will be taken on developing the plane until Airbus has won sufficient commitments from airline customers. "Airbus is now leaning towards developing an A330-200 shrink" rather than redesigning the existing A300-600 with modern electronics, said Colin Stuart, the vice-president of marketing, at a briefing for journalists. The new aircraft would have the same wings and engines as the A330-200, but Airbus would shorten the fuselage to eliminate 20 to 40 seats. The new version of the A330-200 will have fly-by-wire. One drawback with the A300-600, and with its sister plane, the A310, is that they do not share cockpit layout and technology with Airbus's more recent models, which all have sophisticated fly-by-wire electronic control systems. But the twin-engine A300-600, based on Airbus's first plane, the A300, has not been selling well for passenger use. The European planemaker has been taking market share from rival Boeing Co, partly through the success of its single-aisle A320 aircraft, which are more modern than Boeing's 737s. New version will be called A330-100 and will have fly-by-wire technologyĪirbus Industrie plans to replace its ageing A300-600 passenger plane with a new aircraft based on its A330-200, a senior executive said. Found this in the newspaper today (Business Times Singapore).Īirbus plans to replace A300-600 with new A330 jet
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |