looks tricky,non? look at concorde, it just came out at the wrong time.could this be true of the giant a3xx? orders look so promising on paper,but the airlines ordering did say by providing the same amount of seats as a 747, seats will be bigger,cargo can also be carried, so i dont think that airlines could fill up 600+ seats at once.
ever thought about what could happen in the event of an accident god forbid, or the simple day to day embarkation and disembarkation of 600 people?!!!!!!
By: V1 - 5th October 2000 at 18:14
RE: a3xx deemed failure?
I recall people worrying how airports would cope with passenger volume when the 747 was in the development stages. I’m sure you’ll all agree that most major airports have the facilties to easily handle several 747’s today. As for your point about a crash, this is the kind of perspective which would fuel many over the top and scare mongering tabloid newspapers to print a load of rubbish about air safety and ‘death jets’ flying over our cities.
By: Kabir - 5th October 2000 at 15:07
RE: a3xx deemed failure?
As u have mentioned of the disembarkment, many of the airports are upgrading there facilities for this jumbo but many airports will face problems, and why we alsway think negetive about a crash, This will be a very safe aircrfrat and Airbus makes very safe aircraft.
By: keltic - 5th October 2000 at 12:56
RE: a3xx deemed failure?
IATA has just said that a a plane like the A3XX will be needed in the future.
Sign In
October 5, 2000 at 9:50 am