Your only option is Cityjet to London City (with KLM codesharing). They have several flights per workday, but during the weekend there are not that many flights.

Another option is flying to Amsterdam-Schiphol. There is a direct train service linking Schiphol with Rotterdam Centraal train station. Normal train services take 49 minutes, but the high-speed FYRA option takes 26 minutes but costs a premium.

As for Rotterdam the city, it’s not the first option that would jump into my mind when thinking of touristic Netherlands. Neither is it the second, or the third, or anywhere in my ranking really! The city center was bombed into oblivion courtesy of Hermann Goering Redecorating Inc. Of course, since so much was bombed, if you are into modern architecture this place can be interesting.

It also has the second biggest port in the world, so if you’re interested in shipping Rotterdam should be good to you.

There’s a complete public transport route planner at http://journeyplanner.9292.nl/. This site combines the schedules for all modes of public transport in the Netherlands.

I guess I don’t see why the current A320 has inherently any more growth potential than the 737NG.

The main advantage, I would imagine, is that the A320 series has longer landing gear. The new jet engines have a larger diameter fan. These are easier to fit under the A320 then under the B737. Already the B737 engine cowlings are squared of at the bottom, so while further refinements may be possible, wether it’s enough is a big question.

Obviously it is possible for the 737 to increase the length of the landing gear. But doing so would require a redesign of the landing gear, the wingbox, and increase weight as well. Perhaps the landing gear needs to be moved a bit further out as well to make the longer gear fit.

Who knows, perhaps at the end of the day it is better to come up with a cross between the 737 and the 757 wingbox / landing gear. But then you might as well go for a upgraded 757 entirely!

No doubt the guys in Seattle (Chicago, whatever) will work it out.

They are already lic manufacturing An-140 as IrAN-140 🙂

I thought that deal fell through a few years ago after one or two IrAN-140s crashed?

i am sure a few years back Airbus won the tanker contract with A330, but due to congress it was re-opened again
am i correct

The tanker contract is a can of worms best kept closed.

To give a very brief summary: we are now on the third incarnation of the tanker contract. Contract one was awarded to Boeing in 2002/2003, but following a corruption scandal the contract was cancelled in 2005.

The second contract went to EADS/Northrop in 2008. Barely half a year later the US Government Accountability Office cancelled the order. Boeing had filed a complaint and quite a few politicians and citizens complained that EADS was not sufficiently patriotic.

We are now in the third run of the contract. Already mistakes have been made that are dumb enough that when a decision is finally made the loosing party has sufficient grounds to throw a fit. Basically, due to a clerical blunder the Boeing bid was passed to EADS (now without Northrop) and the EADS bid to Boeing. A proposal by Antonov based on the An-112 (a proposed twin jet powered An-70 derivative) was handed half an hour or so too late after the courier got lost on the USAF base where he had to hand in the bidpack.

Marketing hype gone mad….. :rolleyes:

The ´600 to ´900 series have been called Next Generation to distinguish them from the ´100 to ´500 series. The name was never changed when the older series where taken out of production.

Has CIT already announced which carrier(s) will operate the planes?

i certainly would..
but would you fly in this?

Interesting question. This is a B-2 model. Those have been grounded by the Russian aviation autorities. Does that mean that the North Korean Tu-154B-2 is grounded as well? If so, I suppose I would not fly it! 😀

If given the chance to fly on one, I’d probably take it as long as the plane looked to be in good condition.