dark light

Tigerotor77W

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 81 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: More Le Bourget Pics #577802
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    Second that! I was there and can’t wait to get my own pics developed…

    in reply to: Alaska orders upto 100 737s #579721
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    [QUOTE=Grey Area]I’m sorry, but how would you know? πŸ˜€

    Tu as raison… je me suis trompΓ©.

    That is, you are correct. I wasn’t thinking quite clearly when I made my comment. πŸ™

    in reply to: The Le Bourget photo thread #579731
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    TREMENDOUS shots, everyone! I admire all your diligence in getting such clean shots, especially those of aircraft on the runways, as I know firsthand the number of people there over the weekend… I gave up trying to get shots of takeoff and landings.

    Once I get my photos developed (one month away at least), I’ll see if I can scan and post some here. Still using a cheapo film camera… going digital soon, hopefully. πŸ˜€

    in reply to: Paris Air Show // June 2005 #586873
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    Any ideas for the best place for pictures of the planes? Are the stands worth the 10€?

    in reply to: Alaska orders upto 100 737s #586874
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    Boeing is NOT storing orders for the 787, and never meant to. I don’t think anyone would claim that Boeing’s only good product is in the 787…

    in reply to: Airbus A340 #590637
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    Heaving this thread back on topic for a second — how does the actual takeoff performance of the 777ER and LR models compare with that of the corresponding A340 models? Is it true that the 772LR requires more runway to take off than does the A345?

    in reply to: Airbus A340 #594735
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    Call me stupid, but I believed that the Airbus counterpart of the 777 was both the 340 and 330. And not only the 340!!?! At least, this is what Airbus has been arguing all along!

    Indeed the A333 does have a viable counterpart in the 772 A-market version. I was referring to longer range operations… pardon the confusion.

    in reply to: Airbus A340 #595525
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    My posts weren’t intended to push it in a direction of A vs. B. Both companies make claims that offer but a bit of the entire view of what is truly going on, and I was wondering how those claims differed.

    My apologies if I inserted my comments in the wrong thread… I read A340 and expected, perhaps without reason, that itwould be a good chance to ask how the 777 stood up to its Airbus counterpart.

    in reply to: Airbus A340 #595638
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    I’ll double-check the engines claim when I get back… but I believe that is what I read. (Hopefully, that is. :))

    in reply to: Airbus A340 #595644
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    Once gain the seating layout is up to the airline and not the airliner builder.

    It is indeed… and seeing as how I’m opening a can of worms, here goes…

    1) The A343 can carry more passengers… how? It is shorter than the 777, it has 2-4-2 seat in economy (generally), and the two planes have identical pitch in respective classes. Therefore, how can the A343 carry more, given these conditions? (Note: I am assuming that the airplanes are configured as most airlines would spec each class.)

    2) I know that some airlines wanted the width of the 777 to be near the 747 level, but why didn’t airlines want a 2-4-2 arrangement, which is generally more pleasing to customers?

    3) In response to Sandy: Airbus claims that the two BIGGER engines on the 777 are more costly to maintain, and even go above the maintenance costs of the the engine costs on the A340.

    4) Sales: I’m surprised that Thai didn’t go 773ER, given that they had 773s already.

    Of course, these are not the only aspects an airline considers. However, it bothers me that if Airbus meddles with its figures, Boeing does, too.

    And finally, I’m a 777 fan… so I am in no way trying to attack Boeing.

    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    Seems like a rather… unimpressive lovie at this point. However, if Sandy’s rumor proves correct, hopefully it won’t turn out quite to be an anti-A380 movie. At any rate, should be interesting to see just how realistic the action turns out to be.

    in reply to: Paris Air Show // June 2005 #596599
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    Hmm, not sure, then. I couldn’t find the list, and don’t remember choosing a country when I ordered my tickets. Ah well… sorry for not being of more help.

    in reply to: Airbus A340 #596603
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    Sandy and 4 engines good, thanks for the replies. In their literature, which I don’t have with me (I’m in France right now and failed to bring anything technical — other than Sabbagh’s amazing 777 book), I believe Airbus makes the claim that direct operating costs of the A340 are lower than those of the 777. IIRC, those costs were seat-mile.

    Eh; just wondering how and if it is possible for both claims to be true. I guess they can be.

    in reply to: Airbus A340 #597840
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    Why does Airbus claim its A340 is more fuel efficient?

    in reply to: Paris Air Show // June 2005 #597851
    Tigerotor77W
    Participant

    The website for booking your tickets is utter crap!

    It has the option to put it into English, which I have clicked. Unfortunately, they haven’t bothered to change the countries drop-down menu, so I don’t know which is the UK despite looking through it hundreds of times.

    As a result of this, I cannot book my tickets at the moment! 😑

    Can anyone help?

    Grand-Bretagne should be the listed name (for Great Britain). If not, Angleterre (England).

    Those travelling to Paris over the weekend – what day are you going to the show? Saturday or Sunday?

    Friday evening and Saturday, or, if I’m unlucky, just Saturday.

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 81 total)