Tous
← Back to Squawk list
MAS ponders longer-range A330 proposal as 777 replacement
Malaysia Airlines is evaluating whether to standardise on the Airbus A330 for its widebody operations, and could order a longer-range version if Airbus decides to develop one. "We want to rationalise the fleet - I hate running an airline with too many aircraft types," says Malaysia Airlines group chief executive Ahmad Jauhari Yahya. (www.flightglobal.com) Plus d'info...
Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
While I prefer Boeing, and understand the benefits of a standardised fleet from a cost perspective, shouldn't an airline fly aircraft that best suits the specific needs of their routes? There's a big enough market for Boeing and Airbus to coexist. With my limited knowledge of the workings of the FAA etc, I'm just wondering if a directive were to ground a particular aircraft, wouldn't a 'single model' airline be in strife?
What's wrong with the a340-500? They have four engines so they could go all the way to Brazil if they wanted to, or maybe even LA.
Well for starters the a340 is no longer produced by Airbus. Secondly, the a340 has higher fuel consumption than either the a330 or 777, so in what world does it make any sense to replace a 777 with an a340?
haha
Why not order the 777's to replace the A330's? I will reschedule flights to the best of my ability to keep from flying on Airbus. I just don't like certain aspects of the Airbus.
"if it ain't Boeing, I ain't going". I have already switched schedules on United to prevent flying on Airbus, but there are just times when it isn't possible. I would like to see United go all Boeing.
"if it ain't Boeing, I ain't going". I have already switched schedules on United to prevent flying on Airbus, but there are just times when it isn't possible. I would like to see United go all Boeing.
What aspects of Airbus do you not like? Can you be more specific?
Its mostly supporting American business and American workers.
Airbus is building a plant in Alabama, can't give that excuse anymore. So what its not originating in America? Its like the many people I see driving BMWs and Hondas. They serve their purpose, if Boeing makes something better than Airbus, like the 777, the business will have incentive to buy it. Its all about free market not patriotism.
Okay, how about this one. Airbus relies too much on automation. Look what happened to Air France 447. Automation + clueless pilots doomed that flight. And many BMWs and Hondas are still made in the USA. And when the USA suffers plenty of unemployment because American businesses are suffering, then i think its a pretty legitimate reason to support an American plane manufacturer over a European one. The Alabama plant was nothing more than a ploy to reach more US customers, half the parts will still come from Europe.
I have nothing against Airbus planes in general, the A320's wider seats than the 737 certainly are nice. But so is the new boeing sky interior. But i'll root for Boeing when it comes to plane orders/sales.
I have nothing against Airbus planes in general, the A320's wider seats than the 737 certainly are nice. But so is the new boeing sky interior. But i'll root for Boeing when it comes to plane orders/sales.
If a pilot is clueless no matter what kind of airplane, boeing or airbus, he is flying, plane will be doomed.
Some parts from Airbus planes are made on USA, what about supporting those jobs?
Some parts From Boeing planes are made in a foreign country, are you supporting non-USA jobs?
Some parts from Airbus planes are made on USA, what about supporting those jobs?
Some parts From Boeing planes are made in a foreign country, are you supporting non-USA jobs?
Mute argument. The same companies make avionics and other equipment used on both Boeings and Airbuses. So either way, those companies will still do fine regardless of either Boeing and Airbus. The difference is Boeings are assembled by 100% american labor, Airbuses aren't. If an airline orders a 737, the same us avionics company that would have made something for an A320 would instead make it for a 737 instead. Parts manufacturing are not boeing/airbus specific.
And no, Boeings are not 100% fly by wire. There are still other systems to fall back upon. Airbuses rely too much on computer. the faulty readings contributed to the pilot error. There's a saying that Boeings are flown by pilots assisted by computers, and Airbuses are flown by computers assisted by Pilots.
And no, Boeings are not 100% fly by wire. There are still other systems to fall back upon. Airbuses rely too much on computer. the faulty readings contributed to the pilot error. There's a saying that Boeings are flown by pilots assisted by computers, and Airbuses are flown by computers assisted by Pilots.
Airbus is building an assembly plant in USA, then Airbus will be assembled by 100% american labor. And as you said, the same non-USA coompanies that make avionics and other equipment used on Boeing aircraft, will continue making them in a foreing country even if no Airbus aircraft is sold.
Faulty readings on Boeing aircrafts have already contributed to pilot errors. No matter if it is a fly by wire airplane or not, pilot error can't be avoided, they can be minimized but not completly avoided.
Faulty readings on Boeing aircrafts have already contributed to pilot errors. No matter if it is a fly by wire airplane or not, pilot error can't be avoided, they can be minimized but not completly avoided.
Fair enough. But just because Airbus is building a plant in the USA doesn't mean all A320s from now on will be american built. I'd say 70% French built/30% American built, at least for the first few years.
