Richard Branson 5.5b & Airbus

[Gixer]

One thing I find interesting about the civilian airline industry is the compition between Boeing,Airbus and the choices airliners make for the future.

Richard Branson's purchase of 13 A340-600's over B777's is one these decisions. Especially Richard's comment as to why he bought the A340 instead of the B777.

"because passengers prefer the four engines of the A340s to the two engines on Boeing's 777"

And when you think about it, I'd say he's right. We all know that two engine planes due to modern engine designs are designed with enough power even after V1 to fly on 1 engine. But of course passengers don't know that stuff or care they just like to see more engines and feel safer when they do.

It will be interesting in the years to come to see whether the aviation industry steers more towards 4 engine planes like the A340 and new A380's or Boeing 777 and new 7E7's.



...-Gixer

[Furball]

Richard Branson is the man.  I wish the bastages at BA would have let him have Concorde.

[Toad]

2X the overhauls and maintenance; that's why the bean counters prefer 2 motors.

[B17Skull12]

also not to mention more wieght that needs to be carried.  both on engines, wing structure, and fuel.  2 engines is much more conservative than 4 engines.

[Cobra412]

I watched the 777 doing flight test out here at my base and I must say that plane is impressive.  It's take off ability even with a simulated full load of passengers, fuel and cargo was amazing.  Also it's ability to stop extremely fast and turn around and launch again in a shorter time and distance than some modern fighter jets.  It's distance to take off and climb rate were awesome too.

[Chairboy]

I think it's amazing that one 777 engine puts out more power than all 8 of the engines in a B-52 put together.

[ra]

Richard Branson's purchase of 13 A340-600's over B777's is one these decisions. Especially Richard's comment as to why he bought the A340 instead of the B777.

"because passengers prefer the four engines of the A340s to the two engines on Boeing's 777"

I doubt very much that a decision this large was made over some trivial thing like this.  How many passengers count the engines before getting on a plane?

[Toad]

Would one dare suggest the decision was made on price?

Can it be that Airbus gave him a heck of a deal?

[Lizking]

If I am crossing an ocean, I want 4 motors; other than that 2 is fine.

[Toad]

Yeah, I always thought that way until I flew one. They're awfully, awfully reliable now.

Of course, some days the bear eats you. But he might eat you no matter how many engines you have on days like that.

[CyranoAH]

It may or may not have something to do that the A340 was advertised as one of the most comfortable airliners due to the low noise level of its engines.

Daniel

[cpxxx]

It was nothing to do with passenger comfort or passengers desire for more engines.  It's all to do with the long haul routes Virgin flies on and ETOPs restrictions. (Extended Twin engine OPerationS). A twin engine airliner flying over water must be able to reach a diversion airfield in 180 minutes flying on one engine. The 777 got a special  extension to 208 minutes from the FAA but with further restrictions and a Boeing sponsored diversion field in the Pacific. (So it could compete with the four engined A340) This The A340 suffers no such restrictions and can offer some very long haul non stop flights.  Virgin flies a lot to the Far East which are ultra long haul from the UK.

But that all is a bit technical so Branson sells it as a passenger preference issue.

[mora]

There is not a single accident in recent history where the number of engines would have been a factor. ETOPS is probably a major reason for this decision. It's also expensive to have and maintain ETOPS certification. Also the A340 is cheaper and not very far away in fuel efficiency.

[Toad]

Originally posted by mora
Also the A340 is cheaper  

There you go.

[OneWordAnswer]

Originally posted by Toad
There you go.

Subsidized.