As it says above..
What airliner surprises you the most?
In a good OR bad way?
As it says above..
What airliner surprises you the most?
In a good OR bad way?
AE is the best.
jetstream/globe
Personally, I'm surprised with the recent success of the A321ceo/neo. It's quite a late bloomer. It was available in the market for a long time but it is only recently when sales started to accelerate. I think the A321ceo/neo is well on its way to becoming the undisputed king in the narrowbody segment. I'm sorry 757 fans, but you're not getting your 757 back.
I'm sorry 757 fans, but you're not getting your 757 back.
Why'd you have to ruin a very accurate post with a silly comment?
As you should know, I'm the biggest 757 fan there is. Alas, much in the same way I refrain from the Airbus vs. Boeing argument, I look at every aircraft from the perspective of 'the mission'. The 321 is a remarkable aircraft that as you mentioned, with improvements, has become an exceptionally capable aircraft with the ability to complete 99% of the missions a 757 was once used for. However, there is still that 1% where you absolutely need a 757.
A 757 may never roll of the production line again, and indeed it bloody well shouldn't. But a 757 is still a 757.
I'm glad that they're replacing the 757 with something that actually is pleasant to look at.I'm sorry 757 fans, but you're not getting your 757 back.
Honestly the fact that the Air Force still has a role for the B-52 is amazing to me.
Personally, I'm surprised with the recent success of the A321ceo/neo. It's quite a late bloomer. It was available in the market for a long time but it is only recently when sales started to accelerate. I think the A321ceo/neo is well on its way to becoming the undisputed king in the narrowbody segment. I'm sorry 757 fans, but you're not getting your 757 back.
A321 is pretty much like A330-300. Airlines just realize how profitable they are.
Also, pretty surprised any airlines want to buy B747-8i. It's like buying older expensive second hand car with no spare parts for the future.
A321 is pretty much like A330-300. Airlines just realize how profitable they are.
No, continued improvements in efficiency, range and performance have made both the 321 and 333 viable aircraft for missions they were never originally designed for.
No, continued improvements in efficiency, range and performance have made both the 321 and 333 viable aircraft for missions they were never originally designed for.
Actually, it's more that they are extremely profitable and the amount of passengers are increasing so airlines needed bigger plane than A320/B737-800. The last significant improvements for A321 is in the mid 90's.
The A380.
I thought it would look less like an ugly whale
Actually, it's more that they are extremely profitable and the amount of passengers are increasing so airlines needed bigger plane than A320/B737-800. The last significant improvements for A321 is in the mid 90's.
You understand there are progressive changes made during the production run of an aircraft? A new build 321-200 is a significantly more capable aircraft than an early build 321-200.
Why'd you have to ruin a very accurate post with a silly comment?
As you should know, I'm the biggest 757 fan there is. Alas, much in the same way I refrain from the Airbus vs. Boeing argument, I look at every aircraft from the perspective of 'the mission'. The 321 is a remarkable aircraft that as you mentioned, with improvements, has become an exceptionally capable aircraft with the ability to complete 99% of the missions a 757 was once used for. However, there is still that 1% where you absolutely need a 757.
A 757 may never roll of the production line again, and indeed it bloody well shouldn't. But a 757 is still a 757.
Destroyed the toolings for the fuselages, so
Established Oct. 2012
#GOSTROS
the longevity of the 763
I'm with you there. I've never really understood the point of adding another aisle just to have one more seat per row on an aircraft. To me a 2-3-2 setup for a widebody just makes no sense. I've flown on a 763 before & there isn't anything inherently wrong with the aircraft; it just seems like Boeing should have come up with a bit of a wider fuselage. I can see how they're great cargo aircraft later in life though.
You understand there are progressive changes made during the production run of an aircraft? A new build 321-200 is a significantly more capable aircraft than an early build 321-200.
Obviously they are. They also done that to problematic B787 or A330, A320, B737NG or A380. But it's not major. It's a slight tweak over period of time. The major change gonna be the update from the -100 to the -200 which make the plane more attractive.
It would be naive of you to think no other aircrafts ever receive any tweak or improvements over 20 years of service.
The market growth are the reason why airplane with higher capacity like B737-800/-900ER or A321 selling like a hot cake. This day and age, there are 2 billions more people on earth, and billions of people who could afford to travel by air. In the past, most airlines would operate B737-300 instead of the -400 because the market is smaller. Now most airlines would operate B737-800/900 instead of B737-600/-700. This could be proven by looking at the number of sales for the 737-300 vs B737-400 to B737-700 vs B737-800.
So, yeah, the main reason why A321 getting really popular is because of the increase in air travel. And how there are emerging market for 180-220 pax segment on short flights.
I'm going to have to go with the DC-9 family. Some of the most over-built birds in the air. It was mind-boggling to me that NW had some from the late 60s-70s flying around daily up until the end. Even then, they went on to serve with DL for a few more years after that. I have always and will always love them!
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users