Am i the only person here interested in Heavy Aviation Metal?

[DesertHound]

Hey Richard

Must say I'm impressed with that knowledge! Just goes to show, there's always something new to learn. Thanks again. We'll probably be losing the others here with this thread, but hey, it's a heavy metal thread so why not? I'll join in the discussion

Will be interesting to see what the A360 / A370 will be. I think they've got quite a bit of mileage in the A320 / A330 brands still (look how long the 737 brand has been around) but yes, new types could well be A360 / A370's. The A340's are a beautiful machine - especially the A340-500. You're correct in that the A340-200/300 shares the same wing as the A330's. The A340-500's/600's have a different wing and also a number of system differences. My understanding is that the longer range versions of the 777, coupled with the increase in extended twin ops (ETOPS) ranges, put paid to the A340's from a fuel perspective (cost). The 777 is a very economical aircraft and the A340 cannot quite match it. Once the 777's could fly point to point over extended areas without airports, there wasn't the requirement for the four engine aircraft anymore. Cargo capacity on the 777 is also, I believe, superior.

As far as I know you'd have to be a pretty important customer to get Airbus to build you an A340 these days. I think they did close down production of them and stopped marketing it (well, like you said Richard, it's a shared wing with the A330, but it was still an allocation of resources that Airbus needed elsewhere) and I believe it's not an option to buy one anymore.

I'll take a look at that airfleets site. I think I've heard of it before and apparently it's a good source.

Shame about the A300 for the museum. They're getting pretty rare these days. I thought Airbus would have kept one for the local museum! A few cargo (and pax) ones around though.

I'm not up on the A330NEO but I as far as I know it's going to be a spruced up A330, just like the A320NEO is to the A320. Is that your understanding Richard? I always thought the A350 was the formalisation of the Airbus XWB (xtra wide body).

Interesting what's happening with Monarch. I haven't been keeping up on it but from what little I've read, it sounds like the controlling family want a way to sell out, the new owners are specialists in "value creation" (possibly asset stripping) and it all seems like a gimmick to me. I'm not sure we'll see them still in five years from now. I do very much hope I'm wrong though.

I've had the privilege of flying nearly all of the current Airbus family, A319/320/321, A330-200, A340-300, A340-500 and now transitioning to the A380. They are all beautiful machines in their own right, but if I had to pick one (so far) it would have to be the A340-500. First flight on the A380 is next month, but from the simulator training so far, she's shaping up to be even better.

Dan

[Chetcombe]

I've had the privilege of flying nearly all of the current Airbus family, A319/320/321, A330-200, A340-300, A340-500 and now transitioning to the A380. They are all beautiful machines in their own right, but if I had to pick one (so far) it would have to be the A340-500. First flight on the A380 is next month, but from the simulator training so far, she's shaping up to be even better.

You must do a lot of flying 

My favorite experience on an Airbus was actually on the tiniest one, the A318. I flew round trip from JFK to London City on BA. With it being Business Class only and so small it really does feel like you are privileged! The only downside was when I was doing my expenses when i got home and I realized how much more the ticket cost compared to a regular JFL-LHR round trip. Suffice to say I have only flown that route once

[DesertHound]

Hi Chetcombe

It would seem like a lot of flying wouldn't it? The A319/320/321 (and A318 for that matter) all fall under a common type rating, meaning you can fly all four. I flew for an airline which had the 319/320/321, so one day you could be in the 319 and the next day in the 321.

Leaving the small 'bus behind and moving to a company with the A330 and A340, the initial endorsement was on the A330 (known as the base aircraft) and the A340 was added to this six months later. Again, for licencing purposes you can easily fly both. There are some regs involved (such as alternating sim checks) but it's no great deal.

I have friends, on the other hand, who flew the A320 and A330 (not that common due to the size differences) but it is possible. However, you couldn't be rated to fly the complete family (319 up to 340) all at the same time. The A380, as it stands, is a separate rating at this time (although the course is abridged for those with a current A320/330/340 rating).

Ah, the JFK-LCY route. You lucky so and so! I've heard it's a nice product. Apparently it was set up in response to the ending of the Concorde service. BA wanted something distinguished from the normal product out of Heathrow. I guess that would explain the price difference. Console yourself in knowing that you are one of the few 

Dan

[Chetcombe]

Interesting stuff deserthound, good luck on the A380.

The LCY flight numbers are BA001/2 which are the same as the old JFK Concorde flight numbers as I recall. A nice product as you say, but it falls a long way short of Mach 2. I was lucky enough to fly JFK-LHR a couple of times on Concorde, which I guess at a real stretch could be considered an Airbus!!

[DesertHound]

You really are one of the select few then Chetcombe. I'm sure you cherish those memories. As a kid I used to look skywards at 6pm every evening when the roar of those Olympus engines passed over South London - you could almost set your watch by it every evening.

Yes, agreed, A318 and Concorde - not quite the same thing. Both loosely related though 

Thanks for the best wishes.

Dan

[Bealman]

All I know about aircraft is that after a long haul flight from Australia to get to just about anywhere, I'm bloody glad to get off 'em.

Bit of a sad end for the Concorde, though.

[Buzzard]

I was lucky enough to fly JFK-LHR a couple of times on Concorde

Nice.

I flew on Concorde twice, both on the "round the bay" sprints.  The first time I paid for us to go and the second was for free when I entered a competition in the Evening Standard for a pair of tickets.  Both flights were with the same aircraft but never mind as they were great trips and will never be repeated.

Nigel

[DesertHound]

All I know about aircraft is that after a long haul flight from Australia to get to just about anywhere, I'm bloody glad to get off 'em.

Try doing it every week Bealman 

Buzzard ... you also, Sir, are one of the lucky ones in my opinion. It truly was in a class of it's own. It was indeed a sad end to the aircraft. It seems (although anybody please step in with other thoughts) that a combination of ongoing costs to keep the aircraft flying (remember only BA and AF had them, in total a fleet of 14 I believe) and high fuel costs stretched the economics too far.

She was one of a kind indeed.

Dan

[Buzzard]

Buzzard ... you also, Sir, are one of the lucky ones in my opinion. It truly was in a class of it's own. It was indeed a sad end to the aircraft. It seems (although anybody please step in with other thoughts) that a combination of ongoing costs to keep the aircraft flying (remember only BA and AF had them, in total a fleet of 14 I believe) and high fuel costs stretched the economics too far.

She was one of a kind indeed.

Dan

Sir, thank you for the compliment although the only luck was winning a second flight   I paid through the nose for the first.

But never mind they were very magical events and were something I wanted to do since seeing the first prototypes at airshows in the 70s.

Sadly when 14 became 13 the slippery slope to withdrawal started.

I must go and see Alpha Charlie again, next summer perhaps.

Nigel

[DesertHound]

Yes Buzzard, I agree with you with regards the accident in Paris.

The accident crystalised the issue of whether the aircraft was economically sustainable or not. Somehow it seemed different in the minds of the public and the media from other accidents too - as if she wasn't an aircraft but something we had a personal affinity to. Almost like a rock star passing away. Let's also not forget the poor souls onboard.

Where is Alpha Charlie now? I've seen the one at Duxford and also one of the prototypes (I believe) at Le Bourget. I cannot remember the reg's.

Where else are they located around the world? I'll kick off with New York and the Caribbean (Barbados?)

Dan

[Bealman]

That horrendous polarising video sealed the end. I remember it vividly. Sad way for an iconic aircraft to go out.

[Buzzard]

Where is Alpha Charlie now? I've seen the one at Duxford and also one of the prototypes (I believe) at Le Bourget. I cannot remember the reg's.

Where else are they located around the world? I'll kick off with New York and the Caribbean (Barbados?)

Dan

This link will tell you where each one is now

http://www.clubconcorde.co.uk/concorde_locations.php

The French one at Sinsheim is parked next to the only Concordski outside of the former Soviet Union (source wikipedia).  Perhaps I'll get there one day and see how close the russians got to replicating Concorde.

Isn't it strange that Paris was witness to the only two crashes of supersonic passenger aircraft?  We know why Concorde crashed and the consipracy theorists are probably still debating what happened to Concordski.

Nigel

[B757-236GT]

Filton has Alpha Foxtrot. It also had prototype G-BBDG but thats now at Farnborough.

Richard

[Agrippa]

G - BOAA is at the National Museum of Flight near  Edinburgh. Last year  you could get a ticket
for a  cockpit visit, not sure if still available.

[47475]

Personally I prefer a bit of classic Russian heavy metal. There aren't many places I won't go to fly on it!










Nice to see a fellow N-Gauger here in the UAE too, Deserthound.