![]() |
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1629792)
He said it burns more than a 777. But the added bonus WOULD be that since it is a common category we would need fewer pilots. :eek:
What would your opinion be of biting off on a common category with the 330 to streamline the acquisition and training costs to quickly get close to 20 additional WB's in the fleet and the benefit to the pilot group? |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1629785)
George's numbers are a pipe dream. (And I think his fuel consumption numbers are suspect) You can make a similar argument for those Air India 777s. (And that won't add yet another type to the fleet). But whatever. I'll believe it if I see it.
You give me way too much credit, they aren't my numbers, but you knew that... Maybe we can, just for you T, keep this slogan on the tail of one of them: http://www.hellomagazine.com/imagene...claudiapic.jpg ;-) G |
Originally Posted by Fly4hire
(Post 1629809)
Reference comments made in a certain published notes about bridge aircraft. Common type with 330, very short differences course for current 330 pilots if flown as common category, TVM of a cheap acquisition for short term (<10 yrs) makes up for a lot of other factors, and excellent metrics for long haul capacity. 840K MTOW, 375 dual class, 7900nm range for damn near free? That buys a lot of gas and creates a lot of revenue and the aircraft are still very comfy and would sync with other Airbus WB customer premium expectations easily. Recall RA is very fond of used proven airframes at bargain prices. We need added long haul capacity yesterday.
Bridge aircraft to get to the next gen aircraft in the pipeline without being the guinea pig. Not to mention this is a networks guy's wet dream to have a small, medium and large like-type available to sharpshoot capacity... ah never mind...it's not a Boeing ;-) Cheers George |
Originally Posted by Wilbur Wright
(Post 1629786)
Would the A340 be a common category with her little sister? That could put some icing on the cake for RA.
|
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1629789)
Yes, it would certainly be a common category. And might I add, the A346 is one good looking machine.
|
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1629838)
doesnt the sim already say A340?
Sounds like it would be an easy transition.......BUT WHEREZ THE BUNK????:D |
Originally Posted by georgetg
(Post 1629823)
ah never mind...it's not a Boeing ;-)
|
Check your time card, lots of people are having trips disappear. scheduling is well aware of the issue, been fielding calls all day they said.
|
Originally Posted by Fly4hire
(Post 1629809)
Reference comments made in a certain published notes about bridge aircraft. Common type with 330, very short differences course for current 330 pilots if flown as common category, TVM of a cheap acquisition for short term (<10 yrs) makes up for a lot of other factors, and excellent metrics for long haul capacity. 840K MTOW, 375 dual class, 7900nm range for damn near free? That buys a lot of gas and creates a lot of revenue and the aircraft are still very comfy and would sync with other Airbus WB customer premium expectations easily. Recall RA is very fond of used proven airframes at bargain prices. We need added long haul capacity yesterday.
What would your opinion be of biting off on a common category with the 330 to streamline the acquisition and training costs to quickly get close to 20 additional WB's in the fleet and the benefit to the pilot group? Still, it's like that time in between buying a lottery ticket and when they announce the numbers. I can fantasize about the future. |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1629773)
IDK, but if it did, why is VA getting rid of them?
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:31 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands