home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics.airliners
- Path: sparky!uunet!decwrl!ditka!ohare!news
- From: hoyme@src.honeywell.com (Ken Hoyme)
- Subject: Re: Boeing 747-300
- References: <airliners.1992.4@ohare.Chicago.COM>
- <airliners.1992.5@ohare.Chicago.COM>
- Message-ID: <airliners.1992.13@ohare.Chicago.COM>
- Approved: kls@ohare.Chicago.COM
- Organization: Honeywell Systems & Research Center, Mpls. MN, USA.
- X-Original-Message-Id: <HOYME.92Nov19093539@schrodinger.src.honeywell.com>
- Sender: kls@ohare.Chicago.COM
- Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:35:39 GMT
- Lines: 82
-
- (I posted this yesterday, but our mailer had problems with finding where
- to send for this moderated newsgroup. I have been told this has been
- fixed. I see that other follow-ups have occured as well, but there is
- some information in here that wasn't covered. Rather than editing this,
- I am sending it on as originally written.)
-
- In article <airliners.1992.5@ohare.Chicago.COM> kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz) writes:
-
- > In article <airliners.1992.4@ohare.Chicago.COM> jerry@telecom.ksu.edu (Jerry Anderson) writes:
-
- > Unless the Russians have something which I've missed, the 747-400 is
- > easily the largest commercial passenger aircraft in terms of number of
- > seats and payload. Its range is also the greatest of anything now in
- > service, though the Airbus A340 will exceed it once it enters service
- > next year.
-
- According to the "Commercial Airliners of the World" section of the
- 21-27 October 1992 issue of Flight International, the largest Russian
- transport is the Ilyushin II-86 Camber with a maximum seating of 350. I
- noticed that the max. seating estimates for the other airplanes were for
- sardine configurations, so I have to assume that this is not a 3-class
- estimate. (Ex: 747-400 with max seating of 660?? That's cramped!)
-
- >> McDonnell-Douglas MD-11 1993
- >> Airbus AE-400 1994
- >> Boeing 777 1995-6
-
- > All three of these are much smaller than what you're thinking of.
- > Here are the important parameters for these three plus the 747-400
- > for comparison. Seating is for a "typical" three-class cabin and
- > service is the date of first service; MGTOW is in US pounds.
-
- > Mfr. Type MGTOW seating service
- > Boeing 747-400 870,000 430 1989
- > MacDAC MD-11 618,000 250 1991
- > Airbus A-340 559,000 230 1993
- > Boeing 777 515,000 ~220 1995
-
- My data for the 777-200 is 3-class seating of 320, with a stretch
- version planned with 3-class seating in the 360-390 range. United
- ordered the 320 seat version according to AvWeek Oct. 22, 1990.
-
- According to AvWeek Nov. 4, 1991, the A-340-300 will have a 3-class
- seating configuration of 295, and the A340-200 will be shorter with 262
- seats.
-
- > In the 600+ passenger market, Boeing has talked about both further
- > stretches of the 747 and an entirely new aircraft, sometimes using
- > the N650 moniker. McDonnell-Douglas has most recently talked about
- > the MD-12 -- once yet another stretch of the MD-11 -- as a new and
- > much larger aircraft, also in the 600+ passenger category. Airbus
- > has said that if there is demand and/or if Boeing builds such an
- > aircraft, Airbus will build one too. The name A600 or maybe A2000
- > seems vaguely familiar though I can't locate any references.
-
- Boeing is considering three configurations for their "New Large Airplane
- (NLA)" A 747 stretch, a double deck 747 and a totally new double decker.
- 3 class seats range from 484-612. See AvWeek Jan 6, 1992 for a
- description of these options.
-
- An Oct. 28, 1991 AvWeek article covers Airbus's studies on large
- airplane configurations. That article confusingly talks about the
- ASX-700, but shows an artists concept with an A2000 on the tail. 600
- 3-class seats in a double deck configuration.
-
- I have also heard that Boeing will build theirs if Airbus launches. I
- suspect both are eying the market and hoping to delay the investment as
- long as possible, given the current economic climate. If one decides
- the go-ahead, the other will have to launch defensively to prevent the
- other from capturing the market. I hope this won't be another fiasco
- like the DC-10/L-1011 developments, where each captured enough of the
- market to keep the other from making any money. Lockheed got out of the
- business, and some have questioned whether MDAC has ever really
- recovered from that.
-
- Ken
-
- ---
- Ken Hoyme Honeywell Systems and Research Center
- (612)951-7354 3660 Technology Dr., Minneapolis, MN 55418
- Internet: hoyme@src.honeywell.com
-
-