Skip to comments.
Airbus halts production of long-haul A340 plane
Agence France Presse (AFP) ^
| Nov 10, 2011
Posted on 11/10/2011 8:44:29 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
Airbus halts production of long-haul A340 plane
AFP | Nov 10, 2011, 06.07PM IST
PARIS: European planemaker Airbus said today it was abandoning production of its A340 long-haul four-engine aircraft, which failed to compete with Boeing's 777.
"We have accepted reality. We have not sold any A340s for nearly two years," Airbus finance director Hans Peter Ring said during a presentation on the third-quarter results of Airbus parent company EADS.
The abandoning of the programme will allow Airbus to write back into its books a provision of 192 million euros ($261 million) it had made on the programme.
The A340 first flew in April 1992 and in 1993 it scored a record for the longest non-stop flight, between Paris and Auckland, New Zealand.
The Boeing 777 launched two years later and had the same capacity but with only two engines it was more fuel-efficient.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesofindia.indiatimes.com ...
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: a340; aerospace; airbus; civilaviation
Another kick in the stomach to Old European socialism.
posted on 11/10/2011 8:49:38 AM PST
Personally I’m suprised they never redesigned this to be a 2 engine plane... 777 launched in 94. 17 years and they didn’t do jack to compete with the 777?
Maybe they did and the airframe would have had to have had too much rework to justify the expense.
I feel sorry for Airbus, the only reason Boeing beat them in design was that the US government gave them green loans. Maybe if France and would subsidize Airbus, they could become green and design a two engine plane (/ sarcasm).
posted on 11/10/2011 8:58:43 AM PST
by 11th Commandment
Decided to put all their effort into the A380 I suppose.
posted on 11/10/2011 9:01:51 AM PST
I never understood the reason for developing the A340-600 and A340-500. They were developed after the 777 was introduced, and have a large number of parts that are not common to the A330 models. They should have been developed as larger variants of the A330 using twin engines developed for the 777 program.
No problem! Just take two engines off the 340 and haul only really skinny people.
posted on 11/10/2011 9:15:59 AM PST
(You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
I have a pilot friend, and he said the cost and trouble of maintaining 4 engines vs. 2 is a BIG deal.
posted on 11/10/2011 9:17:33 AM PST
(I'm so open-minded my brains fell out)
I'll never forget when the first 777 landed at CVG. I was ON TOP of the control tower that day.
posted on 11/10/2011 9:23:00 AM PST
(whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive...it is the Right of the People to abolish it.)
I was on the original A340 flight test program from 1991-1993 at Airbus working for CFM (engines). I flew on one of the first test aircraft to the Farnborough airshow in 1992, the Berlin Airshow in 1992 and accompanied the test aircraft to Yakutsk, Siberia in Feb/1993 for cold weather testing (temps were -40F).
The aircraft was originally intended for long, thin routes over water. Having 4 engines meant no need for ETOPS certification which was an early selling point. Airbus originally hoped airlines would use both the A340 and A330 and take advantage of some commonality but I don’t believe many airlines did this. When Boeing certified the 777 a couple years later I think it really took the wind out of the sails (and sales) of the A330/A340 program.
posted on 11/10/2011 9:34:53 AM PST
Isn’t the A350 supposed to be the 777/787 challenger?
To: Erik Latranyi
Yes, it has been completely redesigned to compete with those Boeing a/c.
posted on 11/10/2011 9:58:58 AM PST
This is what happened to one of the last A340s built, when the ground crew forgot to chock the wheels
before performing an engine runup test:
posted on 11/10/2011 10:56:43 AM PST
(Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
The aircraft was originally intended for long, thin routes over water. Having 4 engines meant no need for ETOPS certification which was an early selling point. Airbus originally hoped airlines would use both the A340 and A330 and take advantage of some commonality but I dont believe many airlines did this. When Boeing certified the 777 a couple years later I think it really took the wind out of the sails (and sales) of the A330/A340 program.
An advantage of two engines is that you end up with a higher thrust to weight ratio since the plane is certified to operate with one engine out. The 777 excels at climbing, I remember my first flight on a 777, it climbed to 39,000, and made one step up to 41,000. A 747 would typically climb to 31,000 and then make several steps up to 37,000. A 777 departing Singapore at the same time as an A340 will arrive in Frankfurt forty-five minutes earlier, and can climb over the storms in the Bay of Bengal while the A-340 has to fly around them many times, which will often end up meaning a technical diversion for fuel.
posted on 11/10/2011 11:26:22 AM PST
(Pat Buchanan, kryptonite to RINO's)
I also remember seeing a news piece about how the 777 was demonstrated for sales. In the cabin Boeing had different areas set up labeled from all of the configurations for seating and room of their competitor's airliners so buyers could compare it the the 777. It was only a couple of rows for each. IIRC the Airbus 340 was one. Won over buyers so much that Boeing's competitors called it the “dirty pool. It was accurate.”
posted on 11/10/2011 11:42:02 AM PST
by Hillarys Gate Cult
(Those who trade land for peace will end up with neither one.)
well you see the old Europe has still plenty to teach the rest of the world. A340 was - and still - is a great airliner. Btw, the 787 doesn’t seem to do too well. Let’s wait and see “Old Europe” response, I can hardly wait....
posted on 02/11/2014 1:06:26 PM PST
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson