PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Real A300, 310, 757, 767 replacement aircraft idea
Old 6th Dec 2007, 16:18
  #25 (permalink)  
keesje
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Anti-ice, Swedish Steve thnx! I tried to put a LD3 (which is the most commonly used long haul container onto the design). Problem is that it is so high (1,63m) you have to fit two to fill a round lower fuselage and then you end up with a widebody..

Maybe right seized 0.8 m high pallets / containers that can be piled could be developed that are more transferable..

A strongpoint of the 767 vs the A330 is that it fits ICAO cat D gates that are present all over the world. Not conincidently I gave the Greenliner about the same wingspan as the 767.

The 787 and A330 have big lean wings to carry high loads & fuel over long distances efficiently but won't fit many gates and this might require many 767 oriented gates / airports to be adjusted..


As an operator you probably have to choose between the superior cargo capabilities of widebodies and low weight / operating costs / airport compatibility of narrowbody aircraft. No wonder the 757 & A321 are so popular with Leisure operators.

I think cargo on long / medium haul is less important then on medium / long haul. The enormous growth in air traffic also makes dedicated cheaper cargo flights possible on routes where it wasn't feasible before.

On the 2 aisles: you'll notcie it is still a narrowbody. The two aisles allow for pitches / seatwidth's in economy that would probably not be acceptable on 3-3 configurations. It also provides options for more seat on the front of the aircraft (e.g. 5 abreast domestic F (you cant have middle seats there) and some realistic long haul premium options (I can't imagine efficient long haul First on a 757 sized aircraft).

Looking at the empty weight (about ten tons more then the a 757-300 without full carbon wings / fuselage) and new generation engines, I think a significant step in operating costs could be archived compared to the 757, A310 and 767. If the 787 can do 20% better, this aircraft that is more then 25% lighter then the 787 could offer something that would make airlines happely accept shortcomings in e.g. cargo capability.

IMO for the passenger there is a win too, in terms of seatcomfort, handluggage allowance and more direct connections.
keesje is offline