A340-600 Maiden Flight

[FL390]

As the title of this thread suggests, the first flight of Airbus's A340-600 took off today. It is now the worlds longest aircraft at about 240ft (I think).

Virgin is launch customer fo 2002

[Frederic]

Go to the Airbus site and download the movies! Pretty impressive aircraft!

[moschops]

At 240ft I'll bet take-off needs a delicate touch. What's the aft ground clearance on rotation -- and how long before someone smacks the back end?

[AhhhVC813]

Apparently needs no more of a gentle touch than any other long airliner, nor will it require two stage rotations. However there is a piece of software included, that will reduce rotation rate if the tail is in danger of being "banged in".

[SilentHandover]

Expect to see one at the Farnborough Airshow 2002, officials from Airbus are visiting EGLF soon to see if it can cope with the MEgaLongBus.

[ExSimGuy]

80 yds from front to rear? I hope it doesn't only have loos at the back end http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/tongue.gif

[Dropp the Pilot]

Take as many pictures of this sad device as you can, 'cuz as soon as guaranteed performance numbers are released for the 777-200LR are released this 340 will become VERY rare indeed...

Emirates doesn't take delivery of the 340 for eighteen months yet, but they are already trying to flog them!

[Wrongstuff]

Dropp...Yep there's always one!

[Seloco]

With reference to AhhhVC813's post, and having now seen the Airbus videos, it did seem to me that there was indeed a two-stage rotation at take-off, or is this just a normal precaution on a first flight?

[northern boy]

I see the Boeing shareholders are back on line.Any more?.

[Former_SLUF_Driver]

240 feet looooooooooooooooooooong

Copied from the A340-600 AFM:

NOTICE A tail strike can occur while parked unmanned on the ramp in a still wind.

[AhhhVC813]

Sad device eh Dropp? The only sadness I see is in the dire insignificance of your irrelevant posting.

[Kangar]

Dropp, the airline who uses this aircraft to do the intended job of a 777-200LR would be very stupid indeed, but the one who use a 340-500 to fill that gap, they would be a little more clever........as for the sad device, well, maybe you should get right on the phone to AI and point those silly enineers in the right way, after all what would they know about building a plane? Hilarious.

[Frederic]

Been in Toulouse today! Seen the 340-600 do touch and go's. Life! I sat at the holding point when it landed. It was about 200m from my aircraft. WHAAAAAW! What a beautifull aircraft! I'm in love...
Seems AI is in a bit of a hurry to get it certified. The testpilots seemed to be working the aircraft pretty hard today. Oh and Dropp, I think it's great you hate the Airbuses, just gives me more of a chance to fly one. Less competition. Wouldn't mind a 777 either though.

[HOBAY 3]

Still a long way off M0.86 though....

[Dropp the Pilot]

Actually I don't hate Airbuses at all, my related sentiments are more of relief (having abandoned them entirely after 3500 hours on type) and hope (that I never ever have to fly one again).

More to the point, they are a continual source of amusement...for instance, why does Boeing have a bunch of unsellable 340's sitting in their backyard? Did you see any 777's parked in Toulouse?

[NigelOnDraft]

<<for instance, why does Boeing have a bunch of unsellable 340's sitting in their backyard? Did you see any 777's parked in Toulouse? >>

Just shows Boeing's selling tactics! They have to take your "unsellable" 340s in order to shift their products... The better salesman is the one with no surplus stock!

Have flown both A & B - both good products, find it a bit strange that there are those here who seemingly seriously don't appreciate there's room for both companies, and in fact beneficial for some genuine competition that keeps prices down, and innovation high.

[crewrest]

HOBAY 3:

Mach .86 -v- .83/.84: Big deal.

How about:

10 tonnes an hour -v- 8 tonnes an hour: ?

Really don't see why we should get in a tissy, all this Boeing v Airbus crap is a waste of breath. I've been in bars where it has all got rather heated over this subject.

After all isn't it a Boeing expression 'if it looks good, it is good'

[northern boy]

Well said crew rest. At the end of the day airlines exist to make money.A big fast Boeing is fine if you can fill it up with punters and freight but if you are developing a new route or times are hard reduced fuel burn can mean the difference between profit and loss,and that can mean the difference between having a job and being down the road. Its a question of horses for courses.All this "real men fly Boeings" may make some people feel good about themselves but is totally irrelevant in the real world.