Odds and Ends: MH370, Day 5; Delta’s RFP

MH370, Day 5: Yesterday brought another round of frenzied media coverage when the Chinese government released satellite images of what might be pieces of the Malaysian 777 in the water, 140 miles west of the last known contact position of flight MH370.

These images were identified as being up to 72 feet long and 52 feet wide. The images were taken Sunday, after the Friday night/Saturday morning disappearance.

We’re skeptical that these things are part of the airplane. They are huge to be floating on the water. Most likely something this big would have sunk.

Further, we simply cannot get past the fact that no debris field of any kind has been seen anywhere along the intended flight path or within broad proximity. Seat cushions, aircraft insulation, light-weight parts, papers, and even bodies should have been found in broad proximity to the “crash” site–and these haven’t been.

Certainly this would be a breakthrough if these objects turn out to be part of the plane, for you then could mathematically take into account the currents and winds and backtrack to the point of origin. But we aren’t going to count on it.

And in a dramatic development, The Wall Street Journal reports that signals from the plane’s engines indicate the flight flew on for four hours after the transponder stopped sending signals. This theory has been denied by Malaysia.

Delta’s RFP: Aviation Week has a short story that’s filled with news about the Delta Air Lines request for proposals to replace its Boeing 747-400 and Boeing 767-300ER fleets. The story also contains some information about the need for a plane the size of the Bombardier CSeries. Delta wants the Airbus A330neo, the A330 Classic, the A350 or the Boeing 787 (it has left-over, deferred orders from Northwest Airlines on the latter), and it needs a plane with around 5,000nm-6,000nm range (which fits the A330-300/300neo). It also says the Boeing 737-700 isn’t economical and the 737-800 is too big. While not naming the A319 and A320, the Boeing equivalents, we believe the same is true for these aircraft. This suggests the CSeries. Delta also likes the Pratt & Whitney Geared Turbo Fan.

64 Comments on “Odds and Ends: MH370, Day 5; Delta’s RFP

  1. DL could replace the B-744s with the B-748, B-77W, or B-779. The B-788/9 is perfect to replace the B-763ER. This is not to say the similar Airbus models cannot meet the RFP requirements. DL purchased the B-73Gs for the (smaller airliner) high/hot requirement that, at the time, no other airframe could do. Can the CS-300 do that mission now?
    The MH-370 mystery continues…………

    • Since Delta outruled the 777-X as “experimental” it will be a competition A350 vs 77W for the 747 replacement. Is 10 abreast 17” an acceptable option on the 77W for delta? If not, I think the 77W is just uneconomical in comparison with the A350.

      Their 777-200s are 9 abreast with 18,5 wide seats, but some of their long-range 757 have 17,2” seats.

      Is the MAX no contenter in that RFP? Too experimental, too ?

  2. – “I hope they (Airbus) do offer an A330NEO,” Delta CEO Richard Anderson told Aviation Week in Atlanta. “There is a huge need for a small widebody. We really need Airbus to step up and re-engine.”
    – “Delta is not looking at the 777X. “We don’t want experimental airplanes,” says Anderson. “We are not interested in it.”

    I think Boeing’s Delta key account manager is flying back to HQ to explain what’s going on in Atlanta.

    BTW, don’t mention the 380. Its only for Hub-Hub long flights. Delta likely wants to cut marketshare by replacing their 747 after 40 yrs by significant smaller aircraft.TransPac markets are probably shrinking. IMO nobody flies A380s there.


    • “IMO nobody flies A380s there.”
      For A380 routes take a look here: http://www.flya380.net/en/routes

      British Airways: London-Los Angeles (Oktober 15th 2013)
      Lufthansa: Frankfurt-Houston (August 1st 2012)
      Air France: Paris-Los Angeles (May 28th 2012)
      Air France: Paris-New York (November 23rd 2009)
      Lufthansa: Frankfurt-Miami (June 10th 2011)
      Air France: Paris-Washington (June 6th 2011)

      I don’t know how up-to-date that site is, but clearly non-US carriers are able to be succesfull with VLAs in that market. The US carriers seem to agree they have not the neccessary demand on those routes, however.

      • You cut his previous sentence, which gave context to the line you quoted:
        “TRANS-PAC markets are probably shrinking. IMO nobody flies A380s there.”
        All your quoted routes are TransAtlantic routes. Not what he was discussing.
        Korean Air does fly A380 to LA and soon to Atlanta, Singapore also serving LA.
        But clearly that isn’t relevant to US carriers, esp. not as 747 replacements,
        as opposed to augmenters in addition to a replacement.

        Airbus committing to a -1100 stretch of A350 would seem to further help it here,
        I’m sure Delta can use the existing models well, but being able to have a flexibile order convertable to a future stretch would just make it a shoe-in IMHO, with high end capacity and much better efficiency on lower capacity routes.

  3. Scott: I think the Jon Ostower WSJ MH 370 item should not be called a theory. It may be wrong, but its a report as opposed to theory.

  4. Delta Orders:
    Delta is famous now for taking advantage of an opportunity, ergo get the current 777 in the production gap area and have what they need (to replace the 747 class).

    I think the C series has been sold far short. I always felt that if you only need to fly under 2000 and miles and 100 people or less (130 in the 300) why in you pea picking mind would you buy a 737 or an A320 regardless of the “deal”. You wind up with an aircraft that as stated is way to heavy, has much bigger engine all of which cost bucks to keep working for no benefit.

    It would be a great deal for Bombadier.

    I think the 787-10 fits the Delta slot. I don’t buy the A330 NEO argument.

    • Richard Anderson says (reformulating his words) that it is not the Corporate Purpose (ie the ‘Business Charter’) of Delta Airlines to deal with teething issues or to test-fly new aircraft types : those issues he’d rather leave to airframe OEMs or to those airlines whose outsized Operations, Technical, Engineering & Maintenance departments have a special liking, including dedicated manpower and gearing for such. Delta’s primary job is to cost-efficiently and timely move people in style, not to solve in-service chinese puzzles and similar nut-cracking. Proven, reliable in-service dispatch reliability top-ranking statistics is a “GO” decision parameter. The ‘Grand-Father Design’ is OK to RA, to be preferred before the ‘Experimental Aircraft’, ‘Classic’ before ‘-X’ or ‘Vanguard’, but not necessarily ‘CEO’ before ‘NEO’, here RA asserts his full rights to opt according to his carefully weighed inclinations.

      People driving the ‘safe lane’ like Richard Anderson will help extending the useful economical lives of existing programmes, whilst conveying the message to Innovators : make sure you get things right from Day1, it is not our business to take risks with validating new technology, or we’ll come to you later, when your Product is ready. We have learned to favour a business model where ‘patience’ or ‘safe confidence’ are part of the equation more than is the front-running addiction to ‘fashion’ in technology development for its own pervading sake ? …

      • Then based on not wanting to be in the flight test business, DL does not want the A-330NEO. They have not ordered either the B-737MAX or A-320NEO. DL ordered 100 B-737-900ERs instead. That also rules out the B-787-8/-9/-1000, A-350-900/-1000 (they will keep the NW order for the B-788 in the 2020s delivery time frame), and the NSA from Airbus or Boeing. If DL ordered the C-Series, they would be part of the flight test group they say they don’t want to be in.
        So what does that leave? DL could order new build B-767-300ER/-400ER, B-777-200ER/-200LR/-300ER, A-330-200/-300, B-747-8I, and the A-380-800. But I don’t see DL ordering the A-388, their hub at ATL isn’t an A-380 airport, nor is DTW or MSP. NB orders would be the B-737NG, A-320CEO, E-Jet, and CRJ series.
        Looking back on history, DL was a launch customer for the L-1011, DC-8, DC-9, B-767, and CV-880. They were also a launch customer for the RR RB-211 series engines.

        • “DL does not want the A-330NEO”
          ? Delta is asking for it !

          Looking at the time table, requirements and what Anderson says, the A350-1000 seems to again have the upper hand. What else? 787-10? Payload range restricted. 773ER? Heavy and not economical for the 2020-2045 period. 777X: too uncertain according to Delta. 747-8i? A seemingly usefull spec for DL frankly, but there must be a reason the industry passes on them even when rock bottom priced..

          • Mr. Anderson said he does not want to be in the flight testing business. If he ordered an A-330NEO, he would be a launch customer and in the flight testing business he wants to avoid. Have you noticed DL has not ordered any A-320NEOs or B-737MAXs?

        • I am afraid the point is that the A380 soon after EIS had dispatch reliability close to a mature design, and A350 testing seems to be going very smoothly, Interjet gives the SSJ100 a 99.3% dispatch reliability compared with the 787´s 97% 2 years its after EIS. This is a vote of no confidence in new Boeing programs. Looking at Airbus´ track record with the A380 EIS and A350 testing it is conceivable that the A350 will EIS in December 2014 with better reliability than the then 3 year old A787 will have in December 2014. Chicago must be having nightmares, I hope. So, So much depends on MAX and 777-X going smoothly, at least once they are in service.

        • As quoted: “I hope they (Airbus) do offer an A330NEO,” Delta CEO Richard Anderson told Aviation Week in Atlanta. “There is a huge need for a small widebody. We really need Airbus to step up and re-engine.”
          With said article also explicitly including A350 on Delta’s RFP list.

          If you’re forced to contradict customer stated desires and try to hook them on some narrowly construed legalism of one other sentence they stated, you might as well give up.

        • Respectfully, Delta’s statement isn’t so clear. They might “need” Airbus to commit to an A330neo project (and a 380teo {twin-engine option} while they are at it) so that Delta can go to Boeing and say, ‘ok, about the discount on those 777 classics…’ No untruths spoken and need fulfilled!

  5. Delta can acquire the 747-8, and when Boeing stretches the 737Max7 fuselage another five frames, a few of those too.

  6. Whatever DL buys they will probably operate for around 30-40 years, and statistically it’s unlikely to have RR engines. They’ll have 40 or so CF6 A330’s by 2017, and if in fact they wanted more (upgraded) 330’s I think this would contradict the predicted RR option here, while perhaps supporting the often-speculated motivation of GE to jump into the 330NEO game.

    They’ve got 200 or so CFM powered narrow bodies, and are married to the 321 at the upper/mid narrow body range so the “good deal” that could be made with the Canadians may really appeal to them at the lower end right now.

    As with Northwest’s history (and Lufthansa for some types), I’d guess they will fly 50-60 of those 757’s until they are as old as the NWA DC-9’s got. Going with the 5-abreast C-series to replace large numbers of (functionally DC-9-50/717/ size) aircraft makes a lot of sense. This really could be a breakthrough order for BBD (and maybe eventually CS500).

    Once they marry up at the lower end of the NB segment to a type, they will patiently allow other carriers to venture into the “breaking in” phase for the “next generation” Airbus/Boeing 757’s. And by then (2030-35) their A330’s will also be somewhat elderly….

  7. I think 15-20 A380 will provide evolutionairy growth in DL/ Skytteams hub network connecting ATL, DTW, ICN, AMS, NRT, CDG with high volume destinations like LAX, HKG, PEK, SYD, FRA, LHR. Complementing A380 flights from AF, KA, CZ etc. in 550-600 seat configurations.

  8. What else? 787-10? Payload range restricted

    Keesje, the A330/A330neo not have more autonomy than the 787-10! It is time for you to change the disc over your unfounded 787-10 critical!

  9. “The carrier plans to look at four options: The Airbus A350-900 and -1000, all three models of the Boeing 787, the current versions of the A330 and a re-engined A330.”

    It should be a mix of any of the above only. No 777X, 748, A380 here. I wonder if the order would be tied to a modification of VS’s A380 order.

  10. Checklist, nothing against the 787-10. IMO it can be an excellent aircraft on flights up to 10hrs/5000NMs, just like the A330. Throwing 7000NM ranges suggesting it is a serious 772ER/340 replacement like the A359s, is nothing more then wishfull thinking, as the airlines by now have made clear.


    In case of doubts (VV, Aspire, Shaj, RichA), pls google recent comments of LH, JAL and DL execs and check the order books. To fight off the A350-900 & -1000, Boeing is offering a small winged 787-10, discounted 777-300ERs, ULH 777-8X and 777-9X with 17inch wide 14 hour seats that passengers better accept.. While some of the analyst mentioned declared Boeing long haul victory immediately after Randy’s/ McNerny’s first slides (“boxed”), reality is kicking in early.

  11. “It should be a mix of any of the above only. No 777X, 748, A380 here. I wonder if the order would be tied to a modification of VS’s A380 order.”

    It’s difficult to see how – VS have committed to the 787-9 for the long term, its unlikely that they would want more 330s or 360s as well, – unless they are offered a good enough deal tocancel the 787s instead

  12. 787-10 meets the need and by that time the bugs (should) be worked out and the engines will be the most efficient versions. Whats not to like.

    They already have 777s so it fits in with their method of low cost as possible proven aircraft they are setup for.

    • By how much exactly is 787-10 engine more efficient than 330NEO engine?

    • “Whats not to like” I don’t know, perhaps you can take it up with Delta’s management who are explicitly begging for A330NEO and looking at A350 for the larger segment.

      • Another possible explanation for Delta saying a 330NEO is “needed” is that they need a commitment to that project, along with the 777X, to beat down the price on classics from both Boeing and Airbus.

  13. I think that terrorists hijacked this plane and want it to appear that it crashed into the sea and is gone; when in reality it is being hidden somewhere and will be used for another terrorist attack.

  14. MH 370:

    The signals appear to be some kind of auto com check, not data stream.

    That said it proves that MH 370 was in the air 4-5 more house which is what I have contended, ie it flew out of the area then went down, ergo no debris.

    How it did that is of course the debate (and where it is now). I don’t think they can track it from the com checks (but NSA has not weighed in so….)

    From all the actions required to drop it from 35,000 to 29500 (If the last radar scan is not bogus), turn it sharply (90 degree and who knows how many other changes) get it to level off, as well as have both the transponder and ACARS get turned off requires a human agent.

    While any number of damage scenarios could have one or a couple occur, all of those to selectively take place with transponder taken out, ACARS shutdown, kill both pilot and leave the aircraft perfectly operational and flying along like normal is absolutely implausible.

    Lacking a non MH disaffected 777 pilot or the world most educated hijacker and or terrorist (none of which have been identified from the pax list) that leaves one or both of the flight crew (I believe one).

    I now refer to this as a PIL (pilot induced loss). as the only way you can explain all the items.

  15. Given the sparse but interesting data of pings of the ACARS system but no data, – a hypothesis to explore is: could this be this is another SwissAir Flight 11 – a fire in the Main Equipment Center (MEC) underneath the cockpit? If there’s a fire a smoke detector illuminates the ‘EQUIP COOLING OVRD’ message on the cockpit EICAS.

    see diagram here: http://www.skybrary.aero/images/B772_MEC_FIRE.jpg

    It’s possible after seeing a message the crew began a turnback to Malaysia. But if the fire continued it could knock out communications equipment, which would explain the loss of comms, and blow out the crew oxygen bottle which could cause rapid decompression and crew hypoxia if it went off through the fuselage and/or the fire could have damaged the fly-by-wire flight controls which could explain the continued flight.

    While just a hypothesis, unfortunately a 777 had a fire in this exact location – luckily for them on the ground in London Heathrow in Feb 2007. See the UK AAIB report:

    The report said, “…Prior to this accident the aircraft manufacturer was involved in investigating 11 in-service reports of power panel overheat events, three of which involved major damage to the panels. The affected panels were the P200 and P300, and the affected contactors were the RBTB, Auxiliary Power Breaker (APB)and the Primary External Power Contactor (PEPC).

    Given the Boeing experts on this blog – is this scenario possible?

  16. interesting speculation on Delta and the CSeries. I suspect Richard Andersen of Delta is such a man of principal that he will reject any Canadian EDC financing outright as part of a deal since he is such a vocal opponent of the inequities of US ExIm financing.

  17. I think Airbus would be quite happy with 2020 orders for the A330neo!

  18. Keesje said “To fight off the A350-900 & -1000, Boeing is Offering a small winged 787-10” …

    Keesje, it is difficult to give you credibility when you speculate that a small A330 wing better than the “heavy” 787-8 on some missions! it falls well as the 787-10 will be better for 90% of the routes!

  19. I add, that you were the first to dance about a possible small wing A350-1100 as a proposal against the success of the 777-9X! And to finish with 17 “seat, it seems that it does not bother Airbus (or you for that matter) that many A330 are 400/+400 seater one class !… But it does not bother you .. .

  20. “No Keesje the A330neo will not be as efficient as the 787-10! So you know, have the courage to admit it! ”

    Who said so? Anyway, most analyst say/said, until recently, the 787 is about 10-12% more efficient then the A330. GE says the GENX is ~13% more efficient then the CF6-80 hanging under the A330, add 1-2% sharklets, weight savings etc. Then the silence starts.. & someone introduces the 787 is 20% better then the A330 afterall 😉 ..

    Anyway Delta/NWA is known for it opportunistic, effective fleet policy. Cheaply buying 30 773ERs from EK (w’ll use them Pacific only) around 2020 and close a 10 yr deal with GECAS shouldn’t be excluded.

  21. You all miss the POINT, Delta wants what Delta wants period, no more no less. Mr. Anderson is not a big fan of Boeing and current issues with the 787 makes the 777X a no buy. It is a matter of dollars and cents which include maintance cost also. Delta wants an aicraft that gets the job done for the lease amount of cost over along period. That being said when United is loading passengers in Atlanta on a A380 and Delta will look real hard at that aircraft because passengers love it!

    • why would united be loading a A380 in atlanta? none of the big 3 US carriers have expressed an interest in that plane. and even if they did it wouldn’t make sense for united to deploy it to atlanta. it would make sense of EWR to FRA since that connects United and LH hubs (being Star Alliance partners).

  22. Keesje said :”Anyway Delta/NWA is known for it opportunistic, effective fleet policy.”

    Aspire said
    “787 still retains significant fuel burn & operating cost advantage against A330neo787-10 block fuel burn 10-12% lower than A330-300neo on shortest routes787-10 around 7% more weight efficient than A330-300neo”

    not sure if Delta really looking economic plan! They may be crazy? …

    • But fuel is only 30-50% of total costs… the rest is landing fees, crew, mx, etc etc. So 10-12% better on fuel gives 3-6% better on costs. Not insurmountable, certainly not by a re-engine.

      I doubt the 787 is much better on most if these. On some they are exactly equal (crew)…

      Close the fuel gap and you will have a plane that will be able to compete agsinst the 787 on short/medium routes.

  23. One issue many will look at is whether there will be a residual value to the aircraft, 10-20 years down the road. There will be a significant disadvantage for any prospective NEO type to a composite new build 787 manufactured in the next 10 years.

    The wildcard in that though is that DL tends to operate aircraft until they head to the Mojave, so it may not matter in this case.

  24. Not sure Mneja, do you have to forget the 787 is composite and what A330 is not? We are going to redo all the same the point on the benefactions of the CFRP? Then A330 is a concept of fuselage borrowed of 70’s old A300! Incapable to reicive the crew rest like 787’s, A350′ s and of 777′ s!

    A loss(waste) of money if they are situated in the belly freight! A serious airliners not any more to make orders for A330’s!

    • Checklist why do you think DL is not a serious airline? Is LH also not a serious airline because they ordered the metal 777x? Or 747 borrowed of old 60s 747? What about MAX ordering airlines (SW, UA) borrowing a 50s fuselage? A waste of money or do we introduce double standards?

      Txl1649, about residual value of aircraft, I’m not sure about 787 SF mods & pretty sure about a A330 conversion options.

  25. Let’s not forget what we learnt in a previous thread.
    According to Aspire aviation the 787-10 is 25% more fuel efficient

    RR Advance >20% better than Trent 700 used on A330, EIS 2020
    RR Ultrafan >25% better than Trent 700 EIS 2025
    So a A330 Neo with RR Ultrafan would be on par in fuel burn, the lower risk EIS2020 variant would burn only 5% more fuel.

    If mneja’s calculation is right, 5% more fuel burn would only be 1,5% in total costs.
    Current list prices:
    A330-800 245 Mio vs 288 Mio 787-10. That’s 17% more for the 787-10.
    Don’t forget the A330 line is already paid and written off and the NEO cost would be paid mostly by the engine OEM. So Airbus certainly has more headroom for aggressive pricing for the A330 than Boeing with the 787 there.

    How much of the total costs are capital costs ? How much cheaper would a 787-10 competitor have to be in aquision cost to make a 1,5% total cost penalty irrelevant ?

  26. One sidenote about the 77W: why is that aircraft not part of Deltas RFP?
    I think Boeing has a much larger production gap to fill than Airbus with the A330. So I’d expect rock-bottom prices are most likely for that model line.
    Is the 77W already effectivly dead? Is the A350 so much better, rendering even aggressive pricing futile?

  27. Keesje, I know you do not understand express intent to pollute the debate, because you are confident that the A330neo is much less efficient than the 787’s! you mix everything to make longer and sterile discution!

    We can not be more explicit and clear it. I see you in a complex which is that “if Airbus can not then Boeing as” … or, if Boeing can then Airbus can! I regret to tell you that no, Airbus, will not do as Boeing!

    You mention the metal 777-X! No problem on the wing is composite and its size allows it to be monopolistic position! The A330neo? Lol, it will nowhere. identified between the A350 and the composite 787! He suffers from a lack of opportunity to market all by itself! The concept of the 70’s (like 747 70s and not 60’s as you say) is dying! If Delta is not too stupid he can use a technique to show that they are not interested in the 777-X and get a discount (as Akbar El Baker QA?). Because what is the best replacement for the 747 -400 if it is not efficient twin engines 777-9X 400 seater itself!

    LH? Okay let’s talk! She had never Order 777 (non-X) for the simple reason that (except 747, for historical reasons, then 777F which is not a passenger, the greedy A340-600 was the case!) Boeing order seriously. and to support my argument, which is that actually the 777-X unlike the A330neo get older, dying and going nowhere, has no equivalent!

    Finally Keesje, learn the 787-10 is 7% lighter than the A330neo! You know what that mean? it will mean that nowhere! … The 787-10 is about 70 meters, a larger wingspan, better payload range, best belly cargo, more passengers, faster, more efficient, more D-Check away … And it is 7% lighter. I think you have the answer about serious Delta! Should I add? …


    • “[…] learn the 787-10 is 7% lighter than the A330neo!”

      Show us!

      According to available data the B787-8 is about 1 tonne lighter than the A330-200. The -200 can carry more pax than the -8. The A330-300 is about 5 t heavier than the -200. I will wait and see.

        • On what type of seat? Typical airline seating compared with typical Boeing 15” seating? According to this even a Boeing 787 would be 7 % lighter compared to an airline 787. We had the discussion here about Boeing seating. Just look it up.

          Aspire is also comparing a today A330 with a future 787. Until the first 787-10 is up in the air its OEW is speculation. Until then an A330 may be lighter.

        • Pardon, the 227 t for 787 is the MTOW and not the EOW!

          EOW is about 118 t for 787-8 and 119.5 for A330-200.

          Also your Jetstar pax count is quite obscure.

          B787: 335 pax at 21 business and 314 economy.
          Seating (row/pitch/width):
          7 / 38 / 19 for business class
          9 / 30 / 17 for economy

          A330: 310 pax at 42 business and 268 economy.
          Seating (row/pitch/width):
          7 / 38 / 21 for business class
          8 / 31 / 17.5 for economy

          By throwing out 3 business class rows Jetstar could carry 4 economy rows or 32 more economy seats. The difference then is just 335 to 321 pax. With the same pitch another economy row would fit in.

          The real seating difference is just 6 economy seats at the price of 9 abreast seating in economy!

          According to this and the 7 % claim two NEO engines are together 4.5 t heavier than current engines or also about 1 t heavier than a current GEnx-1B.

          That is what I see today.

        • Mhalblaub,

          the A330 is significantly heavier than the 787!

          Maximum Fuel Capacity139,090 litres. A330-200

          Maximum Fuel Capacity126,917 litres 787-8


  28. it is a fantasy to believe that the RR will be available in 2020 ultrafan technologically mature and experienced at the same price as a “traditional” engine with an even ETOPS certification that Trent? Yet for 2020? … Science fiction!

    • EIS of RR ultrafan is planned for 2025. That’s eleven years from now.
      Dont mix it with the RR Advance (EIS 2020).

      Leeham mentioned in a previous comment his impression that for now the Neo-hype is mostly driven by the engine OEMs. So RR is not the only engine OEM eager for a A330-Neo.

  29. Mhalblaub said :” According to this and the 7 % claim two NEO engines are together 4.5 t heavier than current engines or also about 1 t heavier than a current GEnx-1B.That is what I see today.”

    you forget the reinforcement of the wing and the center box of the re-engined A330neo! and lead to further weight!

    • How much further weight? Each wing was already engineered to carry the weight of two CFM-56s.

      • nyx, I do not know how long you talk aviation, but, I fear, IMO, no offense, I think you are not very “geek” … It can be a waste of time for you. ..

        • Wasn’t some of the extra structure from the wing and wing box removed to save weight? The A-342/3 CFM-56-5C engines weigh about 8800 lbs. each (17,600 lbs. per wing) and the A-345/6 RR Trent-500 engines weigh about 10,660 lbs. each (21,200 lbs. per wing). This compares to the CF-6-80E engines which weigh about 9,500 lbs. each on the A-330. Even the WARPs of the A-330MRTT only weigh about 1,200 lbs. each. So the additional wing/wing box structure weight of the A-340 is not needed on the A-330.

        • Oh, you’re very ‘geeky’ alright. I will stop wasting my time on you then, since your expert commentary is too hard for me to understand.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *