Who the hell in their right mind would want to do a flight from New York to Rome in a horrible single isle passenger aircraft. Some years ago I caught a flight from Auckland to Sydney in a damn B-737 encompassing a flight time of about 3.25 hours. It was the worst flight I have ever had from a passenger comfort level plus the misfortune of being a passenger in one of these tin cans! I can cope with a couple of hours of sitting in a sardine can but anything longer, forget it!! I was dying to go the toilet but had to wait ages as a hostess was serving meals & I could not get past the food trolley. With all of the traffic going up & down that single isle (toilets, staff trying to dispense food etc, etc just made this trip a bloody nightmare & to this very day I absolutely refuse to board any single isle sardine can whereby it involves a flight time of anything much over 120 minutes or thereof!! I don't care how fancy the bloody aircraft is as I'm not flying on one of these shit arse cattle trucks & that's it!!
Though the A-220 has only 100 to 150 seats (within its two models -100 and -300), they have a range of 3,600 nmi (6,700 km; 4,200 mi) which could make them go across the Atlantic such as London (LHR) to New York (JFK) which distance is 3443.21 miles / 5541.32 km. Suffice to say that it is the most advanced airplane so far with an airfoil made of composite and engines that provide a gain of 20% less than the B-737MAX along with several other aircraft with the exception of A-321neo LR and XLR. This airplane could serves a myriad of small cities in the United Kingdom flying to cities in Canada and USA, especially all these cities located between Boston and New York, with direct flights. Boeing management and engineering are still designing and building airplanes as they would be the sky tanks. It would be a lot more productive for them to engage into new technologies but also new designs. Boeing would also be more productive if they would work on actual aircraft models instead of getting into several new aircraft at the same time while accumulating problems one after the other. If it was not for the National defense contracts they would be even more in problems than they are. Their "space" division is also eating too much employees resources for the revenue it generates taking their "aircraft division" to the brink of collapse. Some people never understand until its too late to act.
@@PeterNGloor Yep... which has 49.5% of the shares. There is still 912 orders as of last September 30 and keep going. Though the A-220 was designed in Montreal and Mirabel, its wings are made in Ireland but the airplane are assembled in Mirabel, Quebec, Canada and Mobile, Alabama, USA. An absolute marvel to fly. Since we are in Canada, we travel from YQB or YUL to YYZ and/or YVR where the A-220 has plenty of flights.
Unlike the B737, Airbus can just tweak the FMS and FBW systems to adjust for any changes to weight and balance. Hardly any difference training is required.
I doubt if many realise just how significant fixed costs are, and how enabling a higher rate of production can save so much money. Conversely, the imposed limits on production, supply chain issues and the time spent on rectification at Boeing must be making those fixed costs a real concern.
There it go again ! This how good for the AIRBUS A321xlr over BOEING ? Maybe I wish Garuda Indonesia use AIRBUS A321xlr too over it's BOEING 737 for the future of developed country in Indonesia on 2045 years later. Especially, Indonesia have to stop relationship with BOEING and turn to AIRBUS only for Garuda Indonesia as I want.
Thanks@@FLIGAVIA! This is I want to get many more AIRBUS operator planes for Garuda Indonesia. I meant, the many more AIRBUS operator planes much like the world's biggest muslim population country ever ☪️ in Indonesia 🇮🇩 over BOEING for the future.
Boeing has no aircraft that can match the size and performance. Had they kept the 757 basic design instead of the ill-fated 737 Max they would be on par with Airbus.
I think the BOEING'S fate in every long year of this 2024 is in trouble@@PeterNGloorbecause, BOEING has been loss everything forever and ever until it got flopped. Much like biggest Box office movie bombs all the time when I heard.
This never dying misconception that single aisle has "less comfort" than double aisle - Seat pitches remain the same in both configs - Don`t matter if you`re crammed in an A-380 or 737!
And it must not be forgotten that the seats in a typical Airbus A320 series are often wider than many of those found in widebodies. Certainly in Economy. While there are no physical reasons for the passenger experience to be worse, the flight crew are not so well looked after, significantly so, as dedicated rest areas disappear and the galley areas are more cramped.
اقا این هنر قاچاق این مجوز دار با تلویزیون پارسال تا الان دو برابر شده ما که فروشنده نیستیم دوست عزیز مشتری و مخاطبیم کسی ام که نمیگیرن فقط ما پول دادیم الانم نمیخوام پر شده دیگه ما چه فهمیدیم خوبه .
I flew from Manchester to kuwait on airbus single aisle fantastic leg room and comfort plus biggest screen due to the fact you were sitted so far away .
@@JohnMitchExcept that they sometimes are. The Economy class seats in an A320 series aircraft are at least as wide, but often about an inch wider than those typically found in many wide body aircraft. As for seat comfort and legroom, we can blame or praise the airline for their choices.
This never dying misconception that narrow body has "less comfort" than wide body - Seat pitches are seat pitches - Don`t matter if they`re crammed in an A-380 or 737!
Sounds good on paper… however it’s a narrow plane, what would passengers comfort? I’m worried, who would like to travel for a long range seating on a cramped seat
It is a misunderstanding to think a wide body airplane has more room per passenger. The A321 typically fly with 18 inch wide seats in economy. A 777 or 787 often has 17 inch wide seats. It is up to the airline and their business model how much room you have between each seat row. It basically only depends on how many people you want to cram into the plane. It is not necessarily better on a wide body. Personally I probably prefer the narrower plane, because you simply have fewer people in your vicinity.
99% of economy class passengers care about PRICE. If the price is cheap enough they will book it, plus it will be a direct flight. Who wants to take 2 flights if you can take just one if it's cheap Why do you think Ryan Air is one of the biggest airlines in Europe (they fly more passengers than BA), it's not because they have the most comfortable seats or the best service or the best food & drinks or fly from the best airports or ANYTHING else............ it's beacuse it's CHEAP CHEAP CHEAP
This never dying misconception that narrow body has "less comfort" than wide body - Seat pitches are seat pitches - Don`t matter if they`re crammed in an A-380 or 737!
Narrow plane doesn't matter I flew Manchester to kuwait on single aisle airbus most leg room I have ever had . Biggest ife screen because so far away. Just for comfort alone perfect
