Without this Aircraft, Airbus wouldn’t exist!
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 10. 2023
- Get up to 35% off Ekster’s wallets by using the code MENTOUR at www.ekster.com
-----------------------------------------------------
It’s definitely not as notable or as impressive as the 747, the Queen of the Skies. It doesn’t look as distinctive as a Douglas DC-10 or a Lockheed 1011 Tristar. Frankly, it looks just… ordinary, by today’s standards.
But THAT’s the point. The Airbus A300 that I’m going to look into today, is the first EVER twin-engine widebody, a configuration shared by ALL widebody airliners available in the market today.
And on top of that, the A300 was the aircraft that practically launched one of aviation’s giants: Airbus. So how did Airbus and its A300 come to be? And WHY did Airbus decide to start off with a widebody??
Stay tuned!
-----------------------------------------------------
If you want to support the work I do on the channel, join my Patreon crew and get awesome perks and help me move the channel forward!
👉🏻 / mentourpilot
Our Connections:
👉🏻 Exclusive Mentour Merch: mentour-crew.creator-spring.c...
👉🏻 Our other channel: / mentourpilotaviation
👉🏻 Amazon: www.amazon.com/shop/mentourpilot
👉🏻 BOSE Aviation: boseaviation-emea.aero/headsets
Social:
👉🏻 Facebook: / mentourpilot
👉🏻 Instagram: / mentour_pilot
👉🏻 Twitter: / mentourpilot
👉🏻 Discord server: / discord
Download the FREE Mentour Aviation app for all the lastest aviation content
👉🏻
-----------------------------------------------------
Below you will find the links to videos and sources used in this episode.
• Bréguet 763 Deux-Ponts...
• Les usines Bréguet Das...
• New Fokker Jet Introdu...
• 1930s, 1940s USA, Boei...
• NASA Manned Spacecraft...
• Pan American Boeing 70...
• Air France Sud Aviatio...
• BAC ONE ELEVEN FLYING ...
• LTU Lockheed L-1011 Tr...
• A300 Birth of a Saga E...
• BEA Hawker Siddeley Tr...
• Finnair Sud Aviation S...
• Boeing 737-100 - "Roll...
• Finnair DC-9 plane lan...
• Paris Orly Plane Spott...
• Dassault Falcon Jet Ce...
• A300 Birth of a Saga E...
• RB 211 - COLOUR
• A220 Wing Factory Tour
• 1982 American Airlines...
• UPS A300 Receives Cock...
• A350-900 Maiden Flight
• In the making: Vietnam... - Zábava
Get up to 35% off Ekster’s wallets by using the code MENTOUR at www.ekster.com
It’s interesting how Dassault Systèmes went from producing airliners to producing most sophisticated 3d CAD design software
Very unusual evolution
Maybe you should make a video about the A340-600 ?
Thanks Petter. That was very interesting.
Have you considered the Ilyushin Il-76 and related aircraft yet?
I've used an ekster for 2 years now and I love it. congrats on the partnership!
Here's the production of the wings for the A220.
czcams.com/video/tDDrgGSiW3A/video.htmlsi=vzD-3O6iyvOwoUxi
The last A300 was an A300F delivered to FedEx in 2007! I love the 747 as much as anyone, but I find it crazy how few people give a plane like the A300 the recognition and respect it deserves for having a near 50 year long production run!
Indeed! And it’s an awesome aircraft and I hope you will like the video
@@MentourNownice but on main channel can u do bek air 2100 or Leicester City helicopter crash cuz ive never found a good animation on them
@@MentourNow I love every video! You present every video in such an objective, well-informed and easy to digest manner that almost anyone would be able to understand the complex topics in them. You have an incredible gift and talent for teaching others and your team does an outstanding job researching and producing these videos.
The first twin engine wide body aircraft beating Boeing to that concept by 11 years, this concept is now the standard for both companies
Also basically influencing every modern aircraft in production today.
Airbus is an innovator. First twin engine wide-body, fly-by-wire, full glass cockpit, and so on and so on. Airbus, listened to its potential customers and has delivered on that philosophy from the first A300. Congratulations Airbus.
Airbus literally replaced old Boeing
We are not talking about Being post McDonal Douglas merge (its shit)
One of the most incredible stories about the A300 is the one that survived getting hit with a missile. In November 2003, a DHL A300 got hit with a man-portable missile shortly after takeoff from Baghdad International Airport. The impact occurred on the left wing, which destroyed much of its trailing edge, bled out all hydraulics, and caused a fire in the wing. Using differential thrust, the pilots managed to turn around and land back on the runway with minimal additional damage, and the plane was actually repaired afterward.
Yes, that is a remarkable story. Just to cap it off, after landing they ran off the runway and ended up in a minefield (obviously without setting off any mines). Although it was repaired, they couldn't find a buyer - probably because of the age of the aircraft - so it was sadly scrapped.
"[Selling] Airbus A300, new wing, clean Carfax"
@@alles_klar "I know what I got comes with new rims"
Wow!
They also did a full go around with all that damage. Mayday covered that incident.
I have over 1000 hours as a captain on the A300. It truly was a wonderful aircraft with great power and performance. The 3 crew cockpit was also enjoyable and we flew with engineers not third pilots who knew the aircraft inside out. Ours were all freighters and could carry 100k of cargo, replacing DC-8's at that time. Many unique systems started with the A300 that made it very reliable. After many years flying Boeings the Airbus became one of my favorite aircraft.
Not "was" - "is". Still operating , even B4-200F.
It’s still flying strong as a cargo plane. UPS and FedEx still retain relatively large fleets of it.
DC-8F? looks like UPS .. or maybe FedEx 🤭
A300b4
Hawker Siddley self-funding its continued participation in the project after Britain withdrew has to be one of the greatest examples of foresight in the aviation industry.
Self financing - West German Govt helped with the financial support
@@michduncgthe French and German governments funded their respective national components only, the British government withdrew funding to HS.
HS funding was their own and certainly not from either the French or German governments.
@@drjojo4624 I suggest you check again! The West German govt paid 175 million marks to help Hawker Siddeley and ensure they remained in the Airbus programme
put another way, the British government already in the 60's lacked appetite for risk, industrial vision, trust in the "stickiness" of partnerships, had it's bum between two stools, and that continues to this day, sadly.
@@drjojo4624 The French and German financial burden thus ultimately reached 43% each of a cost preliminarily calculated at 1665 billion marks.7 A substantial part of the German contribution of about 175 million marks was to be paid to Hawker Siddeley through a subcontract with the German industry; the British manufacturer had declared its inability to bear more than 40% of the development cost of the wings but was in sole possession of the machines to produce them. In other words, and in marked contrast to the French side, the West German government was even willing to subsidize the utilization of British capacities to keep the Airbus project going.8
The biggest selling point was how Eastern used the A300B4 to fly from Miami and Atlanta all the way to Los Angeles and San Francisco with much less fuel burn than the L1011's Eastern were also already flying. The was the critical juncture that got other airlines to buy the plane.
It’s not just that but Airbus was also smart to loan some A300s to Eastern for free. Risky marketing move but it paid off massively.
@@CoSmicGoesRacing But Airbus couldn't use the first-production A300B2 model. The A300B4, which could fly between Atlanta and the USA West Coast easily, was the model that Airbus lent to Eastern. Its success with its substantially lower fuel burn compared to the L-1011 Eastern were using on this route was critical in convincing other airlines to buy this plane for high-density medium range routes over the L-1011 and DC-10.
Interestingly, the original airline specification that the A-300 was designed towards was a specification from American Airlines. In the time when the slightly smaller widebodies (DC-10 and L-1011) were under development, AA floated a specification for this type of aircraft. This spec was developed by Frank Kolk, of the AA Maintenance and Engineering department, and called for two, rather than three engines. AA wanted this kind of layout for the DC-10, in fact; but the other US airlines held out for three engines. Somehow, the specification wound up in Europe, and Airbus apparently incorporated that thinking into their design. They pitched it to AA, but by that time, of course, AA was already invested in the DC-10; but came the day, in the late 1980's, when Airbus made another "offer you can't refuse", this time to Bob Crandall, and AA wound up with 35 of the -600 variant, which we kept for 20 some years. In that roundabout way, the original AA spec ended up at AA.
I flew it for 9 years in the 1990's, and it was a good airplane, except for that then-unknown rudder issue that would raise its' head shortly after 9-11. The short, stiff wing did not like flying high, and I only ever flew it above FL370 on a couple of occasions when it was empty. You couldn't get it over 330-350 until close to the end of a flight.
Thank you very much for sharing this History and your Experience!👍
Likewise experience in the 310. Didn’t like to go Hi. However, the power of those engines... she flew on power! You go around and you would get 6000fpm easy....
Story sounds like an American retro-fit. Not questioning that this guy proposed the configuration. Not buying that this was the origin of the A300.
Flying experience aside, the A300-600s that American had, were a Maintenance Nightmare !
The European manufacturing processes were more in line with WWII in that the airplanes structure was designed to be life limited, their for things like the basic formulation of the Aluminum in the aircraft was total junk ! We made thousands of dollars in overtime, grinding out corrosion, and replacing Aluminum parts that just seemed to out of nowhere have massive inner granular corrosion. The non Destructive testing department worked night and day, with all the inspections for cracks, and x-rays that were needed on those planes. The only good thing Airbus did was use GE Engines !
The engines gave the Airbus reliability on the gate, which AA loved.
But dealing with the mainly horrible fuselage structures issues, and German Blueprints and French terminology used on the supposedly engineered American manuals, was to be blunt, a pain in the bum !
Maintenance cost is why American ditched the Airbus A-300. I have no idea why after all those problems, when USAir took over Americans Airline, they stuck with so many Airbus Aircraft, and are buying more. Lessons learned, and quickly forgotten!
@@jameslester4474 It sounds like you were one of those AA mechanics who were so hard put to it to keep them in the air. My personal thanks for having done so! Suffice to say that those issues were never brought to the attention of the vast majority of pilots - even those in the flight office, as I was during the first half of the 1990's when the type was at its' maximum usage at JFK, where I was chief pilot.
As to any "engineering" of the manuals, recall that the first 25 of ours were obtained on a then-novel "rent-a-plane" basis - essentially the aeronautical equivalent of going to Hertz or Avis, and not on any long term capital lease as was the norm, then and now, for airplane acquisition. Airbus was, at the time, eager (putting it mildly) for a big sale to another US company; and as I indicated above, they more or less made Bob Crandall an offer he was loath to refuse. We could have returned them at any time on little more than 30 days notice! This is something that Airbus has done repeatedly over the decades, to companies like Jet Blue (among others), to move the metal off the lot. If it were not for this willingness to be giving the airplanes away at and maybe even below cost, Boeing might still be the largest manufacturer. As an interesting aside, Boeing (not to be outdone) immediately offered us 25 767-300's on essentially identical terms, which we also took up enthusiastically - somewhat to the chagrin of Airbus! But the Boeings were the nucleus of an eventual fleet that numbered more than 100, so their gamble paid off a bit more lucratively than did Airbus'.
We did keep them for over 20 years, which more or less points to the notion that, whatever the maintenance cost might be, they were still desirable on the property. They could haul a huge load, both passengers and cargo. In fact, while I was there, they were the largest passenger capacity airplane in the fleet, having more seats (albeit mostly in coach) than even the 777-200's. It was not until AA got 777-300's, very late in my career, that we had an airplane that carried more people than the A-300.
I share your lack of enthusiasm for the later models of Airbusii, although in my case that stems more from a disdain for the sticks and the method of interaction with the automation than for any lack of long-term structural integrity of the airframes.
I flew and love 737.. but looking at the fuselage of A330 which came from A300 always gives me a "now thats how a perfect aircraft looks like" vibe
I had the same feeling when I first saw an A330 at YYZ, operated by a Canadian charter company (Sunwings? Not sure who). Just looked so right.
@@FrewstonBooks Must've been Air Transat
@@matheusgiovannini571 Before Air Transat got theirs. I remember seeing at Pearson an A330 with the script down the fuselage "First A330 in North America". Pretty sure it was Sunwings or similar.
Oh the Dassault Mercure ! I LOVED this aircraft, having spent hours flying on them in my childhood.
Crews nicknamed it the fighter, not only because it was made by Dassault, but because it kinda handled like a fighter jet.
That's also why, while I was jumping of joy at the idea of flying on one, my mum was exactly the opposite, as she really didn't like aerobatic maneuvers.
This aircraft was a godsend for Air Inter and ATC as it could fit into empty slots in approach queues by performing some quite steep maneuvers. Which also meant exceptional punctuality.
The approach to Paris during rush hour was always quite the ride, with the cockpit asking everyone to be seated over the PA. That meant we'd be in for some thrilling sensations.
I think this aircraft is responsible for at least half of my huge love and craving for high thrill sensations.
Plus, Air Inter was a great company, an ancestor to nowadays low-cost carriers, with their "colored fares" : blue, white or red. They really had very affordable tickets and helped democratize air travel.
To the point that they even used A330's for short hauls briefly before being taken over by Air France. Air Inter was an A330 launch customer if I recall correctly.
They obviously also flew several A300's, especially on the Paris Nice, of which I was a frequent passenger with my mum as she worked in Sofia Antipolis several days a month.
The Air Inter A300, as I remember it, was in high density mode with one large single cabin, so it felt huge.
Very good video that offered me a lovely trip down memory lane. The A300, Mercure and Air Inter were my first love with aviation.
Thanks a lot!
You could make an argument that the A300 was the most influential commercial passenger jet ever constructed. Almost every widebody out there is twin engine, and almost every commercial aircraft designed since uses fly by wire. Absolutely a revolutionary aircraft.
Fly by Wire was only introduced by the A 320, which program started in 1979 - and the A 300 (as well as the A 310) has a Yoke (!), not a Sidestick, which was introduced by the A 320, too. But beyond this: Yes, absolutely!👍
Actually the first airliner with Fly by Wire was the Concorde. Of course that was just an analog interface to the flight controls. The A320 was revolutionary because it introduced the digital, fully automated FBW that basically interprets the pilot's intents and does whatever necessary to execute on them. Before the A320, only the F16 and some Dassault fighters had that kind of technology.
I disagree. It's certainly in the running for it but I think the 747 being the first widebody aircraft and Boeing also having the first commercial jet aircraft with nacelles on pylons instead of inbody engines like the Comet make it tough to call this the most influential. The technology just wasn't there prior to have only 2 engines. It's a bit of luck on their side that the engines proved reliable enough to get them past that 30 minute limit. Every jet was going to be twin engine once the engines weren't shit enough to need a third in the tail just for fun.
@@tonymorris4335 You forgot about the Sud-Aviation Caravelle before either A300 and 747.
Rear-mounted but in nacelles at the end of lateral pylons, dating back to the early-mid 1950's (first flight in 1955). It was also the first commercial airliner capable of auto takeoff and autoland. Autoland performed in no visibility for the first time by an Air Inter Caravelle transporting passengers and landing at Paris Orly in January 1969.
The Caravelle was also the base on which Douglas derived its DC-9, after studying the model that GE bought to develop engines.
A300 is not FBW, you are thinking of the A329.
Small gripe: The BAC 1-11 didn't look like the DC-9, the DC-9 looked like the BAC 1-11 as it preceded that design by 5 years. Yes, I'm biassed here, I flew among the last BAC1-11s in regular passenger service. Love these historic videos! Keep them coming.
Yes, the One-Eleven's first flight preceded the DC-9's by 18 months, and it was in service with its launch customer, British United Airways, nearly a year before the DC-9, despite a fatal deep-stall accident that delayed the test programme and certification. The twin-engine DC-9 and its successors used a similar rear-engine and T-tail config as the One-Eleven, so Douglas would have benefited from the data obtained after the One-Eleven accident.
Moving on to the two larger tri-jets, the HS Trident and the Boeing 727 - both of which preceded the One-Eleven but shared the rear-engine, T-tail configuration - I think it's generally accepted that Boeing took the unprecedented idea from de Havilland (Hawker Siddeley's predecessor), which had been indiscreet. The B727 first flew only a year after the Trident, which had been delayed and down-sized by the dithering of its launch airline, state-owned BEA. The Trident 1 turned out to be too small, whereas Boeing was able to cater for the worldwide market.
Both Trident and One Eleven suffered from the thrust limitations of the RR Spey engine, which also had a lower by-pass ratio than the P&W JT8D employed on their American rivals. When BEA eventually demanded a much bigger version of the Trident, the 3B, it had to be fitted with a booster engine for max weight take-offs. The stretched One-Eleven, the 500 series, had to resort to water-injected Speys to compete in the European charter market, but the improvement in take-off performance in the summer was marginal.
An absolute pioneer aircraft model. Excellent analysis and presentation as always, Petter!
Glad you enjoyed it!💕💕
I was fortunate to fly the A-300 at Eastern. The aircraft had the same handling as the DC-8 and was fantastic to fly. I was a little worried about flying the Airbus because of fear of poor craftsmanship but found the aircraft to be better engineered and constructed than Boeing and Douglas.
I didn’t fly, but I was at EA in the mid 80’s in Miami. Sad to see it go along with Pan Am.
Can you explain how the aircraft was better engineered than the 747?
@@sanitman1488 For one, Airbus got the wing right on the first try, they didn't have to come up with redesigning a twist into the wing after the fact, to fix lift distribution problems.
@@coriscotupi actually, if you had taken the foresight to read aircraft manufacturing trade publications and documentaries on the development Boeing 747, it would be clearly evident the aircraft development was pushing the technology at the time warranting the redesign several times to produce to this day one of the most safest aircraft in the air.
@@coriscotupi utter nonsense. The wing as everything else relating to the 747 was radically new, pushing the technologies of the 1960s. Furthermore the Boeing 747sp received a different wing design enhancing its performance and again with the 8i. “Please look up the famous “Sutter twist”. FYI not only do I know what it is ( I maintained the 747s for Pan Am) but I had the privilege to meet him personally at a ceremony at Pan American’s “Jet Center” maintenance facility at JFK Airport. He was there to discuss the 747 while renaming one of first production 747s to ‘’Clipper Juan T Trippe”. You might want to learn about N747PA. As a AMT that has worked on the 747 for Pan Am, I was part of a technician group gathering with Mr Sutter. Here he discussed the “twist” in detail. There was no “fiasco” as you claim rather engineers coming together to solve a problem before production ramped up. As the aerodynamics testing was almost finished, wind tunnel tests showed a problem. Pressure distribution on the outer portion of the newly designed wing was such that the internal wing structure could not properly support the excessive loads. ( lift distribution was not all wrong ) To make matters worse, parts were already being built in the Auburn factory in Washington state. Adding to the pressure on the original 747 team, Jack Steiner, the man who led the 727 and 737 programs, believed the current wing was “unsalvageable”. Adding insult to the injury, after an internal engineering audit, a group of 50 engineers was gathered around Steiner and set out to redesign the wing completely. Joe Sutter wouldn’t have this, as he believed this could jeopardise the whole program. After gathering a few engineers to try to solve the problem, they realized after a while that they didn’t need to twist the whole wing to solve the load problem. Twisting just the outer wing section after the outboard engine pylon would provide 80-90% of the effects from twisting the entire wing.
What’s more, it would be a lot easier and cheaper to implement. It was a close call for Joe and his team, but their ingenuity allowed them to dodge yet another obstacle in the race to creating the soon-to-become mighty 747. The press picked up the story, and so the Sutter twist was born. The “incredibles” got it right the first time before production ramped up.
The a300 was the first to feature a supercritical airfoil, the first to make use of composites, it used glued parts instead of rivets, it was revolutionary, and very beautiful
The bonded lower fuselage skin on early production aircraft had to be replaced when in service dis-bonding occurred.
Interesting. I was inder the impression Fokker pioneered composite/glued parts on commercial planes.
As usual the answer isn't as straightforward. Seems Airbus was pioneering these parts as well. Could well be the first, won't start a chauvinistic internet riot over a now demised aircraft manufacturer 😉
@@gauloiseguyStill a shame Fokker disappeared. Same as Dornier!
Hi Peter, thank you for telling us about this Airbus history. I’m considered so lucky for having an opportunity to fly most of Airbus 24:10 type. Slightly over 30 years experience as pilot, 1992-1994 flew DC-9-32 & 1994-1996 flew B737-200 & my first Airbus on A310-300 & A300-600 in 1996-1998 (First company) was trained by Sabena Pilot. Second company flew A300-600F 2004-2007 was trained at Airbus Toulouse. Third company flew A330-200; A330-300 & A330F then CCQ A340-500 A340-600. I got upgraded as Commander A319 & A320. Fourth, fifth & Sixth company as commander A320 CEO & NEO then Seventh company as commander A330-300 then upgraded to A350-900.
I had the pleasure to fly on an A350-900 just recently. In economy you feel the difference to a 787 or 777 I had on other legs. The live camera view during take off and landing is amazing for passengers.
what a life 🥳🤩👍🏽🛫✈️
I remember fondly flying in those first A300 leased to Eastern to/from San Juan, Puerto Rico. You did not mention it but they also made a lot less noise than the L1011 Eastern was flying in those days. I know, as I lived at the time as they were flying low into what was then called Isla Verde airport.
And that's especially notable too when you recall Eastern had named the L1011 itself the "Whisperjet" -- which tbf they *were* WAY quieter than the then-common narrowbodies.
I remember stewardesses telling me that they were coming back from long hauls less fatigued when flying the A300 than other planes.
Frank Borman, born in 1928, a former NASA Astronaut and in 1977 CEO of Eastern Airlines, was the man who saved Airbus. Without his Deal the French and West German Governments would have shutted down Airbus, which was in the public political discussion at that time - and the Aviation History would have taken a very other Route.
Thank you very much for telling this Story!❤👍
Btw.: Dornier became only in the 1990ies a part of Airbus. The West German Founding Members of Airbus were the Hamburger Flugzeugbau HFB in Hamburg (their Facility and Company Airport in Hamburg-Finkenwerder is still the second-largest Production Site of Airbus worldwide), Focke-Wulf in Bremen and Messerschmitt in Augsburg (Bavaria). Bremen and Augsburg are still the two other main important Airbus Production Site´s in Germany.
CASA in Spain joined Airbus like Dornier only in the 1990ies. - Fokker in the Netherlands and Saab in Sweden never (Fokker fell into Bankruptcy in 1997, Saab finished its Civil Aircraf Program in 2005 with the ending of its Saab-340-Program, but is still a producer of Military Aircrafts.
In those great times, people at the controls of these wonderful companies like eastern, airbus etc, were engineers, astronauts, pilots. Or business men with great vision like Juan trippe of pan am, and also politics with a vision like Kennedy, and in general politicians from that era in Europe. People that knew how to do something beside being politics. People that had a life outside the political parties and because of that, vision and convictions. Now it’s bean counters, and professional politics. and look at the result...
@@joaodantas8530 kennedy had some beef with the british as they had got his cousin? killed on a pointless bombing test exercise in WW2 so he wanted the SST to be faster than concorde. if concorde was going to be m2.02, then the americans were going m2.7. on youtube you can find boeing engineers say that when they heard the announcement they knew the SST was doomed as m2.7 rules out aluminium.
DHL have one coming into BFS quite regularly. You mentioned that wings are made in Belfast. I live 400 metres from one of the factory's at Monkstown Newtownabbey. My nephew has just started as an apprenticeship there. My friend who is 54 has just started full time at the big factory in Belfast. He says there is guaranteed work for next 8 years and that they are bringing lots of high skilled well paid jobs.👏
As a retired from Air Inter, the biggest french domestic airline, incorporated in Air France in 1991, there are some facts :
At Air Inter (IT), we exploited as many as 20 of A300's, all but one B2 series.
They were on the biggest lines from Paris-Orly airport, Lyons before TGV high speed train, Marseilles, Toulouse, Bordeaux, Pau, Montpellier, Sttarsbourg and in summer Corsica, One class, 9 abreast (!), but the longest flights were less than 1 hour and a half block-block, and...314 sets available.
Hi Jean Louis
At the end of Air Inter as passenger I flew once from Strasbourg to Paris in a A330. I clearly remember the sheer length of this aircraft.
My friend Jacques Delfaud, a third man on Mercure then A300 told me that Mercure was highly appreciated by pilots.
One one of my best lights ever was when I was studying in Paris and going back to my home city of Marseille on a Super Caravelle (Super 12). It was the last model Air Inter flew. I could not believe how smooth the flight was and also how relatively quiet the cabin was. Flying in that airplane felt like flying a glider. I flew other aircrafts (Fokkers among others)on that Orly or Roissy-Marseille line but I never flew on the Mercure. Everyone was telling me it was a nice and comfortable plane. I was young at the time and did not know much about airplanes and flying.
So that was a real A300 with 314 seats for passengers!
I grew up as an expat in Sumatra, Indonesia and vividly remember as a 12 year old seeing one of Garuda's brand-new A300B4s fly in to Medan airport from Jakarta. It towered over the collection of 737s, 727s and DC9s that habitually used the airport. And it was far quieter while using less runway to get airborne. It really felt like a huge step forward.
Can tell you, over years now- YOUR aviation videos have been among the BEST, anyone has presented. You present historical facts very ACCURATELY, and enclose them in an interesting, very friendly, honest narrative, with cogent points, that back up your- subject THEME, of a particular subject you've chosen for discourse. I CERTAINLY wish, we had MORE just ;like YOU, doing these comprehensive modern and diverse aviation topics.
The best flying experience I've ever had was in the A380. I've flown on lierally hundreds of aircraft types over more than 60 years of travel from the Vickers Viscount to the Lockheed Hercules (in 1989 as a commercial passenger) - and had some odd experiences. My father, of WW1 vintage, oft repeated a 1st WW RAF pilot who told him a good landing was one you could walk away from. Luckily I've walkeed away from all my landings - but the A380 was always the nicest.
My very first flight almost 35 years back was on an Airbus 310 from Delhi to Kolkata. Your comprehensive video on the origins of the Airbus and their phenomenal success story brought back memories of my very first travel on an aeroplane during my student days. Very well made documentary on Airbus.
it is amazing how far Airbus has come since the early days, would love to see you do a video on the Boeing 727
I second that B-727, remember those cool galley's United had on 727. The oven & coolers came out with the food on every flight. Always a new galley. No drawers or broken coolers.
I think the A300 is really a legendary aircraft. I heard for the very first time about the A300 was from and after watching documentary show about the tragic crash of American Airlines Flight 587. My first time flying onboard an Airbus plane was i think in 2011 onboard the popular Airbus A320ceo (which is also one of my favorite Airbus aircraft) by Indonesia AirAsia from Jakarta to Bali. I don't know much about the Airbus A320 and the Fly-By-Wire and that means i am not an aviation enthusiast and also still a kid at the time. After the crash of QZ8501 in December 2014, I actually have a better understanding about the Airbus A320 and how popular it was that aircraft is just like the Boeing 737. The last time i flown onboard an airplane was also the Airbus A320ceo and that was in July 2018 back home to Jakarta from Bali. Never forget that day. It's been 5 years since my last time flying onboard an airplane and i am looking foward to step onboard an airplane and flying into the skies again in the near future.
The A300-600 did have some wing improvements taken from A310, like deletion of outboard ailerons but it did not have A310 wing, rather the A310 tail section with the rear pressure bulkhead pushed slightly backwards and that allowed additional seating. I have flown a lot of PIA's A310s and can say they are one the most powerful machines with engines capable of producing 60,000 lbs thrust each. A310-300 is an under-appreciated powerful aircraft in comparision to widely known Boeing 757-200.
Thank you for sharing your experience!👍
So true!!!
It's an unfair to compare apple to peach as B757 is a single aisle aircraft.
I remember being in Karachi's Jinnah Int'l airport last year and seeing the scrapyard of multiple PIA Boeing 747s and Airbus A310s while my AirSial flight was taxiing to the runway. It felt sad, but that's just how it is
When Airbus released the A300 their slogan was "two mouths are easier to feed than three or four". So in a way they killed off their own A340, which actually was a A330 derivate to meet ETOPS. I flew with one of the first A300s here in Germany, D-AMAX from Bavaria Germanair, a charter airline. And I flew on it again after Hapag Lloyd purchased Bavaria Germanair. Having all those little hoppers here in Germany, the A300 was so impressive.
Here in Hamburg we had a aircraft manufacturing which built military aircraft (Noratlas and Transall). This place was call HFB (Hamburger Flugzeugbau). My mother used to work there for many years. When A300 was produced, the complete are was converted to Airbus manufacturing space, which it still is.
Today the complete A320 family is produced here, and also fitting and painting of the wide bodies happens here.
They have cool guide tours as well.
I remember a comic strip from the late 1970s showing people standing on a cloud by a sign with an aircraft in reference to Airbus. I have flown on the A330 but not the A300. I have also flown on a Caravelle and once on a BOAC VC10 when I was a child. Fascinating short documentary, Petter!
Eastern, then American and late in it's existence Pan AM, liked the A300 as was 'right sized', as you note were significantly more fuel efficient and smaller than the DC-10/747/L-1011 for pax loads, but also had great cargo capacity. That was critical with their routes from the eastern USA to Puerto Rico and other Caribbean islands as many persons going to those locations were often bringing huge amounts of checked baggage with goods for relatives who lived there. That also led to their popularity and extended production as pure freighters. They also were popular with passengers as had slightly larger fuselages than the 767 so slightly wider seats and thus more comfortable. The A300 was also available before the 767, which didn't come into service until about 1982. Later versions were also used for trans-Atlantic service with modest success as the ETOPS was extended due to better engines. Dispatch reliability declined with AA later in their use life. Considering how they were a base of all their 300 series aircraft but only for a limited part for the A350, it has been for sure a landmark aircraft.
Can't believe a single plane name the Airbus A300 decided to change the whole aviation landscape for good. Appreciate Airbus when u can become they are the reason why aviation is safe and more economically better ( interms of fuel efficiency) including the fly-by wire system introduced as well as the a380 ( a300's Big Bro ) that overtook Boeing's Prized Queen of the sky. Sounds like Ferrari vs Redbull in Formula one is all i can sum it up for those 2 aviation manufacturing giants. What a Great Video Peter. I even though is the Airbus's name came as "AIR" "BUS" interms of transporting people which i have realised after watching this video. Great work once again Peter 👍😁
As for next episode do the A320-21series of course for next, even though I think that video would be very similar to this one. A very good base model being
updated and upgraded through the years. Airbus has a total of 18600 narrow body orders (about 800 is A220) in total (past and present).
Terrific Video, particularly for me an X-Eastern Air Lines employee (@JFK, 1974-1984). The purchase of the A300 by Eastern was the best thing that CEO Frank Borman did at the airline. I took one of the first flights on it on EA on one of my days off. What a fabulous ride! Then, I worked for Lufthansa and had the pleasure of flying on it with them. I must say the A310 was not popular with passengers at all. Because of ETOPS the FRA/DUS-JFK flights took too much longer, especially in winter with strong headwinds. CHEERS from Peter.
Wonderful. I actually flew with a model of A300 and a Mercur on domestic flight in France, back in the 80-ties.
On Paris Bordeaux the Airbus actually reminded of a bus. It was so simple. I rember I was looking out on the engine wondered if it will fall off the wing 🙂.
On my way back to Paris I went with a Mercur. It felt like it never reach more then 2500 m altitude. It flew in a left and rigt pattern, followed the river, then a motorway, and then something else.
A passenger in front of me asked the steward what type of aircraft we were flying.
- A Mercur, it's French, he said very proudly.
I could here sound from passanger in front and then he turned pale.
A great video (along with all the others already posted) my admiration for a well documented and carefully edited work. As an airline crewman for 40 years I appreciate a job well done.
A kind remark, perhaps the "Mercure" can be considered as a flying test bed that allowed to accumulate experience and test new solutions that helped in the development of the next generation, ECAM, EFIS, HUD, etc. incipient philosophies that were tested on the "Mercure".
also the airbus beluga was based on the a300 !! & that has many years left in it in other roles! also it is so lovely to read comments here from pilots who flew the a300 and recounting their memories.
Love to see a video on the SUD Caravelle. Had flown in it back in the mid 70s on Indian Airlines. Loud, is not the word for the sound of its engines! 2 - 3 seat configuration, I think. Somehow, it made its presence felt!
I flew the Caravelle a few times between Paris and Marseille in the late 70s, and I really don't remember the engines to be that loud in the cabin, regardless of where I was sitting. ON the other hand, it was a loud airplane "outside".
@@patrickbotti2357 👍is what I meant. Lived near the airport it's engines are distinctive! Inside, it is quiet, especially if you sit near the front.
airbus has such an extrodinary story behind the company and thanks for the amazing video as usual you make great content keep up the great work😉
My pleasure, thank you for watching!
I'd be interested to hear you discuss the MD-80, which I've heard described as the ultimate non-glass cockpit, and enjoyable to fly.
A really, REALLY great episode. Thank you. I remember flying Trident, BAC111, L-1011 and A340 and watching Caravelles from the Heathrow observation deck which disappeared MANY years ago 😮
I joint Thai International in 1980 as a cabin crew. My first flight was on a A300 from BKK to Sin. The cabin layout was 24/222. 22 first and 222 economy class pax. What a nice plane to fly on .
Thank you for the amazing video about the A300 and the history of Airbus. It is amazing to hear about this groundbreaking plane.
Would love a video about the VC10. Possibly the coolest looking airliner ever!?
There are several of the VC10 on you tube. As I am now ancient I travelled Darwin to London a few times on them and it was a superb aircraft to travel on.
I loved flying the A220….It was such a gentle airplane to operate. Now that I moved over to the A350 I thought it had many things in common with the A220 as far as the FMS which made training a little more tolerable.
Overall, Airbus’s cockpit logic and ergonomics make it a joy to fly.
Tbf, the A220 was made by Bombardier
I don't know which channel I prefer of Mentour's - pilot gives me great insights into the perspective of a pilot but Now gives me a information burst of history, politics and engineering in an easy digestible way. The man, and those who obviously now work with him, are legends.
What a great weekend! First a new episode on Mentour Pilot and now a new vid on Mentour Now.
As always great video with great content in it. I did not know (or expect) that the A300 was built for so long but as always: You end up smarter after a Mentour video so thanks for that!
Great video, as always!! I really love the story behind Airbus and how they, with stubborness and a bit of luck, became what they are today. I'd love to see you do a long turboprop themed video. Growing up in Iceland, I flew a lot on the F27 Friendship (later F50) and on my absolute favourite turboprop of them all, the Twin Otter. So maybe a video on STOL airplanes (Dornier 228 as well)?
Followed the fortunes of the A300 in my very young days and glad you took the time for this all time classic. The fuselage cross- section makes this the most efficient use of space of those early widebodies because Airbus used the 'smallest circle possible' to include 2 x LD3s side by side. The roof space is a small percentage of the 3 American widebodies. I mean look at them! Particularly the 747 roof where you could house a small township! Oh, and that wing design was beautiful & cutting edge in its day too. Just a fantastic design all round. The DC8 is the finest of the 1st generation jets, I keep hearing, and warrants a story of its own. The DC8 project forced the biggest private business venture in history at that time. That'll get you started
I love that fuselage cross-section with 2-4-2 seating, means I can book a pair of seats one being window seat, one aisle seat (my experience is on A340's with the same cross-section). And quite comfortable, only the A380 is better..
One of those interesting moments in aviation history. I do love your ability to take the historical nuance behind these things (e.g. the measurements thing) and condense all this information down into a sub 30 min video that's both entertainng and informative!
Thank you for this update Peter, Airbus A300B was the first wide body plane I travelled in 1977, Air India.
One of the things I'm actually still wondering about is why Airbus decided to switch from the yoke to the sidestick as both the A300 and A310 were equipped with a yoke.
You beat me to it! I'd be very interested to learn about the discussions and debates that led to that. With particular reference to AF 447 (is that the right flight no?), and the views and experiences of those that fly both (or just the yoke).
I may do a video about that..!
I assume it's because airbus has switched to fly by wire.
@@canttouchthefluffThat would be an interesting topic as well. Fly by wire vs direct controls pros and cons.
@kukuc96
It’s less about FBW than it is about the control and feedback design.
Boeing uses fly by wire but it also still uses yokes and the controls reflect the position of what they are controlling which Boeing felt was important tactile feedback.
AF447 would not have happened to a 777 or 787. Period.
We definitely need more Airbus explainers like this - the internet is saturated with amazing Boeing stories and this video openend my eyes on so many Airbus facts i had no idea about!
Hi Petter. I can't explain how happy I am to see a notification that you've uploaded another great video.
Best Aviation related CZcamsr of the century 😂🎉🎉.
Many thanks! That makes me really happy to hear! 💕💕
@@MentourNowwould you consider covering military aircraft...
Petter, Please do a segment on the magnificent L-1011. Unfortunately, for reasons, you know well, It never stood a chance against the criminally under designed (and ugly) DC 10, in spite of being the most advanced new aircraft of its era. I would love to hear what you have to say about it.
fist airliner capable of Autolanding.
When I first arrived to this country in 1982 (NYC Kennedy) as a French Fulbright student, I was booked into an evening flight between Kennedy Airport and Boston Logan. It was a Delta flight and the plane was a brand new L-1011 (which was almost empty by the way.. wide-body between NYC and Boston). I absolutely LOVED that airplane and every time after I flew in it I was impressed how comfortable the plane was in all respect. Arriving to NYC, I had just flown over the Atlantic on an Air Florida DC-10 and I disliked that airplane and I still do to this day. My other despised airplane is the Boeing 757. Once back in 2009, it took us three 757s ! to cross the Atlantic (AA) from O'Hare to Paris. The scheduled plane was faulty and was grounded after hours of wait in the terminal. They eventually switched us to another 757 taken out of the hangar. That plane was not scheduled to fly and was not prepared for the flight. They had to load catering in emergency but no entertainment, nothing. Mind you, we had to change terminal to pick up that plane and that was a 20-25 minutes walk.. We finally embarked. We did not care about entertainment or food. Being 1:00 am at that time, we only wanted to sleep...... An hour and half or so into the flight - everyone was mostly asleep - the pilot came out on the PA and announced that one of the engines had a leak of some sort (I don't remember what the problem was) and needed to turn around. No way to cross the Atlantic with one faulty engine. We were just flying over Boston, and now back back to O'Hare... We spent the nigh at the airport. . The airline scheduled a special flight for the following day at 3:00 pm, which they opened up to reservations. Some of the cabin crew from the night before was still on that plane. An hour before landing I started a conversation with a flight attendant who was in the flight the night before. I mentioned about the craziness of having two airplanes with issues. She responded that even Ithe plane we were on also had a serious problem over the ocean..... I don't remember what it was, there was a question of reboot.... So three 757s to cross the ocean... Well, I was always apprehensive after that when flying on a 757 to Europe or transcontinental US!.ONe of my favorite planes to travel on to this day has been the 747....
amazing its older than i am!@@BB-xx3dv
@@jasonbender2459 HS Trident did autolanding in the mid 1960's.
An episode with the Dassault Mercure would be fun, wasnt it a seriously reliable aircraft, better than pretty much everything else?
It flew like a fighter. I just LOVED it as a child, my mum hated it, too much thrills for her.
This aircraft could fit in empty slots in an approach queue, so ATC and Air Inter loved it, even if it meant a wild ride for the passengers (which I tremendously enjoyed).
I remember the cockpit asking everyone to be seated and attached over the PA. It meant we would have a bit of a roller-coaster time to take an approach slot.
It was super fun, and Air Inter had fairly low prices, a kind of low-cost carrier before the LCC era. I remember the "colored fares", blue, white or red.
They had super short turnover times / block to block, and some iconic uniforms.
I loved Air Inter, the Mercure and the A300.
This video gave me quite a nice and even emotional trip down memory lane, of when I flew a lot as a child with my long departed mum or alone as UM.
I operate the A330 and 350 and is so good to hear the history behind it from my favorite aviation CZcamsr... cheers Mentour
In 1977, I flew with an A300 (in the passenger area), already knowing 727, 737, DC10 and 747. It was amazingly calm inside due to the extremely high bypass ratio of the engines. No winder it became a success.
VC-10: phwoar, what a looker!
I have some Airbus sgares and reckon they're a long-term hold.
Good video, Captain.
Many thanks!
Hearing about the Mercure always makes me sad, such a beautiful aircraft
Yes, indeed.
Remember the early Airbus days, I used to live between Hatfield, De-Havillands then Hawker Siddeley and Radlett, Handley Page Aircraft Company and many of my friends worked at the two company’s, we used to go to the annual open day at Hatfield where they were producing the tail end of the Tridents and then the 146. They were also undertaking development work for the HS125 exec jet, by then the series 600 and the Airbus A300, along with BAC (Vickers) at Wadebridge. One year I remember a new milling machine which was in the process of milling the first wing spar for the A300B2. As the project developed so did the volume of work but both the British politicians and then British Aerospace got cold feet and squandered the British share in Airbus.
Loved this episode. Oddly, I've never flown on any of the A300 to 340 series aircraft and I've been flying long-haul since the 80's.
I've been on the 747's all the way back to the 100 version, B767, B777, B787 as well as the L-1011 and DC-10 (Laker Skytrain back in the day if anyone remembers). The only long-haul Airbus' I've been on are the A350 and A380 and I must say the A350 is probably the best of the bunch despite the fact that I will always have a love for the 747.
I think it's down to airline choice being mostly BA who were very set on Boeing for long-haul for most of the time I've been flying.
I was working at British Aerospace in the early days of the A300 production. I shall always remember one of the Progress Chasers telling me in years to come there will only be two aircraft manufacturers in the World, Airbus & Boeing. It seemed wishful thinking then. How right he was.
Awesome video! What about the A320? It made fly by wire popular in passenger jets and it's one of the most sold families.
More evolutionary than revolutionary. Like the 757/767 that introduced glass cockpit, FMS, and EICAS is as if not more important (as even most general aviation aircraft have all of these features while still using mechanical controls).
The A 320-Program started in 1979 and the first A 320-100 was produced in 1987.
A300 is epoch making what a vision Airbus had to make twin engine wide body which is the order of the entire aircraft industry
This success should very well go in the annals of Aviation history.
Thank you very much for this excellent video with a request to present exhaustive video about bizjets
It would be great to see a video on the MD-80. I always thought it had a really distinctive look with the narrow fuselage and rear mounted engines, especially on the longer variants. The 3-2 seat configuration was quirky too.
I've always liked the shape of both the A300 and A310 aircrafts, compared to the dc10 and L1011 the airbuses are very rounded off in shape and well proportioned in size.
The A300 was the first aircraft to be given ETOPS to fly over the atlantic so yes its a special plane!
Hey don't forget that pesky Cargo Door on the DC-10
@@OceanDriveSpeederyes glad i never flew on a dc10, and the bigger md11s are a handful too
Hi Petter. Awesome video as always. Either this secondary channel as well as the main one (Mentour Pilot), witch BTW I´m both subscribed to, are full of understandable information for a non-pilot. I learn a lot abaout commertial aviation due to your channels. Thank you for that.
As you suggested what else we liked to know about, I have a request for you if and whenever you decid to do so: the history of EmBrAer. It amazes me how well they are doing either in the commertial, busines or military segment. One of the hosts of the channel Taking Off (Chrity Wang AKA @pilotchrisy) is a E175 FO for Envoy (American Airlines I guess). She speaks very highly about the E175.
I´m also waiting for your video about the accident of LAPA 3149 in Buenos Aires Aeroparque airport back in 1999.
As always, thank you and greetings from NE Patagonia, Argentina.
The A330 is by distance flown my most used aircraft by far - and I absolutely love it. No matter if it is one of the -200/-300 models or the -900 NEO. They are just very enjoyable from a passenger point of view.
What I think was a good move by Airbus when going from A300 to A330 (unlike what Boeing did in their 737 evolution) was to not try to squeeze them into the same type ratings. This allowed them to fill the proven fuselage design with the then latest in fly by wire technology, making the A330, despite being a now 30 year old design by itself (and thus older than the A300 was when the A330 replaced it), still not look outdated. I heard people argue that the A340 was a bad design and was therefore discontinued - I don't think it was a bad design, it was just made obsolete by the successful evolution of ETOPS - after all no airline is willing to pay way more in fuel than they have to.
Thanks for the video. Brings back memories. I was just entering my teens in 1976 when the erstwhile Indian Airlines was one of the earliest adopters of the A300B2. They used to fly over my house in Bangalore operating IC105/IC106 Mumbai to Bangalore and return. I used to run out on to my terrace just see the plane climb out of HAL airport runway 27 before turning right to about 360 to intercept the outbound radial. The sound of the GE engines were so different from the Caravelle and Boeing 737-200.
CZcams literally just interrupted your Ekster sponsor message with their own advertising. That's about as rude as it gets.
It would be interesting to hear the story of how Airbus went from yoke to side stick
No yoke? Is a joke.
To save weight and mechanical complexity.
Excellent documentary. Thank you from the U.K.!
I would love to see some history on airliners that preceded the jets - the old propeller versions I watched go in & out of Washington National airport (now Reagan) during my childhood I'm referring to the Martin 202s & 404s, the Douglas DC series, and of course the Connies, and many more than I can mention here. A history video similar to this one, but about them, describing not only what & when but when & WHY then would be awesome!
Great video! How about doing an analysis of the HS Trident, the four engined trijet, that also later influenced the A300 wing design, which we already know just how good that is, plus also it charted the way for Autoland capable autopilots in the future.
Minor hairsplit, the Trident was a 3-jet (hence the name); unless you're counting the APU as a fourth engine.
@@cr10001 Indeed it was a tri- jet, but additionally on the Trident 3B variant, it had a “booster” engine, thereby making it a four engined Trident …..
Trident 3B
High-capacity short-medium range version of the 2E with a 16 ft 5 in (5.00 m) stretch and one additional RB.162 booster engine in the tail; 26 built
😁👍
❤excellent video! Enjoy your work! Thank you. ❤
Thank you too! 💕💕
The first time I flew in the an A300 was on a flight from Tokyo to Manila on Philippines Airlines in 1982. The best part of the flight was that as an 11 year kid I got to ride in the cockpit during landing. What an experience. If I didn't want to be a pilot before that I was convinced I wanted to be one after that. Sadly, I never became a pilot.
The A300 was already doing OK by the time John Leahy came along. Airbus had had to practically give away the A300 to get it off the ground, and were successful. John Leahy built on the foundation, and brought a kind-of ruthless efficiency to how Airbus marketed aircraft. By the time John Leahy was done, it wasn't Airbus that had to go knocking on airline doors to get them to take an interest. He'd reversed that.
If you were an airline that John Leahy had got fed up with and you wanted to buy Airbuses (e.g. British Airways), you basically had to go on a personal pilgrimage to Toulouse, hang around outside his office and hope he'd deign to see you.
It was kind of amazing. They revolutionised the technology of airliners, and they then revolutionised how they were sold. The combination of John Leahy and Airbus really was very potent!
Yes, indeed.
Yes, I read a biography of the guy. One of the greatest marketers that ever lived; terrific sales skills, yes, but a Steve Jobs-like sense of what customers need before any of the customers know it themselves. Without him Airbus probably would not exist, let alone dominate.
@@kenoliver8913 Absolutely agree. He was the chap who injected vim and vigour into the company.
Before him their sales ambitions were pitiful compared to what they do today, and they'd sized themselves to match their ambition.
Leahy said that he could only sell 1000 aircraft if they tooled up to make 1000 (or something like that). Kind of obvious, but the sort of thing it takes a visionary to actually say. So they tooled up. And look what's happened.
That Boeing failed to respond effectively mystified me. Leahy had a "market share is everything" attitude, and Boeing didn't. Boeing's problem now is that every plane they can think of developing has already got an Airbus (a very good one) covering a decent fraction of the market's needs. They can't easily sell enough to pay for the development of something new. This is a very deep trap that Leahy has set for Boeing, and it may yet prove fatal.
The Airbus A300 was the first aircraft of the Airbus consortium, formed by France, Germany, Great Britain and Spain. It was launched in the early 70s and It is capable of transporting around 280 passengers over medium distances. It sold around 561 units. This is really cool 👍🛫
As a young engineer student, I had the luxury that one of my profs used to work for Airbus and taught parts of the design philosophy of the A300, A310 and A320 avionics in systems integration and design classes. (Specific aspects of it as examples). The way how they planned for one coherent, orthogonal design, with a startup phase, migration, forward compatibility, cross model compatibility, etc. shaped the way how I design systems myself. By the way, one thing: This video is full of little pronunciation and spelling traps that stem from the mix of languages in Europe. You navigated most of them, but "Aérospatiale" is a French company, you pronounced it as "aerospaziale" in Italian (which was, by the way, a very good pronunciation in Italian). The word means the same in both languages, and tbh even I had to look up what country that company is from to not say something wrong here ;)
There are also several military subvariants of A300 (A300B10), A310 MRTT and CC-150 Polaris.
Excellent reporting concern the name Airbus came in November 1966 when I boarded a SUPER CONSTALLATION of Lufthansa from Frankfurt to Hamburg where you can ride on last moment (as a bus} and pay on board! Exactly that way it was taken. I was employe of Lufthansa.
A 340 is the most interesting Airbus for me..
🙂
And its the one i never did but i would really like to fly in
But a 300 olympic from Athens to Crete as a ten year old was coo
BAC 1-11 Lauda Air was cool too..
As was TU 154: Balkan Air to
Having flown on the Tu154 many times, 'cool' is something I'd never call it.
The A340, especially the -600 variant still is today my favourite aircraft. So smooth and quiet.
And unmatched elegance IMO.
I've flown her on Etihad and Thai Airways. Alas, probably for the last time quite a few years ago.
My first ever long-haul flight (FRA - NYC) was in a rather new Lufthansa A340 in 1994. I remember it looking rather big, but not quite like a Boeing 747, which had been the most iconic long-haul plane back then. Both the A330 and A340 were developed from the fuselage of the A300/A310, and at least the A330 successfully carried on the fuel-conscious twin-engine wide body layout which would become the dominating layout almost 20 years later (to the detriment of the quad-engine A340 and A380).
I'm lucky, my flights from New Zealand to Europe (Paris) have almost all been A340's or Emirates A380's. A340's have been Etihad, Air France, Cathay Pacific. I think the A340-600 is the best looking airliner ever (A380 is a bit too fat) and I still think *proper* airliners have four engines, specially on long over-ocean flights. (Yes I know about ETOPS). And I love the 2-4-2 seating, means I can book a pair of seats, one window and one aisle - lovely, and the seats are quite comfortable. The only airliner with better seat room (in Economy) is the A380.
And Eastern, the airline that saved Airbus.
Yes, indeed. Aviation History would have taken another direction without them.
Wow! Great video! I’m an aviation fan & you taught me some things I did even know! Informative & entertaining. You’ve got me as a new subscriber! Looking forward to seeing your other videos 😊👍
I actually saw a FedEx A300 at work today :) while wing walking a plane in today :) first time I've seen one and me and my other wing walker looked on flight radar to see what that "short 330" was and we were pleasantly surprised, and then I come home and see this video wow what a coincidence :)
Awesome video Mentour. Could you do a video on the 737 series soon, since you fly the 737NG?
My first flight as a little kid was on the then brand new A300...
Very cool!
@@MentourNow You're actually showing an Olympic Airways plane in the video :D
Nostalgia!! My first ever flight was in A300. Was fortunate to fly in one of the last A300 flights before Air India retired them decades later. Imagine my surprise when I saw the flight engineer reading a newspaper sitting behind the pilots, which was opposite to my imagination that the cabin would be a very busy place for all three of them 😅. Thank you Captain for the video!!
Defo A340 one of only three Airbus aircraft I have to fly on alongside the A318 and the A350 but great vlog 😊😊😊
Corrected comment - you called out the VC10. A beautiful plane, and a fascinating yet sad story of politics, politics, and more politics crippling what was a very advanced platform.
Typical UK Governments 😡
Advanced but flawed. Build with only British needs in mind. Nobody on earth needed an aircraft to fly long distances to under developed airports with a high price to boot. The DC8 and 707 where both cheaper and easier to maintain.
@@MrJimheeren Oh yeah, absolutely. That spec was entirely dictated by BOAC... who then promptly didn't buy it.
@@duncanhamilton5841 flying to New York and Miami is a lot more profitable then flying to Nairobi and Entebbe and you don’t need the VC10 for that job. So yeah it makes sense BOAC didn’t buy that many VC10s. Still a beautiful machine though
History videos are best
Glad you like them! More to come!
imagine being the guy who proposed the idea of giving a plane away
Absolutely fantastic video as always, thank you for the awesome content! I would love to hear your take on the Lockheed L1011, as that seems like it was a very innovate aircraft.
The BAC 111 is not called "Back 111", but "B.A.C. one eleven", spelled out letter by letter. I used to work at British Airways in the 1980s and I once flew a BAC 111 flight simulator. Very basic!
Does it really matter. Most people on earth are not native English speakers and BAC just looks like well you know bak
@@MrJimheeren zats wot ebryboadi hoo knos wot thay ar tokin abote huv korld ytt fir 63 yirs, bbutt yor rittgh, ut disnit riley matre az loang az popel kun ondastan yo, ai serpoz. Way eben botha doioin zings propali, rait? Jist saii yt rong iff yo laik, ut disn riily boathr mee iff yo wonto meik er fule off yorselff.
Yeah, let's all start calling the Boeing 737 the "Bong seven hundred and thirty seven", great idea!
@@Nilguiri don’t act like a baby
Yes!!! I have been waiting to hear your take on this revolutionary (in a sense) aircraft. Please can you feature the A320 family next.
Thank you for this excellent video. The A330 ils my favorite aircraft. It is a beautiful and powerful one. A master piece off the technology. And just being told the history off its predecessor, where everything started, the way you did here just made my Dany.
2:20 I am suprised how many of these I know from mentour _ videos.
💕💕
Interesting vide, especially including how Airbus came into existence. Something I'd like to point out is how Boeing has received a lot of criticism about how they keep making new versions of the 737, instead of developing a whole new plane. Meanwhile Airbus did essentially that with the A300 design, as we see in this video.
There's a few big differences in that Airbus does break commonality when required. And there is nothing inherently wrong with keeping a good design alive with updates. The biggest problem with the 737 is not that it is an old design, but what Boeing did with MCAS and trying to hide it to keep the costs down for airlines to get their pilots certified.
@@Hans-gb4mv I agree with you regarding how Boeing tried to hide the MCAS system issues.
@@Hans-gb4mv Agreed, but there's one other major problem specific to the 737, in that it was designed with unusually short legs (undercarriage) in the days when jet engines were skinny, and engines since then have got fatter even as they grew more efficient. This is the root cause of all the Max's woes. Almost every other type (other than the 737) doesn't suffer from this.
Very well done history lesson. I'm type rated on the A300-B4 but never flew it on the line. The training did introduce me to Airbus nomenclature on system descriptions. The original design has stood the test of time. Thanks for the video.
You are amazing! What a logical narration of the history! Thank you for your hard work