best performing in what way

@@MrEeeaddict In range, since it will be the worst performing in engine power

@@SR_superior_1000 Actually these were the A340-542 variant that used the same RR Trent 556 engines used in the A340-600. SO they had the best takeoff, climb, cruise, landing performance of the entire A340 lineup. 4 are listed as parked atm, 1 in LOS after operating for ARIK, 1 in LDE after operating for HiFly and 2 in Baku in Azal Azerbaijan colors. Not sure where #5 is.

@@bcnwagwu #5 might be TC-CAN, it operates for the turkey government and is an A340-542

But there's already a short field package available for them.

Other airlines have those too. Delta has some that they bought from GOL

@@edwardmyers1746 I'm not sure, but according to what I've read, the short field package became available because of Gol's request, so other airlines bought those too. As I said, it's what I've read, it can be an imprecise info.

@@busfan9874 yes, according to what I read, this version became an option to any airline after Boeing developed it on Gol's request.

India has too in Air India Express.

i don't get the last part

Wonderful story Rocco

@@samal6700 I had ordered a Bacardi and Coke shortly before the meal service. And after my complementary comment about the Boeing 747 the Steward told his colleague to give me a double Bacardi instead.

Interesting. Why do all their A330s run GE engines then?

I also think of SAS with DC-9-20 🤔

I think it was just a fortunate match made in heaven really. So many other airlines ordered the -700 and sizeable orders at that.

As soon as I heard the 737-700ER had the wings of the 800, it started to sound a lot like the C-40s built for the military!

The SUDs were ‘pioneers’ for the 747-300, not the -400…

@@pjotrtje0NL yeah, but the -300 version is unpopular compared to the -400 version unfortunately.

747-400ER was very. Common a few years ago

@@odzergaming I think Qantas had the 747-400ER, but yes, a few years ago the 747-400 was everywhere.

@@sainnt i just realised I’m in Australia

The problem is that it's not officially a variant. Japan airlines just made the a350 have more seats and a reduced MTOW, in short, they just configured the plane for domestic routes. Singapore airlines also did the same thing on a few of its a350's, they added more seats but kept the mtow and engines the same as the standard a350. There was previously going to be an a350 regional to counter the 787-10, but the idea got scrapped. The potential customers for this variant were SQ and Etihad. So no, the a350s used by JAL is not a variant, they just optimized them for domestic routes, like SQ did.

Japan and ANA had 747s designed the same way

What about Ryukyu Air Commuter’s (JAL is parent company) Q400 cargo-combi? I think RAC is still the only customer who use this Q400 modified variant.

Was the CRJ 550 ordered by Skywest, Republican or both?

GoJet

CRJ-550 is the CRJ-700 with a different interior configuration afaik

@qwerty112311 50 seater with two classes and a different name and certification because it had to be certified for safety with one less cabin crew.

That was a wet-lease flight not operated by SAS.

2 overwing exits on each sides which totals 4 overwing exits. The reason for this is due to the fact that easyjet has more seats that standard a319 operators which means that they have to meet requirements for seating a large number of people which is adding overwing exits. Easyjet is the only a319 operator with this configuration.

I fly with this Special A319-132 by Eurowings from Munich to Lanzarote

It is true. All EasyJet's A319 do have one extra emergency door over the wing to the point that you could instantly sees it when you searched for it on Google images

It would be a good replacement for DAL’s 772LRs and they already operate normal A359.

Apparently the ULR is dead in the water as newer A359s have the same range as the ULRs.

@@thesupersaiyann5424 those could work better I guess

It's not officially an a350 variant, it was just configured for domestic routes. And the a350 regional variant was scrapped by Airbus.

The 747SR was also used in Qatars expansion in the 1990s

I thought the 747SP was ordered to be able to fly to Wellington NZ. This was before ETOPS, so they had to use the 707 until they got the 747SP. The "normal" 747-238 was to heavy for the shorter runway in Wellington.

The HZ-AQ30 is damaged from the fighting in Sudan. It’s in the news.

HZ-AQ11 to AQ30 are the regionals.

QF is using the 1000ULR not 900ULR. They want the extra room for exercise, stretch and lounge areas. Air India also wont get a 350-900ULR or 1000ULR itll probably get the base version as SIA quoted that the range isnt nececerrily needed

@@Alislug Air India is getting the A350-900 ULR & A350-1000 HGW . . .

Qantas had 30 747-400s (inc the 6 ERs) at the fleets peek. They slowly started retiring them from 2013 after the last of the A380s arrived and 787-9s started to be delivered. By 2019, the fleet was reduced to just the ERs, which were just operating the routes from Sydney to Tokyo, South Africa and Chile. They were planned to be retired by the end of 2020, but the pandemic and the related suspension of international flying caused them to be retired in early 2020. 1 747-400ER is now a test bed aircraft for GE, another was sold to a US Cargo carrier. The others were scrapped. Qantas wants a 4 class long range aircraft for Project Sunrise, able to transport a reasonable payload (around 300 people across all 4 classes) from the Australian east coast to New York and London. The A350-900ULR can do either the payload or the range, it can't do both. SQ has 161 seats on their -900ULRs while they have 253-303 seats on their normal -900s.

I think it mainly had to do with the negligible range difference with the standard one and jow Australia is far from Europe and the Americas

It's not a variant, they are just modifications that indian airlines asked airbus to implement on their a320's. It's like the numbers of seats, if I order an a350 with 400 seats, does that make me the sole operator of a 400 seater a350 since no other airlines operate an a350 with 400 seats? Does that mean that my 400 seater a350 is a variant?

@@danielnovitadubin8272 this one is mechanically different, and only 1 airline ever ordered it it's worth a mention, also Royal Nepal Airlines with the sole 757 combi

To bad they don't put that on the 321 sorta make it look like a 757

​@@supericeman1 Firstly, the video talks about variants, not modifications, it doesn't matter wether they're are mechanically different, the double bogey gear a320s aren't variants. Secondly, this video also talks about variants that airlines requested boeing and airbus to make, the 757 combi, while only ordered by royal nepal airlines, was not requested by them, boeing already intended to launch a combi version of the 757 regardless of royal nepal airlines' decision.

We shouldn’t forget the Max200 for Ryanair. It will be the nice variant best-seller

@@JeanGylSaussay That variant has actually got other orders besides Ryanair

MAX 9?

Yes all of Ryanair's planes are fitted with built in stairs

There were NG -700s with integrated stairs too.

Hi Jaeyden! You are indeed first 😊 🥇

🥈 😂

You're second

Not the only operator of the B777-200ER.

The Belugas and Dreamlifter were not meant for commercial service, nor are they variants of aircraft. They're technically something different and built for a totally different purpose for the manufacturer's use.

The Indian A320 was just modification Indian Airline's requested for Airbus. Not an entirely brand-new plane

Ryanair

It's not a variant. It's just modifications that air India asked for.

I thought you were trippin, but damn I never thought that was real. Why did Air India do that?

@@YukariAkiyama It's because the runways and pavements in some airports of India were not as strong as typical runways. By having double bogey gears, the weight of the aircraft can be distributed. They were originally from indian airlines but when it merged with air India, the latter received those a320s. It retired the type in 2019.