Jfazzer From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 155 posts, RR: 8 Posted (10 years 7 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4313 times:
Last year I flew to Orlando Sanford from Manchester (UK), with My Travel airways.
I was lucky enough to travel on the A330-300 that they leased from Skyservice (C-FBUS) which had loads more legroom.
However, we had to make a scheduled tech-stop at Bangor Maine for fuel. As U.S air regularly operate the A330-300 to Europe and Northwest will be doing so in the very near future I was wondering why our aircraft didn't have the required range for the journey but these aircraft seem to.
Obviously the 200 series doesn’t have this problem so despite it's lower capacity would this not of been a better choice for the two American airlines??
Saab2000 From Switzerland, joined Jun 2001, 1609 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (10 years 7 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4236 times:
I know that Florida flights to Europe are significantly longer to Europe than flights from the northeastern and the midwestern part of the US. I do not know where US Airways flies from (Pittsburgh?), but I would guess that NWA will fly theirs from Detroit and Minneapolis. Both of these places are closer to Europe than Florida.
I have flown on SWISS from ZRH-MIA and it is about a 10-10.5 hour flight. That might simply be too much for the A-333 (with a full load of pax/cargo), though for the A-332 it is no problem.
All just speculation though. Cannot tell you exactly.
Ap305 From India, joined Jan 2000, 505 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (10 years 7 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4148 times:
The skyservice a330-300 might be a lower mtow version depending on the year it was built. The 230ton(now 233 i think)mtow option was introduced only a few years back(i think only after the 332 came into service).US air's 330s are most probably the 230ton versions.
Crosswind From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 2595 posts, RR: 58
Reply 5, posted (10 years 7 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4007 times:
As charter aircraft Skyservice's A330-300s will seat significantly more than those operated by scheduled airlines with multi-class cabins. The increased payload to be carried, coupled with the fact that they are early build ex-LTU aircraft not certified to the higher MTOWs, limits their range.
Both US Airways and Northwest A330s are A330-300X aircraft, with the highest MTOW available to strech their range.
Spyderz From Canada, joined Apr 2001, 651 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 7 months 1 day ago) and read 3905 times:
Well for this winter Air Canada plans to utilise their A330-300 aircraft on some pretty long routes from Western Canada such as YVR-LHR, YYC-LHR, and YYC-FRA. This will be the first time Air Canada will be using these planes on these long routes.
Tango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3784 posts, RR: 30
Reply 10, posted (10 years 7 months 23 hours ago) and read 3814 times:
Here are some empirical observations about A330-300 range: Two of the longest trans-Atlantic scheduled routes operated regularly by 333s are DUB-ORD (EI) and FRA-YYZ (AC) at 3,669 miles and 3,945 miles, respectively. EI uses only A330-200s on its DUB-LAX route (5,182 miles), having stated that the distance is beyond the range of their -300s. MAN-Orlando/Sanford is 4,233 miles. Thus, it would seem that the realistic maximum range of a 333 at full payload is about 4,000 miles, and less than 5,000 miles.
As noted by Ap305, the 333s of Skyservice are some of the earliest (lower MTOW) of the type delivered, which may explain the reason for the fuel stop at Bangor on the MAN-Sanford flight. Stronger than usual headwinds may also be the reason -- on a FRA-DTW non-stop flight in the recent past, due to headwinds we were more than one hour late in arriving at DTW even though we pushed back on time at FRA and were climbing out within 20 minutes.
MD-11 forever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 years 7 months 6 hours ago) and read 3433 times:
"The A330-200 has an additional fuel tank:
A330-300: 98 m³
A330-200: 137 m³
Therefore the design range is almost 20% more; The -300 is rather a medium range plane, while the -200 is a longhauler, as opposed to the A340-ultra-long-haulers."
As far as I know, the A332 is not able to use the full fuel capacity without payload restriction. Once a pilot complained that they (SR that time) bought an aircraft with those additional tanks and range but they are not using them and even if they would use them, they couldn't load the full payload anymore........
SailorOrion From Germany, joined Feb 2001, 2058 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (10 years 7 months 3 hours ago) and read 3311 times:
Few aircraft I know (quite a few) can use the full fuel capacity when flying with full payload. Check the payload/range diagrams, you will find three limits (three different straight lines).
1) maximum structural payload (the horizontal line).
2) maximum takeoff mass
3) fuel capacity mass (not always found)
maximum fuel capacity: 193 tons
usable fuel @ max payload: 161 tons
maximum fuel capacity: 162 tons
usable fuel @ max payload: 131 tons
maximum fuel capacity: 126 tons
usable fuel @ max payload: 99 tons
maximum fuel capacity: 11 tons
usable fuel @ max payload: 9,5 tons