Thomacf From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 541 posts, RR: 0 Posted (12 years 10 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1551 times:
Why do airlines such as Korean Air operate the 777 and A330? Aren't they about the same when it comes to performance and capacity? I thought these planes were competing against each other. I think there are other airlines that have both. I believe Cathay Pacific, any others?
AT From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 901 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (12 years 10 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1389 times:
Emirates operates both types as well.
But in this case, the 777s and 330s do not have the same capacity: Firstly, Emirates operates only the 330-200, which is the smaller variant and is significantly smaller than a 777. Cathay and Thai use the 330-300 so in their cases the capacity may be closer to a 777. Secondly, Emirates operates the 777 in a 10 abreast configuration so there are considerably more seats than on their 330s, which are the standard 8 abreast. The 777-300 ofcourse offers yet more capacity.
Also, Air France soon will also operate both types.And if the United / US merger goes through and united keeps the 333s, who knows...
TEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (12 years 10 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1373 times:
I strongly agree that United will keep the US Airways P&W powered A330-300 fleet. By doing this they can compete with Northwest on who has the best A330 service in the US. On the A330-200/300 you can order 3 series of engines either the P&W 4000, GE CF6, or RR Trent 700 vs. the 777-200LR & 300ER which has only the GE90 available.
Wingman From Spain, joined May 1999, 2014 posts, RR: 5 Reply 6, posted (12 years 10 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1366 times:
Lay off the dope for a while man. Why the hell compare the engine options on the 332/333 vs. the 777LRs? The 777LRs compete only against the 340NGs, which also happen to only come with one engine choice, at least initially. All other 777s come with exactly the same number of engine options as the 332/333?!?!
TEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (12 years 10 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1331 times:
Hey Wingman, why did Northwest order the P&W powered A330 and SIA the RR Trent powered A340-500 over the GE90 777-200LR or 300ER? Engine options are a BIG thing these days especially when airlines have large fleets of RR, GE or RR powered airliners.
TEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (12 years 10 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1323 times:
Hey Wingman, why did Northwest order the P&W powered A330 and SIA the RR Trent powered A340-500 over the GE90 777-200LR or 300ER? Engine options are a BIG thing these days especially when airlines have large fleets of PW, GE or RR powered airliners.
Hamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2687 posts, RR: 59 Reply 9, posted (12 years 10 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1314 times:
TEDSKI wrote: "why did Northwest order the P&W powered A330 and SIA the RR Trent powered A340-500 over the GE90 777-200LR or 300ER?"
Are you serious?
First of all, NW didn't order the A330 over the 777LR at all. Those two aircraft don't even compete. Second, NW ordering the A330 had a lot more to do with their already outstanding order for 16 A330s than it did with engine choice (oh, that's right, you CAN get all three engines on the 777-200). Not to mention that, alot like U.S. Airways, the A330 works well for Northwest's Atlantic ops. (although I do have question why they would order this aircraft which will leave their Pacific ops (at least those operated by 742s) vulnerable to competition from United, ANA, JAL, Air Canada, etc. who use newer 744s, 777s or A340s on these routes.)
As for Singapore, lets get some facts straight. SQ's original LOI for the A340-500 was placed in May '98, when the new 777s were just being defined, at a point where the aircraft was 50,000 lbs. lighter, with 100-105K thrust engines. The order was firmed up in Feb. 1999. GE did not win exclusitivity on the (now) 777LR program until July 1999.
I agree that engine choice has a play in any airline's fleet decision's, but that does not come at the expense of operating economics or purchasing costs. BTW, TEDSKI, would you care to explain why, if engine choice is such a major factor, SQ would decide to purchase RR-powered A345s to go along with a fleet of GE-powered A343s? Remember, the decision to replace the A343s was made well after the purchase of A345s.
BA319-131 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 8352 posts, RR: 55 Reply 12, posted (12 years 10 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1255 times:
The use of A330 & 777 by some airlines makes good sense.Cathay for example can alternate aircraft on routes depending upon demand,ie they can alter capacity as and when required,route by route(A330-300 seating less that a 777-200)
In regard to the earlier statement of SQ being a major P&W engine buyer,don't forget the 77 777-200/300's on order and option are RR powered.
Hugo From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 393 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (12 years 10 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1213 times:
I don't think anyone mentioned a major reason airlines purchase very similar aircraft: POLITICS. Having fleets of a similar range like an A330 and 777 does not really make sense unless you look at it from a geopolitical angle or from a significant acquisition savings. There are a million ways governments can exert pressure so that they can promote their products... buying aircraft from Boeing and Airbus is an insurance policy for fair treatment from their respective governments.
N628AU From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 329 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (12 years 10 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1179 times:
***IF*** UA/US is approved, they will not keep the A330 fleet any longer than it will take to accept more B777 to replace the A330. The 330 is popular enough to generate substantial cash from leasing the existing ones out and selling the delivery positions on the others. Goodwin expects 4-5 years before operational merger, so I would expect no A330 will be seen in UA colors.
BTW, if you have not checked out the DailyBanter on planebusiness.com, do so. A reader there has posted an interesting new scheme for the merged carrier. It has United titles and the logo on the tail, over a US paint scheme. Looks real sharp.
DatamanA340 From South Korea, joined Dec 2000, 547 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (12 years 10 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1152 times:
Both KE and TG have great fleet of 300 and 306. That's why these airliners get 330s. And I don't know about TG, but all of KE's 777s have larger weight for longer range, so operating 777s on regional routes is not economical. KE and TG chose 777 and LH chose 340. It makes sense.
Hugo, politics is always great reason why one airliner chose that model, but if we can get conclusion with politics, it's better to explain without politics. Answer for 777-330 problem doesn't need politics.
James Bond From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (12 years 10 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1098 times:
I have to clear something up. Did a CF6 fall on your house? Since I've been on this forum (and admittedly, I haven't been here too long) I've seen you do nothing but bash GE engines. It's 100% guaranteed that if a post can even vaguely involve engines, you'll be there trashing GE. Airlines do not solely base their aircraft choices on engine make man! Please, try, try very hard, to not mention anything about General Electric in your next post. I'm sure it will be difficult for you.