Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus Announces 240t A333, 332 And 332F  
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2805 posts, RR: 59
Posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 19363 times:

The Airbus Twitter account writes from Farnborough:

#Airbus offering enhanced A330. 400 naut. miles more range on -300 model. London-Tokyo, San Fran.-Beijing now among poss. nonstops.

So they took the easy and effective way, Sharklets would only have been worth +70nm for a lot of recertification. MTOW and perhaps a PIP as well is things they have done ZIG times on this frame series, a straightforward trade.

[Edited 2012-07-09 03:07:48]


Non French in France
51 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineExtra300 From Sweden, joined Sep 2011, 86 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 18925 times:

Good news for the A330 programme!

Maybe this new 240t 330 can replace some of the A343 out there?


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 7007 posts, RR: 63
Reply 2, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 18679 times:

Not unconnected to this, I'm sure...

http://www.rolls-royce.com/civil/new...ormance_improvement_700_engine.jsp

Amazing how RR just keep making the Trent 700 better.


User currently offlinesturmovik From India, joined May 2007, 515 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 18436 times:

The A333 has improved ~2000nm in range from the original 1992 version! That seems staggering.. I know its been 20 years, but amazing stuff!


'What's it doing now?'
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2805 posts, RR: 59
Reply 4, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 18284 times:

Quoting PM (Reply 2):
Not unconnected to this, I'm sure...

Nope, the increased weight bought them 350nm on the 333 and the last 50 is the T700 PIP.

Here the Airbus announcement: http://www.airbus.com/newsevents/new...range-a330-with-increased-payload/

[Edited 2012-07-09 04:54:27]


Non French in France
User currently offlinefrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1715 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 18225 times:

Quoting PM (Reply 2):
Not unconnected to this, I'm sure...

I agree, reading this in the article: "The enhanced Trent 700 will complement the improvements to the A330 aircraft that Airbus has announced"

I wonder >1% fuel burn improvement combined with higher MTOW will be the improvement MH are looking for, enabling them to replace 77E's with A333? KUL-AMS would be difficult I suspect.



146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E90,F50/7
User currently offlineka From Switzerland, joined Apr 2000, 662 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 17948 times:

Let the speculation begin who will be the first customer!

...sounds like the prefect A343 replacement at LH/LX.

Ka.



Keep smiling - you might be on Radar!
User currently offlineba319-131 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 8596 posts, RR: 54
Reply 7, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 17881 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 5):
I wonder >1% fuel burn improvement combined with higher MTOW will be the improvement MH are looking for, enabling them to replace 77E's with A333? KUL-AMS would be difficult I suspect.

- Too long a route for even this enhanced 333, 332 of course would have no issue.



111,732,3,4,5,7,8,BBJ,741,742,743,744,752,762,763,764,772,77L,773,77W,L15,D10,30,40,AB3,AB6,A312.313,319,320,321,332,333
User currently offlineindia1 From India, joined Aug 2011, 194 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 17843 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I wonder if they are saving the sharklets for the next round of incrementals then, circa 2015? There was this interesting article which mentioned that the codename "Ultimate" given to this enhancement was dropped because it had a connotation that the end was nigh. Sharklets + NEO would make it the Ultimate 330 for sure.

User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13552 posts, RR: 100
Reply 9, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 17427 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting sturmovik (Reply 3):
The A333 has improved ~2000nm in range from the original 1992 version!

Nitpick, we're talking 1600nm improvement. That is still impressive!

Quoting india1 (Reply 8):
I wonder if they are saving the sharklets for the next round of incrementals then

I expected them in this round. IMHO, Airbus is switching which sharklets to consider (for more range).

Quoting india1 (Reply 8):
Sharklets + NEO would make it the Ultimate 330 for sure.

I do not see the business case for the engine vendors on the NEO. Not with the A320NEO, MAX, 788/789, and A350. Not anymore that is. (I used to be a fan, back when the EIS would have been much earlier.) There is no engine 'on the shelf' for a quick upgrade.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 5225 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 17378 times:

Depending on what they have done to achieve it , is it possible that it could be retrofitted to the present 233 and 238t versions.?

User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10253 posts, RR: 97
Reply 11, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 17323 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 10):
Depending on what they have done to achieve it , is it possible that it could be retrofitted to the present 233 and 238t versions.?

The 238t upgrade certainly was retrofittable, so my guess would be "yes".

The RR article suggests that the engine PIP is retrofittable too  

Rgds


User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4988 posts, RR: 41
Reply 12, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 17138 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 5):
I agree, reading this in the article: "The enhanced Trent 700 will complement the improvements to the A330 aircraft that Airbus has announced"

And so Airbus is continue to show that there still is a lot of potential in the highly impressive and successful A330 program.  .

I wonder when they might do something like the shark-lets. Maybe with the next package for 2017?     .


User currently offlineExtra300 From Sweden, joined Sep 2011, 86 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 16957 times:

What do you think, wouldn´t this 240t A333 be the ideal plane for SK to replace their 343?

User currently offlineRubberJungle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 16927 times:

Quoting ka (Reply 6):
Let the speculation begin who will be the first customer!

Subscriber only story, but this says Airbus is in talks potentially to land a customer this week:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...nch-customer-for-240t-a330-374039/


User currently offlineindia1 From India, joined Aug 2011, 194 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 16791 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting RubberJungle (Reply 14):
Airbus is in talks potentially to land a customer

As per an earlier report, they said "3 airlines and a leasing company" asked them if they could have it ready earlier, but mid-2015 is what they're targetting.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31440 posts, RR: 85
Reply 16, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 16431 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting india1 (Reply 15):
As per an earlier report, they said "3 airlines and a leasing company" asked them if they could have it ready earlier, but mid-2015 is what they're targetting.

With the A350 EIS slipping, this is a good tactical move by Airbus to tide A350 customers over.

One interesting point is that the A330-200 can now lift some 10 tons more payload by weight than the A350-800 (and some 15t more than the 787-8). The A330-300 now also looks to match the payload weight of the A350-900 and 787-9.

[Edited 2012-07-09 07:33:09]

User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2805 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 16134 times:

Airbus has stopped at tweaking measures to go to these 400nm, given the cost of the re-certification for a sharklet updagrade (look at the 320 flight test program, it spans a year just for the sharklets, they affect everything, start, cruise, landing) the tweak effort/return on payload/range is more optimal.

Here the tweaks (per A feature story from Farnbourough http://event.airbus.com/airshows/far...with-more-payload-and-range.html):


Start performance (retain performance as much as possible at 240t instead of 235t):
- Improve drag at start (and thus L/D) by tuning the inboard slat deployment, direct spin-off from A350 who uses an even lower drag droop-nose on the inboard wing to lower drag (learned from the A380 program which started this trend).


Cruise performance (spec range now 5950nm):
- Reshape the flap fairings for lower drag (learning from A350 aero program).
- Tune the fly by wire for laod alleviation by deploying the ailerons to off-load the outer parts of the wing when hit by gust (also from A350 which can run the flaps and the ailerons for load alleviation). Thus (almost?) no extra structure for hike in MTOW.
- Get RR to tune the T700 another percent.


A problem is that the 333 hits it tank limit at 5500nm in the previous versions, the aero and T700 tweak can perhaps increase that to 5700nm, the last 250nm is then in the area where one leaves of payload to gain range despite not being able to fill the same weight in fuel.



Non French in France
User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9243 posts, RR: 76
Reply 18, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 15993 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 4):

The airframe from a takeoff performance perspective with the available was still capable of another 10-15t TOW, I suspect we will see more of these announcement in the future.

Quoting RubberJungle (Reply 14):

In the press statement, one of the routes listed was "Kuala Lumpur to Paris", we discussed on a recent thread a FI article about MH considering the A330 to replace their 777s. FI - MAS Ponders Longer-range A330 (by astuteman Jul 4 2012 in Civil Aviation)

I said in that thread, the longest route that MH have with the 777 is KUL-CDG, this maybe aimed directly at them.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 16):

One interesting point is that the A330-200 can now lift some 10 tons more payload by weight than the A350-800 (and some 15t more than the 787-8). The A330-300 now also looks to match the payload weight of the A350-900 and 787-9.

However not over the same range.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 17):
- Improve drag at start (and thus L/D) by tuning the inboard slat deployment, direct spin-off from A350 who uses an even lower drag droop-nose on the inboard wing to lower drag (learned from the A380 program which started this trend).

I wonder if them means a change of the inboard slat angle, they are fairly large devices.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 17):
the aero and T700 tweak can perhaps increase that to 5700nm, the last 250nm is then in the area where one leaves of payload to gain range despite not being able to fill the same weight in fuel.

I have speculated in the past that they may offer a T700 core upgrade similar in a way the T700 core was used to upgrade the 524. If they can get a counter rotating core into the T700, I could see the engine saving the best part of another 5%.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2805 posts, RR: 59
Reply 19, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 15830 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 18):
Quoting ferpe (Reply 17):the aero and T700 tweak can perhaps increase that to 5700nm, the last 250nm is then in the area where one leaves of payload to gain range despite not being able to fill the same weight in fuel.
I have speculated in the past that they may offer a T700 core upgrade similar in a way the T700 core was used to upgrade the 524. If they can get a counter rotating core into the T700, I could see the engine saving the best part of another 5%.

In practice, on a 233t 333 how much of a problem is the tank limit? With a real world DOW at some 128t or so (or even more, which is some 4-5t over the spec OEW) and depending on seating I guess there is not enough tons left to share between payload and fuel to come to the tank limit very often, even if one would have legs or wind/alternative conditions that forces a MTOW start.

Your experiences?



Non French in France
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31440 posts, RR: 85
Reply 20, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 15763 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Assuming MZFW (175t) does not change, a 240t MTOW would allow the A330-300 to tank 65t of fuel, which would be within 11.5t of the usable fuel capacity.

User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9243 posts, RR: 76
Reply 21, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 15582 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 19):

In practice, on a 233t 333 how much of a problem is the tank limit?

Generally speaking it is not an issue for our route network. The problem is not when everything is reasonably good, it is in conditions where you have widespread weather taking out a number of nearby alternates like we have in typhoon season.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 5225 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 13826 times:

Quoting zeke (Reply 21):
it is in conditions where you have widespread weather taking out a number of nearby alternates like we have in typhoon season.

How do you adjust for this ? Being more consevative on holding times and diversion distances. Perhaps something like 1 hour and 400 or more nm.?


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8776 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 13516 times:

How long of a range for the A332 now?

User currently offlineimiakhtar From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 12885 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 23):
How long of a range for the A332 now?

The current 238t A330-200 will get you 7250nm. An additional 2t fuel will give you 20min more flying time and 150nm.


25 FlyingCello : The A330 is a great aircraft...just as Boeing hit the sweet spot with the 77W, the A332/333 seem to just keep getting better. There is no more gracefu
26 titus95 : I think the very first airline to sign for it , will be Malaysia. They stated last week they are ready to get this plane to replace the 772 , and thus
27 Post contains links and images Devilfish : 5,950nm?!! Theoretically at least, that gives it nonstop LHR-MNL range at 5,821nm GC. http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=lhr-mnl&DU=nm This would not b
28 ferpe : A announced they would up the MZFW with "almost" the 5t. That is the beauty of solving your beef up problem with load alleviation, the whole frame be
29 airbazar : Just go down the list if A340 operators, exclude the ones with A350/B787 orders, then when you run out of it, add current 772 operators who can't aff
30 sunrisevalley : They need 6400nm for KUL-LHR based on a timetable time ~ 13h 40m. I doubt if the revised A333 will give them what they need for this particular city
31 EddieDude : The article published on Airbus' website states the following: Meanwhile, the new 240 tonne A330-200 will fly up to 270nm further – to 7,050nm (13,
32 ferpe : I find that very strange as well, as if they say that their official web data from before was not correct (238t flies 7250nm with 3 class cabin of 25
33 Post contains links imiakhtar : I was working off the A330 specs on airbus.com here: http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamili...330family/a330-200/specifications/ The current HGW varian
34 Stitch : Hopefully they will update the APACs soon and use the 240t metric for the payload-range charts.
35 sunrisevalley : So far as I know they never updated the payload/range charts for the 238t version. In their most recent ACAPS they are no longer providing OEW detail
36 ferpe : Airbus issued an excel in January which concurred with their website values, it was rather detailed and I have been using it since for my frame excel.
37 Post contains links imiakhtar : Prior to the 238t announcement when the 233t was the baseline HGW option, airbus listed the A330-200 range as 6750nm. This was followed a few years a
38 Coronado : Are Delta's 332/333 upgradable to the 240t standard. This seems to be a quick fix to boost capacity on some long thin routes?
39 Stitch : I would expect so. They all appear to be delivered in 2009 and 2010 per airfleets.net and I believe those have the structure to take MTOW hike.
40 Post contains images sturmovik : I went by what the Airbus press release stated, I guess their corporate communications dept rounded it off to the higher number?
41 Burkhard : The A333 is a very fine, very efficient plane for mid range and mid to long range, but it isn't an ULR plane. The A333 isn't an ULR plane - but many
42 someone83 : Airfleets.net list when the aircraft was transfered from Northwest to Delta, not when it was built. The first one is a 2003-model AFAIK
43 faro : I don't quite understand that statement...what then is the constraint with the available amount of thrust? Surely if one adds another 10-15t of weigh
44 zeke : Structural, hence the reason I think why the A340 has the center landing gear for takeoff, it is not needed for landing. I just know when I punch out
45 workhorse : By the way, what is today's longest 333 route? The one I know about is FRA-SEA, by LH. Can we say that this is the current 333's limit and FRA-SFO or
46 JerseyFlyer : Do we know if the improvements include eliminating the redundant structures in the wing that were there for the A340 outboard 2 engines? This was spec
47 JerseyFlyer : This change will create some clear space between the A332F new-build and the P2F conversions. What chance a new-build A333F now? Could someone with te
48 SASMD82 : Yeah, probably. In another thread there was discussed which aircraft could replace KLM's MD-11 best on the routes to the Caribean. In my opinion, it
49 sweair : Looks like the A330 family will stay for a bit longer.
50 Stitch : Back in 2009, Airbus spoke about a possible new-build A330-300F with a volume of around 570m3 (about 100m3 more than the A330-200F) and a payload of
51 DTWLAX : DL's A332/333 were not delivered in 2009/2010. Those were the years DL took charge of the aircrafts after the NW merger. Those aircrafts were deliver
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Airbus 320 And 321 Series In Flight Journals posted Sun Apr 4 2004 06:58:50 by FlightLover
Airbus A330-200 And Boeing 767-400 posted Thu Nov 2 2000 06:01:46 by 220389
Airbus Announces A320 Factory In Alabama posted Mon Jul 2 2012 16:11:10 by moderators
EK Announces Daily DXB-BCN And 2nd Daily DXB-MAD posted Wed Jan 25 2012 05:07:43 by realsim
KLM Orders A330-300's And ERJ's posted Thu Nov 18 2010 00:25:20 by mauriceb
US Airways A330 Routes And Expansion posted Sat Jun 5 2010 19:59:09 by will777
Porter Announces More Ottawa Flights And Lounge posted Wed Aug 26 2009 08:41:42 by AAmd11
Airbus Delivers 1000th A330/A340 posted Fri Jul 31 2009 11:51:34 by N14AZ
Zest Wants More A-320 And MA-60. posted Wed Jun 17 2009 00:22:00 by SIBILLE
Trident- Stye- Seating For 320 And 737? posted Thu Apr 2 2009 01:59:13 by Ty134A