Fanofjets From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2056 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted
Mon Feb 4 2002 04:02:01 UTC (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 8307 times:
"Better" is a relative term. It depends on what the airline is going to use the aircraft for, the airline's fleet compatability, and so forth. For example, an airline with A340s in its fleet would probably go for the A330, while another carrier with 757s would go with the 767.
Though the 767 is my personal favorite, both aircraft have proven to be safe, reliable, economical, and versitile machines. Both are fine airplanes.
The aeroplane has unveiled for us the true face of the earth. -Antoine de Saint-Exupery
RC Pilot From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted
Mon Feb 4 2002 04:12:01 UTC (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 8293 times:
Like Fanofjets said.
They do that so that they dont have to train pilots as much since the a330 and 40 have the same cockpit (in general)
The 757 and 767 are exactly the same i think
Jean Leloup From Canada, joined Apr 2001, 2116 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted
Mon Feb 4 2002 04:17:35 UTC (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 8274 times:
In any case, I don't think teh comparison is a good one because of the significant difference in size between the two aircraft!
Next flight.... who knows.
Qatar From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted
Mon Feb 4 2002 04:23:44 UTC (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 8268 times:
From the capacities you could compare the B767-400 with the A330-200 / A300-600. The A330-300 actually competes with the B777-200
Tristar2000 From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 274 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted
Mon Feb 4 2002 06:35:59 UTC (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 8208 times:
You sure about the A300-600 carrying 380 pax??
The A330-200 is longer, by about 15 feet.
About the 767-400 against the A330, I would say the Airbus is the true widebody. You can't really compare the A330 with the 767-200s and -300s because they are quite shorter.
I would compare the 767-200 with the A310 and the 767-300 with the A300-600. Then again, the airbus planes are true widebodies.
And yes, Qatar was right to compare the A330-300 with the 777-200. On that respect though, the 777 is a larger widebody than the airbus.
But when all said is done, like someone said, both planes are proven and quite appreciated by pax. everywhere.
ATA L1011 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1402 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted
Mon Feb 4 2002 07:27:43 UTC (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 8183 times:
The A300-600 holds more than the 763 and more cargo, and slightly less than the 330-200. the 330-300 does compete more with the 777-200 as far as capacity.
Treat others as you expect to be treated!
Boeing767-300 From Australia, joined Sep 2001, 664 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted
Mon Feb 4 2002 10:06:13 UTC (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 8147 times:
As previously stated in these posts I don't think the 767 is comparable to the A330 200. It is a lot smaller.
The 767 is hearalded as the most widely used Transatlantic plane and to quote Air canada of all people on a Discovery Documentary "a great profit earner"
All three are great planes, however if you are looking between A332 and B772 the Choice is easy. B777 all the way.
The 764 is closer to the A332 and the jury is still out. Only Delta and Continental know how good the 764 is!