Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A330-200 Extra Weight Compared To The A300-600  
User currently offlinePanais From Cyprus, joined May 2008, 463 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6474 times:

I was doing a comparison between the Airbus A300-600 and the A330-200 and I have noticed that although they have the same fuselage diameter at 5.64 m with the cabin length of the A332 cabin is only 10% longer (4.3m), the operating weight empty of the A332 is 30% more. (90.9 tons for the A300-600 vs 119.6 tons for the A332)

I know the wings on the A332 are longer and bigger, but does this justify the extra 28.7 tons?

Is it the engines?
The engine diameter on the A300-600 is 94 inches, while the engine diameter on the A332 is 97 inches.

Where is the extra weight coming from?

Thanks

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6910 posts, RR: 46
Reply 1, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6436 times:

I know that the A332 has much longer range than the A306; this is a big factor. This means that there must be space for the tanks, structure to support the weight of full tanks, as well as the longer wing to generate the lift to carry the extra fuel. Comparing the empty weight is fairly meaningless without also comparing the MTOW. The MTOW of the A336 is 165,900 kg, while the A332's is up to 233,000kg. The ratio of MTOW to empty weight for the A306 is about 1.8, while for the A332 it is 1.4. Again, this in itself does not mean much; what airlines are interested in is how much they can carry for how far at what price. And the A332 has proved itself to be a much more efficient moneymaker for the airlines than the A306.


The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineFaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1548 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6432 times:



Quoting Panais (Thread starter):
Where is the extra weight coming from?

Prolly a fair bit of the extra is in the landing gear too. Need stronger gear for the higher MTOW as well taller struts for the 10% longer fuselage. And those struts are solid alloy steel...

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offlinePellegrine From France, joined Mar 2007, 2449 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 6431 times:



Quoting Panais (Thread starter):
Where is the extra weight coming from?

Wings, longer fuselage, center tank, trim tank, engines, landing gear, support structure for higher weights & payload...



oh boy!!!
User currently offlineFaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1548 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 6406 times:



Quoting Panais (Thread starter):
I know the wings on the A332 are longer and bigger, but does this justify the extra 28.7 tons?

There is one relevant point to your question: with all fuel tanks (including center) filled to maximum, the A332's weight is practically at MTOW. This facility is obviously never used except for (exceptionally long) ferry flights because you then have nil payload.

What this means is that part of the structural strengthening needed to support all that fuel load is, in a manner of speaking, deadweight. It is strengthening that is only relevant to ferry flights and not payload-carrying ones.

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offlineTristarSteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 4009 posts, RR: 33
Reply 5, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 6401 times:



Quoting Faro (Reply 4):
There is one relevant point to your question: with all fuel tanks (including center) filled to maximum,

How many A332 have centre tanks? I am sure the last few I have seen didn't have one.


User currently offlineFaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1548 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6395 times:



Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 5):
How many A332 have centre tanks? I am sure the last few I have seen didn't have one

Hmm, I may be wrong but I believe that all A332's havem. I think that it was one of the differences between the A333 and A332...

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offlineRheinwaldner From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 2226 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6376 times:

Good observation. The 30% come from the different peformance profiles. The A330 is a high performer (= long range plane) compared to the A300.

B.t.w. these 30% are a good indication how much the 783 would have to be lighter than the 788 to be taken serious on the short-range market. On the example A300 vs A330 you can spot anything that would make the 783 succesful too. Do you know that a tailor made short-range 783 design would deliver the best CASM of any plane flying on this planet today? And this by a large margin.


User currently offlineFaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1548 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6357 times:



Quoting Rheinwaldner (Reply 7):
Good observation. The 30% come from the different peformance profiles. The A330 is a high performer (= long range plane) compared to the A300

Which perhaps raises the question of why add all the extra strengthening needed when operationally you will never come close to filling in all your fuel tanks on revenue flights. Only reason I can see is anticipation of (much) higher thrust versions of your engines in the future.

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offlinePanais From Cyprus, joined May 2008, 463 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 6349 times:

Thank you all for the input, very helpful.

Quoting Rheinwaldner (Reply 7):
these 30% are a good indication how much the 783 would have to be lighter than the 788 to be taken serious on the short-range market

If you were advising Airbus, barring creating a new plane, would you advise them to extent the A300 to the A332 length, or have Airbus re-design the entire middle section of the A332?

Which option will be closer to the 787-3 in performance and capacity, with more range?

There is a nice movie about assembling the A332. Would advise to run it at a slower mode.
http://www.northropgrumman.com/kc45/video/Airbus_Timelapse_256kbps.asf


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9105 posts, RR: 75
Reply 10, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 6172 times:



Quoting Panais (Thread starter):
same fuselage diameter at 5.64 m with the cabin length of the A332 cabin is only 10% longer (4.3m)

The A330-200 is over 5m longer than the A300, it is the length of this cylinder would contain a fair bit of weight, looking at the difference in length between the A330-300 and A330-200 being similar to the difference in length between the A330-200 and the A300-B4, you can assume that piece of cylinder is over 3,000 kg. Compare the cabin/cargo volume to appreciate the differences.

Quoting Panais (Thread starter):
I know the wings on the A332 are longer and bigger, but does this justify the extra 28.7 tons?

It would have a lot to do with it. the difference in span is significant, as well as the wing thickness. Compare the fuel volume between the two to appreciate the size difference.

Quoting Panais (Thread starter):
Is it the engines?

A330 engines are lighter than A300 engines, so is the rudder, vertical and horizontal stabilizer.

Quoting Faro (Reply 2):
Prolly a fair bit of the extra is in the landing gear too.

The nose landing gear on the A330 is about 3% heavier than the A300, but the main gear on the A330-200 is about 28% heavier.

Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 5):
How many A332 have centre tanks? I am sure the last few I have seen didn't have one.

As far as I know all do, but I do not think all have fuel jettison.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic A330-200 Extra Weight Compared To The A300-600
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Need Info On The A330-200 posted Mon Aug 4 2003 23:12:04 by Cancidas
Throttle On The A320 Compared To The A330 posted Mon Mar 25 2002 15:37:13 by GunFighter 6
Reverse-Thrust Force Compared To Brakes posted Wed Feb 18 2009 12:50:21 by Dakota123
What Happened To The Pratt & Whitney PW3000? posted Fri Dec 5 2008 19:22:36 by Northwest727
Comparing The 757 To The 707 posted Thu Nov 20 2008 19:45:05 by Quickmover
What's That Thingy Called Next To The Engine? posted Tue Nov 18 2008 21:59:15 by NRT744
How Safe And Strudy Was The A300? posted Tue Oct 7 2008 19:05:47 by 747400sp
Question To The Maddog Pilots. posted Thu Sep 11 2008 16:48:02 by B767
A320/A321 Compared To A332/A333 Costs posted Mon Sep 1 2008 07:11:34 by Panais
Why Aren't A330s And A340s Level To The Ground? posted Fri Aug 29 2008 04:54:56 by AirCanada014

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format