MONARCH
Posts: 357
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 9:43 pm

Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Mon Aug 06, 2001 6:32 pm

I think British Airways should start to buy A340s & A330s to use as long/medium haul flights. I am also getting fed up of seeing B747s all the time, maybe time for a change?

What do you think!

 Smile

 
Udo
Posts: 4288
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:16 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Mon Aug 06, 2001 6:43 pm

They have one of the largest fleets of B777s in service so there is absolutely no chance for any A340.
Maybe the A330-200 is a future option for thin long haul routes and dense European routes where the ageing B763s fly today.

Regards
Udo
Me & You & a Plane Named Blue...
 
flyvs007
Posts: 179
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2001 5:14 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Mon Aug 06, 2001 6:46 pm

Didn't BA just recently place a substantial order for Airbus aircraft? (A320's @ Farnborough a couple of years back?)

On the whole though they're trying to streamline their fleet as far as possible, so I don't think they would want to suddenly diversify.

As for your comment about 747's...I don't like BA much but I am so happy that they operate (is it the largest?) such a large fleet of 747's - they're beautiful airliners and still "the King of the jungle."
 
YOERI1970
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2001 11:14 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Mon Aug 06, 2001 6:50 pm

I don't get this question actually.
Why should they change something that's satisfactory ?
And besides.....their longhaul (747, 777) boeingfleet is relatively young, so why should they change ?
 
gerardo
Posts: 3372
Joined: Sun May 21, 2000 6:22 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Mon Aug 06, 2001 8:59 pm

... to offer us spotters something new, perhaps?  Wink/being sarcastic

Nah, just kidding, sorry!

Gerardo
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
 
Guest

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Mon Aug 06, 2001 9:09 pm

There is no chance of British Airways acquiring Airbus A340s, as they already operate one of the largest Boeing 777 fleets in the world. In any case, the airline's widebody fleet is still relatively young, with Boeing 747-400s (the -200Bs will be gone soon), 777s and 767s...

FlyTriStar

 
JAL
Posts: 3875
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2000 12:37 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Mon Aug 06, 2001 9:44 pm

There is no chance that BA will buy A340/330 as they have already a large fleet of 747/767/777. Beside BA is trying to simplify it's fleet so I don't think that they'll buy any Airbus widebody they're more likely to buy more A320/319/321.


Work Hard But Play Harder
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Mon Aug 06, 2001 11:00 pm

I can definitely see the A330 as this WOULD simplify the fleet, it has after all the same cockpit and handling characteristics as the Airbus shorthaul fleet. In the past BA have benefited from the common type-rating shared by the 757/767 but their 757 fleet is the oldest in the world and half their 757s have just been sold to DHL. When the 757 has been replaced by A320s and A321s the 767s will be old and ready to be replaced as well, and the logical aircraft will be the A330, the best thing Airbus have produced.

On longhaul they will stick to the 777 and 747, although perhaps dispose of the initial GE powered 777s as later 777s have been Rollers.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
doug_or
Posts: 3118
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2000 9:55 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Mon Aug 06, 2001 11:11 pm

cedar jet: you bring up good points, but doesn't the 757 have significantly more range than the a321?
When in doubt, one B pump off
 
Airbus Lover
Posts: 3163
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2000 10:29 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Mon Aug 06, 2001 11:46 pm

I agree that the A321 has inferior range compared to B757 but the capacity is just about the same. I would suggest that the range to be increased again to some extra 600nm(?) and become A321-300 to increase it chance to replace the aging B757s. The A319 and A320 will remain unchanged unless otherwise requested by customers or fuel tanks to be added?

just my thoughts
 
MAC100
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2000 7:53 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Tue Aug 07, 2001 12:35 am

Why should they change to A330/A340s? Their 777s are marvelous much more spacious and comfortable than the A330s and A340s that I have flown (SR and LH).
 
flight152
Posts: 3211
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 8:04 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Tue Aug 07, 2001 12:39 am

BA is commited to a longhaul fleet of Boeing aircraft (aka no airbus). They are not going to order these planes just because you are sick of seing their 744's.
 
Superfly
Posts: 37735
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Tue Aug 07, 2001 12:42 am

It would be nice to see British Airways A340 but they already bought a bunch of 777  Sad
There 747-200s aren't that old are they?
I'd rather see the A340 replace the 767 or 777.
Bring back the Concorde
 
Sabena332
Posts: 14938
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 3:57 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Tue Aug 07, 2001 1:29 am

Hi !!!

BA need`s no A 330 or A 340 because they have the Boeing 777 and the 767.

Greetings from Germany

Patrick
NZ1's mother is a disgusting crack-whore and his father is a worthless alcoholic!
 
GDB
Posts: 12652
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Tue Aug 07, 2001 1:42 am

No chance of A340's, though I'd personally like to see some A340-500's for long thin routes.
The B767 fleet is in decline, some have already been leased to Qantas, the rest, and the QA ones when the lease expires, could well end up being converted to tankers for RAF use.
Only the few E4 ETOPS B757's will be retained. There could be an outside chance of some A330's in the future, but for now they are going to stick with Boeing for long-haul, Airbus for short-haul.
The B747-236's and some -436's are being replaced by B777's.
A friend and fellow BA employee has a very impressive model of an A340-300 in the previous BA colours, no doubt made as part of the sales pitch by Airbus 10 years ago for the L1011/DC-10 replacements which the B777 won.
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Tue Aug 07, 2001 4:21 am

Actually the A330 would be short haul. BA would lose a tonne of money flying the 777 shorthaul, it's just too much aircraft for the job. There are plenty of short haul routes BA need widebodies, such as Manchester, Brussels, Paris, Edinburgh (occasionally 747, true story), Rome, Athens, Nice, Cyprus et al.

Agreed above that the 767s are fading, some to Qantas, some for tanker trials in the US. So they'll need a replacement. And it's pretty useless to replace a worn out fleet with new but identical aircraft. Is this progress? Especially when a more up to date and efficient aircraft is available (A330).

Finally, the A321's lesser range would suit BA as their 757 fleet doesn't stray very far - mostly shuttle and northern Europe. The longest 757 sectors at BA are to Helsinki or Athens, except for the occasional on-again-off-again trans-Atlantic stuff from the UK regions. The less over-powered A321 would be perfect for London to Frankfurt, Zurich, Madrid etc.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
Guest

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Tue Aug 07, 2001 6:55 am

"Agreed above that the 767s are fading, some to Qantas, some for tanker trials in the US. So they'll need a replacement. And it's pretty useless to replace a worn out fleet with new but identical aircraft. Is this progress? Especially when a more up to date and efficient aircraft is available (A330)."

What..............?

-Tom
 
b757300
Posts: 3914
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:27 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Tue Aug 07, 2001 7:47 am

The A330 really isn't intended for short haul routes either. When Airbus proposed the A330-500, they received a cold reception from the airlines. Turns out the aircraft was too heavy for short haul routes. If the A330-500 (a shorter A330-200) is too heavy, then I would assume the A330-200/300 would also be to heavy.
"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
 
eg777er
Posts: 1782
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2000 11:11 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Tue Aug 07, 2001 1:42 pm

Yes Tom, the 767 is not as up to date as the A330.

Cf an aircraft designed in the 70s with one designed in the 80s-90s.

A330 - cheaper to run, more cargo, more range, more passengers - more sales.
 
YoungDon
Posts: 495
Joined: Thu May 31, 2001 9:33 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Tue Aug 07, 2001 2:07 pm

The A330-200 is not short range, and the A330-300 is far too big to replace the 767's in my opinion. This will probably be what they get though, to replace the 76's.
 
aviasian
Posts: 1244
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2001 8:11 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Tue Aug 07, 2001 2:12 pm

Cedarjet : You are right about BA's likelihood to lose a tonne of money if the B772s are operated on short-haul routes.

However, B777s have been operated very profitably on short-haul intra-Asian routes by many Asian airlines, including SIA and MAS on the 50-minute SIN-KUL route.

And it is a hugely popular aircraft with many who have flown it and noted its spaciousness (unless of course if you fly on TG's B772s which feature 10 abreast seating in Economy Class).

Its cargo carrying capability has also been instrumental in improving the airline's bottom line.

So on specific routes, it is possible for the B777s to operate profitably. SIA has ordered the B777-200 as the replacement for the A310-300s.

 
aussie_
Posts: 1600
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2000 10:39 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Tue Aug 07, 2001 6:06 pm

It'd be great to see them, but I agree with everyone else saying that it isn't likely. The 777 suits them perfectly.
 
mb339
Posts: 235
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2001 8:37 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Tue Aug 07, 2001 6:45 pm

BA should buy Boeing because BA is the largest customer of Boeing in Europe.
 
Guest

Eg777er

Wed Aug 08, 2001 12:51 am

"Yes Tom, the 767 is not as up to date as the A330."

With the exception of the FBW control system, I see no other reason why the A330 is more "advanced" than the 767. And anyway, new designs like the CRJ for example are still using conventional flight control systems.

"Cf an aircraft designed in the 70s with one designed in the 80s-90s."

I hate to break it to you, but the A330 has it's roots stuck in the 1970s just like the 767, don't you remember the A300?

"A330 - cheaper to run, more cargo, more range, more passengers - more sales."

Cheaper to run? Do you have figures to prove that? Actually I have seen otherwise, with the 767 offering lower overall operating cost's. Yes, the A330 offers more cargo space, but naturally, the 767 carries less, being a smaller plane, and with that offers a more passanger pleasing 2-3-2 arrangement. Yes, the A330 offers more range but not by a huge amount. Heres some figures:

767-200ER:6,670nm
767-300ER: 6,115nm
767-400ER: 5,635nm

A330-200:6,400nm
A330-300:5,500nm

As you can see, the 767-200ER has greater max range than the A332, and the 767-400ER has greater range than the A333, with the 767-300ER not far behind the A332 in terms of range.

Passangers:

767-400ER:245 (3 class)

A330-200:256 (3 class)

Capacity is very close if you ask me. And tell me, is the 747-100 more advanced than the A320 because it holds a larger capacity?

Sales:

767 (From 1981): 835

A330 (From 1992): 193

Your last statement there makes no sense with these figures. I suggest you look at monthly deliverys, and you might find Boeing spitting out just a bit more 767s than Airbus is A330s. But who knows, that could change at anytime.

-Tom

 
Eddy Cheuk
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2001 10:34 pm

Goodbye The Boeing 757

Wed Aug 08, 2001 1:33 am

Personally, I love Boeing rather than Airbus. But I think the Boeing 757s of British Airways seem getting old, and now is the time for their retirement. Goodbye Boeing 757s, let Airbus A330s continue your great jobs for British Airways!!!
 
modesto2
Posts: 2669
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2000 3:44 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Wed Aug 08, 2001 1:41 am

Without getting too detailed, they got 767, 777, 747. What else do they need? A330/A340? Don't think so!!!
 
Guest

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Wed Aug 08, 2001 1:57 am

Ok, this is what the Airbus fans are saying:

They have one of the largest fleets of B777s in service so there is absolutely no chance for any A340.
Maybe the A330-200 is a future option for thin long haul routes and dense European routes where the ageing B763s fly today.


Either that or something like that. Let's get this straight, the 767 is not aging, Tom (King767) has corrected you guys for lots of times on this. THe A330 doesn't simplify the fleet just because it has only cockpit commonality with the A32x series. Also, someone mentioned that some 777s were replacing BA's 744s? I haven't seen any 744s leave the fleet due to 777 replacement. there is no chance for A330/A340 in BA fleet, they have a large 747/777/767 fleet, and that is all you need to know, so stop dreaming.

Eddy Cheuk,

Thanks for the laugh on your previous statement.

But in the serious part, I heard BA ordered some DC-8NG to replaced the 747/777/767 in the fleet, also, the A330s and the A340s would come in and help to replace the Boeing 757s.
 
David_itl
Posts: 5946
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Wed Aug 08, 2001 5:22 am

Boeing 747-400

From a BA press release dated 15th April, 1998:

In a further refinement to its longhaul fleet plans, the airline has replaced orders for four Boeing 747-400s with orders for a further three additional Boeing 777s.

From a BA press release dated 11th October, 2000:

The summer 2001 flying programme will require two fewer 747-400s than British Airways has at present - mainly as a result of the Heathrow-Kuala Lumpur suspension. Two more 747-400s will become surplus the following winter, with further unprofitable flying reductions anticipated.

As a result, the airline has decided to dispose of these four aircraft during the year ahead. Expressions of interest have been received from a number of parties, and negotiations are now at the final stage.

British Airways has the largest Boeing 747-400 fleet in Europe, with around 20 more of the aircraft than any of its European competitors. It currently operates 57 Boeing 747-400s in an overall mainline fleet of more than 260 aircraft. Its longhaul fleet also includes 36 Boeing 777s. The airline currently holds firm orders for nine more of these twinjets, with options on a further 16.



Care to comment?

David/MAN 352 and counting
 
richardw
Posts: 3131
Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 3:17 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Wed Aug 08, 2001 5:50 am

BA will avoid the A340 to negate comparison with Virgin's A340 services.
 
Guest

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Wed Aug 08, 2001 6:09 am

David_itl,

I'm talking about the existing fleet, and not order cancelations. If they cancelled 744 orders and changed them to 777, that is just a change, and not a replacement out of the fleet. The second article has nothing to do with 744 being replaced by 777, only BA reducing capacity on some routes by getting rid of a few of them, but not replacing them with 777.
 
Guest

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Wed Aug 08, 2001 11:51 am

What is the big deal about A-320' A-330' or A340'S I have been on all three with BA and Iberia.They are all nice planes but I still like B-737' 767' and777 better! Isure as heck would not change just to change!
 
eg777er
Posts: 1782
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2000 11:11 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Wed Aug 08, 2001 1:41 pm

I have very accurate figures from Gulf Air with direct operating cost comparisons between the 767-3P6 and the A330-243.

The A330 comes up as cheaper to run in almost every route sector, apart from short hops such as BAH-DXB, BAH-AUH and of course BAH-DOH.

However, for the less fuel burn per seat, the A330 can carry more passengers and more cargo from key markets in Europe to the Middle East than the 767.

I accept that these figures are airline specific, but from my contacts in the industry I have learnt that similar performance figures are claimed for both the 767 and A330 - so I would assume there is a performance 'difference'.

I know that the A330 has its roots in the A300 - oh, big wow, the 222 inch fuselage - and that's it!

The A330 has a new wing, new avionics, new landing gear, new engines, new interior, new materials....all designed in the 80s-90s. Again, compare with a 767 designed solely in the 1970s.

And you discount the cost-effectiveness of the fly-by-wire system. In the case of BA, this would allow shorthaul/European pilots to CCQ and MFF, seamlessly transfer between 319/320/321 (when BA gets them) and 330. Same as BA currently do with the 757 and 767, but on a much larger scale.

The FBW also allows features such as automatic fuel transfer between areas of the aircraft to acheive a precisely calculated CofG. This reduces workload and increases efficiency.

And for orders - In total orders the 767 wins. But compare an aircraft which went into service over 10 years earlier.

Look at current sales data - in the time since the 767-400 gained its first order, the A330-200 has outsold it by 3 to 1. I think that shows you more than anything about the popularity of the current 767.

Boeing747-400,

The 767s are ageing in BAs fleet. Airframes such as G-BNWA, G-BNWB etc. are reaching 12 years of age. They are almost as old as the 757s, which are leaving the fleet. Here in Europe, our airlines don't like flying geriatric jets, as it doesn't portray a good image.

And consider the political aspect. Our dear Prime Minister is a europhile, and therefore is in a position to exert enormous pressure on BA to buy European (with RR engines of course!) even though the airline is not state owned. BA need all the government help they can get in order to get T5 at Heathrow approved and built, Heathrow expanded with a third runway and the AA deal blessed. I think they might trade these for a few A330s - what do you think?
 
Udo
Posts: 4288
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:16 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Wed Aug 08, 2001 6:43 pm

I agree with Eg777er,

their B767 fleet IS ageing, if you believe it or not. The oldest examples will reach 13 years soon, so don't tell me the planes are young. And what big differences do they show compared to B767s from 1982? More range. And?
The A330 is a completely new design, having only the fuselage width in common with the A300.

And forget the crap about the similar range...the B763 has serious problems on routes where the A332 can fly easily and without problems. Take BKK-VIE by Lauda, they often have to stop somewhere when winds blow, or STR-ATL by Delta. They have to stop several times a month to take more fuel...and what about SK and their flight to HKG? They stopped them because they couldn't operate them economically with their B763. That's logic if you always have to leave behind tonnes of cargo to make sure you can fly nonstop...oh, no they want to resume HKG, guess why?
Yes, on the paper there's not much difference, but in reality it is a difference. The A332 can take more pax and more cargo on longer routes, so I don't need thousands of numbers to conclude it can be operated more economically.

The B764 is a low seller because it cannot match the A332's longhaul figures. I'm already excited what CO will do on flights out of IAH to Europe in the future. They will use the B762 and the B777 but not the B764 that much...

Don't praise the B762's range any longer, that aircraft is out of date and nobody orders it any more except CO which has a Boeing exclusive contract (such as Delta).
It has a good range but is much smaller, even less pax and less cargo than the B763, so much for economics compared to the A332.

Why do you praise the 2-3-2 configuration? I don't see an advantage over the 2-4-2 configuration, as you have only ONE pax between you and the aisle on both.

Let's wait some two or three more years, then the BA B767s will be even older than now. BA will replace them and the only option I see is the A332.
By the way, it's also a question of offering new First and Business classes. They just fit better into an A330 body than into the B767.


Regards
Udo
Me & You & a Plane Named Blue...
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 7982
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Wed Aug 08, 2001 10:46 pm

As for BA's future widebody orders, I think they could order the A330-200, primarily for long, thin routes where the 777-200ER is overkill (e.g., routes to Africa and some parts of Asia).

But BA will never order the A340 series. Isn't that what the 777-200ER is for?
 
M27
Posts: 409
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:25 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Thu Aug 09, 2001 12:20 am

I believe Eg777er and Udo have determined that there is no need for BA, or for that matter, any airline to ever order a Boeing aircraft again, what with their superior fuel burn and fbw technology that makes them so effecient. It would be stupid to do so! Any airline that does is doing so only because the US goverment is putting pressure on their country. Perhaps maybe its their contacts that have told them this, but they sure arrived at this determination and have left no way anyone could question it.
 
M27
Posts: 409
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:25 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Thu Aug 09, 2001 1:00 am

Correction to my post! It should have read,"What with their superior fuel burn, and fbw technology that makes
Airbus so efficient, it would be stupid to do so!
 
eg777er
Posts: 1782
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2000 11:11 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Thu Aug 09, 2001 1:36 am

If you believe that, you're wrong.

I have nothing against Boeing or its products.

My favourite aircraft is the Boeing 777 - it's comfortable, has a great interior, the cockpit is a masterpiece of aviation design and ergonomics. I like nothing better than to relax in a BA Club World seat and fly from London to Bahrain on G-ZZZA, ZB, ZC etc.

However, in the 767 size category my favourite aircraft is the A330-200 - I've flown it numerous times with Gulf Air and love the 2-2-2 in Business class with 50 inch pitch, sleeper seats in First, the wide cabin, no middle seat etc.

In comparison, the 767 cannot offer the same width of seat without dropping one per row. It cannot hold two LD3 containers side by side which means you either end up with a) non standard containers or b) wasted space. It also cannot fly me as far as I want to go.

With regards to the A320/737NG debate I can't really comment. I haven't flown the 737NG at all. However, I love BAs new A319s - sports car leather seats, drop down monitors. I'm sure they're the same as a new 737NG.

But who cares? I think the real issue here is why I have to write a post that proves that I am not an Airbus fanatic, or a Boeing fanatic. Why are people who make serious observations about the quality of a product instantly branded on this forum as being fanatics? Why?

A world aviation fleet comprised entirely of Boeing or entirely of Airbus would be a very boring world indeed!

 
MAC100
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2000 7:53 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Thu Aug 09, 2001 1:53 am

I agree with Eg777er. I am not sure, however, whether I agree about comfort in coach. My experiences with A330 are limited to a "once and never again" experience on SR, where they pack you like a sardine into a can. Compared to this, 767 appear less crowded and more comforatble for the poor guy in coach.
I have been on numerous A32X flights (mostly USAir shuttle) and have recently flown on Delta to experience their 737 NG planes. Here Delta certainly wins with their "sports car leather seats", but other than that there really is not a big difference, the cabin of the Airbus is supposedly a few inches wider, but I never felt a difference.
Maybe BA should buy A330/A340 planes afterall, and show some other airlines how to set them up so that even poor coach passengers find them tolerable...
 
Guest

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Thu Aug 09, 2001 1:58 am

If BA orders the FBW A330-200/300 with I assume RR Trent 700 series engines instead of the 767-400, there could be a future possibility that they may place an order for the RR Trent 500 powered A340-500/600 that has the same cockpit setup as the A330 if they don't want the GE90 777-300ER.
 
Guest

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Thu Aug 09, 2001 2:27 am

"The A330 comes up as cheaper to run in almost every route sector, apart from short hops such as BAH-DXB, BAH-AUH and of course BAH-DOH."

I find this very hard to believe, especially when there are no numbers, or figures to prove it. Why do you think the 767 is so successful? It's because it can operate on both short to medium range and long range routes most economicaly for most carriers (Especially U.S. majors as you can see by the popularity of the A330 in the U.S.).

"However, for the less fuel burn per seat, the A330 can carry more passengers and more cargo from key markets in Europe to the Middle East than the 767.

I accept that these figures are airline specific, but from my contacts in the industry I have learnt that similar performance figures are claimed for both the 767 and A330 - so I would assume there is a performance 'difference'."


Again. this is all just BS unless you can provide numbers to back this up.

"I know that the A330 has its roots in the A300 - oh, big wow, the 222 inch fuselage - and that's it!

The A330 has a new wing, new avionics, new landing gear, new engines, new interior, new materials....all designed in the 80s-90s. Again, compare with a 767 designed solely in the 1970s."


Yes, im sorry to tell you again, but the A330 is just as much a 1970's design as the 767. The 767 too, just like the A330, has been heavily updated since it's entry into service back in September 8th, 1982. A number of advancements came from the 777, for example, similar landing gear, brakes, cockpit, and interior used on the 777. Heres a nice note: The 767-400ER actually has a more "advanced" cockpit than the A330/340 in that it uses LCD screens rather than the CRT's used in the 330/340. And do you care to tell us what magic materials the A330 is made out of? Im sorry, but it's the same titanium and composites that were being used with the 767, and even back with the A300. The A330 uses the same engines (with the exception of the RR Trent) as the 767, with the P+W 4000 and the GE CF6, but in larger versions. The latest 767s use an award winning interior designed for the 777. Anyway, what was wrong with the 767s old interior?

"all designed in the 80s-90s."

This statement makes little sense. Airbus is using the same fuselage designed in the late 1960's, using the same materials, and still using that good old reliable CF-6 engine which all came from the A300. That CF-6 engine has been advanced many times over the course of it's career, into what is now a very advanced aeroengine.

"Look at current sales data - in the time since the 767-400 gained its first order, the A330-200 has outsold it by 3 to 1. I think that shows you more than anything about the popularity of the current 767."

Ok, lets say the 767 was introduced into the market in 1991, a year before the A330 orders started to pick up. With my calculations it would have sold approximately 417 airframes between 1991 and 2001.

"The 767s are ageing in BAs fleet. Airframes such as G-BNWA, G-BNWB etc. are reaching 12 years of age. They are almost as old as the 757s, which are leaving the fleet. Here in Europe, our airlines don't like flying geriatric jets, as it doesn't portray a good image."

Hmmm, a few of EIs A330s are already 7 years old, and LHs earliest A340s are now ageing 8. In 3 or 4 years are we going to start to see topics like: "What will EI use to replace it's A330s with?" or "When will LH announce it's A340 replacement's". What do you think? Anyway, 12 years old is just over middle age, hardly "ageing". Did you know that BA just retired it's last 737-200 a few months ago?

-Tom





 
Guest

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Thu Aug 09, 2001 2:48 am

King767, exellent post! I couldn't have said it better!

Eg777er wrote:

I have nothing against Boeing or its products.

Excuse me? You seem to have everything against Boeing!
 
Guest

Udo

Thu Aug 09, 2001 3:20 am

"their B767 fleet IS ageing, if you believe it or not. The oldest examples will reach 13 years soon, so don't tell me the planes are young. And what big differences do they show compared to B767s from 1982? More range. And?
The A330 is a completely new design, having only the fuselage width in common with the A300."


I guess we have different definitions of the term "ageing". So I guess a few of LH's A340s are close to "ageing" status in your terms. What big differences? Upgrades in systems, advancements in engines and range, payload etc. And more recently, the introduction of the new interior and cockpit, new landing gear, brakes, etc thanks to the 777 and 764ER. A330 a completely new design? I think you have been looking at Airbus.com too long Big grin

"And forget the crap about the similar range...the B763 has serious problems on routes where the A332 can fly easily and without problems. Take BKK-VIE by Lauda, they often have to stop somewhere when winds blow, or STR-ATL by Delta. They have to stop several times a month to take more fuel...and what about SK and their flight to HKG? They stopped them because they couldn't operate them economically with their B763. That's logic if you always have to leave behind tonnes of cargo to make sure you can fly nonstop...oh, no they want to resume HKG, guess why?
Yes, on the paper there's not much difference, but in reality it is a difference. The A332 can take more pax and more cargo on longer routes, so I don't need thousands of numbers to conclude it can be operated more economically."


Wow Udo, cool down there for a second. I know you want everyone to "forget" the truth  Smile. Tell me, what magical powers does the A332 have that can make it fly these routes "with no problem". Again here are the figures:

A330-200: 6,400nm

B767-300ER: 6,115nm

The two aircraft have very close range, so please don't try to saw otherwise. Yes, I agree with you that airlines operating in a market where cargo is a very important revenue, the A330 would be best, and even better, the 777. But we are talking about BA here, and the 767 suites them well. Both aircraft suffer from payload restrictions, and both were not designed for ultra-long range flights. Hmm, what about the Airtours A332 flight that operates from Scandinavia to Phuket, with a stop in Bahrain. So please, don't feed us BS. Also, why don't you tell us why AC is still ordering 763s while they have more A330 on order?

"The B764 is a low seller because it cannot match the A332's longhaul figures. I'm already excited what CO will do on flights out of IAH to Europe in the future. They will use the B762 and the B777 but not the B764 that much..."

The 767-400ER was never planned to be a big seller, but to further make the 767 line more attractive, especially when current 767 operators requested a variant like it. About IAH, I did not read anyhting about 762 or 777 to Europe. It only stated the 764 was to be operating a route to CDG, I believe it is.

"Don't praise the B762's range any longer, that aircraft is out of date and nobody orders it any more except CO which has a Boeing exclusive contract (such as Delta).
It has a good range but is much smaller, even less pax and less cargo than the B763, so much for economics compared to the A332."


Just how is the 767-200ER outdated? The reason why the 762 has attracted so few orders in the past is because the markey has changed. The 762 has the right to be praised with it's 6,615nm range. Just why are you so freakin' negative? And how could you even attempt to compare the A332 and the 762ER together? They are two very different aircraft designed for different markets. And I don't think the "Exclusive Contracts" exist anymore, thanks to our friendly neighbors, the EU. Tell me, is the A340-200 outdated because nobody orders it?

"Why do you praise the 2-3-2 configuration? I don't see an advantage over the 2-4-2 configuration, as you have only ONE pax between you and the aisle on both."

Why do I praise it? Because it makes the cabin feel alot less crowded, and if I happen to get a seat in the center section, thats one less person who has to get up for the middle guy. And there is only one middle guy.

"Let's wait some two or three more years, then the BA B767s will be even older than now. BA will replace them and the only option I see is the A332.
By the way, it's also a question of offering new First and Business classes. They just fit better into an A330 body than into the B767."


Yes, let's wait, just as we will wait to see EI and LH's decision to replace their A330s and A340s Big grin. Is that really the only option you see. I happen to see more than that. They could order the A332, or they could order any of the following: 753, 763, or 764.

Why are you one of the most narrow-minded, arrogant users on this board?

-Tom




 
CX747
Posts: 5566
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

Hello All.

Thu Aug 09, 2001 3:45 am

We've got a pretty good discussion going on here!


BA & the 767-300ER: First off, I have to say that I don't think British Airways will be retiring their 767-300ERs within the next 2-3 years. The carrier has enough problems right now making a profit. let alone retiring a perfectly good aircraft and replacing it with one that will do the exact same job. Now, that does not mean they won't EVER order the A330, I just said that it won't be ordered in the forseeable future.

BA & the 757-200: Oh the demise of the 757 in BA's fleet. How much is that costing them. The truth be told, alot. If you don't already know, retiring aircraft is expensive. Now, the DHL deal is pretty sweat, but you have to take all that money and put it into paying off the debt acquired when a new A319 shows up. Also, the 757-200 isn't leaving the fleet. 15 757s are "hanging" around.

BA & the A340: The 777-200ER wins in almost every category. I don't have to show you the numbers because its just a plain fact. If you would like, you can go and learn for yourselves. More pax, greater "real" range, faster, less expensive fuel costs. If it wasn't that way, SIA wouldn't be kicking out 15 month old A340-300s pretty soon.

Boeings 767-400ER: Anyone would be in their right mind to say that this aircraft has not been a "hot seller". Well, news flast folks. IT WASN'T MEANT TO BE A HOT SELLER. What it was designed to do was keep the likes of Delta and Continental happy. By producing the 767-400ER, Boeing was able to sell hundreds of 737NGs, 757-200s and 777s to these carriers. Any carrier that orders the 767-400ER outside of these two is icing on the cake.

Old Aircraft: While I will agree with you that American carriers operate their aircraft a while longer than you, I will not allow individuals to say they are geriatric. Can anyone tell me how OLD Aer Lingeus's 747-100s were? Can anyone tell me how OLD Lufthansa's A300s and A310s are or were? How about the oldest A320-100s in British Airways fleet? Air France is definately operating some ancient A320s by now. Fellas, age truly doesn't mean a thing. I recently flew an United 727-200 that was delivered in 1978. We departed on time, flew faster than a company cough "Bus" cough that was slowing us down and arrived on time. Eventually costs will rise on an airframe as time marches on, but thats just the name of the game.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
DELL_dude
Posts: 318
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 2:58 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Thu Aug 09, 2001 4:28 am

Well stated CX747 you spoke the truth, and anyone who would doubt you is a fool.

DELL_dude
 
flight152
Posts: 3211
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 8:04 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Thu Aug 09, 2001 5:17 am

BA buying the A340 and A330 is the winner of my flying pig award!

 
DatamanA340
Posts: 535
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2000 7:02 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Thu Aug 09, 2001 3:35 pm

The biggest problem of 335 is its too long wingspan. No carrier would prefer this plane wider than 747 classics for short-hauls.

Thus, 330 for 767 replacement makes sense. 13 years old is quite aging. Just think how many years it takes to replacement the type of airplane, especially Airbus products will take more.

...Although 764 would be better because of flock of 7x7s.
 
eg777er
Posts: 1782
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2000 11:11 pm

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Thu Aug 09, 2001 3:42 pm

(Again) I have nothing against Boeing.

However, I do have something against ignorant, blinkered, fanatical Airbus/Boeing supporters.

King767, I would love to be able to FedEx you all the A330/767 performance data that I have (believe me, it's a lot) but I can't - it's privileged information.

With regards to the 'age' of the A330 vs the A300, please name me just one system that has been carried over from the A300. One. (Apart from the engines - nothing to do with Airbus, and if the airlines have any sense they'll order Trents.)

Now let's see what obvious system on the 767 has been around since 1960s-70s. Oh, that's right. The wing. Pretty crucial aspect of an aircraft's performance, wouldn't you agree?

With regards to the cockpit - I can plug an LCD monitor into an old 486 I have here. I can also plug a 15" CRT into my new Pentium 4. Which is the more advanced? Pretty pictures on new screens are not everything you know - the definition of 'advanced' defines what goes on behind the scenes, and in the case of the 767 this is not dissimilar to what was going on in 1982.

I agree with CX747. The A340 hasn't got a hope in hell in BA's fleet. Like have said ad nauseam, their 777 is very comfortable.

With regards to their new A319s. They are not spending huge reserves of (net) money to obtain them. The savings by operating full A319s instead of 75% full 757s are more than enough to pay off the bank loans.

As I have said before - A330 is more passengers, more cargo, more range, better economics.


And BTW, Boeing747-400?

Post such as

"King767, exellent post! I couldn't have said it better! "

Demean your intelligence. You could not have said it at all  Smile .
 
CX747
Posts: 5566
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

Fellas.

Fri Aug 10, 2001 12:08 am

I have to say, that this is one of the better discussions we have had hear in a long time.

Old: Here is my first question. Is the 747-400 old? Many on this forum say that it is old and "crappy" and needs a replacement because the damn thing is going to fall out of the sky. The 747-400 also has a "new wing", but Airbus fans continue their "die 747 die here comes the A380 its new" mantra all day long. Now, the A330/340's heritage lays in the A300/310 programs. Pretty much same fuesalage, nose etc, just like the 747-400 but has a new wing, just like the 747-400. The A330/340s are not old and neither is the 747-400.

Also, I don't know if it has come up, but FBW doesn't mean anything, and if you bring up the fact that its "new", well then I just have to laugh. It is definately an interesting part of today's commericial aviation and does save some weight. But the amount of weight it saves is a ridiculous reason to say it its better. If it was "better" then the 737NGs wouldn't be ordered. It is just DIFFERENT. As for newness of it, and some claims that Airbus invented it, how about it was first used in the Apollo series space vehicles? So, lets take this word "new" and through it out of the discussion.

767 Dated? The 767 is a little bit more "dated" than the A330/340 when it comes to design, but not by that much. Lets be honest, almost all of the current generation of aircraft have heritage from earlier models. Also, basic aeronautic principles haven't changed much. If you took a 767-300ER fresh of the Everett line and compared it to a spankin new A330-200, you would see two aircraft that are pretty much equal. Now, one might have more range, while the other burns less fuel. Also, the 767 lack of container carrying ability is a silly point. The 767, carries containers just as well as the A330. Just not the same size.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
CX747
Posts: 5566
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

Fellas.

Fri Aug 10, 2001 12:11 am

I have to say, that this is one of the better discussions we have had hear in a long time.

Old: Here is my first question. Is the 747-400 old? Many on this forum say that it is old and "crappy" and needs a replacement because the damn thing is going to fall out of the sky. The 747-400 also has a "new wing", but Airbus fans continue their "die 747 die here comes the A380 its new" mantra all day long. Now, the A330/340's heritage lays in the A300/310 programs. Pretty much same fuesalage, nose etc, just like the 747-400 but has a new wing, just like the 747-400. The A330/340s are not old and neither is the 747-400.

Also, I don't know if it has come up, but FBW doesn't mean anything, and if you bring up the fact that its "new", well then I just have to laugh. It is definately an interesting part of today's commericial aviation and does save some weight. But the amount of weight it saves is a ridiculous reason to say it its better. If it was "better" then the 737NGs wouldn't be ordered. It is just DIFFERENT. As for newness of it, and some claims that Airbus invented it, how about it was first used in the Apollo series space vehicles? So, lets take this word "new" and through it out of the discussion.

767 Dated? The 767 is a little bit more "dated" than the A330/340 when it comes to design, but not by that much. Lets be honest, almost all of the current generation of aircraft have heritage from earlier models. Also, basic aeronautic principles haven't changed much. If you took a 767-300ER fresh of the Everett line and compared it to a spankin new A330-200, you would see two aircraft that are pretty much equal. Now, one might have more range, while the other burns less fuel. Also, the 767 lack of container carrying ability is a silly point. The 767, carries containers just as well as the A330. Just not the same size.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
CX747
Posts: 5566
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: Should BA Buy A340's & A330's.

Fri Aug 10, 2001 12:17 am

Sorry about the double post on the last one, damn browser. Anyway.

Another fact that was brought up, is the one about the A330 outselling the 767. Thats true. The 767 has been outsold by the A330. And the 777 family has practically destroyed the A330/340 family in orders. If we look at the overall offerings of the two manufacturers, you will see that while Boeing still produces the 767 and would love to sell you one, they would rather you purchase a 777. So, not only does the 767 have fierce competition from the A330 but also the 777.

Also, once and for all, people should make up their minds on whether the A330 competes with the 777 or the 767? This constant jumping back and forth where the A330 stands on its own and then joins the fight against the 777 is getting ridiculous. ONE OR THE OTHER, NOT BOTH.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower

Who is online