asianguy767
Posts: 247
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 11:17 pm

Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:37 am

I'm curious why B767 operators have chosen the A330 as a replacement instead of the B767-400ER? I understand for some its a fleet realignment with some airlines getting the A340 together with the A330 like SAS but what about those airlines that don't operate the A340 and yet have chosen the A330 to replace their B767s like EVA Air, Qantas & Asiana. Surely using the B767-400ER as a replacement would cost less to these B767 operators than introducing a new aircraft type. Is it a range issue or a timing thing? Please enlighten me and pardon my ignorance.
 
User avatar
Richard28
Posts: 1622
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 5:42 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 8:27 am

I'm not an expert, but understand that the cargo hold of the A330 (which takes pallets) is much larger than the B674
 
Indy
Posts: 3957
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:37 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 8:33 am

As a passenger I like the A330-300 better. I would pick it over the 767 any day. Just my opinion. Cargo from what I have been told in the past is the big deal. So that would be a big plus. A nicer interior is just icing on the cake.
Indy = Indianapolis and not Independence Air
 
avek00
Posts: 3158
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 8:53 am

Cargo was the big issue with the 764 - it faces a significant cargo disadvantage vice the 330. That said:

1. QF got its 330s for a song for ordering the A380;
2. The Boeing 787, which is designed to replace the 767, is selling like hotcakes; and
3. The A330 has proven itself to be an absolute dog on high-frequency short-haul missions - to QF's and MH's chagrin, the 330 simply was not built for runs like SYD-MEL and SIN-KUL.
Live life to the fullest.
 
flight152
Posts: 3212
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 8:04 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 8:54 am

As a passenger I like the A330-300 better.

Uhh. Care to explain why?
 
kdeg00
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 5:41 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 9:00 am

I know I like the 330/340 better than the 767 from a cabin noise standpoint. I started using SAS to Europe from SEA after they replaced the 767 with the 343 and have had much more comfortable trips.
 
star_world
Posts: 943
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2001 7:52 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 9:04 am

Quoting Indy (Reply 2):
As a passenger I like the A330-300 better



Quoting Flight152 (Reply 4):
Uhh. Care to explain why?

Uhh...  Smile I'd definitely agree with Indy on this one - much quieter cabin, usually more modern interiors (with a few exceptions) and almost always better IFE. Nothing wrong with the 763 at all, have flown many, many transatlantic flights on them, but the 330 is a much more modern feeling aircraft.
 
Indy
Posts: 3957
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 1:37 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 9:06 am

Quoting Flight152 (Reply 4):
As a passenger I like the A330-300 better.

Uhh. Care to explain why?

The inflight entertainment is killer! And its a quiet ride. Nothing wrong with the 767. It is a good ride too. I just think the 330-300 is better.
Indy = Indianapolis and not Independence Air
 
Xkorpyoh
Posts: 727
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 12:55 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 9:14 am

I just flew on CO's 764 and loved it more than the 330s. The cabin interior of the 764 is just like the 777. PTVs and very spacious and confy.
I like the 330s but not crazy about them.
 
ACYWG
Posts: 259
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 7:20 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:16 am

I personally have an answer for those of us that fly AC regularly on the long hauls. I highly prefer AC's A333's over the 767's cause the 333's have Rolls-Royce Trent engines....and If there is a better sounding engine on an AC plane....I haven't yet found it. Though to be truthful, I havn't flown on the A345's yet, but then again, those are still Trents on those as well.
 
looneytoon
Posts: 438
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:19 am

I have flown the 764 before from IAH to GRU and it was a very pleasant flight. Cabin noise was low, and IFE was pretty good too. I really dig the 777-like interior of the 764.
LooneyToon
 
Carpethead
Posts: 2566
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 8:15 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:31 pm

Please explain to CX why it uses its A330 on fairly short-hauls within Asia. Those A330 frequently turnaround in about an hour.

For Asiana, they already operate A321s so stepping up to the A333 is not a big deal.

BR has yet to replace the 767 with the A332. All have been used for expansion and replacement of pax MD-11s.

As other people mentioned cargo as a big factor, the 767 is an older design and perhaps airlines went for a newer design in the A330. Still I would have thought there would be a few more operators for the 764 by now.
Similar to the 753, it might have been just a timing thing. Wrong product at the wrong time.
 
alexchao
Posts: 665
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:39 pm

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 11):
BR has yet to replace the 767 with the A332. All have been used for expansion and replacement of pax MD-11s.

The A330-200s have begun to replace the B767s in EVA Air's fleet. A B767-200 (B-16622) is scheduled to leave EVA in late April.

Scheduled Retirement for EVA Air's B767s:
April 2005
B-16622 (762)
N602EV (763ER)

May 2005
B-16625 (762)
N601EV (763ER)

July 2005
B-16621 (762)

November 2005
B-16623 (762)

June 2006
B-16603 (763ER)
B-16605 (763ER)

This might have changed since my info may be outdated.
 
9v-svc
Posts: 1703
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 5:19 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:44 pm

I remembered the 764ER had a world tour , went to many places but failed to get any orders apart from CO and DL. Mostly because of the cargo capacity and the range of the aircraft.
Airliners is the wings of my life.
 
6thfreedom
Posts: 2622
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 11:09 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 2:46 pm

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 3):
The A330 has proven itself to be an absolute dog on high-frequency short-haul missions - to QF's and MH's chagrin, the 330 simply was not built for runs like SYD-MEL and SIN-KUL.

Can you please explain this in a little more detail. I'm being dead serious, not sarcastic in any way.

QF operates mostly B763 SYD-MEL vv. What's the main difference with the A330? What are the issues?
 
N77014
Posts: 812
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 7:16 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:02 pm

I think a more relevant issue is the operating costs vs. capacity issues, particularly over the North Atlantic.

SAS in particular, is hurting as they find their A330's ill suited for thinner routes.

Keeping their older B767's while an expense for keeping an additonal fleet type, is not a bad option for substituting for the larger A330's on thin or off-season routes and markets.
A new life awaits you in the Off-World Colonies...
 
baw716
Posts: 1460
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 7:02 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:49 pm

The problem with the 767-400 is the same problem with the -300. It cannot hold LD3 cans, nor can it take full size pallets. The A330 can take LD3 cans and full size pallets, so from a cargo perspective, there is a significant advantage on the A330 v. the B767-400.

The B767-400 was made for a specific mission: High density, medium range routes for which cargo is not a major component in the revenue mix for the aircraft. Delta, for example, uses the 767-400 as the replacement for the L1011. It does this very well. Continental, on the other hand, does use their -400 on long haul, but on secondary routes that are already served by a 777. Continental uses them to South America and occasionally to Europe. They use their -200s for the long haul low density routes where cargo and low density dictate the aircraft to be utilized.

In terms of passenger comfort, one can argue that the A330 is wider, therefore more spacious. Of course, the 767 advocates use the fact that there is only one middle seat, so 87% of the seats are windows and aisles and the pitch is usually between 32-33 inches)

Is there one that is better? No. They just are better on different misssion types.

baw716
David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
 
monteycarlos
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 4:24 pm

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 11):
BR has yet to replace the 767 with the A332. All have been used for expansion and replacement of pax MD-11s.

Yeah spot on from what I heard... fleet plans suggested the MD-11's would all be cargo converted (ideal for the MD-11) and then A332's would take the pax routes which the MD-11's used to fly.

Quoting Indy (Reply 2):
As a passenger I like the A330-300 better.



Quoting Flight152 (Reply 4):
Uhh. Care to explain why?

Noise level on the A332/3 is alot better IMO than that 763... I've done MEL-SYD and reverse a few times on both aircraft and its alot different. But then again alot of the actual comfort settings inside the cabin are purely to do with the airline, but the noise is a big factor for me.

Quoting 9V-SVC (Reply 13):
I remembered the 764ER had a world tour , went to many places but failed to get any orders apart from CO and DL. Mostly because of the cargo capacity and the range of the aircraft.

What is the range incidently?

Quoting 6thfreedom (Reply 14):
QF operates mostly B763 SYD-MEL vv. What's the main difference with the A330? What are the issues?

The A332 takes alot longer to turn around. It is a much bigger aircraft and takes alot longer to service once it has landed. Its ideal mission is not the short haul kind of stuff that QF have it doing.

Quoting BAW716 (Reply 16):
The problem with the 767-400 is the same problem with the -300. It cannot hold LD3 cans, nor can it take full size pallets. The A330 can take LD3 cans and full size pallets, so from a cargo perspective, there is a significant advantage on the A330 v. the B767-400.

Agreed... Cargo is the big issue here as it is worth alot of money to airlines because it is pure profit (cream on the cake if you will). The more cargo you can squeeze in on top of baggage and pax, the more money you will make.
It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 4:41 pm

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 3):
3. The A330 has proven itself to be an absolute dog on high-frequency short-haul missions

EK uses it effectively in their DXB-KHI/LHE/ISB routes...I've been on them a few times..I don't mind their -A332's for short routes, but I don't like their A333's for their medium haul routes such as DXB-CDG....
"Up the Irons!"
 
monteycarlos
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 4:54 pm

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 18):
but I don't like their A333's for their medium haul routes such as DXB-CDG....

Hmmm, not sure that EK operate A333's... in fact their website says they don't. Are you sure it wasn't one of the A332's?
It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
 
Carpethead
Posts: 2566
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 8:15 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 5:37 pm

Alexchao,
Thanks for info on BR's 767 fleet. I guess it's safe to say they won't be painted in their new colors.
Any takers for the ex-BR planes. Surely, AC is looking at the 763ERs.

BR is retiring all eight 767s in about one year period. I believe BR doesn't have that many A332s left to be delivered. BR is taking some 773ER starting this year but these are part of replacement for 744 combis that will be converted to freighters. Could we see an add on to the A332 order? Another scenario is the displacement of some of MD-90s off domestic routes as result of the start of the high-speed rail link between Taipei and Kaohsiung. These could be used to replace the 767, while not matching the capacity, with increased frequencies.
 
VHXLR8
Posts: 487
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 6:58 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:42 pm

Quoting Indy (Reply 2):
As a passenger I like the A330-300 better. I would pick it over the 767 any day. Just my opinion. Cargo from what I have been told in the past is the big deal. So that would be a big plus. A nicer interior is just icing on the cake.

If a nicer interior is what you're after, then you should choose your flights based on airline, not on aircraft type; as it is the airline that determines the cabin interiors, not the manufacturer
 
monteycarlos
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 7:31 pm

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 20):
Thanks for info on BR's 767 fleet. I guess it's safe to say they won't be painted in their new colors.
Any takers for the ex-BR planes. Surely, AC is looking at the 763ERs.

Not when they're looking at replacements for those 763ER's... some will tell you they have already got a deal with Boeing for the 787 but we'll wait and see... shouldn't be too long.

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 20):
BR is retiring all eight 767s in about one year period. I believe BR doesn't have that many A332s left to be delivered. BR is taking some 773ER starting this year but these are part of replacement for 744 combis that will be converted to freighters. Could we see an add on to the A332 order? Another scenario is the displacement of some of MD-90s off domestic routes as result of the start of the high-speed rail link between Taipei and Kaohsiung. These could be used to replace the 767, while not matching the capacity, with increased frequencies.

BR doesn't operate domestically... The Kaohsiung routes are operated by UNI air so the MD-90's are probably at their disposal and not at BR's. I guess whats left of the A332's and the 777's will take over whatever void is left by the 767's but I doubt that its going to be that bigger hole that needs to be filled.
It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
 
star_world
Posts: 943
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2001 7:52 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 9:23 pm

Quoting VHXLR8 (Reply 21):
If a nicer interior is what you're after, then you should choose your flights based on airline, not on aircraft type; as it is the airline that determines the cabin interiors, not the manufacturer

While this is true in some cases, it's safe to say that the majority of A330s have a "nicer" configuration than most 767s, simply because of the age of the aircraft and the options available for interior cabin fittings. Of course people will come back with comments about the 764 with the 777-style interior as already mentioned above, but the fact is that these aircraft are few and far between, and non-existant if you're not in the US!

So yes, it is definitely down to the operators in theory, but the average standard of A330 interiors is much more modern than 763s.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 9:31 pm

Quoting Asianguy767 (Thread starter):
s it a range issue or a timing thing?

Range is a large part of it, but range vs. uplift is the real thing. The A330-200 has a significantly greater uplift than the similar capacity 767.

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 3):
The A330 has proven itself to be an absolute dog on high-frequency short-haul missions - to QF's and MH's chagrin, the 330 simply was not built for runs like SYD-MEL and SIN-KUL.

It wasn't... but a lot of it is just QF and MH. CX and EK manage to op the plane just fine on short routes, although SYD-MEL is a very short route. Its a big plane, significantly bigger than a 767. It takes time to turn.

If SQ, CX, and all the other Asian carriers can manage to effectively fly the 777A as a regional plane, then QF should be able to get better results from their A330s.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 18):
I don't mind their -A332's for short routes, but I don't like their A333's for their medium haul routes such as DXB-CDG....

EK operates no A330-300s at this time.
 
avek00
Posts: 3158
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:05 pm

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 24):
CX and EK manage to op the plane just fine on short routes,

Short routes aren't the problem - high-frequency short-haul routes such as SIN-KUL and SYD-MEL are where the 333 is a dog - the planes go mechancial at the drop of a hat, in addition to having underisable turaround times.
Live life to the fullest.
 
DLPMMM
Posts: 2128
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 12:34 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:20 pm

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 25):
Short routes aren't the problem - high-frequency short-haul routes such as SIN-KUL and SYD-MEL are where the 333 is a dog - the planes go mechancial at the drop of a hat, in addition to having underisable turaround times.

I have seen this sort of statement several times on different threads. I am not doubting anyone's veracity, but was wondering if there is any authoritative statements or data from one of the A330 operators to back this up.

I like to try to separate urban legend from fact, and it can be difficult with these sorts of statements as it does sound plausible.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:58 pm

Quoting Asianguy767 (Thread starter):
I'm curious why B767 operators have chosen the A330 as a replacement instead of the B767-400ER? I

Range and cargo

Quoting Indy (Reply 7):
The inflight entertainment is killer!

That has nothing to do with the A330, rather the airline (I assume this is US and yes, that IFE is excellent)

Quoting 6thfreedom (Reply 14):
QF operates mostly B763 SYD-MEL vv. What's the main difference with the A330? What are the issues?

Lots of electrical problems along with sundry heating, cooling and others

Quoting BAW716 (Reply 16):
It cannot hold LD3 cans

Yes it can, just not side by side all the way back

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 24):
If SQ, CX, and all the other Asian carriers can manage to effectively fly the 777A as a regional plane, then QF should be able to get better results from their A330s.

The 772A is built as a plane that can handle shorter hauls. The 773A handles even shorter hauls and flies high frequency because it was built to handle that. Boeing built the plane to replace older widebodies that were already doing relatively short hauls. Airbus targeted the A330 at the longer end of 767 routes in part because it is so large (to keep development costs down and to not canibalize A300 sales at the early stages), part because heavy jets other than the 753 are less and less often seen on shorter routes and part because they knew the 767 would be limited by its earlier development to be a medium haul aircraft that happened to be able to emerge into a reasonably long haul aircraft. Hence, the A330 was able to have similar range to the smaller 767s while having more capacity. Also, given how long ago the A330 was developed, Airbus was again still looking to not hit A300 sales too hard, which would have been impossible if the A330 was truely aimed at the 767 square on.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
Cleared2Land4
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 11:42 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:12 pm

Quoting Indy (Reply 2):
As a passenger I like the A330-300 better. I would pick it over the 767 any day. Just my opinion. Cargo from what I have been told in the past is the big deal. So that would be a big plus. A nicer interior is just icing on the cake.

Im with him the 330s are also cleaner and newer
United Airlines... "It's Time to Fly."
 
TexasLonghorn
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 3:53 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:36 pm

The A330s may be newer and quieter inside, but the 767's 2-3-2 seating arrangement is money. This makes it feel so much less cramped than the 330's cabin. I guess the the price of this is the cargo container flaw.
 
tjcab
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 3:14 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:54 pm

Definitely prfer the 330 over classic 767's, however, all late model 767's have the 777-style interiors. Flew to IAH-LAX on CO's 764, one of the most pleasing experiences, and LAX-EWR on CO's 762 and was surprised to have the exact same cabin as the 764, including the PVT's...

I will have lean toward late model 767's simply because of the 7-accross seating. As an operator, probably will go with the 330's due to the cargo capacity, as cargo (correct me if I'm wrong) generates more revenue than passengers.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Sat Apr 23, 2005 12:37 am

Quoting Cleared2Land4 (Reply 28):
Im with him the 330s are also cleaner and newer

That depends completely upon the carrier.

Quoting Tjcab (Reply 30):
as cargo (correct me if I'm wrong) generates more revenue than passengers.

It really depends on who is flying the plane
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Sat Apr 23, 2005 12:43 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 27):
Boeing built the plane to replace older widebodies that were already doing relatively short hauls.

Relatively short hauls are still hauls in the 4000nm range, which is the target sweet spot for the 330 as well.

Boeing built the plane to replace DC-10s and L-1011s on midrange runs.

N
 
teamregal
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Sat Apr 23, 2005 1:47 am

Quoting Monteycarlos (Reply 17):
Yeah spot on from what I heard... fleet plans suggested the MD-11's would all be cargo converted (ideal for the MD-11) and then A332's would take the pax routes which the MD-11's used to fly.

The A332 is smaller than the MD-11, so wouldn't that leave a serious gap in passenger load? Wouldn't you need at least need the A333X for an MD-11 mission?  scratchchin 


REGAL
You would dare to challenge me? .........Insanity!
 
baw716
Posts: 1460
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 7:02 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:07 am

Just my two cents:
My personal preference: B767 for passenger comfort, A330 for cargo.
I have flown more than 500,000 miles in the 767 transatlantic, I can tell you that had I had to endure that in any other aircraft where there was anymore chance to get a middle seat, I would have gone insane. I can count on one hand in all that flying the number of times I have flown in a middle seat on the 767. I wonder what my chances of that would have been on the A330?

Cargo is a no brainer. A330. For the guy who said you can stuff an LD3 into a 767 sideways, yes you can do it, but you lose SO much capacity in doing so that it is not even worth putting the can in the airplane.

baw716
David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
 
teamregal
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:09 am

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 24):
If SQ, CX, and all the other Asian carriers can manage to effectively fly the 777A as a regional plane, then QF should be able to get better results from their A330s.

To add on to what N1120A said, the passenger loads in the Asian short-haul/domestic market are dense. So not only are SQ and CX planes full, their plane (B777A) was built for that sort of mission. Now unless QF's short-haul/domestic loads are just as dense, they are certainly going to less than pleased especially with a plane (A330) that was not built for such missions.  twocents 


REGAL
You would dare to challenge me? .........Insanity!
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:15 am

I contend that the 777A was not designed for a short haul or domestic mission any more than the A330 was.

Obviously, QF's short hauls are just as dense. They took 330s and loaded them up with seats.

N
 
teamregal
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:22 am

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 36):
Obviously, QF's short hauls are just as dense. They took 330s and loaded them up with seats.

That's the part I didn't know. So, we're back to square one...Why is QF having such a hard time?


REGAL
You would dare to challenge me? .........Insanity!
 
yul332LX
Posts: 798
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 5:15 am

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

Quoting Tjcab (Reply 30):
As an operator, probably will go with the 330's due to the cargo capacity, as cargo (correct me if I'm wrong) generates more revenue than passengers.

It depends on carriers, but generally speaking, margins are MUCH higher for cargo than they are for pax.
E volavo, volavo felice più in alto del sole, e ancora più su mentre il mondo pian piano spariva lontano laggiù ...
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Sat Apr 23, 2005 8:09 am

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 32):
Relatively short hauls are still hauls in the 4000nm range, which is the target sweet spot for the 330 as well.

Boeing built the plane to replace DC-10s and L-1011s on midrange runs.

Except that 772As most often do runs like LAX-HNL (just over 2000nm), LAX-ORD/DEN (under 1000-1500nm) and the like
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
monteycarlos
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: Why A330 To Replace The B767?

Sat Apr 23, 2005 10:24 am

Quoting TeamREGAL (Reply 33):
The A332 is smaller than the MD-11, so wouldn't that leave a serious gap in passenger load? Wouldn't you need at least need the A333X for an MD-11 mission?

The BR A332's have 252 seats, the MD-11's were 280 by memory... so 30 odd seats down. I'd hazard a guess that the routes where the MD-11 was filling will more than likely be taken over by the 773ER once delivered this year. I don't see BR ordering any more A330's.

Quoting TeamREGAL (Reply 35):
Now unless QF's short-haul/domestic loads are just as dense, they are certainly going to less than pleased especially with a plane (A330) that was not built for such missions.

According to some data I saw, MEL-SYD vv. is the second largest route in terms of pax numbers in the world. So the demand is there, and that is why QF thought that the A333 would be good (a lot of seats and a lot smaller than a 747) but the turnaround time on that plane was not as expected.

Quoting TeamREGAL (Reply 37):
That's the part I didn't know. So, we're back to square one...Why is QF having such a hard time?

QF probably aren't having such a hard time now. All the A333's have been taken onto international routes and only the A332's operate now under the CityFlyer program. You'll note that the A332's are running MEL-SYD at times where there is prime business traffic (i.e. 7am departing MEL, 6pm departing SYD) and from my experience they are usually pretty full. But as was previously stated MEL-SYD vv. is a very short route, and its not hard to see that this isn't what the plane was designed for.
It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...