MaverickM11
Topic Author
Posts: 15215
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

Environment Where The A300 Is More Efficient Than The A330?

Tue Nov 29, 2005 4:52 am

Is there any operating environment where the A300 is more efficient (lower trip cost, lower CASM, or other) than the A330-300? For instance are the UNIT COSTS cheaper when LH operates, say, FRA-LHR with an A330-300 or an A300-600R?
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
sllevin
Posts: 3312
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 1:57 pm

Environment Where The A300 Is More Efficient Than The A330?

Tue Nov 29, 2005 5:11 am

I would imagine that on short haul the A300 is more efficient, just because it weighs so much less. Even though the 330 is newer and spiffier, still, it has to lift tens of thousands of pounds more airframe into the air...

Steve
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

Environment Where The A300 Is More Efficient Than The A330?

Tue Nov 29, 2005 5:52 am

Quoting MaverickM11 (Thread starter):

The LH example is not the best one as the A330 is configured for longhaul here, while the A300 is more for shorthaul. Also the A333 is much bigger than the A330, maximum high density config is 440 vs. 360. Maybe we should compare it to the A332 which is around 380.
As for trip costs, the A300 should always win as it is lighter (less landing and handling fees etc.), but its (overall) fuel burn fuel burn shouldn´t be much different from the A330.

I can remember reading an article about the A333 and its first operator, Air Inter. They used it on French domestic routes. They said the A333 burns the same amount of fuel as the A300, but at the same time carries more payload over a higher range.
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
JHSfan
Posts: 460
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 6:22 am

RE: Environment Where The A300 Is More Efficient Than The A330?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:26 am

Using an old A300 as a Cafe is a good idea. The A330 is way to expensive. Bon appetit  Smile

- JHSfan
Look at me, I´m riding high, I´m the airbornmaster of the sky...
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: Environment Where The A300 Is More Efficient Than The A330?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:54 am

The A300 is a real lightweight, it'll be at least 2,000lbs lighter than the 783.  Cool

Obviously not as efficient though.
 
YULWinterSkies
Posts: 1266
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 11:42 pm

RE: Environment Where The A300 Is More Efficient Than The A330?

Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:08 am

Quoting A342 (Reply 2):
Maybe we should compare it to the A332 which is around 380.

Yes, and nobody (to my modest knowledge) uses it as a shorthaul plane, so I assume that the A300 does better on shorthaul routes than the 332. But is there actually an airline that operates both 332 and 300-600?

On a side note, the A300 is one of the greatest planes of all times anyway: the invention of the 2-4-2 economy seating plan (the most convenient IMO), the first twin widebody ever made, and a super good cargo plane that just got new orders from (was this UPS or FedEx?). And, guess what: I've never flown on it!!!!!!  Sad  Sad
When I doubt... go running!
 
MaverickM11
Topic Author
Posts: 15215
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Environment Where The A300 Is More Efficient Than The A330?

Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:07 am

Quoting A342 (Reply 2):
Maybe we should compare it to the A332 which is around 380.

That's clearly built for medium to long haul flights and therefore has the accompanying weight. I picked the -300 since several airlines use it on shorter hops, especially its initial use in the domestic French market with Air Inter. Is there a mileage range under which the A300 has cheaper operating costs (either overall or per seat) than the A330-300?
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: Environment Where The A300 Is More Efficient Than The A330?

Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:30 am

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 5):
But is there actually an airline that operates both 332 and 300-600?

LH did, only A300's and A333's now
China Southern
Monarch
KE
QR
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: Environment Where The A300 Is More Efficient Than The A330?

Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:36 am

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 5):
was this UPS or FedEx?).

It was FedEx... There are still a few UPS ones to be built, then one or two for a Japanese cargo operator (possibly also a few for Air HK still?), then the rest are for FedEx.....
 
trex8
Posts: 4577
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: Environment Where The A300 Is More Efficient Than The A330?

Fri Dec 02, 2005 2:35 am

CI said last year that on its initial routes tpe-HKG,BKK, TYO, the A333 was burning less fuel than the A306
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: Environment Where The A300 Is More Efficient Than The A330?

Fri Dec 02, 2005 5:22 am

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 5):
Yes, and nobody (to my modest knowledge) uses it as a shorthaul plane, so I assume that the A300 does better on shorthaul routes than the 332.



Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 6):
That's clearly built for medium to long haul flights and therefore has the accompanying weight. I picked the -300 since several airlines use it on shorter hops, especially its initial use in the domestic French market with Air Inter. Is there a mileage range under which the A300 has cheaper operating costs (either overall or per seat) than the A330-300?

Of course, this is right, but some carriers use it for shorthaul hops in between longhaul flights (QF and Malaysian Airlines for example) and Air Algerie as well as MS use it for relatively short flights. To my knowledge, these 2 carriers don´t even use it on longhaul flights. IIRC, Air Algerie has the 217-ton MTOW version (in comparison to the 233-ton one used by most airlines).

And there isn´tmore additional weight the A332 carries around because it´s a longhaul aircraft. Just some additional fuel tanks and the systems related with those. If you have a route which will fill the A332 but not the A333 (pax and cargo), then it´s more economic to use the A332 compared to the A333.

As I said before, I expect the A300 to have a lower overall cost in any case, but for CASM on short routes, I have no clue.
Exceptions confirm the rule.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: airbuster, Alsatian, Channex757, gilesdavies, Google Adsense [Bot], JJV, jonchan627, maxbaby01, MaxiAir, OzarkD9S, shamrock350, speedbored, steman, tomofutah, uta999, WA707atMSP, wrcairline and 313 guests