YULYMX
Topic Author
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:53 pm

Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:11 am

Any reason why the A330-200 is alot more in use than is sister A-330-300??

In north América i think that only know of AC, US, NW And AT(1) who use them (333)? Accross the Atlantique, KLM, AF, Swissair, Aerolingus, LH, Corsair, Emirates, AT(3) all use the 332

they carry about the same amount of PAX but the range of the 332 is about 6000 Nautical miles (12 hours) and the 333 about 5000 nautical miles (10 hours) layout inside could vary from 3-3-3 (332) 2-4-2 (333)

A330 family is a great plane but why no succes with North american Carrier?
 
kappel
Posts: 1836
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 6:48 pm

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:13 am

Quoting YULYMX (Thread starter):
they carry about the same amount of PAX

Nope, the a332 is smaller. Just check the airbus website. The market for the a333/b772 (non-ER) is just not that big, they lack range.
L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:20 am

Quoting YULYMX (Thread starter):
Any reason why the A330-200 is alot more in use than is sister A-330-300??

The A332 is primarily a competitor of the B764, and the A332 is by far the superior product of those two. But the A333 competes with the B772, and the most superior product of those two depends on the mission.

Quoting YULYMX (Thread starter):
layout inside could vary from 3-3-3 (332) 2-4-2 (333)

Both the A332 and the A333 have 2-4-2 as a standard economy cross-section. Some charter carriers use 3-3-3 in both types.
Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4460
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:21 am

With Northwest the 332 is configured for 243 seats while the 333 has 298 seats. I think 55 seats is quite a sizeable difference. The 330 is quite a success for NW and US since that is their main aircraft for trans-atlantic.
 
YULYMX
Topic Author
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:21 am

the airbus site state that the A332 can carry 253 PAX for 6750 nautical miles and ther A333 can carry 295 PAX for 5650 nauticals miles. In 3 classe configuration

[Edited 2006-06-05 21:24:06]

[Edited 2006-06-05 21:24:36]
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4460
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:26 am

Quoting YULYMX (Thread starter):
A330 family is a great plane but why no succes with North american Carrier?

You don't think it is a success with NW and US? How do you define success?
 
YULYMX
Topic Author
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:29 am

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 5):

they don't use alot of them unless NW replace all their DC-10 with the 333
 
FlySSC
Posts: 5179
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 1:38 am

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:48 am

Quoting RedChili (Reply 2):
But the A333 competes with the B772

The A333 is not really competing with the B772.
The B772 has a much greater range (8300km/8600km for the A333 against 9500km for the B772 and 14000km for the B772ER).

Initially, the A333 was designed to be a medium range airliner, successor of the A300.
The launch company was Air Inter who was using it on the French Domestic network in a single 412 Y seats config.

The A332 competes with the B767 (and is by far better) but the A333 is more a competitor to the ... A343, especially on the North Atlantic routes.
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4460
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 4:54 am

Northwest is currently using 18-20 330 of which 10-12 are being used trans-atlantic. By this fall all trans-atlantic will be 330 as the DC10 are retired, and more 330's arrive. That will give them a total of 32 I believe that NW flies more 330 trans-atlantic than any other carrier. How can you call that no success?
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 5:35 am

Quoting FlySSC (Reply 7):
The A333 is not really competing with the B772.

They certainly do compete. True, there are some missions where the A333 does not have the range to compete with the B772 and where you could say that the Airbus competitor is the A343 or the A345.

But the A333 and the B772 do compete on many missions also. I could point to many airlines that could replace their B772 with an A333, e.g. CX or TG. For the missions that CX and TG have chosen to use the B772, they could also have used the A333.
Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
 
YULYMX
Topic Author
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 6:39 am

IF NW go with 32 A333 than it is a success...
 
Btriple7
Posts: 1207
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 3:58 am

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 6:52 am

Quoting YULYMX (Thread starter):
Aerolingus

It's Aer Lingus by-the-way, not Aerolingus.

Quoting YULYMX (Reply 10):
IF NW go with 32 A333 than it is a success...

How can you say it's not a success at the current moment?! Airbus has sold a fair amount of A333s, haven't they?!

I would have to agree with Bobnwa. The A333 is operated in significant numbers with US, NW, and other airlines. Also to clarify, Aer Lingus does operate four A333s (I thinks its four, correct me if I'm wrong). Just because the A333 has not outsold the A332 doesn't justify it not being a success.

I think Airbus is satisfied that the A330 program as a whole has been successful. Both the A332 and A333 have sold in significant enough numbers to make them both very worth while.

Regards,
Btriple7

[Edited 2006-06-05 23:54:30]
Just...fly.
 
YULYMX
Topic Author
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 7:46 am

I love both planes don't get me wrong but it seems that airlines buy more 332 than the 333 i as just wondering why... AC only got 333, transat got 3 332 and 1 333...

they both could be a great replacement for the boeing 767 on the north atlantic route from NA to Europe, even the NA south America Routes...

North american airlines are loaded with 767's and 777'S and not much A330 and they seems to be pretty good planes and the don't take forever to takeoff like the 343...  Smile
 
FlySSC
Posts: 5179
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 1:38 am

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 7:58 am

Quoting YULYMX (Reply 12):
I love both planes don't get me wrong but it seems that airlines buy more 332 than the 333 i as just wondering why...

The A332 has a great range ... and no real competitor on the market in its seat capacity, and can be used on 5/6hours flights as well as 12 hours flights both very economically.
For an airline, It is the perfect aircraft for providing additional capacity on a strong route (AF to NRT), opening a new destination, or offering more frequencies rather than bigger aircraft on thinner routes.
The A333 is a great beautiful aircraft, even better looking than the A332, IMO ... but it is "handicaped" by its limited range compared to its "competitors" ...
 
YULYMX
Topic Author
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 9:26 am

the 333 range is still 10 hours not to shaby...
 
aircanada014
Posts: 1224
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:24 pm

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 10:00 am

I did a post awhile back regarding AC's fleet for A340-300 and A330-300 that their range changed or was it an error on their site. A340-300 used to had range of 7790 miles and A330-300 had range of 5650 miles. Now it said 340-300 range is 8340 miles while the 330-300 is at 6562 miles.

Timetable code 343
Period of use 1995 - present
Manufacturer Airbus
Number of aircraft 10
Engines CFM56-5C4
Seats (typical) 286 (30 Executive First, 256 Hospitality)
Cargo capacity 35,494 lbs (16,100 kilos)
Fuel capacity 37,384 usg (141,500 l.)
Overall length 208 feet, 11 inches (63,69 m.)
Wing span 197 feet, 10 inches (60,3 m.)
Top of fin from ground 55 feet, 3 inches (16.85 m.)
Cruise speed 540 mph (869 km/h)
Range (full passengers) 8,343 miles (13,350 km)
Cruise altitude (typical) 37,000 feet (11,277 m.)


Timetable code 333
Period of use 1999 - present
Manufacturer Airbus
Number of aircraft 8
Engines Rolls Royce Trent 772B
Seats (typical) 274 (42 Executive First, 232 Hospitality)
Cargo capacity 30,644 lbs (13,900 kilos)
Fuel capacity 25,767 U.S.gal (97,530 litres)
Overall length 208 feet, 10 inches (63,69 m.)
Wing span 197 feet, 10 inches (60,30 m.)
Top of fin from ground 55 feet, 3 inches (16.85 m.)
Cruise speed 540 mph (869 km/h)
Range (full passengers) 6,562 miles (10,500km)
Cruise altitude (typical) 37,000 feet (11,277 m.)

Here's the link to AC's fleet.

http://www.aircanada.com/en/about/fleet/current.html
 
trex8
Posts: 4576
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:12 am

the A333 competes with the original low TO weight 772, of which there haven't been too many compared to the far more succesful longer range 772ER (or IGW as it once was). When the 772ER appeared, Airbus marketed the A343 as its direct competitor. But for <4000nm, the A333 being lighter is probably a "better" aircraft than the 772 which is why its very popular with Asian carriers for regional routes. The lower capacity A332 having more range than the A333 , but not as much as a A343/772ER, is more a 767 replacement.
 
User avatar
LTU932
Posts: 13069
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 12:34 am

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Tue Jun 06, 2006 5:11 pm

Quoting YULYMX (Thread starter):
Accross the Atlantique, KLM, AF, Swissair, Aerolingus, LH, Corsair, Emirates, AT(3) all use the 332

EI and LT operate a mixed A332/A333 fleet (with most, if not all A333s being standard models, not HGW models). Plus LH is getting rid of the leased A332s. They were only brought into the fleet as a stopgap measure until the brandnew A333s from Toulouse were starting to be delivered. I believe this summer, the last two LH A332s (D-AIMD and D-AIME, both former SN aircraft) will leave, and we still don't know if those A332s will go to LX or to someone else.
 
YULYMX
Topic Author
Posts: 734
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:53 pm

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:10 am

Anyone have flown both is there a big difference?
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9251
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:25 am

Air Greenland also uses an A332


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Nicolas Kersting - NiK Photography

 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Airbus 330-200 VS A330-300

Wed Jun 07, 2006 4:52 am

Quoting YULYMX (Reply 12):
AC only got 333

I'm just guessing on this, but the reason they declined to get the 332 is that it would compete too closely with the 763s they already had, and that weren't ready to be replaced yet. I can think of no major airline that operates both 763s and 332s (except for ones like KLM that are in the process of replacing those 763s with those 332s).

The 333 is a great plane for airlines that want good capacity, but don't have a need for true long-range flights. The 343 fills the need of the latter category. However, most airlines have realized that they're better off just getting the 777 and using it to fill both holes (it doesn't do quite as well as the 333 for medium-range trips, but far outperforms the 343 for long-range trips). But if an airline only has one of those holes to fill (like US, whose transpacific market is non-existant, or NW, who already had a good transpacific fleet), the 333 makes perfect sense.

Quoting AirCanada014 (Reply 15):
I did a post awhile back regarding AC's fleet for A340-300 and A330-300 that their range changed or was it an error on their site. A340-300 used to had range of 7790 miles and A330-300 had range of 5650 miles. Now it said 340-300 range is 8340 miles while the 330-300 is at 6562 miles.

Sounds like they used to list ranges in nautical miles and now list them in statue miles.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day