BoeingVista
Topic Author
Posts: 1684
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:23 am

Airbus to raise A330-300 MTOW to 242t and activate the center tank, maybe they are planning a 787-10 killer...

I'm sure that A333 customers will be very happy about this as it will make some restricted routes more practical, it will make it a more capable aircraft at long ranges and allow more freight to be carried. On Flightglobal Pro no free link as yet.

[Edited 2012-11-29 01:23:40]
BV
 
User avatar
817Dreamliiner
Posts: 3216
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:12 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:32 am

Correct me if im wrong but I thought the -300 didnt have a centre tank? When you say activate, im thinking its already there, but not used...
Please let me know... If you know this is the end of the world, Let me know... If you know the truth...
 
RubberJungle
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 10:16 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:37 am

 
ba319-131
Posts: 8133
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 1:27 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:38 am

Quoting 817Dreamliiner (Reply 1):
Correct me if im wrong but I thought the -300 didnt have a centre tank? When you say activate, im thinking its already there, but not used...

- It is already there, just not used on the -300.
111,732,3,4,5,7,8,BBJ,741,742,743,744,752,762,763,764,772,77L,773,77W,L15,D10,30,40,AB3,AB6,A312.313,319,320,321,332,333
 
76er
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:04 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:47 am

Quoting ba319-131 (Reply 3):
It is already there, just not used on the -300.

My thoughts exactly, the article however states that the -300 does have the tank built in.

Nevertheless, amazing A still manages to tweak the 330, even with the 350 coming ever closer to first flight. Seems the WO330 will see the light of day after all.  Wink

[Edited 2012-11-29 01:48:47]
 
qf340500
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 4:22 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:50 am

Yeah baby, yeah!!!!

This A330 is getting better and better!!! Let the orders roll in... I must say, now that the A340-500/ -600 are dead (for new planes at least), the A330 is my favourite plane! It looks great and its seems to have a lot of potential still!
 
76er
Posts: 451
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:04 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:54 am

Yup, all it needs now is the GTF.  cloudnine 

[Edited 2012-11-29 01:57:47]
 
qf340500
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 4:22 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:55 am

That would be awesome !!!!!!!
 
User avatar
3rdGen
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 7:19 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:58 am

Adding a center tank probably wouldn't be that difficult, the architecture in that area of the aircraft is the same as the -200. Building new 300s with center tanks would probably not be that difficult.
لا اله الا الله محمد رسول الله
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3794
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:01 am

Quoting 76er (Reply 4):
Nevertheless, amazing A still manages to tweak the 330, even with the 350 coming ever closer to first flight. Seems the WO330 will see the light of day after all.  

That is amazing isn't it?  

I guess it is one of the wide-bodies with the greatest difference in performance when she was introduced in 1994 compared to what she might able to do in 2015. And I mean of course that it is still called the A330-300 instead of being another variant of the A330-family.  
 
Flying-Tiger
Posts: 3924
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:07 am

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 9):
I guess it is one of the wide-bodies with the greatest difference in performance when she was introduced in 1994 compared to what she might able to do in 2015.

Anyone willing to show how an 1994 A330-300 with Trents has evolved into a 2015 A330-300 with Trents in terms of payload, range, SFC etc?
Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8,B742/4,B762/763,B772,CR2,CR7,ER4,E70,E75,F50/70,M11,L15,S20
 
User avatar
Aquila3
Posts: 496
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:18 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:07 am

Quoting 76er (Reply 6):
Yup, all it needs now is the GTF.   

[Edited 2012-11-29 01:57:47]

That would be much easier on the A340, due to the smaller size of the engines.
BTW I believe the GTF itself has already flown on a 340 as a test bed.
But as we have already debated in another post, A will not do it.
It would be a too good plane, undermining the 350 project.
So much for the detractors of the 330/340 project
chi vola vale chi vale vola chi non vola è un vile
 
fcogafa
Posts: 865
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:37 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:23 am

from the article:
It will give operators of the -300 the option of activating the centre wing fuel tank, a standard feature on the longer-range -200 but one which has remained unused on the larger aircraft.

This will increase the -300's fuel capacity from 97,500 litres to more than 139,000 litres. The modification will include tank inerting.

Airbus hopes the improvements will extend the A330-300's range to 6,100nm by 2015, enabling it to perform westbound flights from south-east Asia to Europe.
==============================

This reads like an Airbus press release and we know how 'sexed up' they are..

It implies that the fuel capacity is increased by over a third, but range only increases 500nm? Also, sounds a bit woolly that 'Airbus HOPES the range will extend to 6,100nm', shouldn't it know that?

This is presumably the Airbus reaction to the B787-10 project. Just because the MTOW is raised a bit doesn't necessarily lead to many new orders as most airlines won't need the extra range. In fact the article states that an MTOW increase to 240t attracted only one customer.
 
qf340500
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 4:22 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:28 am

sure there must be one who finds a hair in the soup  ))

after all we are on a.net...
 
User avatar
817Dreamliiner
Posts: 3216
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:12 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:28 am

Quoting ba319-131 (Reply 3):
It is already there, just not used on the -300.

Thanks, never knew it was there at all.
Please let me know... If you know this is the end of the world, Let me know... If you know the truth...
 
CRJ900
Posts: 1940
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:35 am

Quoting 817Dreamliiner (Reply 14):
Quoting ba319-131 (Reply 3):It is already there, just not used on the -300.

Thanks, never knew it was there at all.

Me neither, I always thought the -200 centre tank was added in the aft cargo hold to give the -200 such a long range. Does that mean that the current A333s are flying around wasted weight having an empty tank they cannot use?
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
TP313
Posts: 264
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:45 am

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 12):
It implies that the fuel capacity is increased by over a third, but range only increases 500nm? Also, sounds a bit woolly that 'Airbus HOPES the range will extend to 6,100nm', shouldn't it know that?

Actually it s pretty simple to to explain that:
The 6,100nm range is the fully loaded maximum range and its increase is of 500nm because the 333 became, with this change, a MTOW limited design. Now, at full load, you can't take fuel if it pushes the whole weight over 242 T.

Flight Global says that Airbus "hopes" precisely because they aren't issuing an Airbus press release, understood?





[Edited 2012-11-29 03:20:51]
 
RubberJungle
Posts: 302
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 10:16 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 11:35 am

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 12):
It implies that the fuel capacity is increased by over a third, but range only increases 500nm?

The capacity figure is simply an increase in volume, that's all. It increases to the figure given simply by becoming available, but that doesn't mean you can simply fill the entire tank with fuel and jet off.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4080
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 11:45 am

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 15):

As I understand it, the tank is probably not a structure in its own right but more a sealing of the unused centre MLG bay built in for the A340, so the added wasted weight is negligible if any at all.

Can anyone clarify?
 
vfw614
Posts: 3168
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 12:34 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 11:57 am

I would find it very surprising if the A330-300 has been flying arund for almost decades with a fully-fledged centre tank that now, all of a sudden, is rediscovered... Certainly slightly more complicated than that.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6341
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:02 pm

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 12):
It implies that the fuel capacity is increased by over a third, but range only increases 500nm?

  
Fill it with fuel and it will go an awfully long way. just don't expect to put much payload in it.
A look at the range/payload chart clearly shows how removing the fuel capacity constraint adds that c. 500Nm whilst still carrying an economic payload.
That was just lost potential before.
Airbus have been long overdue in addressing this IMO. That said, it needed the higher MTOW's to leverage the gain

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 12):
In fact the article states that an MTOW increase to 240t attracted only one customer.

so far....
The lack of an activated centre tank may have been a key factor in this   

Quoting qf340500 (Reply 13):
sure there must be one who finds a hair in the soup

Along with the rest of the wig..  
Quoting moo (Reply 18):
As I understand it, the tank is probably not a structure in its own right but more a sealing of the unused centre MLG bay built in for the A340, so the added wasted weight is negligible if any at all.

If I was a betting man I'd suggest that the "extra" 2t from 240t to 242t is needed to cover off any OEW gain

Rgds
 
BoeingVista
Topic Author
Posts: 1684
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:08 pm

Quoting vfw614 (Reply 19):
I would find it very surprising if the A330-300 has been flying arund for almost decades with a fully-fledged centre tank that now, all of a sudden, is rediscovered... Certainly slightly more complicated than that.

From the Airbus Did You Know section on the A330

Quote:
The A330-200 and A330-300 are almost identical in all but length. The only two other key differences are that the centre tank is activated for increased fuel capacity and an extended fin and rudder on the A330-200

So maybe a bit odd but yes, it seems so.
BV
 
fcogafa
Posts: 865
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:37 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:12 pm

Quoting RubberJungle (Reply 17):
The capacity figure is simply an increase in volume, that's all. It increases to the figure given simply by becoming available, but that doesn't mean you can simply fill the entire tank with fuel and jet off

Thanks for the explanation.

So basically the stats quoted sound good but mean nothing. More accurately they could have said something like 'This will increase the -300's usable fuel capacity from 97,500 litres to more than 100,000 litres.'?
 
Tristarsteve
Posts: 3364
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:04 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:15 pm

Quoting moo (Reply 18):
As I understand it, the tank is probably not a structure in its own right but more a sealing of the unused centre MLG bay built in for the A340, so the added wasted weight is negligible if any at all.

No. The centre tank is the wing centre section where it goes through the fuselage. The structure is there on all A330/340, but is not sealed on the 330-300. It would probably be possible tio activate it by mod action.

The Centre MLG bay is also fitted on all A330/340. This is aft of the centre tank in the undercarriage bay. On the A330 it is just an empty box. This would never be suitable for fuel.
 
delta88
Posts: 113
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 7:35 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:26 pm

Seems Airbus is getting quite serious about fighting back the 787 and Boeings plans for big, long range future airliners! Maybe we'll see more of the A333s now in Boston!! :P
B712,B738,B739,B752,B762ER,B763ER,B772ER,MD82,MD83,MD88,MD90,A320,CRJ9,CRJ2,EMJ145,ERJ175
 
sweair
Posts: 1816
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:59 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:34 pm

I guess Boeing gives up on the 787-10 now that its killed?
 
queb
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 3:10 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:36 pm

Quoting moo (Reply 18):

For ref:

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/aircraft-pictures/A330%20MRTT%20Fuel%20Tank%20Arrangement.jpg
 
BoeingVista
Topic Author
Posts: 1684
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:53 pm

Quoting sweair (Reply 25):
I guess Boeing gives up on the 787-10 now that its killed?

No, it just comes back with the non launch of the 787-10XX

Quoting Aquila3 (Reply 11):
But as we have already debated in another post, A will not do it.

Nope probably not but an engine OEM could make an unsolicited proposal, I remember that RR once made an unsolicited proposal to the USAF for the re engining of B52's to turn it into a quad jet with RB 211's
BV
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9855
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:00 pm

Quoting 817Dreamliiner (Reply 1):
When you say activate, im thinking its already there, but not used...

It would be a lot more than just turning on a switch. The -300 cockpit would need some upgrades (eg adding overhead switches for the centre fuel pumps), the flight warning computers would need to be upgraded, upgrades to the fuel quantity computers, FMEGC, fuel inerting system (and somewhere to refil it from), installation of sensors and pumps in the tanks, plumbing, and possibly even fuel jettison.

Nothing insurmountable, however it is not an overnight job. Probably could be done during one of the bigger regular checks. The current aircraft performance wise is good for over 250t.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
airbazar
Posts: 6876
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:26 pm

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 12):
This is presumably the Airbus reaction to the B787-10 project.

They already have the A359 as a competitor to the B7810. I see this has another sign that they won't build the A358.

Quoting delta88 (Reply 24):
Seems Airbus is getting quite serious about fighting back the 787 and Boeings plans for big, long range future airliners! Maybe we'll see more of the A333s now in Boston!! :P
BOS already gets plenty of A333's: LX, LH, DL, EI. I'd like to see some 773's for a change   Not a single airline flies the 773 to Boston. I'm hoping AF will once they retire the 744s.

[Edited 2012-11-29 05:28:16]
 
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 845
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:34 pm

This will take the capability of the new build freighter further ahead of conversions and position the line well to produce mainly freighters after A350 EIS.

When should we expect launch of a new build 242t A333F?
 
astuteman
Posts: 6341
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:46 pm

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 22):
So basically the stats quoted sound good but mean nothing. More accurately they could have said something like 'This will increase the -300's usable fuel capacity from 97,500 litres to more than 100,000 litres.'?

It means exactly what it says. The capacity goes up to what it says it does. Which gives the airlines the flexibility to choose how it uses the airframe.
Realistically though, with the type of payloads an A333 will typically carry, a centre-tank equipped A333 will never fill its tanks.
Which is absolutely no different to the quoted tank capacities for...

The 787-8
The 787-9
The A330-200
The 748i
The A380
etc
etc

In fact pretty much everything bar the 777-300ER and the A32X series - both of which are fuel volume limited, like the CURRENT A333 is.

Just about every other widebody I know has fuel capacity it will very rarely use

Quoting sweair (Reply 25):
I guess Boeing gives up on the 787-10 now that its killed?

I don't think so.
Any more than Airbus seem to give up on their aircraft that get "killed" on a regular basis..  

Rgds
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11831
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:10 pm

Now when will the A333 gain winglets/sharklets? That should add another 150nm or so to the range...

Quoting BoeingVista (Thread starter):
Airbus to raise A330-300 MTOW to 242t and activate the center tank

About time!    I'm excited.

Quoting 76er (Reply 6):
Yup, all it needs now is the GTF.

I do not see the business case for a new engine (as much as Pratt would like to sell on widebodies). Sharklets will be enough to keep the plane selling.

Quoting moo (Reply 18):
so the added wasted weight is negligible if any at all.

How much does the sealing, inerting gear, and valves/plumbing weight? I'm curious.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 20):
Airbus have been long overdue in addressing this IMO. That said, it needed the higher MTOW's to leverage the gain

Agreed. I think this will sell a few A333s.   

Quoting airbazar (Reply 29):
I see this has another sign that they won't build the A358.

Agreed. There will be too few missions left for that size. Either up-gauge to the A359 or buy the A333. The A345/77L sales have shown that is a small market. Save the money for PIPs on the other A350s.

Quoting JerseyFlyer (Reply 30):
When should we expect launch of a new build 242t A333F?

The freighters are built on the A332 and need the MTOW too. Is the A332 going to 242t too or is the tail moment arm impacting the MTOW?

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
r2rho
Posts: 2440
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:13 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:50 pm

Amazing, the A330 just keeps getting more and more capable... When you look at how this a/c started out in the 90's versus what it is becoming today...

Quoting moo (Reply 18):
As I understand it, the tank is probably not a structure in its own right but more a sealing of the unused centre MLG bay built in for the A340, so the added wasted weight is negligible if any at all.

You are right that it is not a structure in its own right, but a sealed center wing box (not center MLG bay, which is aft!), but you will have to add fuel pumps, inerting etc. And possibly the higher MTOW requires some structural reinforcements that add weight too. It won't be a huge amount of weight, but it's there.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 20):
I'd suggest that the "extra" 2t from 240t to 242t is needed to cover off any OEW gain

  

Quoting vfw614 (Reply 19):
I would find it very surprising if the A330-300 has been flying arund for almost decades with a fully-fledged centre tank that now, all of a sudden, is rediscovered... Certainly slightly more complicated than that.

Well, it is the new higher MTOW that makes it possible to use that tank. It hasn't been "rediscovered", it's just that there was no sense in activating it with lower MTOW, as you would not achieve any net payload-range gain.

Quoting zeke (Reply 28):
It would be a lot more than just turning on a switch. The -300 cockpit would need some upgrades (eg adding overhead switches for the centre fuel pumps), the flight warning computers would need to be upgraded, upgrades to the fuel quantity computers, FMEGC, fuel inerting system (and somewhere to refil it from), installation of sensors and pumps in the tanks, plumbing, and possibly even fuel jettison.

Nothing insurmountable, however it is not an overnight job.

Exactly, and the good thing however is that all that engineering and design work is already done for the A332 or A343, so it's fairly straightforward for Airbus to implement.
P.S. Regarding the inerting system, at least on Airbus a/c, it takes its air from the bleed, there are no nitrogen tanks or similar to be added for "refill" as you say.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 29):
I see this has another sign that they won't build the A358.

   These A330 improvements are pushing the A358 into an ever smaller niche... slap some sharklets and another PIP onto it and the niche becomes yet smaller again....

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 32):
Now when will the A333 gain winglets/sharklets? That should add another 150nm or so to the range...

It has been mentioned this year by Airbus that they are under study, though no official decision has been taken yet.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23095
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 2:51 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Thread starter):
...maybe they are planning a 787-10 killer...

They're still sending a knife to a gunfight.

The 787-10's cabin is 3.5m longer than the A330-300 so at 9-abreast in Economy, the 787-10 will seat significantly more people. The 787-10 also offers 10 more LD3 positions so it can haul significantly more cargo by volume.

And as noted above, the A330-300 will be more MTOW-restricted than the 787-10 when it comes to fuel (especially if Boeing does indeed raise MTOW beyond 252t). So a 787-10's payload-range chart will remain superior to the A330-300s (both due to being able to tank more fuel at MTOW and due to lower fuel burn from the newer generation engines).


While I am sure this is aimed to improve the A330-300's chances against the 787-9 and 787-10 for customers needing delivery in the near term, I find myself in agreement with those who believe this and the HGW A330-200 are hedges against the A350-800.

I also believe this will help the A330-300F when Airbus launches it.

[Edited 2012-11-29 06:52:20]
 
BoeingVista
Topic Author
Posts: 1684
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:00 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 34):
They're still sending a knife to a gunfight.

The 787-10's cabin is 3.5m longer than the A330-300 so at 9-abreast in Economy, the 787-10 will seat significantly more people. The 787-10 also offers 10 more LD3 positions so it can haul significantly more cargo by volume.

Very nice stats but the 787-10 will also cost 3 times as much to buy, the cargo market is in free fall and if it was all about moving the maximum amounts of people everybody would be flying A380's and 77W's.

They are bringing a smaller gun to a gunfight, a .22 will kill you just as dead as a 40 cal if it catches you right.
BV
 
Tristarsteve
Posts: 3364
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:04 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:07 pm

Quoting r2rho (Reply 33):
Regarding the inerting system, at least on Airbus a/c, it takes its air from the bleed, there are no nitrogen tanks or similar to be added for "refill" as you say.

Boeing has a similar idea. But the inerting system is anything but simple. On both systems the huge filter/sieves that remove the oxygen from the air have to be fed with air at a precis temp/pressure. The air is taken from the pneumatic manifold through what is essentially a pack complete with ACM and heat exchangers to achieve this.

[Edited 2012-11-29 07:09:10]
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23095
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:12 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 35):
Very nice stats but the 787-10 will also cost 3 times as much to buy, the cargo market is in free fall and if it was all about moving the maximum amounts of people everybody would be flying A380's and 77W's.

So you feel Airbus will charge $87 million for a 242t A330-300.
And they have the balls to accuse Boeing of "predatory pricing".  


As to cargo, airlines are moving more of it in the bellies of their passenger planes rather than on dedicated freighter aircraft. So larger cargo volumes are seen as a benefit.


And more seats equals lower CASM, especially when trip costs are similar (or lower), which is why the larger models of each family tend to be the ones that sell better.
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:18 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Thread starter):
maybe they are planning a 787-10 killer...
Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 35):

They are bringing a smaller gun to a gunfight, a .22 will kill you just as dead as a 40 cal if it catches you right.


I don't mean to sound rude, but could someone please tell me why a slightly improved A333 (25 year-old design) is supposed to "kill" the much more modern 787-10, yet at the same time, the 77W and even some believe a vastly improved 777X (original design approx same age as A330) is going to be far and away eclipsed by the A350-1000? I'm not really following the logic here.

Will the improved A333 sell more planes? Quite likely. Will it "kill" the 787-10? Not likely, at least not in and of itself. Slow down with the hyperbole.

[Edited 2012-11-29 07:22:28]
SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
 
Flying-Tiger
Posts: 3924
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:19 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 37):

As to cargo, airlines are moving more of it in the bellies of their passenger planes rather than on dedicated freighter aircraft. So larger cargo volumes are seen as a benefit.

Actually the current tendency seems more to de-couple freight more and more from the passenger side as the passenger flows are far less reflecting the actual export / import flows. Take a look at China: most consumer electronics are now made in inland China where no intercontinental passengers fly to - 10 years ago this was Hong Kong.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 37):
So you feel Airbus will charge $87 million for a 242t A330-300.
And they have the balls to accuse Boeing of "predatory pricing".

Not on list price - but probably in real pricing closer to 50% of list compared to probably 30% of list for a 787-10. Depriciation on the lines, development costs etc are mostly gone at the A330, compared to the B787...

Quoting Stitch (Reply 37):
And more seats equals lower CASM, especially when trip costs are similar (or lower), which is why the larger models of each family tend to be the ones that sell better.

... which is only of interest if you are actually able to fill these extra seats.
Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8,B742/4,B762/763,B772,CR2,CR7,ER4,E70,E75,F50/70,M11,L15,S20
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23095
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:30 pm

Quoting Flying-Tiger (Reply 39):
Not on list price - but probably in real pricing closer to 50% of list compared to probably 30% of list for a 787-10. Depriciation on the lines, development costs etc are mostly gone at the A330, compared to the B787...

Yes, Airbus will be able to offer better pricing power than Boeing, but over 20 years, operating cost savings and revenue increases can and do overcome capital and interest cost savings.



Quoting Flying-Tiger (Reply 39):
... which is only of interest if you are actually able to fill these extra seats.

Careful, people might think you don't like the A380.  

Seriously, it's clear world passenger traffic continues to grow, especially in Asia and the Indian subcontinent where flight times are under 10 hours. Airbus has seen strong sales of the A330-300 in this area because it's size and capacity make it the most efficient platform for those missions. Notice how Airbus focuses on how the 242t A330-300 will allow connections between Asia and the EU or the EU and Western North America, missions formally only capable in that size category with the heavier and less-efficient A340-300 or 777-200ER. The 787-10 will only improve those efficiencies and therefore it should be as popular at a minimum.

Also, if a 787-10 has similar (or lower) trip costs to the A330-300X, then those extra seats and cargo positions effectively become bonus revenue if filled and don't really penalize you if not.

[Edited 2012-11-29 07:38:21]
 
BoeingVista
Topic Author
Posts: 1684
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:03 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 37):
So you feel Airbus will charge $87 million for a 242t A330-300.
And they have the balls to accuse Boeing of "predatory pricing".

Don't roll your eyes buddy, but yes that's exactly the figure I had in mind as Airbus is on record for selling A330's for around that figure and of making money on the deal, all the initial production investment has been paid off over the last 18 odd years and as time goes by they get even cheaper to build.

Quoting Flying-Tiger (Reply 39):
Not on list price - but probably in real pricing closer to 50% of list compared to probably 30% of list for a 787-10. Depreciation on the lines, development costs etc are mostly gone at the A330, compared to the B787...

Yup so $176 m for a 787-10 (even though I think Stitch has used the 787-9 list price but whatever) and $84 m for a A330 damn, that's only twice the price after discounts! So you could only get 2 A330's for a 787-10 not 3

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 38):
I don't mean to sound rude, but could someone please tell me why a slightly improved A333 (25 year-old design) is supposed to "kill" the much more modern 787-10, yet at the same time, the 77W and even some believe a vastly improved 777X (original design approx same age as A330) is going to be far and away eclipsed by the A350-1000? I'm not really following the logic here.

Nothing is killing anything, its reverse sarcasm..
BV
 
r2rho
Posts: 2440
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:13 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:24 pm

Some interesting articles on the A330 improvement history (prior to this new MTOW announcement but giving a good overview)

http://www.aspireaviation.com/2012/0...ight-on-a330-improvement-strategy/

http://airinsight.com/2012/07/05/the...ontinuous-improvement-of-the-a330/

"The A330-200 has seen a 3.5% increase in MTOW while achieving over 8.7% more range. The A330-300 has seen its MTOW rise by 10.9% but its range is now up 43.6% from EIS."

Quoting Tristarsteve (Reply 36):
Boeing has a similar idea. But the inerting system is anything but simple. On both systems the huge filter/sieves that remove the oxygen from the air have to be fed with air at a precis temp/pressure. The air is taken from the pneumatic manifold through what is essentially a pack complete with ACM and heat exchangers to achieve this.

So both manufacturers use the same principle. And yes, you're right it is fairly complex, one wonders if carrying nitrogen tanks would not have been easier, except for the maintenance hassle of replacing or refilling them after each flight...
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4963
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:32 pm

I believe this is the point where the A330-300 has become more capable than the original weight A340-300 for all but hot/high missions. (Hasn't quite reached the level of the A340-300X, but it's getting close.)
 
vfw614
Posts: 3168
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 12:34 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:32 pm

Quoting r2rho (Reply 33):

Well, it is the new higher MTOW that makes it possible to use that tank. It hasn't been "rediscovered", it's just that there was no sense in activating it with lower MTOW, as you would not achieve any net payload-range gain.

What I meant to say is that apparently the space needed for a central tank is there, but not, as some of the contributions and the term "activate" suggest, the whole infrastructure in the sense that it is only a matter of some paperwork being signed before the tanks can be filled.
 
deltalaw
Posts: 102
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 5:47 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:34 pm

Will be interesting to see which airlines take advantage of this to actually open up new routes.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23095
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:41 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 41):
Don't roll your eyes buddy, but yes that's exactly the figure I had in mind as Airbus is on record for selling A330's for around that figure and of making money on the deal, all the initial production investment has been paid off over the last 18 odd years and as time goes by they get even cheaper to build.

A brand-new off the line 235t A330-300 has an average list price of $231 million and an average value of $101 million, so if airlines are indeed paying only $87 million for them, then that could explain why the plane is so popular - airlines are playing speculator.  

I will agree with you that I believe Airbus can build an A330-300 for under $87 million so I will agree with you that Airbus would not lose money on delivering an airframe for that average sales price. In fact, I know of at least one A330 deal with a discount even deeper than the 62% that selling an A330-300 for $87 million would be.

So maybe deep-discounting will be Airbus' strategy going forward. But I for one am inclined to think that such discounts are - and will continue to be - the exception, rather than the rule. Even Airbus expects that the A330 family will see it's sales fall as the 787 and A350 enter service in large numbers.



Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 41):
Yup so $176 m for a 787-10 (even though I think Stitch has used the 787-9 list price but whatever) and $84 m for a A330 damn, that's only twice the price after discounts! So you could only get 2 A330's for a 787-10 not 3

I added the $34 million price difference between the 787-8 and 787-9 to the 787-10 to come up with the $262 million list price. I expect the actual list will be less, as the differences between the 787-8 and 787-9 are greater than between the 787-9 and 787-10.

And two A330-300s will carry a lot more people and cargo than one 787-10, which would require airlines to be able to fill them, wouldn't it? They'd certainly have to since the aggregate operating costs would be far higher.   
 
astuteman
Posts: 6341
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:41 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 32):
Is the A332 going to 242t too or is the tail moment arm impacting the MTOW?

The FI article quotes the 242t A330-200 as gaining another 350Nm beyond the 238t A330-200. -

Quote:
Airbus's latest enhancements will extend the range of the A330-300 by 500nm (930km) over the 235t model, and by 350nm for the 238t A330-200 at full passenger load

which should put it squarely in 7 500Nm nominal range territory

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 38):
Will the improved A333 sell more planes? Quite likely. Will it "kill" the 787-10? Not likely, at least not in and of itself.

Personally I believe we're seeing the "slippage" of the 787-10's EIS providing Airbus with a window of opportunity into which to sell these upgraded A330-300's for a number of years more without breaking the bank in doing so.

It isn't going to "kill" any 787's - more likely the converse.
It will just take the 787's a bit longer again to enact the termination  

Rgds
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23095
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 5:08 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 43):
I believe this is the point where the A330-300 has become more capable than the original weight A340-300 for all but hot/high missions.

With a 50t payload, a 257t TOW and CFM56-5C4 engines, the A340-300 can fly 5000nm. With a 45t payload and a 242t TOW, the A330-300X looks to be good for around 4250nm.

(See below, please, for more).



Quoting r2rho (Reply 42):
Some interesting articles on the A330 improvement history...

Quote:
"The A330-200 has seen a 3.5% increase in MTOW while achieving over 8.7% more range. The A330-300 has seen its MTOW rise by 10.9% but its range is now up 43.6% from EIS."
Quoting astuteman (Reply 47):
Personally I believe we're seeing the "slippage" of the 787-10's EIS providing Airbus with a window of opportunity into which to sell these upgraded A330-300's for a number of years more without breaking the bank in doing so.

And this is one of the reasons I take exception to the belief that Airbus must deeply discount A330s to shift them.

The 242t A330-300 is now capable of many of the missions that could formerly only be flown by the A340-300 or 777-200ER. While the A330-300X and 777-200ER are still both significantly more capable, airline needs for those more capable missions are either starting to shrink or are more and more being handled by larger planes (A380-800 and 777-300ER).

Airbus is improving the value of the A330-200 and A330-300, so selling them for less just doesn't make sense to me.


Quoting Deltalaw (Reply 45):
Will be interesting to see which airlines take advantage of this to actually open up new routes.

Malaysian Airlines (A330-300) and Korean Airlines (A330-200) have launched new routes (at least for those models) thanks to the improved capability.
 
parapente
Posts: 1280
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

RE: Airbus Push A333 Mtow To 242t Activate Center Tank

Thu Nov 29, 2012 5:16 pm

wrong knife... It's the 350 that will take on the -10

They're still sending a knife to a gunfight.

The 787-10's cabin is 3.5m longer than the A330-300 so at 9-abreast in Economy, the 787-10 will seat significantly more people. The 787-10 also offers 10 more LD3 positions so it can haul significantly more cargo by volume.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 303dk, Ab345, asqx, B737900ER, Bing [Bot], BWIAirport, CM767, dbo861, Deltabravo1123, FAST Enterprise [Crawler], geardown, gen2stew, HeeseokKoo, IslandRob, jb1087xna, LFW, LoudounHound, mat66, MaxxFlyer, Miami, msycajun, nry, ozark1, prchan, qf15, rocket45, SonomaFlyer, Tedd, thomasphoto60, VirginFlyer, Wingtip1005, Yahoo [Bot], Ztim and 355 guests