This is not an attempt to start a transatlantic war, but a question for a real ops expert. I was musing the other day about the A330-200: by my calculations you could fit 30 pax in a nice F class with 49" pitch, 6-across, and another 230 pax in economy with 'extra room, i.e., 34-35" pitch as opposed to the standard 31 - 32, so you have 260 comfortable people. Anyhow, to pick an example of the 767-300, DL fits 254 people in (24 F and 230 economy) in 'regular' seat spacing, so capacity-wise we're talking roughly equivalent, but less commodious. Now my question: on a per-plane basis, say from west coast to ATL or a transcon, is the A330-200 more expensive to operate? I realize that the 767-400 is the true competitor to the A330-200, but couldn't help but wonder how the A330-200 stacks up against the many 767-300s that crisscross the US.

- zauberfloete
**Posts:**297**Joined:**

Where did you get your numbers from?

"Anyhow, to pick an example of the 767-300, DL fits 254 people in (24 F and 230 economy)"

Delta has 206 or 212 passengers in their 767-300ER.

http://www.delta.com/travel/maps_guides/aircraft/b-767-300r/index.jsp

In a dense 2 class config. you will have about 244 paxe.

In the A330-200 the std. config with two classes is 293 seats, 30B at 40in + 263Y at 32in pitch.

Some Airlines have two class concepts with only ~260 paxe on their A330-200, some airlines (like canada3000) have 340 Y seats on their A330-200.

So you have definitely more seat capacity on the A330-200 then on the 767-300.

The A330-200 is as you know a much bigger and heavier aircraft as the 767-300.

The A330-200 has a mtow of 233t, the 767-300 of 186,8t.

So the trip costs of an A330-200 will off course be higher then that of a 767-300ER. That´s clear.

But the A330-200 has more capacity and therefore the slightly higher trip costs are Ok for the airlines.

Also the freight capacity of the A330-200 is higher then that of the 767-300ER.

The total cargo hold volume of the A330-200 is 4752 ft3 compared to 3,770 ft3 of the 767-300.

Also the cargo weight capacity is much higher and the A330-200 is able to carry std. freight pallets & containers, the 767-300 is not.

Max. range of the A330-200 with max. passangers is 6650 nm (253 passenger and baggage) compared to 6,115nm of the 767-300.

But normally the max. Pax. range is not used, because

a normal flight will carry additional freight to the baggage and therefore the range decreases.

Quite simply, the A330 offers a more cabin capacity, better payload carrying capability, better range and take-off performance then the 767-300ER.

And that justifies the higher tripcosts against the 767-300.

The A330 is just a bigger plane and therfore costs and provides more.

It´s the choice of the airline if the particular route fits the A330-200 or not.

The 767-400 is more compareable to the A330-200.

It´s very close in passenger capacity. It´s not that close regarding cargo, due to the fuselage geometry of the 767. And it comes not close to the A330-200 in range. But the A330-200 has higher trip costs as the 767-400, therefore the 767-400 is very costeffective on a per seat basis. It´s the real A330-200 competitor.

It really depends on the airline wether a 767-400 or A330-200 is better for their network. Things like comunality, freight capacity etc. are counting here, because the passenger capacity of the a330-200 and the 767-400 is very very close.

"Anyhow, to pick an example of the 767-300, DL fits 254 people in (24 F and 230 economy)"

Delta has 206 or 212 passengers in their 767-300ER.

http://www.delta.com/travel/maps_guides/aircraft/b-767-300r/index.jsp

In a dense 2 class config. you will have about 244 paxe.

In the A330-200 the std. config with two classes is 293 seats, 30B at 40in + 263Y at 32in pitch.

Some Airlines have two class concepts with only ~260 paxe on their A330-200, some airlines (like canada3000) have 340 Y seats on their A330-200.

So you have definitely more seat capacity on the A330-200 then on the 767-300.

The A330-200 is as you know a much bigger and heavier aircraft as the 767-300.

The A330-200 has a mtow of 233t, the 767-300 of 186,8t.

So the trip costs of an A330-200 will off course be higher then that of a 767-300ER. That´s clear.

But the A330-200 has more capacity and therefore the slightly higher trip costs are Ok for the airlines.

Also the freight capacity of the A330-200 is higher then that of the 767-300ER.

The total cargo hold volume of the A330-200 is 4752 ft3 compared to 3,770 ft3 of the 767-300.

Also the cargo weight capacity is much higher and the A330-200 is able to carry std. freight pallets & containers, the 767-300 is not.

Max. range of the A330-200 with max. passangers is 6650 nm (253 passenger and baggage) compared to 6,115nm of the 767-300.

But normally the max. Pax. range is not used, because

a normal flight will carry additional freight to the baggage and therefore the range decreases.

Quite simply, the A330 offers a more cabin capacity, better payload carrying capability, better range and take-off performance then the 767-300ER.

And that justifies the higher tripcosts against the 767-300.

The A330 is just a bigger plane and therfore costs and provides more.

It´s the choice of the airline if the particular route fits the A330-200 or not.

The 767-400 is more compareable to the A330-200.

It´s very close in passenger capacity. It´s not that close regarding cargo, due to the fuselage geometry of the 767. And it comes not close to the A330-200 in range. But the A330-200 has higher trip costs as the 767-400, therefore the 767-400 is very costeffective on a per seat basis. It´s the real A330-200 competitor.

It really depends on the airline wether a 767-400 or A330-200 is better for their network. Things like comunality, freight capacity etc. are counting here, because the passenger capacity of the a330-200 and the 767-400 is very very close.

Zauberfloete,

I think that CF-CPI was talking about Delta's transcon range 767-300's (not ER). These hold 252 people. Yes the A330 is much larger than the 763 and therefore has higher costs to operate. But if an airline can fill up the seats in the 332, then that's just fine.

I think that CF-CPI was talking about Delta's transcon range 767-300's (not ER). These hold 252 people. Yes the A330 is much larger than the 763 and therefore has higher costs to operate. But if an airline can fill up the seats in the 332, then that's just fine.

I won't be surprise if this becomes a A vs. B war.

Work Hard But Play Harder

So I'll fire the first shots.....

Everyone seems to compare the 767 with the A330. However, the 767 and A310 are of more comparable size and they came out roughly at the same time. 767s are still selling very nicely. The A310 died out years ago and are going to the freight dogs. The better design is obvious.

Everyone seems to compare the 767 with the A330. However, the 767 and A310 are of more comparable size and they came out roughly at the same time. 767s are still selling very nicely. The A310 died out years ago and are going to the freight dogs. The better design is obvious.

FLYi

Users browsing this forum: 21pilots, admanager, aerlingus747, AF022, B6FA4ever, BA744PHX, BobbyPSP, caleb1, catdaddy63, compensateme, ConorB, CONTACREW, DeltaRules, dmorbust, drunkmuppet, dubaiamman243, egnr, eidvm, finnishway, GianiDC, Google Adsense [Bot], guyanam, Heavierthanair, highflier92660, hOMSaR, jetmatt777, kivalliqboy1, LHRFlyer, MAH4546, mcogator, MrBretz, MrHMSH, ojas, PDXpat, Polot, raylee67, rockyracoon, rutankrd, sierra3tango, SpeedYellow, StTim, SUNDOWNERSHK, trex8, TUGMASTER, twaconnie, usflyer123, yochai and 347 guests