panais
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 1:50 pm

A330-200 Extra Weight Compared To The A300-600

Fri May 29, 2009 8:18 am

I was doing a comparison between the Airbus A300-600 and the A330-200 and I have noticed that although they have the same fuselage diameter at 5.64 m with the cabin length of the A332 cabin is only 10% longer (4.3m), the operating weight empty of the A332 is 30% more. (90.9 tons for the A300-600 vs 119.6 tons for the A332)

I know the wings on the A332 are longer and bigger, but does this justify the extra 28.7 tons?

Is it the engines?
The engine diameter on the A300-600 is 94 inches, while the engine diameter on the A332 is 97 inches.

Where is the extra weight coming from?

Thanks
 
SEPilot
Posts: 4914
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: A330-200 Extra Weight Compared To The A300-600

Fri May 29, 2009 11:02 am

I know that the A332 has much longer range than the A306; this is a big factor. This means that there must be space for the tanks, structure to support the weight of full tanks, as well as the longer wing to generate the lift to carry the extra fuel. Comparing the empty weight is fairly meaningless without also comparing the MTOW. The MTOW of the A336 is 165,900 kg, while the A332's is up to 233,000kg. The ratio of MTOW to empty weight for the A306 is about 1.8, while for the A332 it is 1.4. Again, this in itself does not mean much; what airlines are interested in is how much they can carry for how far at what price. And the A332 has proved itself to be a much more efficient moneymaker for the airlines than the A306.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
User avatar
Faro
Posts: 1491
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:08 am

RE: A330-200 Extra Weight Compared To The A300-600

Fri May 29, 2009 11:07 am



Quoting Panais (Thread starter):
Where is the extra weight coming from?

Prolly a fair bit of the extra is in the landing gear too. Need stronger gear for the higher MTOW as well taller struts for the 10% longer fuselage. And those struts are solid alloy steel...

Faro
The chalice not my son
 
Pellegrine
Posts: 1766
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: A330-200 Extra Weight Compared To The A300-600

Fri May 29, 2009 11:14 am



Quoting Panais (Thread starter):
Where is the extra weight coming from?

Wings, longer fuselage, center tank, trim tank, engines, landing gear, support structure for higher weights & payload...
oh boy!!!
 
User avatar
Faro
Posts: 1491
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:08 am

RE: A330-200 Extra Weight Compared To The A300-600

Fri May 29, 2009 12:04 pm



Quoting Panais (Thread starter):
I know the wings on the A332 are longer and bigger, but does this justify the extra 28.7 tons?

There is one relevant point to your question: with all fuel tanks (including center) filled to maximum, the A332's weight is practically at MTOW. This facility is obviously never used except for (exceptionally long) ferry flights because you then have nil payload.

What this means is that part of the structural strengthening needed to support all that fuel load is, in a manner of speaking, deadweight. It is strengthening that is only relevant to ferry flights and not payload-carrying ones.

Faro
The chalice not my son
 
Tristarsteve
Posts: 3359
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:04 pm

RE: A330-200 Extra Weight Compared To The A300-600

Fri May 29, 2009 12:15 pm



Quoting Faro (Reply 4):
There is one relevant point to your question: with all fuel tanks (including center) filled to maximum,

How many A332 have centre tanks? I am sure the last few I have seen didn't have one.
 
User avatar
Faro
Posts: 1491
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:08 am

RE: A330-200 Extra Weight Compared To The A300-600

Fri May 29, 2009 12:30 pm



Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 5):
How many A332 have centre tanks? I am sure the last few I have seen didn't have one

Hmm, I may be wrong but I believe that all A332's havem. I think that it was one of the differences between the A333 and A332...

Faro
The chalice not my son
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1244
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

RE: A330-200 Extra Weight Compared To The A300-600

Fri May 29, 2009 1:17 pm

Good observation. The 30% come from the different peformance profiles. The A330 is a high performer (= long range plane) compared to the A300.

B.t.w. these 30% are a good indication how much the 783 would have to be lighter than the 788 to be taken serious on the short-range market. On the example A300 vs A330 you can spot anything that would make the 783 succesful too. Do you know that a tailor made short-range 783 design would deliver the best CASM of any plane flying on this planet today? And this by a large margin.
 
User avatar
Faro
Posts: 1491
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:08 am

RE: A330-200 Extra Weight Compared To The A300-600

Fri May 29, 2009 2:05 pm



Quoting Rheinwaldner (Reply 7):
Good observation. The 30% come from the different peformance profiles. The A330 is a high performer (= long range plane) compared to the A300

Which perhaps raises the question of why add all the extra strengthening needed when operationally you will never come close to filling in all your fuel tanks on revenue flights. Only reason I can see is anticipation of (much) higher thrust versions of your engines in the future.

Faro
The chalice not my son
 
panais
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 1:50 pm

RE: A330-200 Extra Weight Compared To The A300-600

Fri May 29, 2009 2:19 pm

Thank you all for the input, very helpful.

Quoting Rheinwaldner (Reply 7):
these 30% are a good indication how much the 783 would have to be lighter than the 788 to be taken serious on the short-range market

If you were advising Airbus, barring creating a new plane, would you advise them to extent the A300 to the A332 length, or have Airbus re-design the entire middle section of the A332?

Which option will be closer to the 787-3 in performance and capacity, with more range?

There is a nice movie about assembling the A332. Would advise to run it at a slower mode.
http://www.northropgrumman.com/kc45/video/Airbus_Timelapse_256kbps.asf
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9743
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: A330-200 Extra Weight Compared To The A300-600

Sat May 30, 2009 4:43 pm



Quoting Panais (Thread starter):
same fuselage diameter at 5.64 m with the cabin length of the A332 cabin is only 10% longer (4.3m)

The A330-200 is over 5m longer than the A300, it is the length of this cylinder would contain a fair bit of weight, looking at the difference in length between the A330-300 and A330-200 being similar to the difference in length between the A330-200 and the A300-B4, you can assume that piece of cylinder is over 3,000 kg. Compare the cabin/cargo volume to appreciate the differences.

Quoting Panais (Thread starter):
I know the wings on the A332 are longer and bigger, but does this justify the extra 28.7 tons?

It would have a lot to do with it. the difference in span is significant, as well as the wing thickness. Compare the fuel volume between the two to appreciate the size difference.

Quoting Panais (Thread starter):
Is it the engines?

A330 engines are lighter than A300 engines, so is the rudder, vertical and horizontal stabilizer.

Quoting Faro (Reply 2):
Prolly a fair bit of the extra is in the landing gear too.

The nose landing gear on the A330 is about 3% heavier than the A300, but the main gear on the A330-200 is about 28% heavier.

Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 5):
How many A332 have centre tanks? I am sure the last few I have seen didn't have one.

As far as I know all do, but I do not think all have fuel jettison.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Tewks and 13 guests