I saw a pic of an AA A300 at ORY recently, does anyone know why they'd send in an A300 instead of a 767 or 777? It also got me wondering about which (if any) airlines operated regular TATL A300 services. I tried searching for schedules but I'm not sure where to find any. Thanks for any help!

Monarch operated their A300-600s transatlantic regularly to Orlando/Sanford, especially in the earlier years of their operation. Monarch later acquired A330s and a DC10 which then took most of the Florida charters, but the A300 would still be seen at times. Sometimes requiring a fuel stop in Bangor.

The AB6 was AA's primary aircraft on JFK-LHR prior to the arrival of the 772 fleet.

Hello,

American Airlines used the A300 from London Heathrow to Boston and New York, Lufhtansa used also the A300 between Frankfurt and Montreal. Air Liberte has used A300 but it stoped in azores ilsand to reach the fren indies

Monarch may used a 300 toreach florida but it stoppet each time in Bangor

usflyer msp wrote:

The AB6 was AA's primary aircraft on JFK-LHR prior to the arrival of the 772 fleet.

with the caveat of "for a VERY brief period," which can be measured more precisely in months than years.

I believe reading on here that LH at the end of the AB6 era had a one off AB6 transatlantic flight due to a last minute equipment sub. Somebody correct me if I’m wrong though.

LAX772LR wrote:

usflyer msp wrote:

The AB6 was AA's primary aircraft on JFK-LHR prior to the arrival of the 772 fleet.

with the caveat of "for a VERY brief period," which can be measured more precisely in months than years.

The A300-600 flew the LHR routes for more than months a few years, those were best configured A300 ever. AA was not going to install First Class Sleeper and Business Class for only months. AA found itself short of long haul airplanes in the early and mid 1990's with Latin and Heathrow routes purchases. The also had the MD-11 dogging them. They didn't have enough 767, Dc-10 and MD-11 so the medium haul A300 usd to the Caribbean filled in.

LAX772LR wrote:

usflyer msp wrote:

The AB6 was AA's primary aircraft on JFK-LHR prior to the arrival of the 772 fleet.

with the caveat of "for a VERY brief period," which can be measured more precisely in months than years.

It was several years. AA had a subfleet of FJY configured AB6's used exclusively on TATL routes from JFK and BOS.

jfk777 wrote:

The A300-600 flew the LHR routes for more than months a few years.

usflyer msp wrote:

It was several years.

I'm aware of how long they were on the route.

My response was to the claim that they were the "primary aircraft," which was only for a very short time.

OA940 wrote:

I saw a pic of an AA A300 at ORY recently, does anyone know why they'd send in an A300 instead of a 767 or 777? It also got me wondering about which (if any) airlines operated regular TATL A300 services. I tried searching for schedules but I'm not sure where to find any. Thanks for any help!

Back to the original question. AA operated A300 on:

JFK-LHR Jan97-Jan02
BOS-LHR Apr97-Jan02
BOS-ORY Apr97-May99
BOS-LGW Jun98-Jun99
EWR-LHR Jun99-Jan02

WD / Wardair flew A300s transatlantic.

Air Afrique operated their AB6 between ABJ and JFK

Dominion301 wrote:

WD / Wardair flew A300s transatlantic.

No. Never.
I’m guessing you are thinking of the A310-300.

Ward’s A300s were A300B4-203s. With full fuel, there was about 6:30 flying time. The longest route flown by the A300 at WD was YYZ-BGI.

Is the A300 capable of doing Trans-Pacific flights? Like SFO to NRT?

OA940 wrote:

I saw a pic of an AA A300 at ORY recently, does anyone know why they'd send in an A300 instead of a 767 or 777? It also got me wondering about which (if any) airlines operated regular TATL A300 services. I tried searching for schedules but I'm not sure where to find any. Thanks for any help!

AA operated the A300-600 from JFK to LHR (up to 2 daily out of 6 daily departures then)and ORY (and BOS-ORY) for a time because they did not have enough 767s to cover the long haul routes in the network at the time, and the 777s were only then beginning to come on line in 1999. The A300 operations to LHR/ORY from JFK, BOS, and EWR (LHR) and JFK and BOS to ORY began around 1998. Believe A300 ops on TATL for AA ended in 2002. The entire 34 strong fleet of A300s was retired by 2009 (one was lost in the crash of AA 587 in November 2001, but AA had 35 total). There was a sub-fleet of A300s converted to FJY configuration to service the LHR and ORY routes that they were operated on. Those planes had PTV's in economy. The 763's did not, and never would.

Ziyulu wrote:

Is the A300 capable of doing Trans-Pacific flights? Like SFO to NRT?

No, they didn't have the range. Doing westbound on the transatlantic flights would've been pushing the friendship. The A300-600R was a medium range aircraft at best, so across the Pacific wasn't going to happen, unless a couple of stops were involved.

airbuster wrote:

I believe reading on here that LH at the end of the AB6 era had a one off AB6 transatlantic flight due to a last minute equipment sub. Somebody correct me if I’m wrong though.

Correct, LH used AB6 mainly in Europe and to TLV, but I also recall this one off. I think it was FRA-BOS. I worked at the company then and remember it too.

LAX772LR wrote:

usflyer msp wrote:

The AB6 was AA's primary aircraft on JFK-LHR prior to the arrival of the 772 fleet.

with the caveat of "for a VERY brief period," which can be measured more precisely in months than years.

No, infact it was for a number of years.

A320GOUZO wrote:

Air Afrique operated their AB6 between ABJ and JFK

I remember taking that flight before as a kid. It was operated via Dakar.

Air Liberte flew the A300-600 Paris-Montreal. I managed to catch it in person arriving at Montreal-Mirabel.

Wardair, Eastern Airlines, Continental never used A300 on TATL flights

EA used ex AZ DC 10-30 for european routes (London Gatwick)

CO flew transatlantic with DC 10-300, Boeing 747 until the 777 arrived

Dakar New York wern't operated at the end with a A330 or a B 767-300 ER or A310-300 ?

Yes Air lib can used the A300 to Montreal but it was limit

I remember seeing LH A300s at PHL in the very early ‘90s (routed through Montreal Mirabel). I believe the reason given was delays with A340 deliveries.

American A300-600Rs were very limited on the Atlantic run, my mate who worked at AA at LHR at the time said the most weight restricted he ever saw was in winter when they were occasionally restricted to 101 pax. Don’t know why they didn’t stop in Keflavik, that’s not a couple of rows blocked, it’s significant. Anyway that’s what they did, instead of a tech stop.

airbuster wrote:

I believe reading on here that LH at the end of the AB6 era had a one off AB6 transatlantic flight due to a last minute equipment sub. Somebody correct me if I’m wrong though.

That is correct. It was operated FRA-BOS-FRA on LH420/421 for about a week or two during a pilot and catering strike in 2008. Due to the strikes there were two captains that flew it as the FOs were part of the strike, it was non-ETOPS so had to fly quite a northerly routing, and there were tonnes of bags left behind every night due to weight restrictions.

It also had the (at the time) LH mid-haul seats and all food was served on disposable dish wear due the catering strike. It was a crazy week. But at least it flew.

Source: had friends working in BOS during this time.

Pottok wrote:

Wardair, Eastern Airlines, Continental never used A300 on TATL flights

EA used ex AZ DC 10-30 for european routes (London Gatwick)

CO flew transatlantic with DC 10-300, Boeing 747 until the 777 arrived

Dakar New York wern't operated at the end with a A330 or a B 767-300 ER or A310-300 ?

Yes Air lib can used the A300 to Montreal but it was limit

CO flew the 757 across the pond too.

cedarjet wrote:

American A300-600Rs were very limited on the Atlantic run, my mate who worked at AA at LHR at the time said the most weight restricted he ever saw was in winter when they were occasionally restricted to 101 pax. Don’t know why they didn’t stop in Keflavik, that’s not a couple of rows blocked, it’s significant. Anyway that’s what they did, instead of a tech stop.

Considering it was winter and TATL, 101 pax would have been a decent load factor.

cedarjet wrote:

American A300-600Rs were very limited on the Atlantic run, my mate who worked at AA at LHR at the time said the most weight restricted he ever saw was in winter when they were occasionally restricted to 101 pax. Don’t know why they didn’t stop in Keflavik, that’s not a couple of rows blocked, it’s significant. Anyway that’s what they did, instead of a tech stop.

They were real pigs westbound.
Always struggled with the weight issue.
Many many times people were asked to move from there respective cabins for take off so that they could trim the ship... F to Y or vv ....
Freight would commonly be left behind to be carried by either the 767/777/MD11...
Also, the were definitely not the primary JFK-LHR bird......as mentioned up thread , possibly 2 out of the six JFK rotations a day .
A/c used were 065-074 inc.
Not AA’s best choice, but it’s all they had.

Pan Am, towards the end, used to send its A310s to FCO.

CrewBunk wrote:

Dominion301 wrote:

WD / Wardair flew A300s transatlantic.

No. Never.
I’m guessing you are thinking of the A310-300.

Ward’s A300s were A300B4-203s. With full fuel, there was about 6:30 flying time. The longest route flown by the A300 at WD was YYZ-BGI.

Really? I coulda sworn they were used on the likes of YHZ-LGW? But the few WD AB3 pics in the database are all in North America.

I remember airline armchair quarter backs swearing that after the A300 and all it's problems AA would only buy from Boeing and never from AB again. Then came I think the 2008 order of both Airbuses and Boeings.

Miamiairport wrote:

I remember airline armchair quarter backs swearing that after the A300 and all it's problems AA would only buy from Boeing and never from AB again. Then came I think the 2008 order of both Airbuses and Boeings.

The AA order for Airbus and Boeing was placed in 2011, not in 2008.

jmc757 wrote:

Monarch operated their A300-600s transatlantic regularly to Orlando/Sanford, especially in the earlier years of their operation. Monarch later acquired A330s and a DC10 which then took most of the Florida charters, but the A300 would still be seen at times. Sometimes requiring a fuel stop in Bangor.

You would certainly need a holiday after enduring that! Two hours LGW to PMI was painful enough on a Monarch A300.

Pretty much off topic (sorry) but Swiss used a leased A300 on the ZRH-DAR route. Even with a stop at NBO that was TATL distance.

Dominion301 wrote:

CrewBunk wrote:

Dominion301 wrote:

WD / Wardair flew A300s transatlantic.

No. Never.
I’m guessing you are thinking of the A310-300.

Ward’s A300s were A300B4-203s. With full fuel, there was about 6:30 flying time. The longest route flown by the A300 at WD was YYZ-BGI.

Really? I coulda sworn they were used on the likes of YHZ-LGW? But the few WD AB3 pics in the database are all in North America.

Wardair did very little business in the east of Canada. Other than tech stops in the 727 days, there were few transatlantic flights from anywhere east of YUL/YMX. I did hear talk of flights out of YQB to CDG during the A310 days but I’m not sure if any flew.

At 450 miles further than YYZ-BGI, I am pretty sure the A300B4-203 couldn’t fly YHZ-LGW. I flew many YYZ-BGI-YYZ flights and if weather was bad in YYZ requiring a far alternate, BGI-YYZ was pretty tight. Cabin configuration was a pretty light 30J/220Y.

I flew the A300 at WD from its introduction, doing my initial course in JNB and ferrying one to Canada, right till the lease ended and ferried one to TLS. It was a fine aircraft, advanced for its day ... but the leap to the -600/600R was huge. With a two man glass cockpit and -80 engines, the -600 was more suited to longer flying.

Btw, I say A300B, but one of Ward’s A300s was an A300C4-203. Other than a slightly higher OEW, performance was identical to the A300B4-203.

Was my worse ever cramped flight in a AA A36 from JFK to LHR in the back row in horrendous turbulence. hiding under a blanket. Visions of that A36 tail coming off.... No wonder I aim to turn left now whenever I can.

Cointrin330 wrote:

Miamiairport wrote:

I remember airline armchair quarter backs swearing that after the A300 and all it's problems AA would only buy from Boeing and never from AB again. Then came I think the 2008 order of both Airbuses and Boeings.

The AA order for Airbus and Boeing was placed in 2011, not in 2008.

Correct, it was in July 2011; regardless, it still doesn't change the premises that AA bought from Airbus again, even after the A300 problems and specifically the downfalls from AA587.

Miamiairport wrote:

I remember airline armchair quarter backs swearing that after the A300 and all it's problems AA would only buy from Boeing and never from AB again. Then came I think the 2008 order of both Airbuses and Boeings.

The A300 struggling on TATL wasn't a problem, it was not supposed to do that when on the drawing boards ! If anything it's rather proof it was a great aircraft. Remember, ETOPS didn't exist back then. Yet, the A300 ended up as the first ETOPS certified aircraft.

Personally all my A300 flights have been on short-medium haul routes (PAR-FRA-MUC and back, PAR-TUN and back) and the comfort of 8 abreast in economy for such flights is unparalleled.

WayexTDI wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

Miamiairport wrote:

I remember airline armchair quarter backs swearing that after the A300 and all it's problems AA would only buy from Boeing and never from AB again. Then came I think the 2008 order of both Airbuses and Boeings.

The AA order for Airbus and Boeing was placed in 2011, not in 2008.

Correct, it was in July 2011; regardless, it still doesn't change the premises that AA bought from Airbus again, even after the A300 problems and specifically the downfalls from AA587.

I wasn't challenging the fact that AA purchased Airbus jets again, though as I recall, the 2011 order was split between A&B because of the timing. AA needed the refresh the fleet at an accelerated pace and putting the order with a single manufacturer would have resulted in a long wait for deliveries.

Several of the major cargo haulers have used the A300 on TATL services too, some may still do.

LH operated the A306 on DUS-EWR-DUS for a while in the late 1990‘s and/ of early 2000‘s.

by738 wrote:

Was my worse ever cramped flight in a AA A36 from JFK to LHR in the back row in horrendous turbulence. hiding under a blanket. Visions of that A36 tail coming off.... No wonder I aim to turn left now whenever I can.

If the tail comes off being in the premium cabin isn't much of an aid, except perhaps your last few minutes will be a little less horrendous.

Someone mentioned Eastern and Continental AB3s - they were 1st gen B2/B4 variants. What kind of range did those birds have? I'm not sure they didn't struggle westbound transcon in winter months?

FCOTSTW wrote:

Pan Am, towards the end, used to send its A310s to FCO.

And to MXP too, but the A310, specifically the A313 had the range to make those flights for the most part.

OA operated the A300-600R out of ATH to JNB for some time before substituting it with the A340-300

BlueberryWheats wrote:

... certainly need a holiday after enduring that! Two hours LGW to PMI was painful enough on a Monarch A300.

Better non-stop in best case to the states, than flying to Goa with tech stop...
The European B737-800 operators like Smartwings and Dutch Corendon flying still today to Mexico and Brasil are not better either...

drerx7 wrote:

Someone mentioned Eastern and Continental AB3s - they were 1st gen B2/B4 variants. What kind of range did those birds have? I'm not sure they didn't struggle westbound transcon in winter months?

Don’t think of range as distance, think of it as time. As I said earlier, the A300B4-203 had roughly 6 1/2 hours of fuel with full tanks. It cruises at 450 knots. That’s roughly 2900 nm. Consider a 75 knot average headwind and it drops to roughly 2450 nm, 2200 with a 100 knot headwind.

I should mention, the 6 1/2 hours is cruise time, after taking into account climb/descent. But, if you consider IFR alternates and hold off fuel, reduce that by about an hour ..... 5 1/2 hours of cruising.

But ..... winter brings up other factors requiring consideration ...

Your take off weight will be affected by contaminated runways. Sometimes an issue, sometimes not. Airbus contamination figures were always the most restrictive of any aircraft I had flown till then. Mostly because, being newer, it fell under newer rules. Dry, damp, wet 1/8”, wet, 1/4”, slush, snow, ice, wet ice, etc. etc. .... all had different numbers. Previous aircraft, it was just dry, wet, snow and even still was pretty vague.

Winter also brings up weather issues. One may have to hold a longer alternate or with the risk of delays, more holding fuel.

Also, with ground icing issues, more fuel is boarded for de-icing.

There are so many factors, it’s hard to give a range in nm. with no other considerations. As I mentioned, I used to do a lot of YYZ-BGI-YYZ in the A300B. (About 2250 nm flight plan distance) Sometimes it was tight.

AB3s - they were 1st gen B2/B4 variants. What kind of range did those birds have? [/quote]

Scanair (SAS' charter airline) flew ex-SAS A300B4 for years OSL/ARN - Canary Islands, which is about 4,500 km with 291 pax. I flew it myself in 1985 Oslo - Tenerife South. Pretty decent for a 1st gen bird

Ziyulu wrote:

Is the A300 capable of doing Trans-Pacific flights? Like SFO to NRT?

No.

Cointrin330 wrote:

WayexTDI wrote:

Cointrin330 wrote:

The AA order for Airbus and Boeing was placed in 2011, not in 2008.

Correct, it was in July 2011; regardless, it still doesn't change the premises that AA bought from Airbus again, even after the A300 problems and specifically the downfalls from AA587.

I wasn't challenging the fact that AA purchased Airbus jets again, though as I recall, the 2011 order was split between A&B because of the timing. AA needed the refresh the fleet at an accelerated pace and putting the order with a single manufacturer would have resulted in a long wait for deliveries.

This is veering off the subject; AA (and I think maybe UA or DL also) had signed an exclusive agreement with Boeing to buy only Boeing. However the European Union sued to have that thrown out. AA didn't buy Airbus for a while anyway, though it paved the way for them to launch that massive split order with Boeing and Airbus when renewing the fleet. True or not, AA publicly said it was because only one of the two could not deliver that many airplanes in the desired time frame. That prior EU lawsuit at least meant AA didn't have to go about breaching the agreement with Boeing.

Back on subject: as I recall, 10 of the A300s were reconfigured in the 3-classes for the long hauls. I can't remember if they were reconfigured back to F/Y when withdrawn from the European routes, or if they were returned as-is. They were a white-tail lease at the outset (to persuade AA into ordering Airbus), so they had easy return status.