CX773W
Topic Author
Posts: 57
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2012 9:29 pm

Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sat Jan 25, 2014 7:38 pm

While the A332 is a reasonably sucessful medium-to-long range aircraft, I just wonder why the erstwhile A330 operators in the Asia Pacific mostly shun the A332? (Besides CX and sister company KA, CI, OZ, PR, SQ and TG all fly only A333's and I've heard MH has phased out their A332's as well). Can anyone explain this anomaly? Thanks!
 
rutankrd
Posts: 3025
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2003 6:08 am

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sat Jan 25, 2014 7:58 pm

Well a number of the larger regional players bought into the early A330-300 models as ideal for those high density regional operations.

The performance of the A332 and Asia airline replacement cycles just didn't mesh before EADS were able to offer the much improved later A333s.

These have been ordered in numbers, even the CAAC- Air China have been receiving the up-rated A333 lately.
 
User avatar
Mortyman
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:13 pm

Vietnam Airlines has 332's, as do China Eastern Airlines, China Southern Airlines, Eva Air, Garuda, Hainan Airlines, Hong Kong Airlines
 
The Coachman
Posts: 1193
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 9:57 pm

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:14 pm

Considering the main thing the 332 was bought for was range, a lot of the Asian carriers didn't need it. The Chinese airlines require them for thinner China-Australia/NZ routes and also for thinner European routes as range is a factor as do Korean but SE Asian airlines, for that reason, didn't need it.

Otherwise, with the improvement of the 333 over time giving most airlines what they needed for range, there was no point ordering the 332 with its inferior CASM over most of the sectors flown by those Asian airlines.

If one wanted 332 range, the model most of those SE Asian airlines ordered was the 772ER - see SQ and MH as just 2 examples.
M88, 722, 732, 733, 734, 73G, 73H, 742, 743, 744, 752, 762, 763, 772, 773, 77W, 320, 332, 333, 345, 388, DH8, SF3 - want
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3640
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:33 pm

Air Chine, Cina Eastern, China Southern, Air Calin, Fiji Airways, Garuda, Qantas, Eva Airways, Hainan Air, Hawaiian Air, Hong Kong Airlines, Korean Air, Jetstar, Sichuan Air, Vietnam Airlines, Virgin Australia, and, on the margins of Asia-Pacific, Sri Lankan - together amount to a not insignificant amount of A330-200 operators.
come visit the south pacific
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3640
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:37 pm

Quoting The Coachman (Reply 3):
If one wanted 332 range, the model most of those SE Asian airlines ordered was the 772ER - see SQ and MH as just 2 examples.

And these days they buy the A330-300HGW in preference to the 77E.
come visit the south pacific
 
Burkhard
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:34 pm

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:48 pm

Why buy an A332 if you can fly 40 seats more for free at some operation costs? If the range of the A333 is suffcient, then there is no reason to waste money with A332s.
 
The Coachman
Posts: 1193
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2001 9:57 pm

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sat Jan 25, 2014 8:49 pm

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 5):
And these days they buy the A330-300HGW in preference to the 77E.

And that is so because the range gap between the 2 models has closed considerably. It used to not be the case hence the 77E was used on routes not quite utilising the 77E's range but which was beyond the 333. Now, with the 333 capable of performing some of those routes, why bother carrying extra weight around?
M88, 722, 732, 733, 734, 73G, 73H, 742, 743, 744, 752, 762, 763, 772, 773, 77W, 320, 332, 333, 345, 388, DH8, SF3 - want
 
ukoverlander
Posts: 394
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 10:57 pm

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sat Jan 25, 2014 9:52 pm

Correct me if I am wrong but other than a simple stretch the aircraft are the same aren't they? Are there any other specific modifications that matter in this context?

On that basis it seems a simple choice between greater range and greater capacity (and so better CASM). If your airline doesn't need the range then the 300 is the logical choice.

I'm sure Airbus don't expect to sell both models in equal numbers and given that they are essentially the same aircraft they probably don't care much either so long as the customer buys an A330.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7128
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sun Jan 26, 2014 12:11 am

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 5):

And these days they buy the A330-300HGW in preference to the 77E.

Still the A333IGW wouldn't do a lot of routes the 77E is used on. It will be interesting to see what MH do with their longer 77E routes KUL-FRA/AMS/AKL. AKL maybe doable at a stretch but AMS/FRA I would think are to far. Hang on to a few 77Es longer and get A350s?

Some people thought NZ would pick up A330s rather than 777s back in 2004 since they ordered A320s. The 333 even now would be restricted on pretty much all NZs long haul routes and the A332 in 2005 would have suffered the same fate on the US routes and couldn't do AKL-YVR. A340s may have been an option and good for South America maybe but other than that the 77E I think was the right choice.

Overall sure there are several routes todays 333IGW can do that an early 2000s one couldn't have.
 
civetfive
Posts: 187
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 1:44 am

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sun Jan 26, 2014 12:59 am

Quoting ukoverlander (Reply 8):

That matter? Not really. The -200 is technically a shrink, it has a slightly taller tail, a lower empty weight and about 30 cubic meters less of cargo space.
 
jfk777
Posts: 7161
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sun Jan 26, 2014 2:49 am

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 6):
Why buy an A332 if you can fly 40 seats more for free at some operation costs? If the range of the A333 is suffcient, then there is no reason to waste money with A332s.

The A330 -300 is the regional Asian plane which is good for Moscow but not CDG, FRA and LHR. The 777 is the plane for Asia to Europe, the 77W.
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3640
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sun Jan 26, 2014 5:08 am

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 9):
Some people thought NZ would pick up A330s rather than 777s back in 2004 since they ordered A320s.

Still, imagine if they'd bought the A332 and the 77E - it would have been the perfect fleet for NZ with the 77W.
come visit the south pacific
 
[email protected]
Posts: 151
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2000 8:10 pm

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sun Jan 26, 2014 5:13 am

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 11):
The A330 -300 is the regional Asian plane which is good for Moscow but not CDG, FRA and LHR. The 777 is the plane for Asia to Europe, the 77W.

Well, from South East Asia for sure due to payload restrictions, but e.g. Chinese carrier start to use them to Europe, e.g. CA ex BJS and I guess more to come
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 7128
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sun Jan 26, 2014 5:16 am

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 12):

Still, imagine if they'd bought the A332 and the 77E - it would have been the perfect fleet for NZ with the 77W.

Why both? 332 for Asia 77E for North America? Remember in 2004/05 when they were ordered it was decided to upgrade the 744 fleet and keep 5 763s. NZ have a smallish fleet, maybe now it could have worked but the 787 is about to arrive so no use for the 332 IMO?!
 
777ER
Head Moderator
Posts: 10066
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: Why A332's Are Uncommon In The Asia-Pacific

Sun Jan 26, 2014 6:25 am

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 12):
Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 9):Some people thought NZ would pick up A330s rather than 777s back in 2004 since they ordered A320s.
Still, imagine if they'd bought the A332 and the 77E - it would have been the perfect fleet for NZ with the 77W.

Yes back at the time NZ was deciding on its future widebody fleet it would have made a perfect combination (with maybe keeping the B763 fleet to enable expansion/tourist destinations like HKT/DPS) but now the B787 makes a perfect replacement instead of the A330
Head Forum Moderator
[email protected]
Flown: 1900D,S340,Q300,AT72-5/6,DC3,CR2/7,E145,E70/75/90,A319/20/21,A332/3,A359,A380,F100,B717,B733/4/8/9,B742/4,B752/3,B763,B772/3, B789
With: NZ,SJ,QF,JQ,EK,VA,AA,UA,DL,FL,AC,FJ,SQ,TG,PR

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos