"Get what worked out? The plane is doing EXACTLY what it is supposed to be doing! Domestic routes? Again, look at CO, and DL has plans to send them to Europe too. Far more to what story? LOL!"
-How long have they been in service? How long has the 764 been flying and certified to fly?
-Why is it taking so long for the international routes at Delta to be served with the 764? (-Aside from the pilot rest facility issues-)?
"Again, you fail to realize just what the 764ER was designed for. And even the A333? You still fail to realize that the 764ER has more range. Stunning?......."
The 233 tonne variant has a 5600 nm range flying 295 passengers plus baggage, now if you follow on that alone, the reported 245(?) tonne variant is supposed to be even -more- capable. Fingernail-biting time at Everett no?
Here's yet another source on the A330-200 versus the 767-400.
"You really are jumping at this plane. It has not even been in service for a year yet! Cement wedge? The 767 is only there to fill in between the 757 and the 777, and does not have to exactly equal the capacity of the A330. If it did, then it would run into the 777. Airbus does not have anything bigger than the A340, which is as big as the 777."
Explain the A340-500 and -600, those are much larger variants of the A340. The 600 will be the longest plane ever when it enters service I might add. It also appears many A340-500 customers are switching to the -600.
"Oh, and please explain to me the "trend" LOL! "
The order numbers speak for themselves on the listed web URL above.
"Cargowise, you are right, the A330 does have an advantage, although it is not as big as some people make it seem. I have to say you are wrong about the 767 having "higher operating costs".
Not according to AerLingus, you want proof?
Fine: Aer Lingus uses their A330s an average of 13 hours daily (1995), they calculated the roundtrip cost per passenger at $408, compared with the 747-100 at $430, the MD-11 at $450 and $500 for the 767-300ER.
Those costs are not fiction, they are actual hard numbers AerLingus arrived at on it's own and published in Airways Magazine, Mar/Apr 1995 issue, page 40.
These numbers are according to Conor McCarthy, Aer Lingus' general manager for marketing strategy. I suppose he was fudging these numbers? Are you willing to say that Aer Lingus is "lying" over these numbers. They have experience with all the aircraft in question (whether they were owned or leased) and they -should- know. Wouldnt they?
What about your "otherwise" stats. I'd love to see them. Could you share them here?
"I have seen stats (And no, not from Boeing.com) that say otherwise (Not concerning cargo), that show the 767-400 having general lower operating cost's. Yes, EI chose the A330 because of it's higher cargo capacity, but again, they chose the BEST example. This does not mean the 767s cargo cost's were way off there, but the A333 happened to provide the best."
Ah! a backpeddle here! Just a slight one (LOL!)
"I have done research, and I have found an answer a long time ago."
Then please share it here before offering rhetorical answers without that supposed proof behind them. That's all I ask. I have offered proof and heck you can even go to the source themselves at AerLingus to confirm it.
"It's hard to tell that you did not include any bias either (Just looking at your profile)."
Which means what? I make no bones about who I like. No crime in that. I would endeavor you however to do some fact checking of your own and then offer your sources where you get your data from. I -have- offered mine.
"MAC, I am not the type of person who is as narrowminded as some, and take one example as fact. I found that it really matters where you are operating."
Like USAirways for example. They operate a large US based system and seem to be performing wonders with their new Airbus fleet. (G)
"For small National European carriers, or most other small carriers, the A330 is the best choice, offering best cargo load, and PAX load. For larger carriers (Any of the US Majors, BA, CA, etc.) with a more complex route system, with a need for an aircraft that is capable of both medium and long hauls, with varying load capability's, the 767 is the best decision. I also find in some parts of the pacific region (Travel for example between Hong Kong and Taipei) that the A330 would benefit from it's large cargo market. Airlines holding off on the -300ER or any -400? I think your greatly mistaken.
The economics are simply far too different for Asia. The 767-300 and 400 are fine for the Atlantic market, for the Asia market, especially high density city pairs like TPE-HKG, minimum A330-300 size seems to be the norm and on up to 747-400. If you dont use your slots wisely, you reap the whirlwind quite early. Which explains why the 767-300 is seen by only a few carriers out there. QF, BR, NH, JL, Air China. That's it. At that, only one, BR (EVA Air), operates the TPE-HKG route with 767s and possibly JL. BR is also -getting rid of- their 767-300s, replacing them with 8 A330-200s (contract signed today!), Qantas signed for A330-300 and -200 models as well in their A380 order (G).
"Look at Kenya, Balair, CityBird, Sobelair, Air2000, just a few which were all faced with the A330 and stuck with the 767. What were they thinking? Mabye you could explain why? It would really hurt to say why wouldent it? Aside from the A330's cargo advantage (If you look at it, only with a small range advantage, that's all the advantages it's got. I happen to believe that Airbus's low prices, and "deals"
combining other aircraft, and Airbus's common cockpit. "
Massive differences there that you just illustrated before regardign "route systems" and the like.
Firstly, Kenya Airways is by no means a carrier the size of US Airways or even DragonAir for that matter, they are the only truly scheduled passenger/cargo airline operation in the mix. Take a long look at the rest of the carriers you mention. They are all --charter carriers--. Cram'em'in and fly it operations. Huge difference in mission, and quite probably not a freight market whatsoever on their routes because they are charter operations which means the planes are sold for passengers only. Kenya Airways is the only true passenger carrier in that mix. The only one.