Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
KlimaBXsst
Topic Author
Posts: 1000
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:14 pm

Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:18 pm

Pretty much a YES or NO question.

- Common and existing ULDs
- Fuselage perfect width for 6-7-8 abreast
- 200 seat size and a “real” wide body fuselage
- Ease of updating with latest tech efficiencies
- Admirable safety record
- It looks good
Aesthetically the A 340 got it right!
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 1479
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:20 pm

Is there a modern efficient 50K thrust engine available for it?
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 12064
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:23 pm

The A310 was a shrink (albeit heavily modified compared to many shrinks) so no. The fuselage is too large for its size. If they were to modernize anything it would be the A300.

Airbus already has a ~200 seat medium range aircraft in the pipeline. It’s called the A321XLR.
 
Someone83
Posts: 5383
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 5:47 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:26 pm

Polot wrote:
If they were to modernize anything it would be the A300.


Which is basically the A330...
 
mxaxai
Posts: 2693
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:36 pm

There will be no "modernized A310", the A300/310 was developed into the A330. If Airbus really wanted a smaller widebody, they'd shrink the A330. Surprise, they did have plans for that called A330-100 / A330-500 in the mid-90s and early 2000s but those never went anywhere. Equally unsurprisingly, there were plans for a stretched A330-400 / A330-600 which were never built either.
 
upperdeckfan
Posts: 1086
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 1:59 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:42 pm

Polot wrote:

Airbus already has a ~200 seat medium range aircraft in the pipeline. It’s called the A321XLR.


That's the future, 200 seat widebodies - on standard density - are a thing of the past.

What we'll se in the future are narrowbodies being streched in size and range.
748,744,742,741,772,773,762,763,
764, 789, 732,733,735,737,738,739,
752, 722, 717,74M,DC10,DC9,M82,
M83, M87, M88,310,319,320,321,332,
333, 343, 346,359,388,L1011,CR2,
CR7, CR9,CRK, E175,E190,ATR42,
DSH8, CS1,CS3
 
avier
Posts: 1291
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:38 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:45 pm

To re emphasize, as others have mentioned above, the A310/A300 evolved into the A330, and that further evolved into the A330neo. So you're basically asking for a shrunk A330neo, which doesn't seem to have many takers.
 
User avatar
YMX4ever
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2020 4:18 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Oct 23, 2020 1:28 pm

I was thinking the same thing about a modernized A310, would be nice to see the A310 back in the skies.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 2377
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Oct 23, 2020 3:11 pm

YMX4ever wrote:
I was thinking the same thing about a modernized A310, would be nice to see the A310 back in the skies.

As been mentioned many times, the closest available "modernized A310" is called the A330-800; which has only a handful of takers.
 
spahrtan
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 8:19 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Oct 23, 2020 3:16 pm

upperdeckfan wrote:
Polot wrote:

Airbus already has a ~200 seat medium range aircraft in the pipeline. It’s called the A321XLR.


That's the future, 200 seat widebodies - on standard density - are a thing of the past.

What we'll se in the future are narrowbodies being streched in size and range.


So what you’re saying is Boeing needs a carbon winged, updated engine, 757-2/3...? :scratchchin: :duck:
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4637
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Oct 23, 2020 3:32 pm

KlimaBXsst wrote:
Pretty much a YES or NO question.

- Common and existing ULDs
- Fuselage perfect width for 6-7-8 abreast
- 200 seat size and a “real” wide body fuselage
- Ease of updating with latest tech efficiencies
- Admirable safety record
- It looks good


That's obviously a big no.

As others have mentioned, Airbus already has a good 200-seat size aircraft with the A321(NEO/LR/XLR). It's not a wide body, but for this size aircraft narrow bodies have proven to be more efficient. Less fuselage material per seat saves weight and thus fuel.

It's true that the A310 has an admirable safety record, however the safety record of the A320-series is even better. Good looks are no valid argument.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sun Oct 25, 2020 5:17 am

Someone83 wrote:
Polot wrote:
If they were to modernize anything it would be the A300.


Which is basically the A330...


No, the A330 heavier re-winged A300 cross sectioned aircraft with a fly by wire system. The only thing the A300 has in common with the A330 and A340 is it's cross section. It probably has less in common with the A330 than the 707 has with a 737.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sun Oct 25, 2020 6:16 am

WayexTDI wrote:
YMX4ever wrote:
I was thinking the same thing about a modernized A310, would be nice to see the A310 back in the skies.

As been mentioned many times, the closest available "modernized A310" is called the A330-800; which has only a handful of takers.


No, it has heavier with longer wingspan wings and heavier landing gear. The A300 and A310 were optimized for short and medium haul.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 5497
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sun Oct 25, 2020 6:55 am

If we compare the numbers from this topic. They aren't completely accurate, but it gives us a number in the ballpark:
viewtopic.php?t=1355819

The A320neo is listed as having a fuel burn of 2100 kg/hr, so lets say that means an A321XLR burns around 2500 kg/hr. The same topic lists the A310 as having a fuel burn of 4500 kg/hr.

Now the A310 is a slightly bigger plane, but capacity is nowhere near enough to justify a fuel burn penalty of 2 tons more per hour. Now you could improve it with new engines and improved wings, but even that won't get anywhere close to the savings needed.

For a starter, a suitable engine doesn't exist. The A310-300 has a MTOM of 164 tons with engines delivering between 200 and 260 kN of thrust. The A321XLR has a MTOM of 101 tons, with engines delivering up to 160 kN in its most powerful version. If we say the A310neo saves 20%, and those savings are used to lower the MTOM, the A310neo will still have a MTOM of over 130 tons, more than the most powerful PW GTF or LeapX can handle.

The closest you will get that is powerful enough is the GEnX or Trent 1000. The same topic lists the 787-8 with those engines with a fuel burn of 4800 kg/hr. The A310 is smaller and lighter, so you would save a bit of fuel over the 787, but it is still close to double the fuel burn of the A321XLR. On top of that, the GEnX and Trent 1000 weighs 2 tons more than a CF6 each, adding 4 tons to the OEW.
 
Sokes
Posts: 2773
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sun Oct 25, 2020 1:33 pm

VSMUT wrote:
For a starter, a suitable engine doesn't exist. The A310-300 has a MTOM of 164 tons with engines delivering between 200 and 260 kN of thrust. The A321XLR has a MTOM of 101 tons, with engines delivering up to 160 kN in its most powerful version.

Length roughly:
A310 47 m,
A 300 54 m,
A330-300 59 m
I assume Airbus would have preferred an A330-200 and a shrink if a good, weaker engine had to be available. A shrink to A310 length is probably overdoing it.

So yes, a 170-190 t MTOW plane with A330 fuselage, 51 m carbon wing and new engines is a good idea. But I think it's more a problem with engine makers than with Airbus.

What if Boeing wants a new engine for a new 160t MTOW plane and Airbus wants one for a 190t MTOW plane?
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
stratable
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2019 12:22 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sun Oct 25, 2020 2:41 pm

Sokes wrote:
Length roughly:
A310 47 m,
A 300 54 m,
A330-300 59 m
I assume Airbus would have preferred an A330-200 and a shrink if a good, weaker engine had to be available. A shrink to A310 length is probably overdoing it.

So yes, a 170-190 t MTOW plane with A330 fuselage, 51 m carbon wing and new engines is a good idea. But I think it's more a problem with engine makers than with Airbus.

What if Boeing wants a new engine for a new 160t MTOW plane and Airbus wants one for a 190t MTOW plane?



Which means we're back at Boeing's MoM-plane. I'd love to see a small widebody again, and really enjoyed flying the A310.
I guess as we've seen in the MoM discussion here on the forum, it'll be difficult to find the right time to launch such a plane.
I prefer widebodies over narrowbodies and would love to fly a "new" A310.
A313 319/20/21 332/3 343 359 B734/8 742/4/4M 752/3 763ER 772/E/W 787-8/-9 CRJ900 CS300 ERJ-145 F70 Q100/300/400
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4637
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sun Oct 25, 2020 3:40 pm

Sokes wrote:
I assume Airbus would have preferred an A330-200 and a shrink if a good, weaker engine had to be available. A shrink to A310 length is probably overdoing it.


I don't think so, shrinks are never a good idea and Airbus knows it. They know what happened to the A318, which is being outperformed by similar sized aircraft such as the E190-E2 and the A220. The difference is that those aren't shrinks, they're just naturally that size. That makes them perform better.

stratable wrote:
I prefer widebodies over narrowbodies and would love to fly a "new" A310.


You might love it, but airlines don't. Wide bodies always have a higher fuel burn than narrow bodies, so if possible they always prefer narrow bodies. If you take two planes with similar seating capacity, where one is a wide body and the other is a narrow body, the narrow body is always the preferred choice. They weigh less and have a lower fuel burn. It's easier to fly them into smaller airports that can't handle wide bodies, giving these aircraft more flexibility. Narrow bodies also require less powerful engines to move the same amount of people.

The A310 has a capacity that fits in a narrow body, so why would you develop a wide body for it?
 
stratable
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2019 12:22 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sun Oct 25, 2020 5:16 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
You might love it, but airlines don't. Wide bodies always have a higher fuel burn than narrow bodies, so if possible they always prefer narrow bodies. If you take two planes with similar seating capacity, where one is a wide body and the other is a narrow body, the narrow body is always the preferred choice. They weigh less and have a lower fuel burn. It's easier to fly them into smaller airports that can't handle wide bodies, giving these aircraft more flexibility. Narrow bodies also require less powerful engines to move the same amount of people.

The A310 has a capacity that fits in a narrow body, so why would you develop a wide body for it?


Absolutely agree with you. It's probably difficult to make the economics work for a widebody MoM plane (as we can see with Boeing right now).
Still as a passenger, I prefer a widebody over a narrowbody. It just "feels" like a real plane, like you're actually going far away. Narrowbodies to me have that short-haul vibe.
This is obviously highly subjective and airlines primarily care about numbers.
A313 319/20/21 332/3 343 359 B734/8 742/4/4M 752/3 763ER 772/E/W 787-8/-9 CRJ900 CS300 ERJ-145 F70 Q100/300/400
 
johns624
Posts: 3936
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sun Oct 25, 2020 5:31 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
Someone83 wrote:
Polot wrote:
If they were to modernize anything it would be the A300.


Which is basically the A330...


No, the A330 heavier re-winged A300 cross sectioned aircraft with a fly by wire system. The only thing the A300 has in common with the A330 and A340 is it's cross section. It probably has less in common with the A330 than the 707 has with a 737.
He didn't mean a literal modernization. He meant it in the sense that the 330 is the catalog replacement.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Mon Oct 26, 2020 4:34 am

johns624 wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:
Someone83 wrote:

Which is basically the A330...


No, the A330 heavier re-winged A300 cross sectioned aircraft with a fly by wire system. The only thing the A300 has in common with the A330 and A340 is it's cross section. It probably has less in common with the A330 than the 707 has with a 737.
He didn't mean a literal modernization. He meant it in the sense that the 330 is the catalog replacement.


Well the 757 was supposedly the catalog replacement for the 727. In actuality it was used more as a domestic replacement for the 707 and 720. The 737-300 and 737-400 capacity wise were more like 727 replacements. Many airlines actually still had 727's when the 737NG came out, and the 737-800 pretty much became a direct replacement for some of the last 727's still in service in the US by the end of the last century. Just because the manufacturer calls a new product to be a replacement for an older product doesn't mean customers will perceive it as such.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 2377
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Mon Oct 26, 2020 2:45 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
YMX4ever wrote:
I was thinking the same thing about a modernized A310, would be nice to see the A310 back in the skies.

As been mentioned many times, the closest available "modernized A310" is called the A330-800; which has only a handful of takers.


No, it has heavier with longer wingspan wings and heavier landing gear. The A300 and A310 were optimized for short and medium haul.

And wide-bodies on short and medium haul are not really viable these days; it's mainly narrow-bodies with more frequency.
 
johns624
Posts: 3936
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Mon Oct 26, 2020 4:25 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
johns624 wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:

No, the A330 heavier re-winged A300 cross sectioned aircraft with a fly by wire system. The only thing the A300 has in common with the A330 and A340 is it's cross section. It probably has less in common with the A330 than the 707 has with a 737.
He didn't mean a literal modernization. He meant it in the sense that the 330 is the catalog replacement.


Well the 757 was supposedly the catalog replacement for the 727. In actuality it was used more as a domestic replacement for the 707 and 720. The 737-300 and 737-400 capacity wise were more like 727 replacements. Many airlines actually still had 727's when the 737NG came out, and the 737-800 pretty much became a direct replacement for some of the last 727's still in service in the US by the end of the last century. Just because the manufacturer calls a new product to be a replacement for an older product doesn't mean customers will perceive it as such.
The market changes. The 707 was replaced on many routes by the 747 classic. It was replaced by the 744 or the T7, all dissimilar airplanes. Smaller 737s are being replaced by 220s and Rjs.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Tue Oct 27, 2020 4:18 am

WayexTDI wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
As been mentioned many times, the closest available "modernized A310" is called the A330-800; which has only a handful of takers.


No, it has heavier with longer wingspan wings and heavier landing gear. The A300 and A310 were optimized for short and medium haul.

And wide-bodies on short and medium haul are not really viable these days; it's mainly narrow-bodies with more frequency.


But back when the A300 came out, the engines on the 747, DC-10, L-1011, and A300 were much more efficient than anything yet available on a narrow body. There also weren't open skies agreements that allowed airlines to fly to any airport bat which an airline could get slots.
 
Kent350787
Posts: 1976
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:06 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Tue Oct 27, 2020 6:01 am

flyingclrs727 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:

No, it has heavier with longer wingspan wings and heavier landing gear. The A300 and A310 were optimized for short and medium haul.

And wide-bodies on short and medium haul are not really viable these days; it's mainly narrow-bodies with more frequency.


But back when the A300 came out, the engines on the 747, DC-10, L-1011, and A300 were much more efficient than anything yet available on a narrow body. There also weren't open skies agreements that allowed airlines to fly to any airport bat which an airline could get slots.


In the pre-COVID world, experience had shown that airlines outside the US were prepared to "misuse" widebodies on short or medium range routes to provide fleet commonality and flexibility. Japanese airlines have moved away from D versions of aircraft, and QF has used 762/3 and now A332/3 on MEL-SYD-BNE.

IIRC, QF specified a lower load cabin floor on its first couple of A332 which couldn't support international business seats, but otherwise the medium sized widebody fleet has been largely interchangable between domestic and international.
S340/J31/146-300/F27/F50/Nord 262/ Q100/200/E195/ 733/734/738/744/762/763/77W/788/789/ 320/321/332/333/345/359
 
Electra
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2019 7:58 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Tue Oct 27, 2020 12:46 pm

Kent350787 wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
And wide-bodies on short and medium haul are not really viable these days; it's mainly narrow-bodies with more frequency.


But back when the A300 came out, the engines on the 747, DC-10, L-1011, and A300 were much more efficient than anything yet available on a narrow body. There also weren't open skies agreements that allowed airlines to fly to any airport bat which an airline could get slots.


In the pre-COVID world, experience had shown that airlines outside the US were prepared to "misuse" widebodies on short or medium range routes to provide fleet commonality and flexibility. Japanese airlines have moved away from D versions of aircraft, and QF has used 762/3 and now A332/3 on MEL-SYD-BNE.

IIRC, QF specified a lower load cabin floor on its first couple of A332 which couldn't support international business seats, but otherwise the medium sized widebody fleet has been largely interchangable between domestic and international.


Yes that’s correct. QF’s first 4 A332s had the lower load cabin floor. They only operated domestically for a few years (2002-2006 IIRC) before being transferred to JQ when they began international operations. When QF started receiving new A332s again in 2007, the fleet was a mix or international and domestic configs. Eventually, all the A332s (and A333s) were reconfigured to the current international product, allowing for greater fleet flexibility.
Incidentally, the first one or two A333s in the fleet also operated in a domestic config for a very brief time before being reconfigured for international operations.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 2377
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:54 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:

No, it has heavier with longer wingspan wings and heavier landing gear. The A300 and A310 were optimized for short and medium haul.

And wide-bodies on short and medium haul are not really viable these days; it's mainly narrow-bodies with more frequency.


But back when the A300 came out, the engines on the 747, DC-10, L-1011, and A300 were much more efficient than anything yet available on a narrow body. There also weren't open skies agreements that allowed airlines to fly to any airport bat which an airline could get slots.

OK. And? The situation has changed since the 70s; why try to "transpose" the 70s into the 2020s without adjusting for the current environment?
If there was a market for wide-bodies on short and medium haul, Boeing, Airbus and maybe others would have an offering available; that there is none should answer your question.
 
LucaDiMontanari
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:37 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Wed Oct 28, 2020 4:14 pm

Polot wrote:
The A310 was a shrink (albeit heavily modified compared to many shrinks) so no. The fuselage is too large for its size. If they were to modernize anything it would be the A300.


That is about what I would say. Or better: Airbus should have done it one and a half decade ago - now its too late for obvious reasons. The original A300 was not ordered anymore, since even the then offered -600 series was a more than a quarter of a century old design at that time. But Airbus has recently shown great capability of turning a 30 year old design into what a lot of fanboys regard as the most sophisticated single aisle plane today - mostly by bolting two new engines on it.

Would a similar move have been possible by let's say 2007/2008 for the A300? I think yes: there were two engines available/under development at that time, who in my opinion would have done the job. First the RR Trent 500, of which Rolls would have been happy to sell a few more (and thus also would have been more interested in sorting out its issues). Second the GEnx, which was expected to produce thrust from 53,000 lbf. Luckily, the A300 has a lot of room under its wings, so I guess that the new engines would have fitted without too much filthy tricks. And at least the GEnx is still considered as a good engine today, powering the 787 and will do so for quite some time.

So far about the engines. It would be interesting, what further investments would have been needed to get a usable airplane. Wings? Not necessarily: the A320 wing is aerodynamically mostly a scaled down A300-600 wing and still works fine. Instruments/control systems? Maybe: I guess it is mostly a question of how much effort Airbus would have thrown at it. A similar cockpit layout like the A330/A340 would have been perfect in terms of commonality but would require to implement a FBW system. There was a working system available for very similar aircraft and it wouldn't be a big problem to integrate it. The big question is, if the necessary certification would have paid off.

Where would such a plane be used? I doubt it's the short haul routes the original A300 was designed for. In fact, the A300-600 was occasionally used on transatlantic flights, albeit not that often. Not because of lack of range but rather for the lack of ETOPS certification. Let's assume, such a plane would gain some 30% range and ETOPS, it would make a great plane for 8-10 hour missions. That's something like central Europe to Miami or Vancouver. Or Tokyo to Sydney, New York to Hawaii, to name a few. And still for 5 hours US transcons it would work fine. Not to forget of it's cargo hauling capacity, either belly cargo or full freighter!

Some other posters said, "Airbus has the A330" - yes, they have, but this one has a huge disadvantage for such medium haul routes, similar to the 787-3 concept: a way too large wing, so you carry tons overs tons of surplus metal (or CFRP) with you, pushing fuel bills and landing fees up. No one needs a 14+ hour wing on a 6 to 8 hour sector, that's a big (if not the main) issue why wide bodies are "no longer efficient on such routes" today. A big belly, small wing plane would be a whole different story. If Airbus did so, the program would be alive now for like 12 years - I'm sure it would have been a better suited freighter than the A330F (making this not that successful project obsolete - 45m wing span anyone? Hello, is there FedEx on the phone?) and it would have outperformed (and thus killed) the 767 freighter in any aspect. Ad a mere 200 copies for passenger use and you have already outperformed the original A300 series in a sales per year scheme. Let us not forget that there is another large aircraft maker, that thinks of revamping a 40 year old bird might pay off even today! Airbus could have been a decade in advance. Luckily they did not, so we may have the chance to enjoy a 767MAX at some point :mrgreen:
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 12064
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Wed Oct 28, 2020 4:36 pm

LucaDiMontanari wrote:
Where would such a plane be used? I doubt it's the short haul routes the original A300 was designed for. In fact, the A300-600 was occasionally used on transatlantic flights, albeit not that often. Not because of lack of range but rather for the lack of ETOPS certification.

Well no...it was because of lack of range. The A300-600(R) and A310 both have 180 ETOPs certification since the early 90s. The best A300-600R would still struggle on NE US to west EU routes (especially in winter), let alone anything longer.
 
LucaDiMontanari
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:37 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sun Nov 01, 2020 2:08 pm

Polot wrote:
LucaDiMontanari wrote:
Where would such a plane be used? I doubt it's the short haul routes the original A300 was designed for. In fact, the A300-600 was occasionally used on transatlantic flights, albeit not that often. Not because of lack of range but rather for the lack of ETOPS certification.

Well no...it was because of lack of range. The A300-600(R) and A310 both have 180 ETOPs certification since the early 90s. The best A300-600R would still struggle on NE US to west EU routes (especially in winter), let alone anything longer.


That's why Lufthansa flew them into JFK and even PHL occasionally... Let's get this straight: these were rare events, as it was at the very edge of the A300's range, you're right in this way. On the other hand, LH's A300 weren't ETOPS certified as far as I know, due to the fact that they usually flew them just on intra-european routes. And still managed it over the pond (no idea how restricted they were...). So this is why I say, a modern engine with at least 30% less fuel consumption would have made an A300NEO a great north Atlantic plane. I point on the 'would have' - now it's too late.
 
User avatar
YMX4ever
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2020 4:18 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Wed Nov 11, 2020 5:21 pm

I would much rather be on an A310 for long haul than an A321neo
 
debonair
Posts: 4273
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 10:50 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Wed Nov 11, 2020 6:12 pm

There is no need for a "new" A310, as Airbus offering the A330-800.
 
debonair
Posts: 4273
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 10:50 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Wed Nov 11, 2020 6:13 pm

There is no need for a "new" A310, as Airbus offering the A330-800. :twocents:
 
IADCA
Posts: 2359
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Nov 13, 2020 1:59 am

debonair wrote:
There is no need for a "new" A310, as Airbus offering the A330-800. :twocents:


Even the -800 is a massively larger airplane than the A310. You're talking about a plane that seats 265 in an all-Y configuration with 14 LD3s underneath (A310) versus 406 passengers and 27 LD3s (338).
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4637
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Nov 13, 2020 4:43 pm

YMX4ever wrote:
I would much rather be on an A310 for long haul than an A321neo


True, but the airlines would much rather see you on an A321neo than on an A310.

Due to it's narrow body design, the A321neo consumes way less fuel than a wide body with a similar capacity. There is a certain minimum capacity threshold to make a wide body viable, the A310 is below that threshold.

IADCA wrote:
debonair wrote:
There is no need for a "new" A310, as Airbus offering the A330-800. :twocents:


Even the -800 is a massively larger airplane than the A310. You're talking about a plane that seats 265 in an all-Y configuration with 14 LD3s underneath (A310) versus 406 passengers and 27 LD3s (338).


I agree the A330 is not the true A310 replacement, the A321 is. The A330, although bigger, is essentially an A300 replacement.
 
debonair
Posts: 4273
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 10:50 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sat Nov 14, 2020 2:17 pm

KlimaBXsst wrote:
- Fuselage perfect width for 6-7-8 abreast
- 200 seat size and a “real” wide body fuselage


IADCA wrote:
Even the -800 is a massively larger airplane than the A310. You're talking about a plane that seats 265 in an all-Y configuration with 14 LD3s underneath (A310) versus 406 passengers and 27 LD3s (338).


Sorry, lost in translation. Difficult to explain... Yes the A330-800 is much larger than the A310. But, this is just my opinion, you can't compare the "old" '90 design a la AirTransat A310 with 244 seats in today's world. Kuwait Airways A330-800 offers 235 seats, comparable in capacity to TS, but in these modern today's standard - with all aisle access and fully-flat beds in Business. Because, if you translate these (the same) standards to the A321neo, you will get always fewer seats, like 171 seats on tap Air Portugal (and never the 200 requested)!
 
KlimaBXsst
Topic Author
Posts: 1000
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:14 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sat Nov 14, 2020 3:14 pm

debonair wrote:
KlimaBXsst wrote:
- Fuselage perfect width for 6-7-8 abreast
- 200 seat size and a “real” wide body fuselage


IADCA wrote:
Even the -800 is a massively larger airplane than the A310. You're talking about a plane that seats 265 in an all-Y configuration with 14 LD3s underneath (A310) versus 406 passengers and 27 LD3s (338).


Sorry, lost in translation. Difficult to explain... Yes the A330-800 is much larger than the A310. But, this is just my opinion, you can't compare the "old" '90 design a la AirTransat A310 with 244 seats in today's world. Kuwait Airways A330-800 offers 235 seats, comparable in capacity to TS, but in these modern today's standard - with all aisle access and fully-flat beds in Business. Because, if you translate these (the same) standards to the A321neo, you will get always fewer seats, like 171 seats on tap Air Portugal (and never the 200 requested)!


In the US, 6-7-8 abreast would probably mainly be used domestically, but one has to admit it does give more options for fully flat, herring bone, pod, or compartment options and perhaps 171 or so seats longer trans oceanic range internationally.
Aesthetically the A 340 got it right!
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 1479
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sun Nov 15, 2020 2:27 am

PatrickZ80 wrote:
True, but the airlines would much rather see you on an A321neo than on an A310.

Due to it's narrow body design, the A321neo consumes way less fuel than a wide body with a similar capacity. There is a certain minimum capacity threshold to make a wide body viable, the A310 is below that threshold.

Airlines don't always fly 80-90% full - sometimes, they have to fly at 60% or less of the plane's seats sold. In such instances, a narrow body might be more economically feasible - as such, deploying such aircraft on those routes will make them more sustainable.
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4637
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sun Nov 15, 2020 10:33 am

debonair wrote:
Because, if you translate these (the same) standards to the A321neo, you will get always fewer seats, like 171 seats on tap Air Portugal (and never the 200 requested)!


Of course on full-service airlines you don't. On LCCs you do, or at least get close to it. Just compare these two A320s:

TAP Air Portugal

Wizzair

With the 30 and 32 inch seat pitch on TAP, only 156 seats fit in that plane. With the 28 inch seat pitch on Wizzair they manage to fit 180 seats in the same plane. That's 24 more passengers that can contribute to the operating costs of Wizzair compared to that of TAP.
 
User avatar
BawliBooch
Posts: 1590
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:24 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Mon Nov 16, 2020 6:32 am

For those saying A330-800 is the modernized A310 -> A330-800 is a 406 seat (HD)/250T MTOW/8000nm plane.

What i believe the OP refers to a modernized A310 like aircraft for MCMR (Medium Capacity, Medium Range) routes. A 300 seat (HD seating), 4/5000nm plane optimized for flights<=6 hours with lower operating weights and operating costs than the 330/787. The A330-800 is too much wing and too big for this market which could see well over 1000 aircraft at the least. Should be a hit especially in Asia where efficient aircraft of such capacity/range are desperately needed. Right now airlines are "abusing" A330/787 family aircraft for this segment.

I would argue that Airbus is well positioned to deliver an aircraft that fits this spec. The new A360 would have A330 systems but on a significantly smaller and lightened frame with smaller Composite wings optimized for 2-6 hour missions. I would say the ideal A360 should be sized between an A310 and A300.

Proposed A360:
OEW < 80t, MTOW 150-180T, Range 4-5000nm, atleast 17 LD3 positions in the hold.
Pax capacity: 300 (High Density 9 abreast)
255 (Single Class 8 abreast)
225 (2 class regional - 18J, 6 abreast @ 60" + 207Y, 8 abreast @ 32")

Airbus would be able to get to market sooner and Boeing would be unable to respond with anything more than a refreshed 767MAX.

Questions: What engines are available to power the hypothetical A360 MCMR aircraft? Who will build the wings? Time to find a new supplier for the wings with Brexit? And most importantly, Can Airbus find the money to bankroll the project or will European govts have to subsidise the project with long term easy loans? Recovery plan to help Airbus deal with COVID?
Mr.Kapoor's favorite poodle!
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 1479
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Mon Nov 16, 2020 6:59 am

BawliBooch wrote:
For those saying A330-800 is the modernized A310 -> A330-800 is a 406 seat (HD)/250T MTOW/8000nm plane.

What i believe the OP refers to a modernized A310 like aircraft for MCMR (Medium Capacity, Medium Range) routes. A 300 seat (HD seating), 4/5000nm plane optimized for flights<=6 hours with lower operating weights and operating costs than the 330/787. The A330-800 is too much wing and too big for this market which could see well over 1000 aircraft at the least. Should be a hit especially in Asia where efficient aircraft of such capacity/range are desperately needed. Right now airlines are "abusing" A330/787 family aircraft for this segment.

I would argue that Airbus is well positioned to deliver an aircraft that fits this spec. The new A360 would have A330 systems but on a significantly smaller and lightened frame with smaller Composite wings optimized for 2-6 hour missions. I would say the ideal A360 should be sized between an A310 and A300.

Proposed A360:
OEW < 80t, MTOW 150-180T, Range 4-5000nm, atleast 17 LD3 positions in the hold.
Pax capacity: 300 (High Density 9 abreast)
255 (Single Class 8 abreast)
225 (2 class regional - 18J, 6 abreast @ 60" + 207Y, 8 abreast @ 32")

Airbus would be able to get to market sooner and Boeing would be unable to respond with anything more than a refreshed 767MAX. Question is: can Airbus find the money?

Where would Airbus get the engines for this aircraft? There are no current engines (50,000-60,000 lbs thrust) that can power it - so a new engine or a derivative from an existing engine will be needed. That will inflate costs - airlines abuse the A330/350/B787/777 nowadays because there are no economically viable alternatives.

With a new wing and engine needed for this aircraft, will it be economically viable for Airbus to offer this to airlines? Why not just make more A330s and A321s and keep improving them continuously? There will be less complexity in the supply chain and no need to set up a new assembly line for a new aircraft model.
 
User avatar
BawliBooch
Posts: 1590
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:24 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Mon Nov 16, 2020 12:28 pm

flee wrote:
Where would Airbus get the engines for this aircraft? There are no current engines (50,000-60,000 lbs thrust) that can power it - so a new engine or a derivative from an existing engine will be needed. That will inflate costs - airlines abuse the A330/350/B787/777 nowadays because there are no economically viable alternatives.

I am not very technical but would engine variant based on the A340-500 engines work? That should be in the 55-60k ballpark range? Maybe that manufacturer could build a variant of that engine for this mission with a higher BPR?

flee wrote:
Why not just make more A330s and A321s and keep improving them continuously? There will be less complexity in the supply chain and no need to set up a new assembly line for a new aircraft model.


Good point on the supply chain complexity and assembly line.

However the counter argument driving the market is that the A321 is too small (200 seats standard 32" 6 abreast 1 class) and the A330-200 (370 @ 32" 8 abreast). The A360 would slot right in the middle.
Mr.Kapoor's favorite poodle!
 
User avatar
YMX4ever
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2020 4:18 am

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Fri Nov 27, 2020 2:47 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
YMX4ever wrote:
I would much rather be on an A310 for long haul than an A321neo


True, but the airlines would much rather see you on an A321neo than on an A310.

Due to it's narrow body design, the A321neo consumes way less fuel than a wide body with a similar capacity. There is a certain minimum capacity threshold to make a wide body viable, the A310 is below that threshold.

Yes exactly! All about the $$$ for these airlines which I understand but in my own humble opinion if I had to buy a ticket for overseas and I had a choice between widebody & A321neo the widebody will win even if I gotta dish out 200$ extra for me it would be worth it
 
stratosphere
Posts: 2011
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:45 pm

Re: Should Airbus bring back a modernized A310?

Sun Dec 13, 2020 7:08 am

Why? Even FedEx got rid of them. Not worth it.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests

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