kimimm19
Topic Author
Posts: 351
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 9:34 pm

A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:04 pm

Just wondering if anyone on the forum has a subscription to The Air Current that could summarise the figures in this article?

They've apparently published fuel comparison figures on Delta's first route Seatle to Shanghai between the a330neo and the 767-300er.

It's behind paywall though.

Cheers!

https://theaircurrent.com/three-points/ ... max-execs/
 
george77300
Posts: 1110
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 8:33 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:12 pm

kimimm19 wrote:
Just wondering if anyone on the forum has a subscription to The Air Current that could summarise the figures in this article?

They've apparently published fuel comparison figures on Delta's first route Seatle to Shanghai between the a330neo and the 767-300er.

It's behind paywall though.

Cheers!

https://theaircurrent.com/three-points/ ... max-execs/


I do not, interested too. But I'd imagine the consensus will be the A330neo burns more fuel for the trip being the larger aircraft, but noticeably more efficient per seat.
 
xwb565
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 1:01 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 3:51 am

Ostrower reports the trip fuel burn is just about the same with the neo carrying 70 more passengers. It has to be said that the difference goes beyond just seat count though. The neo carries a substantially more modern and heavier interior.
 
User avatar
SQ22
Moderator
Posts: 1217
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:29 am

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 6:37 am

xwb565 wrote:
Ostrower reports the trip fuel burn is just about the same with the neo carrying 70 more passengers. It has to be said that the difference goes beyond just seat count though. The neo carries a substantially more modern and heavier interior.


Interesting, can you provide a link?
 
xwb565
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 1:01 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:07 am

SQ22 wrote:
xwb565 wrote:
Ostrower reports the trip fuel burn is just about the same with the neo carrying 70 more passengers. It has to be said that the difference goes beyond just seat count though. The neo carries a substantially more modern and heavier interior.


Interesting, can you provide a link?


As the Op says, Its behind a paywall. Someone with access gave the general information. There are solid numbers in the article but I think if people want to see it they should subscribe to the air current. I will try to get the figures from someone else who has first hand knowledge so that they can posted here.
 
User avatar
SQ22
Moderator
Posts: 1217
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:29 am

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:34 am

xwb565 wrote:
SQ22 wrote:
xwb565 wrote:
Ostrower reports the trip fuel burn is just about the same with the neo carrying 70 more passengers. It has to be said that the difference goes beyond just seat count though. The neo carries a substantially more modern and heavier interior.


Interesting, can you provide a link?


As the Op says, Its behind a paywall. Someone with access gave the general information. There are solid numbers in the article but I think if people want to see it they should subscribe to the air current. I will try to get the figures from someone else who has first hand knowledge so that they can posted here.


Thanks
 
DASYE
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2019 3:21 am

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:40 am

Delta says like this, although this is from their business proposal, not operation stats. I assume this isn't too far away from the reality..
Image
 
kimimm19
Topic Author
Posts: 351
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 9:34 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 11:11 am

xwb565 wrote:
Ostrower reports the trip fuel burn is just about the same with the neo carrying 70 more passengers. It has to be said that the difference goes beyond just seat count though. The neo carries a substantially more modern and heavier interior.


Interesting.

The a330 in general is a larger and heavier aircraft before the neo came along and sat more between a 767 and a 777-200.

Based on the approx same fuel burn and 70 more passengers, does this add up to the improvements Airbus was hoping for in efficiency?
 
User avatar
AECM
Posts: 193
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:52 am

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 12:33 pm

kimimm19 wrote:
xwb565 wrote:
Ostrower reports the trip fuel burn is just about the same with the neo carrying 70 more passengers. It has to be said that the difference goes beyond just seat count though. The neo carries a substantially more modern and heavier interior.


Interesting.

The a330 in general is a larger and heavier aircraft before the neo came along and sat more between a 767 and a 777-200.

Based on the approx same fuel burn and 70 more passengers, does this add up to the improvements Airbus was hoping for in efficiency?


I would say yes
 
DASYE
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2019 3:21 am

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 1:21 pm

So does it mean that the real world fuel consumption is similar to this estimate on this service proposal?
Since all birds other than A339neo have been in Delta's fleet for a while, I reckon their numbers are quite accurate.
sorry for my last post, I'm not used to the user interface of this forum :(
Image
 
Armadillo1
Posts: 401
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:00 pm

is this for same time period, i.e. 339 flew 3.5m miles for same time 763 flew 2.8m?


upd: oh, i see, its normalised for departures
Last edited by Armadillo1 on Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
kimimm19
Topic Author
Posts: 351
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 9:34 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:03 pm

[quote="DASYE"][/quote]

Thank you for this data!

So if we are to adjust for the different lengths of these segments in terms of the weight of fuel required to carry more for the longer segments, that would put the a339 and the a359 in quite a commanding position as promised.
 
DASYE
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2019 3:21 am

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:38 pm

kimimm19 wrote:
DASYE wrote:


Thank you for this data!

So if we are to adjust for the different lengths of these segments in terms of the weight of fuel required to carry more for the longer segments, that would put the a339 and the a359 in quite a commanding position as promised.


Not sure what's inside The Air Current's article, but according to that DL proposal and source xwb565 quoted, A339s are doing surprisingly well especially in medium haul route, showing fuel efficiency figures at least on par, or even better than comparable Dreamliners :)
Not sure about their long-haul performance, though, and 339's numbers should be normalised considering 330neos have lower cruising speed than 787s.
 
Armadillo1
Posts: 401
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:46 pm

1 gallon =2.971 kg?
so avg 339 fuel burn is 4,734 kg per hour?
 
DASYE
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2019 3:21 am

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:53 pm

Armadillo1 wrote:
1 gallon =2.971 kg?
so avg 339 fuel burn is 4,734 kg per hour?

Since it's US gallon, 1 gallon = 3.7854 litres.
The rest depends on specific gravity you apply.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13814
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 3:01 pm

Armadillo1 wrote:
1 gallon =2.971 kg?
so avg 339 fuel burn is 4,734 kg per hour?


Depends on what you use, thats close enough

A339 4779 kg/hr
A359 5451 kg/hr
77E 6942 kg/hr
A332 5287 kg/hr
763 4788 kg/hr
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
StTim
Posts: 3402
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 5:43 pm

Looks good for the 339 for medium routes.
 
Theseus
Posts: 235
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 6:03 pm

Even though the flight lengths / routes are different, I am a bit surprised by some of the differences.

In particular, I see the A330-200 burns much more than the much, much larger A350-900, although its data is on a much shorter flight (and it seems to me that longer flights incur a penalty, as a longer flight means more fuel carried, hence higher fuel burn during the first few hours).
 
StTim
Posts: 3402
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 17, 2019 6:06 pm

Those figures show why Boeing needed to do the 777X
 
trex8
Posts: 5327
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Thu Jul 18, 2019 3:11 am

Theseus wrote:
Even though the flight lengths / routes are different, I am a bit surprised by some of the differences.

In particular, I see the A330-200 burns much more than the much, much larger A350-900, although its data is on a much shorter flight (and it seems to me that longer flights incur a penalty, as a longer flight means more fuel carried, hence higher fuel burn during the first few hours).

The Trent 7000 should be burning less fuel, at least in the low teens % less, than any A330ceo engine. There isn't suppose to be much difference in fuel burn between an A333 and A332.
 
kimimm19
Topic Author
Posts: 351
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 9:34 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:11 am

trex8 wrote:
Theseus wrote:
Even though the flight lengths / routes are different, I am a bit surprised by some of the differences.

In particular, I see the A330-200 burns much more than the much, much larger A350-900, although its data is on a much shorter flight (and it seems to me that longer flights incur a penalty, as a longer flight means more fuel carried, hence higher fuel burn during the first few hours).

The Trent 7000 should be burning less fuel, at least in the low teens % less, than any A330ceo engine. There isn't suppose to be much difference in fuel burn between an A333 and A332.


You wouldn't think so, but people have brought it up quite a bit over the years how much of an advantage the larger variant has over the smaller one in terms of fuel burn per seat.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 10636
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:33 am

zeke wrote:
Armadillo1 wrote:
1 gallon =2.971 kg?
so avg 339 fuel burn is 4,734 kg per hour?


Depends on what you use, thats close enough

A339 4779 kg/hr
A359 5451 kg/hr
77E 6942 kg/hr
A332 5287 kg/hr
763 4788 kg/hr


Now that is interesting...

A339: 17,98 kg/m2/hr
A359: 18,78 kg/m2/hr
77E: 24,45 kg/m2/hr
A332: 22,25 kg/m2/hr
763: 25,13 kg/m2/hr

Of course cruise speed isn't the same...

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
kimimm19
Topic Author
Posts: 351
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 9:34 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Sat Jul 20, 2019 4:02 pm

In this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHt-JPNtpkA

Delta states that the a330neo burns 1,000lbs less per hour.
 
Armadillo1
Posts: 401
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Mon Jul 22, 2019 8:28 am

Less than what?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13814
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Mon Jul 22, 2019 12:42 pm

Armadillo1 wrote:
Less than what?


If you look at the numbers above, the A339 appears to be about 1000 lb/hr less than the A332.

A339 4779 kg/hr
A332 5287 kg/hr

difference 508 kg/hr or 1120 lb/hr
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
Armadillo1
Posts: 401
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Mon Jul 22, 2019 12:45 pm

thank you, but those deltas may be talk about something else. may be 333
so i asked
 
kimimm19
Topic Author
Posts: 351
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 9:34 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Tue Jul 23, 2019 4:35 pm

Armadillo1 wrote:
thank you, but those deltas may be talk about something else. may be 333
so i asked


Given that Delta have the a330-300, I would assume you are correct.
 
trex8
Posts: 5327
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:09 am

kimimm19 wrote:
trex8 wrote:
Theseus wrote:
Even though the flight lengths / routes are different, I am a bit surprised by some of the differences.

In particular, I see the A330-200 burns much more than the much, much larger A350-900, although its data is on a much shorter flight (and it seems to me that longer flights incur a penalty, as a longer flight means more fuel carried, hence higher fuel burn during the first few hours).

The Trent 7000 should be burning less fuel, at least in the low teens % less, than any A330ceo engine. There isn't suppose to be much difference in fuel burn between an A333 and A332.


You wouldn't think so, but people have brought it up quite a bit over the years how much of an advantage the larger variant has over the smaller one in terms of fuel burn per seat.

Fuel burn per seat will be significantly less as a -300 can carry @20% more passengers than a -200 while the trip fuel is supposed to be only slightly more on a -300.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13814
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:02 am

kimimm19 wrote:
Armadillo1 wrote:
thank you, but those deltas may be talk about something else. may be 333
so i asked


Given that Delta have the a330-300, I would assume you are correct.



DL have the A332/A333/A339
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
kimimm19
Topic Author
Posts: 351
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 9:34 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 2:06 pm

zeke wrote:
kimimm19 wrote:
Armadillo1 wrote:
thank you, but those deltas may be talk about something else. may be 333
so i asked


Given that Delta have the a330-300, I would assume you are correct.



DL have the A332/A333/A339


Yes, but the a339 would be compared to the a333, just as the a338 would be compared to the a332.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13814
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: A330neo vs 767-300er fuel stats: Anyone have subscription to aircurrent?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 2:15 pm

kimimm19 wrote:
Yes, but the a339 would be compared to the a333, just as the a338 would be compared to the a332.


Not necessarily, I have seen industry people compare the 332 to the 339 because they have similar range.

Then can demonstrate the capability increase of carrying a 333 load over a 332 range with lower than 332 block fuel burn, and also lower per seat fuel burn.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Agent and 28 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