Airbus VS Boeing

Discussion in 'Qantas Frequent Flyer Program' started by Chucksta, Mar 28, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Welcome to Australia's leading independent Frequent Flyer and Travel Resource!
Our site contains tons of information that will improve your travel experience.
Joining AFF is fast, simple & ABSOLUTELY FREE -  join now by clicking on the JOIN NOW button, and take immediate advantage of these great BENEFITS.
Once registered, this box will disappear. And you will see fewer advertisements :)
  1. Chucksta

    Chucksta Active Member

    Mar 19, 2006
    623
    28
    Australia
    Just got back from Melbourne.

    Outbound flight was a A330-200

    Inbound was Boeing 767-338

    Although the airbus is newer, I actually prefer the 767.

    I don't know if it is just me, but there seems to be about 3-4cm more legroom in economy.

    Has anyone else noticed this?

    Wonder why Qantas didn't go for the 777? They seem to be far superior than the A330. More room for cabin bags, more toilets etc...
     

  2. NM

    NM
    Moderator

    Aug 27, 2004
    15,760
    1,211
    Flight Map:
    View my flight map
    Several reasons:
    • The 777 costs significantly more to purchase than the A330
    • The 777 is not economical to operate over short sectors where QF is using the domestic config A330-200
    • Turn-around time is higher for the 777 due to higher seating capacity and that costs time and money on domestic operations
    • Airbus threw in the A330's at a very low price as an incentive for QF to order the A380
    The 767 was ideally suited to QF's high-capacity domestic operations, being a good compromise of operating costs, turn-around time and capacity. The A330-200 is the closest thing to the 767 in those terms and available today. However, QF are still not completely happy with the turn-around time for domestic ops. The 787 is expected to meet the QF high-capacity domestic operations requirements very well, as well as medium to long-haul international operations.
     
  3. Yada Yada

    Yada Yada Established Member

    Dec 6, 2004
    1,872
    7
    1F
    I haven't noticed this. If anything, I would have said that there is more legroom in the A330's. Certainly last time I flew in one in WHY, I remember thinking that the legroom and seat width was better than anything else QF operates.

    I like the A330's more than the B767's. The latter are older and the cabins are much more worn as a result. They also rattle & squeak, and the o/h compartment doors seem to spontaneously open quite frequently during landing.

    The A330's are newer, so the cabins are in good condition and more modern in design. And they seem to be the quietest of all QF equipment in the air.
     
  4. JohnK

    JohnK Veteran Member

    Mar 22, 2005
    40,002
    8,548
    BNE, SYD and CNX
    After my experience SYD-CGK-SYD on the 767 I vowed never again. I do get them occassionally on domestic routes but is only 1 hour flight so a little more bearable.

    I notice CX uses A340's and 777-300's on some of their short to medium haul sectors. I have never been on either! How does the A340 compare to the A330?
     
  5. NM

    NM
    Moderator

    Aug 27, 2004
    15,760
    1,211
    Flight Map:
    View my flight map
    A340 and A330 are the same internal cross-section. The difference is the uplift and range capability. Hence it is unusual to have an A340 configured for short-haul operations, even though the do operate such missions on occasions. This is why Airbus can advertise that you won't find a middle seat in business class on an A340. But we all know you will find it on some A330s since some of these are configured for short-haul ops such as QF's A330-200s used on domestic services.

    So the A340 is not well suited to short haul ops. But if an airline has them available and has a short-haul mission to perform before the aircraft departs on its next inter-continental service, then it may well make sense to use it.

    777 is a slightly different story. It can be effectively used for short-medium range ops such as Asian regional services. It can be configured for a reasonably high density seating plan for such missions. However, its not well suited to Australian short-haul domestic services due to the longer turnaround time. This is less of an issue for 2-4 hour international services (SQ even use them for the 30 min hop between SIN and KUL) where quick turnarounds are not as critical as say multiple MEL-SYD-MEL ops in a day.
     
  6. Yada Yada

    Yada Yada Established Member

    Dec 6, 2004
    1,872
    7
    1F
    I've been on these a few times. F is almost always empty.
     
  7. JohnK

    JohnK Veteran Member

    Mar 22, 2005
    40,002
    8,548
    BNE, SYD and CNX
    I have noticed CX using the A340 between HKG-TPE-HKG (500 mile flight) and I am not sure where the flight originated or where it is going.

    So I gather from what you are saying there should be no difference in the flight experience of an A340 to an A330.
     
  8. Kiwi Flyer

    Kiwi Flyer Senior Member

    Sep 24, 2004
    5,453
    4
    Some airlines do indeed use A340s on short haul flights. The ultra-long haul routes have too few landings and take-offs to keep pilots current, so they need to rotate through short hops also. Plus, as mentioned by NM it may make sense if there is significant time between the long haul flights to utilise the aircraft on short flights.

    SQ uses A345 twice daily return SIN-CGK-SIN.
     
  9. NM

    NM
    Moderator

    Aug 27, 2004
    15,760
    1,211
    Flight Map:
    View my flight map
    With the common certification between A330 and A340 aircraft, the issue is more likely one of union regulations (like short-haul crew vs long-haul crew) or one of aircraft utilisation. The same A340 crew should be able to operate A330 aircraft if they need to get their hours up.

    Aircraft maintenance can be another factor, since this is based on both hours and cycles. So if an aircraft is approaching its hours limit, it may be advantageous to use it on some short sectors to give it more cycles proportional to its hours. QF used this to its advantage with cycling 767s through domestic and international services.
     
  10. Jobu

    Jobu Member

    Dec 24, 2005
    496
    76
    1K
    Occasionally between Perth and Sydney, Qantas uses A330-300s which have been upgraded with Skybeds in business and AVOD in economy. I generally try and get these flights and always try upgrade, but usually very tough as it is normally full.

    JOBU
     
  11. serfty

    Moderator

    Nov 16, 2004
    39,076
    7,708
    MEL
    Flight Map:
    View my flight map
    That's very much due to there being over 20% less J seats in an Qantas A333 than in an A332 ( 30 vs 38 ).
     
  12. Groundfeeder

    Groundfeeder Active Member

    Nov 3, 2005
    651
    30
    Brisbane
    yada yada

    Have done both BNE-CNS 767 and return A330 in 1A and found that 767 had the legroom that better matched my 6'3 frame.

    Both had same seating (Dreamtime?) but the 767 got my points for roomier J cabin, but loads were different and therefore less J pax in 767 create more room IMHO, as spouse and I could wander freely from port/s'board to better check out the reef view.
     
  13. NM

    NM
    Moderator

    Aug 27, 2004
    15,760
    1,211
    Flight Map:
    View my flight map
    The QF A330s have never had Dreamtime seats installed in business class. If you experienced the same seats in a 767 and an A330, then you were on the A330-200 with the Millennium domestic business class seats. And the 767 was the domestic config, either ex-BA 767-336 or the domestic config 767-338.

    There is a significant difference to go from that to the international config on either A330-300 (Skybed) or 767-338 (Dreamtime).
     
  14. Groundfeeder

    Groundfeeder Active Member

    Nov 3, 2005
    651
    30
    Brisbane
    NM

    Following small gesture of forelock tugging, I believe the 767 I was on to CNS was domestic part of the flight that continues on to Japan.

    Millenium, Delerium, Unobtainium - who cares as long as the seat electrics work.
     
  15. Yada Yada

    Yada Yada Established Member

    Dec 6, 2004
    1,872
    7
    1F
    Geoff - I think you may be correct. I've flown in J in both the A330-200's and 767's and agree that the 767 may have the edge up front.

    However in my post above I was referring to the seats in Y - my recollection is that the A330's have better space down the back. I guess someone needs to be nerdy enough to take a tape measure aboard next time to check. It won't be me! :D
     
  16. NM

    NM
    Moderator

    Aug 27, 2004
    15,760
    1,211
    Flight Map:
    View my flight map
    If the aircraft did in fact continue on to NRT (and not just the flight number), then it would almost certainly have been Dreamtime seats. Its quite easy to tell the difference.

    The easiest way on the 767 is to look at the config. The international config with Dreamtime seats has 1x2x2 seating across, and the lonesome A seats are the ones to chose if travelling alone.

    The Millennium seats are mechanical (pneumatic) in operation with the recline controls on the vertical surface of the arm rest. The Dreamtime seats are electric in operation and have the recline controls on the horizontal surface of the arm rest. And of course the Dream times have the IFE screen that swings up from under the arm rest, while the Millenniums don't have IFE screens.

    Here is a picture of Dreamtimes in an international config 767.
    Here is a picture of Millenniums in a domestic config 767.

    Also note that the A330-200 Millennium seating config is 2x3x2 except for the first row which is 2x2x2).
     
  17. Groundfeeder

    Groundfeeder Active Member

    Nov 3, 2005
    651
    30
    Brisbane
    NM,
    Musta been Dreamtime as it was international configuration (1x2x2)

    Yada Yada,
    Been a long while since I went Y on 767 and, no, I won't be partaking in the measuring detail. I certainly enjoyed the A330 in J and haven't yet been in Y to sample the config. I must admit, its the arriving at the terminal in a A330 knowing many envious eyes are watching this elegant bird that kicks along the ego most satisfactorily.
     
  18. Yada Yada

    Yada Yada Established Member

    Dec 6, 2004
    1,872
    7
    1F
    A similar feeling applies when flying PER-SYD on QF566, an A330 that leaves approx 25 mins after DJ434. When the A330 overtakes the B737, you often get a good view as the Airbus passes by at a higher altitude. The QF pilots often take great delight in pointing out the speed difference to pax over the PA. :?
     
  19. needaholiday

    needaholiday Intern

    Aug 29, 2005
    58
    0
    Sydney Aust.
    One point to note on turnaround at the airports for the 787; the increased wingspan of the 787 will cause problems for the airports where multiple side by side gates are designed to accomodate 737's, as the space between the domestic gates designed for 737's will have to increase accomodate the same number of 787's.

    Stats

    737 - Wingspan: between 28.3 m and 34.3 m (36 m for winglet -700, -800, -900)

    787 - Wingspan: between 51.6 m and 60.0 m
     
  20. thadocta

    thadocta Active Member

    It isn't often that an Airbus overtakes a Boeing, it is usually the other way around. You often see a B747 overtaking various Airbus aircraft between SE Asia and Europe, particularly over the middle east.

    (I remember one occasion when I was on the flight deck when overflying Tehrahn - that is how long ago it was - and commenting to the FO and SO - the Captain was sleeping at the time - about the aircraft we were overtaking - he commented that they were indeed Airbus aircraft).

    Dave
     
Loading...

Share This Page