330/340 versus 777

[rotornut]

At last count Airbus has sold 810 - 330/340 series against 622 for the 777. Does anyone know why Boeing can't seem to catch up to it's rival. Is the 777 just too big, perhaps?

[fritzi]

You just compared the 340 and 330 to the 777 which is not very accurate. Add the 767 and the 747 to your count and then you will see that Boeing has sold A LOT more Long Haul aircraft than Airbus.

[rotornut]

Dear Fritzi,
You are correct. However, don't forget the 300/310 series and the fact that the 747 in one form or another has been around for over 30 years.
The 330/340 and 777 are direct competitors. In fact I believe Boeing designed the 777 because Airbus was already off the mark with the 330/340.
My above query relates to the fact that Boeing hasn't been able to catch up to Airbus in the big twin category based on the numbers from the respective websites. I find this somewhat surprising since the 777 seems to be a very good airplane, at least according to reviews on the prune.

[Max Angle]

you will see that Boeing has sold A LOT more Long Haul aircraft than Airbus.

For how much longer though, since the launch of the A380 the 747 order book has almost dried up.

[Check Mags On]

rotornut

You say the boeing 777 isn't selling as well as the airbus in the big twin cat.
But your figures compare the 777 to the 330/340 family.
330 two engines
340 four engines.

The a 330 has 464 orders and 277 delivered
The a 340 has 346 orders and 246 delivered

We have all seen the various arguements 2 engines or 4.
Thats another thread.
I agree that Airbus figures look a little better at the moment.
But I agree it is an unfair comparison to put the a330/430 family together, without allowing for for boeing's other airplanes overlapping that family's market.

[RRAAMJET]

R-nut,

crew-commonality has a big part to do with it; the 777 has no shared types (I think the 767-400 could be, though). The A-330 is also a lot cheaper. It's also not as capable as the 777 IGW version, but I think that's a fallacious comparison. I don't know of any carrier flying A-330's on 14hr-plus legs with a full load....that's what the A-340-600 is for. But the 777 does it every day on 2 engines, and hence is in a different market.

I think...let's let the Cathay chaps comment here. They've the most experience of operating and comparing both types (all 3, actually).

[Taking Over, Nigel]

" more 330/340s than 777s"
Ha! Hyundai sell more cars than say BMW.
That makes 'em better does it???
Give me a break!

Cheap. That's what it's all about. Airlines buy aeroplanes on the recommendation of accountants before they pay attention to pilots. The previously astronomically high US dollar has not helped either.
I've flown the 330. I've flown 737's, 767's, and the 747-400
I have not flown the 777- but wish I did. I have met numerous 777 pilots and ALL loved the 777.
I've met plenty of airbus drivers who are somewhat less than in love with their aeroplane- me included.
:rolleyes:

[Wino]

The 777 has been offered for a much shorter period of time then the 330/340.

Considering amount of time offered then it is MUCH more successfull than the 330/340


Cheers
Wino

[halas]

l agree with Nigel.

Some 330 drivers are always quick to tell you how much better the 330 is over the 777.

777 drivers just grin, as they don't have to try and prove their beast is better than anything.

Seems that these 330 guys are trying to convince themselves more than anyone else, like the Hyundai driver Nigel mentioned.

Having a go at the brown cockpit is popular. They just don't realise that this is a nostalgic touch, just to remind you of the legacy of this manufacturer and it's history dating WAY back.

halas

[rotornut]

Looks like I hit a nerve on this one. But I suspect price has a lot to do with it:
Cheap. That's what it's all about. Airlines buy aeroplanes on the recommendation of accountants before they pay attention to pilots.
I never suggested the 777 was inferior to the 330/340 series.

By the way, check sales stats for this year or, for that matter, the last two years for the respective models and throw in the 747, if you like.

[NWSRG]

To compare Boeing and Airbus fairly, should you not add 767/777 together, comparing with A330/A340? And this is also then dependant on model cycle. When the 7E7 replaces the 767, Boeing should get a boost, simply by having the newer, more efficient aircraft.

[747FOCAL]

Max Angle,

You are a funny guy. You might see 150 or so A380s in the next 10 - 15 years, but that is about it. If Boeing would make the 747 more environmentally friendly there would be a lot more orders. But, because Boeing management can't see past lunchtime and their next meeting about the meeting about the meeting about meeting..............:E :E :E

The 747-400SF is going to be responsible for lack luster A380 sales for at least 20 years.:ooh: That is if they can pass PAX evac, otherwise you got a big Freighter and that is it. :\

[aviate1138]

Halas said......__ _ _ __ _


l agree with Nigel.

Some 330 drivers are always quick to tell you how much better the 330 is over the 777.

777 drivers just grin, as they don't have to try and prove their beast is better than anything.

Aviate1138 says...

You commercial pilots are all the same, right from basic training. Bet you still like either a Cessna or Piper based on your Cherokee or 152 ab initio experiences? Lets have some constructive arguments rather than emotional based ones. There will be few 'perfect' commercial aircraft because they try to do too many things within the same envelope. But the 'mine's better than yours' jibes are a bit like being back in the Upper 5th!
Aviate 1138 - a happy VFR PPL type

[Heavens Gate]

As one of the few lucky ones having actually flown the 777 as well as the 330/ 340, I hate to disappoint those diehard Boeing-fans who think so lowly about the Airbus-products.
Even though the 777 is more fun to fly, it is not as economical to operate as the Airbus-pair and that has nothing to do with price. We even achieve a higher dispatch-reliability with the "plastic planes". Maybe it is time to accept that both companies know how to build great aircraft.

[ngpilot]

Come on guys!!

The matter is, as pilots, we should have planes to ride on.
More is better. That is what offers jobs!!!!
The Type Rate is not important.
Both "ladies" have beautiful angles and performance.

Take care!!!:cool:

[West Coast]

Which one gives me the most time off and most pay with the best quality of life? Thats the best one to fly.

[Advocatus diaboli]

It's my feeling that discussions like this are best left to the guys on Airliners.net - the 'enthusists'!

[Thunderball]

Advocatus diaboli

I understand where you're coming from, but - believe me - "real world" perspectives from operating aircrew based upon actual experience of flying these aircraft in service can be hugely valuable to those of us who have to make, or can influence, aircraft type selection decisions. The marketing communities of the manufacturers put up such a barrage of b/s that quite serious performance, reliability or maintainability issues can sometimes fail to become known in the public domain.

For my money, if you've got any opinion about heavy jet transport aircraft based upon experience, keep on posting!

[Advocatus diaboli]

Okay, point taken. I agree real world perspectives are useful, but only as you say, based on actual experience, and I'm not talking about MS Flight Sim!