A330/B777. Which is a better A/C ?

[IcarusRising]

I am sure they are both good but would like to have some input, especially from pilots that have flown both.

[Pugilistic Animus]

they both suck---bring back the Caproni:\---that was a real ship!!! :}

[BigJoeRice]

I was on the evaluation team for my airline when we did the evaluations of these aircraft as a DC10 replacement. The flight, technical, and other operational groups unanimously selected the B777, but the A330 was cheaper so guess what we ended up with.

[fullforward]

...but this is one the dumbest questions I've seen...better for what and for whom?

It's like ask wich is the better: an Audi A8 ou a BMW 335?

Both are superb machines: 777 is more suited for long haul, high density routes, with excellent cargo capability. Otherwise the A330 is the smartest choice.
Having flown both, as far as the "fun to drive" factor is concerned, I'd pick the triple.:ok:

[Terry McCassey]

The Audi, or is it the BMW ?

[OverRun]

Actually I like my scooter better than the Audi or BMW. And it costs about $7 to fill up.


A330-300 vs 777-200
Evaluating the economics of a 5,000NM trip (close to average route length for most 777-200ER operators; long for the A330-300).
The 777-200ER’s MTOW is 150,000lbs heavier than the A330-300’s. The 777-200ER has the highest fuel burn, which is (at today’s prices) $18,000 higher than the A330-300’s. Maintenance costs for the A330-300 and 777-200ER: the Airbus will have about $65-90 per hour lower maintenance costs than the 777-200ER. Similar flightcrew salaries, and one less flight attendant for the A330 overall result in the 777-200ER having the highest cash DOC trip cost. This is $19,000 more than the A330-300 on the 5,000NM trip. The 777-200ER also has the highest list price at $190 million, compared to $166 million for the A330-300, but actual prices have been known to vary from list price :). The 777-200ER has a 23-seat higher capacity, which allows more bums on seats to partially overcome its higher trip cost. The 777-200ER still, nevertheless, has the highest cost per seat.

Evaluating the market/pax appeal. The 777-200 wins hands down. I can even stand up straight in the toilet (which leads me to diverge from the thread slightly and wonder aloud about the Airbus toilet designer and how tall (or short) they must be. I'm sure no-one over 6 foot tall can stand up straight in an Airbus toilet in any cabin class. Or maybe there is something about Airbus toilet designers that they actually like bending over backwards and p*ssing on their pants. Rant over. Back to the thread).

Evaluating the suitability for airlines outside the G8 countries. The 777 wins hands down.

And BigJoeRice has already given the evaluation for the flight, technical, and other operational groups above.

[Pugilistic Animus]

No votes for the Caproni? :{

Caproni Ca.60 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caproni_Ca.60)


Far ahead of it's time :}

[FullWings]

That Caproni was nice... How about this one? (http://www.tapisvolant.nl/images/a21sj1.jpg)

Only one passenger, I suppose, but it is a jet. :)

[arcticflyer]

I have the opportunity to bid for one or the other. Other pilots have told me that if you like high tech the 330 is for you, if you like Boeing aircraft for their low tech features then its the 777. I am now leaning for the 330 as having its rating on a license greatly expands ones job options when things go downhill in the industry as is now unfolding before our eyes.

[fourgolds]

Overrun , I would be interested to see the same comparative figures with a 777-300 ER and an A332 ?

[Fluke]

I have flown both types, personally preferring the airbus. I guess the main reason being the disappointment of the lack of advancement in the cockpit of the B777 from the B744, not counting the electronic checklist. The way I see the 777 is a great airplane held back by pilot design inputs.
Both types have shocking pilot seats and the 777 is very noisy in the cockpit.
Flying the 330 seemed to be a lesser workload especially about the equatorial regions as you had higher operational ceilings and could get above the weather.

The main reason that promped me to chane from A330 to B777 was the airline companies use of MFF (CCQ) and the effect it has on your roster when flying the airbus types.
Watch out SQ Airbus 345 drivers when you get the 330...

[BRE]

What is MMF(CCQ)?

[Wizofoz]

MFF(CCQ)- Mixed-fleet flying (Cross-crew qualification). It means being able to fly either the A330 or A340.

[BRE]

Overrun
"I'm sure no-one over 6 foot tall can stand up straight in an Airbus toilet in any cabin class." - I am exactly 6 foot tall and I have never noticed a problem with the height of LH's or AC's A330 toilets. I also find the cabin quieter than any other plane beside the A340, but then I have not flown in a 777 yet.


"Evaluating the suitability for airlines outside the G8 countries. The 777 wins hands down." - Care to elaborate? It boils down to cost per seat for a given route, inside or outside the G8, doesn't it?

I must admit I am surprised by these numbers. I would have thought the 777 to be more efficient. After all, it is a quarter generation ahead...

[templarknight]

Search 'Airbus vs Boeing' on this forum. It has several pages of comparisons and offers differing opinions. Mine is (and being qualified to state it) is the B777 is a piece of junk compared to the Airbus. Given that it is the newest and most modern Boeing to date I would assume therefore that my opinion would apply to all other Boeing products.

[0-8]

MFF(CCQ)- Mixed-fleet flying (Cross-crew qualification). It means being able to fly either the A330 or A340.

Not only the 330/340.

Under MFF you can also hop between flying the A318/319/320/321 one day then A330 the next.

[FlightTester]

Not trying to decide on a future tanker replacement for the USAF are you?:ok:

[YYZguy]

I have a friend who just left 330/340 to transfer to 777 and he said that the Airbus was better for line operations (lower workload). However the 777 was better during non-normal ops due to the electronic checklist and no requirement for checking FCOM 3 notes, OEB´s, and other nonsence that Airbus can´t seem to put on the ECAM.

[Wizofoz]

Under MFF you can also hop between flying the A318/319/320/321 one day then A330 the next.

I don't know of any operator who does that (correct me if I'm wrong), but Southwest pilots can jump from a 737-200 to a 737-800 (and could to a -900 if they had any!!).

[abfgh]

Swiss. A320 Series/ A330
and A330 /340

[Dani]

Swiss doesn't do it anymore. There have been a lot of small airlines that used to do it (incl. Lufthansa), but from a certain size it doesn't bring so many benefits anymore.

[fourgolds]

Flown both will say this.

FMC better on bus
Electronic Checklist / Abnoramals better on 777
Handling ( especially in gusty and crosswind conditions 777 is better)
Daily opps , airbus is less busy. but abnormals bus is way busier and more complicated.
Seat is far far superior on the bus , 777 is awfull.
Ride , way better on 777.

Economics , well you,ll have to ask the beancounters.
But had 476 pob yesterday on 777-300er , most I ever had on the A332 was 290 odd. But again 5500 kg,hr v 8000 kg,hr +- . who knows ?

I do know this going into Hong Kong in the typhoon I was so comfortable in the 777 ( done the same roller coaster in the bus before). So the 777 although dare I say is no where near as clever as the bus , it really delivers when it counts most.

[togaroo]

As for mixed fleet flying, Thomas Cook Airlines in the UK still MFF with the A320 family and A330 family, varying in MTOW of 77,000kg to 230,000 kg.
When MFF its different but still the same to fly, basically one you sit in for about 5 hours and the other around eight hours, you still get a sore butt!

The 777 and A330 are both good at what they do but the A330 on looks is the winner for me.

With regard to the A330 v the B777 as a MRT Tanker - why not buy both, then it would keep everyone happy provide different capabilitiy and if one turns out to be a dog then ditch it at a later date, history shows that the US Military used to do this all the time, especially the Navy, if they didnt like an aircraft they would give it to the Marines to make it work!

edited: because I cant touch type :(

[cfm56dash7]

Alaska flew the 737-200 as a separate fleet from their CFM powered brethren. Probably a good idea as those -200s had gravel kits, combi cargo doors and flew into unpaved airports.

They operate the 737-400/700/800/900/-400 combi and the freighter all as one fleet model. Oh yeah, there are also variants as to winglets or no and multiple cockpit configs.

[OverRun]

Fourgolds - at last found time to answer.

With the same 5,000NM sector, comparing the A330-200 and Boeing 777-300ER; the A332 with 293 seats and 773 with 451 seats. Flight crew costs similar, but the 777 cabin crew trip cost is $3500 higher because many more hosties are on board. Trip fuel is $21,000 more for the 773 (at $US 3.60 per US gal).

Cash DOC per seat NM is interesting. The A330-200 and B777-200ER are close (US$0.060 and $0.057 respectively) and the 777-300ER and A330-300 are the same at US$0.049.

When lease costs are added in, it becomes:
A330-200 and B777-200ER are close (US$0.082 and $0.078 per seat NM respectively) and the 777-300ER and A330-300 are close (US$0.067 and $0.069 respectively). Which means that with the A330-300, you get the cheap economics of the big 451 seat 777 but in a handy size and more flexible 335 seater.

Like all these comparisons, it depends on the input data. A good purchase deal will alter the economics – I used the same discount off aircraft list price for all aircraft. And actual internal seat configuration will change the seat-mile cost.

Boy the fuel is a killer today!!! At $3.60 per US gal, the fuel component of the cash DOCs ranges from 68-73%. OK, that doesn’t include any airline ground costs, marketing costs, or lease costs, but it is still scary. At the old price of $1 per US gal, which was the price when these sorts of planes were being bought, the fuel component of the cash DOCs ranged from 37-42%.

BRE
I’m not sure why the efficiency difference with the 777. My guesses from the economics viewpoint are that the weight difference has to be one factor – it weighs a lot more than the same capacity Airbus. The 777 has bigger engines that burn a lot more fuel than the equivalent Airbus. And the 777 costs more. But I’m sure there is a lot more to it than that, and there are others more able to comment.

[Old Aero Guy]

"I’m not sure why the efficiency difference with the 777. My guesses from the economics viewpoint are that the weight difference has to be one factor – it weighs a lot more than the same capacity Airbus."

Of course if you want to fly non-stop from say HKG to JFK, the 772ER will do it while the A333 will not. The extra weight at the same capacity does produce a tangible benefit in terms of payload-range.

[fourgolds]

Overrun , Cant argue with those figures.But as you said and as the next poster stated. It depends if you are comparing apples with apples.
Your comparison makes the A330 a more efficient machine without question. However as the next poster stated the 777 can complete missions the 330 cannot in terms of payload and range. So its a strong competitor in both the medium range sectors you described and the long range sectors. Whereas the 330 would require a pitstop to complete same mission on the Longrange/Ulr sector. That would be very pricey.

So the 777 can compete for the medium/longrange and ultra long range trophy and overall if the comparisons were done I think we would find it interesting.

Although I must say I would rather sit in a A330 for 17 hrs ( if it could do it) than on the 777 torture device of a seat. I truly hate the seat on the 777. For all the economics in the world I would rather sit comfy.

[BerksFlyer]

Is this even a fair comparison?

The a330-200's MTOW is 230 tonnes whereas the 777-200er's is 298 tonnes. I wouldn't have thought they could be compared because they're designed to cater for a different market. Am I wrong in thinking that?

[777fly]

The A330 is 90% of a 777 in all respects: Cost, size, speed, capacity, range, insurance, landing fees, etc,etc. Horses for courses. They are both good aircraft.

[N1 and ITT]

@Dani
Falling into old rumors traps...? Autsch. :rolleyes:

Swiss doesn't do it anymore. There have been a lot of small airlines that used to do it (incl. Lufthansa), but from a certain size it doesn't bring so many benefits anymore.

Swiss does it. And works nicely.

However, they are evaluating the impact of 7 different "kind of types":

A319
A320
A320E (-IJU/V/W)
A320E (from 2010 on)
A321
A330-200
A330-300 (from 2009 on)

Since all these nice birds have been built in different decades, this might cause some headache. But generally everybody loves the idea of MFF.

And to get on topic: Flew Boing and Airbus, and prefer the Bus by far.

So far the facts.

N1

[Hussar 54]

Have a friend who works for a UK charter company - told me that some of the senior guys there, including himself, mix 320's and 330's sometimes in the same week....Confirm, anybody ?

[K.Whyjelly]

Have a friend who works for a UK charter company - told me that some of the senior guys there, including himself, mix 320's and 330's sometimes in the same week....Confirm, anybody ?

The charter airline in question could quite possibly be Monarch or Thomas Cook.

I do know that some bmi pilots fly the A319 (or 320/321) one day and then can jump into the A330 the next.