Rarife, thank you, that’s very interesting stuff. The 350’s fuel vector is quite wild indeed. I think it is due to relatively small wing tanks and big center tank. Once you start putting fuel into the center tank (I.e. above 46 tons), the c.g. starts moving forward
really quickly . I wonder if Airbus had overlooked this issue when designing the 350...
On the A330, this wasn’t a problem, as: a) most fuel went into wings, rather than CTR tank (if any), b) at higher fuel levels, the fuel would go into the trim tanks, moving the c.g. aft...
OTOH, the 787, which I fly now, has a fuel tank configuration similar to the 350, i.e. very little fuel going into the wings (17 tons per wing) and a lot into the center tank (67 tons). This, however, is mitigated by an insane C.G. envelope. The forward c.g. is as far as 6% MAC and aft c.g. is 39.5% MAC. I actually wonder how Boeing managed to establish such a wide envelope. Haven’t seen anything like it on any other airplane!
back to the original question - I’ve ferried an empty A330 on very short flight (i.e. no load, only cockpit crew and low fuel) and don’t seem to remember any W&B issues...