There are 2 tankers being proposed for the RAF's Future Strategic Tanker Aircraft programme. These are the elderly ex-BA 767-336s being offered by TTSC and new A330-200 derivatives being offered by AirTanker. The 767s are not the same as the Boeing KC767A, having much less fuel and nothing like the KC767's new -400 derived flight deck. The A330-200s will have the A340 wing with Trents on the inboard pylons and AR pods on the outboard. If you examine the payload range graphs for both types, it will be readily apparent that the A330 offers a considerable payload range advantage over the B767, particularly at ranges in excess of 5700 nm. For example, it would be possible for an A330 to fly non-stop direct from Brize Norton to the Falkland Islands, a great circle distance of 6800 nm, carrying at least 100 passengers whereas a B767 would be unable to fly the route non-stop with any payload. The A330 has a baseline seat fit of 293 seats, 30 B-class at 40” pitch and 263 Y-class at 32” pitch. British Airways operates the B767 in a variety of seating configurations; typically in ‘Longhaul Regional’ configuration it is fitted with 32 B-class ‘Club World’ seats at 43” pitch and 183 Y-class ‘World Traveller’ seats at 32” pitch. However, other B767-300ER configurations include 24 B-class seats at 38” pitch and 245 Y-class at 32” pitch, a total of 269 seats. The A330 cabin interior is considerably more spacious than that of the B767, allowing standard 42” width Y-class seat pairs to be fitted in an 8 seat abreast configuration with 2 x 19” aisles, apart from the rearmost 5 rows which are fitted 7 seats abreast. The narrower cabin of the B767 means that seats and aisles of the same dimensions may only be fitted in 7 abreast configuration. Both aircraft offer substantial underfloor cargo areas without any compromise from additional Air Refuelling fuel tanks; the maximum cargo volume available in the A330 is 4803 ft³, using 26 LD3 cargo containers, the most common container in use world-wide, plus 695 ft³ bulk cargo in the rear of the hold whereas the B767 offers a maximum volume of 4030 ft³, some 16% less. However, to achieve this the B767 needs to use 30 smaller LD2 containers plus 430 ft³ bulk cargo. Unlike the A330, the B767 cannot carry LD3 containers in side-by-side pairs.
Although British Airways Fact Book 2002 lists the maximum take-off weight of its B767-336 aircraft as 181.4 tonne, Boeing quotes the MTOW of the B767 aircraft as 186.9 tonne in 269 seat configuration. At ISA+15°C in still air at sea level, the B767 at 186.9 tonne requires a take-off field length of 10100 ft, whereas at its MTOW of 230 tonne under the same conditions, the A330 requires a take-off field length of only 8300 ft. On such a 8300 ft runway under the same conditions, the B767 would be limited to a MTOW of 175 tonne.
For the Air Refuelling role, on a North Sea Air Refuelling Area sortie upon which a full VC10K3 could offer 2:10 hours on task or a VC10C1K/K4 1:44 hours, an ex-BA B767 with 73.1 tonne of fuel on take-off could offer 2:16 hours or a new A330-200 with 111 tonnes 3:41 hours at the same assumed constant offload rate.
It has been alleged that the A330 faces infrastructural problems at certain bases from PCN/ACN and dimensional constraints; hence one should examine the A330’s capability if forced to operate from a base some 500 nm further from the ARA. In such a case it could still offer 3:16 hours on the same task, an hour more than the rival B767 and thus the purported deployability limitation of the A330 is clearly more than offset by its much greater AR capability.
It will be readily apparent that AirTanker’s Airbus A330-200 platform offers a markedly superior capability in both Air Transport and Air Refuelling roles when compared against the ex-BA Boeing 767-300ER proposed by TTSC even when deployed to a base 500 nm further from the ARA than that used by its competitor. It is also a far more modern aeroplane in all respects; however, the viability of operation of either aircraft by the RAF is inextricably linked to the business case presented by the bidding consortium as the aircraft are planned to be 'hired' under a public-private partnership deal rather than being acquired conventionally.....
Last edited by BEagle; 4th Sep 2003 at 00:58.