17 replies to this topic

[Hillary Clinton]

Hello, I'm Owner of AirAsia X. My Airline is pretty new and grows rapidly. We have Boeing 757, Airbus A320-200 and also Airbus A330-200 which is on order. So I'm planning to lease order 2 Aircraft, I have been looking through the plane list. It have Airbus A340-200, Boeing 777-200ER and Airbus A330-200. Here are some information about these aircraft:

Airbus A340-200:

- Lease Amount: $1,577,778
- Capacity: 420
- Speed:478 mph
- Range:7,829 mi (9,210 max)
- Turn Time:90 min
- Available:1993-2008
- Production rate: 3 weeks

Airbus A330-200:

- Lease Amount: $1,244,444
- Capacity: 406
- Speed: 478 mph
- Range: 6,503 mi (7,650 max)
- Turn Time: 65 min
- Available: 1998-
- Production Rate: 3 weeks

Boeing 777-200ER

- Lease Amount: $1,944,444
- Capacity: 440
- Speed: 485 mph
- Range: 7,532 mi (8,861 max)
- Turn Time: 85 min
- Available: 1997-
- Production Rate: 4 weeks

I need Suggestions; If you have any aircraft to present for me please tell me.

[X-Wing @Aliciousness]

I suggest A340-300, it's more effecient than the 777, has the same capacity, and very nearly the same range.

[Anže]

Go for A340-200. It will cost you almost $400,000 per month less and will also burn less fuel per passenger compared to 777-200ER.

[pseudoswede]

I found I actually get better profits with the 772ER compared than the 342 (simple experiment of opening an unserved route and trying each aircraft). Naturally, this is also if you plan on purchasing the aircraft shortly after leasing.

Have fun with those maintenance costs.

[Hillary Clinton]

Well Thx guys... So in between if we want to get more profit between both which one is best suited for intercontinental routes?

[Tower777]

Hi.

It depends on how many and which type of routes ( distance, demand, runaway, etc) you will open. In general, If I could operate with 3 planes, I would choose A332 because is the cheapest and it has the lower turn time. And the passengers that they can transport are similar.

[Tower777]

And the fuel and cost of maintenance are important as well in order to choose an airplane.

[Hillary Clinton]

Well I see. Im base in Tokyo Narita And i Want to connect routes to USA and Australia so it also depends

[QK Flight Industries]

I suggest A340-300, it's more effecient than the 777, has the same capacity, and very nearly the same range.

I thought that the A343 was less efficient because it had four engines, while the 777 has two.

[Tower777]

You can use 'browse airport' skill on the left menu. From NRT, you can fly to Australia and New Zealand and also to USA, except east coast with A332. To east coast you can use A340's. And you will use the same family.

As I told you before, I think that you should study thees you want before and then try to match the best planes (and families) for those routes.

[ar157]

I thought that the A343 was less efficient because it had four engines, while the 777 has two.

In theory yes, but 777s..well lets take any of the GE-90s, in theory they can power a 747 on its own. now stick to of those on a 777 also A343 has retarded fuel numbers in game. the A343 is more fuel efficient than the A333

[Hillary Clinton]

Fine, Thank You Guys. Ima order 1 Airbus A340-200

[kaarlows]

I may be a little late to answer this question, but as others might have it well in the future I'd like to add my 2¢.

From the 2 options you stated in the title of this post (A332 or B772ER) there's a slight advantage to the Airbus option. The reason for this is that not only it's more fuel efficient, the lease (or the buyout price) is much cheaper and it has lower minimun runway requirements which can be great for operating to high density smaler airports.
The drawback on the A332 is the range: more than a thousand miles less. But if you're not planning on using it on transatlantic operations, this wouldn't be a problem. Also you have to remember this airplane carries less passengers: 406 pax instead of 440 pax on Boeing's offering.

For the 400-450 pax capacity we have one sure winner: the Airbus A330-300. It has a very good minimun required runway (7302 ft), a nice range (5627 mi) and the best fuel effiency of all with a price just slightly pricier than it's smaller sibbling, the A332. Remembering that it has the same full pax capacity as the B772ER (440 pax).

If you need the range, than the bests airplanes for Ultra-Long-Haul routes are definitely the B777-200ER and B777-200LR. The B772ER is extremely fuel efficient outdoing it's bigger brother the B773ER. The B772LR is the true Worldliner making it possible the absurdly long routes that in real life I see it very hard to exist for long.

Note that I haven't mentioned the A340s. Although they're very nice airplanes, because they use 4 engines instead of 2, they're much less efficient in fuel consumption which can be a real disavantage on very competitive routes (you would be less profitable than a competitor using twinjets), specially when you consider that fuel takes up around 70% of the operating costs on a route.
Yet, the A340-500 is available sooner than the B772LR so you can get an edge in offering first the longer distance routes from your airport, possibly giving you the chance to hold monopoly on it for quite a while. But as soon the Boeing option become available, get it and substitute on those routes, specially if you don't hold monopoly on them.

Other 2 options you might consider are the B767-400ER (406 pax, slightly more fuel efficient than A332 but has much greater minimum required runway and shorter range) and Boeing 777-300 (the best airplane in the game but watch out the engine option for it's minimum runway requirements).

My ranking for long-range 400-550 pax airplanes is as follows:

• B777-300 (550 pax, 6070mi range)
• A330-300 (440 pax, 5627mi range)
• A330-200 (406 pax, 6588mi range)
• B777-200ER (440 pax, 7702mi range)
• B767-400ER (406 pax, 5604mi range)
• B777-300ER (550 pax, 7655mi range)
• B777-200LR (440 pax, 9175mi range)

Note that these data above are with the most fuel efficient engine options. The range and minimum required runway may change when you pick a less fuel efficient engine.

[Nexus8]

A340-200 all the way
http://ae31.airline-...e3r5&player=333

[mxax-ai]

I do not like the A340-200. It has less seats than the -300, but has the nearly the same operating costs and I've never found to actually need those extra 300 mi range.
Kaarlows, yes, the A345 and -6 are definitly less fuel efficient than the competing 777s. But the A340-300 costs less and burns less fuel than the 777-200ER, so if you need something of that payload-range size, I'd suggest the A340.
Unless one needs the 1000 mi extra range of the A340 (TATL, regional routes, intra asian,...) the A330 might be abetter option, as its leasing/buying costs are lower than the A340's ones and the turnaround time is shorter. Although the fuel burn of it os higher in game.

[kaarlows]

According to this post, the fuel burn is calculated on the number of engines an aircraft has. So in almost all situations a twinjet is more fuel efficient than a tri or quad-jet.
And my main airline have 40 A340s which I bought in the beginning before knowing on how to calculate the fuel burn. When I switched the aircraft in those routes for comparable A333 or B772ER, my profit increased and specially the fuel costs decreased. So that's why even though I like the look of the A340s, I'm switching most of them to the mentioned aircrafts.

[LJ Aviation]

For any route A333 can reach go for A333. Do not buy A332. If A333 cannot reach it ex trans-pacific go for 777-200ER. Or if u fly ultra longhaul (Sydney-London) DO NOT use A340s use 777-200LRs. A333 is good for anything but range.

[LJ Aviation]

Even though there isn't really a lot of routes that is very long and can fill a 777-200LR. So unless you can find a route that is extremely long and fat, do not buy these.