B767-300/ER or A300-600??
#1
Posted 30 April 2016 - 02:51 PM
B767-300:-
http://ae31.airline-...php?aircraft=38
B767-300ER :-
http://ae31.airline-...php?aircraft=39
A300-600
http://ae31.airline-....php?aircraft=1
What would you choose and why?
#2
Posted 30 April 2016 - 02:59 PM
I choose the A300-600. I've flone both the 767-300ER and A300-600 before, and found the A300 to be more reliable and with lower maintenance cost than the 767. Even though the A300 Family is the first set of planes Airbus has built, they really did a great job on making a plane to compete against Boeing's 767.
#3
Posted 30 April 2016 - 04:09 PM
#4
Posted 30 April 2016 - 07:32 PM
If you want capacity, A300. For range, 763ER.
#5
Posted 30 April 2016 - 07:39 PM
#6
Posted 30 April 2016 - 10:06 PM
#7
Posted 01 May 2016 - 05:09 AM
767-300ER it's really good for flights to most of eroupe and Major African cities.
#8
Posted 01 May 2016 - 12:41 PM
I would choose 767-300ER rather than A300's
"Managing a real world airline is not as easy as you play Airline Empires. Real world airline are more and much more complicated"
#9
Posted 01 May 2016 - 01:32 PM
Order both at the same time for faster expansion
#10
Posted 01 May 2016 - 09:09 PM
Ammm, A300-600, but later I'd replace them with A330-300 (or A330-200 if I'm recreating some of the real world airlines) for MH routes.
#11
Posted 01 May 2016 - 10:36 PM
#12
Posted 02 May 2016 - 01:31 AM
#13
Posted 02 May 2016 - 02:05 AM
I'll just add that there's a reason there are hundreds of 767-300ERs still in passenger service, while there are almost no A300s left in passenger service.
#14
Posted 02 May 2016 - 03:31 AM
Are you kidding? About half of all A300s are still flyingI'll just add that there's a reason there are hundreds of 767-300ERs still in passenger service, while there are almost no A300s left in passenger service.
#15
Posted 02 May 2016 - 07:27 AM
763ER
#16
Posted 02 May 2016 - 10:44 AM
763ER
#17
Posted 03 May 2016 - 08:48 AM
Even though the A300 Family is the first set of planes Airbus has built, they really did a great job on making a plane to compete against Boeing's 767.
Agreed with the first statement although companies that got into Airbus weren't inexperienced, but second is wrong, 767 was made later to compete with A300.
I'll just add that there's a reason there are hundreds of 767-300ERs still in passenger service, while there are almost no A300s left in passenger service.
That's not true, by the way A300 is an older model superseded by A330-200 almost 20 years ago. Not because it was bad but because Airbus offered something even better.
Since 777 is much bigger than 767 Boeing had no replacement in this class until 787 and today it's still slowly produced because of Boeing's calculations with military tankers and having solid sales as freighter, those are only ones being ordered as of today with 0 passenger versions ordered so I don't think that we'll be seeing a lot of them in pax service for too long.
...
Anyway, 767 is less profitable but more capable for "realistic" companies in AE, and in AE profit is not a problem so for small companies I'd take 767.
If you want to have a big company, take both, but early on prefer A300 if you want more profit for your investment.
#18
Posted 03 May 2016 - 10:45 AM
That's not true, by the way A300 is an older model superseded by A330-200 almost 20 years ago. Not because it was bad but because Airbus offered something even better.
very true, technically the A310,A300,A330 and A340 are all the same base design
#19
Posted 03 May 2016 - 03:26 PM
#20
Posted 03 May 2016 - 07:27 PM
Are you kidding? About half of all A300s are still flying
Exactly. There weren't many to begin with
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users