Are you kidding? About half of all A300s are still flying
Yeah they are with a nice Fedex logo on the side or UPS
Are you kidding? About half of all A300s are still flying
Yeah they are with a nice Fedex logo on the side or UPS
800 is a lot, my friend. That number is actually astronomical considering that it was Airbus's first plane. Nice try baiting tho.Exactly. There weren't many to begin with
Exactly. There weren't many to begin with
Really mature teasing... And a really clever joke.
Check the numbers, there were 816 total A300/A310 produced in some 30 years. That's not a lot for wide-body airplanes in that age? -.- And it's funny? You obviously know of some super-produced similar plane I don't know about, or you're comparing production numbers of a wide-body airplane model with some cheap Toyota series or whatever. -.-
Yeah they are with a nice Fedex logo on the side or UPS
Right, yeah, by the way just the same thing happening to 767s.
Vistara and I are operating from India. The 767-300ER is useful for flights to Australia with small demand, but the A300-600/R is also very useful because it can reach a lot of European cities from Mumbai and Delhi.
800 is a lot, my friend. That number is actually astronomical considering that it was Airbus's first plane.
Actually it was 561. https://en.wikipedia...iki/Airbus_A300
B767-300ER
767-300ER.
763ER definitely
763ER. Your only option.
I would choose 767-300ER rather than A300's
763ER
763ER
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.
Truth!
A300, because 767 looks like an ass.
That is VERY rude!
Order both at the same time for faster expansion
Not!
Just order 747s and be done with it
But they cost more, are more expensive to operate and take more runway space.
The 767 is better than the A300.
Also Mose A300s are in freight service these days. There are very few in passenger service. Unlike the 7676 which is popular for both passenger and freight service.
816 counting A310 because it's to A300 what 762 is to 763. End of discussion.
And by the way buddy, you just wrote 7 posts in a row, most of them not containing even one whole sentence, and put together wrote nothing others didn't already say at least twice.
LMAO.That is VERY rude!
konj is right Preston, you can do all of that in one post.
Adding the A310 to the A300 series is like adding the 757 to the 767 series. They are different aircraft. Just don't do it. I agree there are a lot of freight 767s, but Austrian, United, KLM, Delta, American, Air Canada, and BA still use them..
Comparing production, there were 561 Airbus A300 aircraft built versus 1064 Boeing 767 built, not to mention the 767s are still in production, There are 765 767 aircraft still in service versus less than 300 A300 aircraft still around.
konj is right Preston, you can do all of that in one post.
Sorry.
Adding the A310 to the A300 series is like adding the 757 to the 767 series. They are different aircraft. Just don't do it. I agree there are a lot of freight 767s, but Austrian, United, KLM, Delta, American, Air Canada, and BA still use them..
Comparing production, there were 561 Airbus A300 aircraft built versus 1064 Boeing 767 built, not to mention the 767s are still in production, There are 765 767 aircraft still in service versus less than 300 A300 aircraft still around.
Good point.
Both, A300 on short-medium-haul fat routes, B763ER on longhaul routes and also 757 on thin transatlantic flights
I operate from SJC and BNA so I use 763 in SJC and A300 in BNA, because A300 range is just enough for BNA to major Europe cities
I started an airline in Ireland and used both the 767-300ER and the A300-600R and i found that they are both really good in different ways. For transatlantic routes to The East Coast, the South and The Midwest of the US and all of Canada as well as to The Middle East the A300 was ideal because of speed and turn time. The 767 was better for routes to Asia , The West Coast of The US and Hawaii because of its range.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users