At the moment, Airbus and Boeing offer competing products with essentially every size of aircraft.
When it comes to widebodies, both major planemakers offer aircraft that are on the
lower end of the capacity spectrum in the form of the Airbus A330-800 and Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner.
While the sizes of these two jets are quite similar, their origins and sales
performances are drastically different, and it’s something we’ll look at in today’s video!
Let’s first examine the origins and backgrounds of each jet.
The Airbus A330-800’s roots go back to the mid-90s,
when Airbus approved the development of the A330-200. This would be a shorter,
longer-range aircraft than the initial A330-300 offered by the European planemaker.
The A330 would be an overall success for Airbus and so the A330-800 would be announced in 2014
as part of Airbus’ A330neo program - an update to the original A330 platform.
The aircraft is identically sized to its predecessor, the -200, offering
increased commonality for airlines already operating older aircraft of the same type.
The update from the A330ceo would mainly take the form of new, modern
engines - exclusively provided by Rolls-Royce - the Rolls-Royce Trent 7000 to be specific.
While its bigger brother, the -900, would enter service with TAP Air Portugal in December 2018,
the -800 wouldn’t take its first revenue flight until November 2020 with Kuwait Airways.
While it was introduced to the world later than the first A330 program,
the Boeing 787-8’s origin story seems a little more drawn out and more complicated.
In 2003, Boeing announced that it was embarking on
a new project - which it called the 7E7 program at the time.
This would officially become the 787 program in 2004, offering a clean sheet widebody
design incorporating all of the latest technologies in aerospace engineering.
This included a fuselage and wings made from composite materials, as well as new and efficient
engines from both General Electric and Rolls-Royce - the GEnX-1B and Trent 1000 respectively.
The result was an airframe comprising nearly half carbon fiber reinforced
plastic and other composites offering a weight savings of
approximately 20% when compared to more conventional aluminum designs.
Incorporating such cutting-edge technologies into an aircraft would prove to be a challenge, with
Boeing delivering the first 787-8 to ANA in late September 2011 - three years later than scheduled.
Its first revenue service would take place the following month.
The aircraft type would face a widescale grounding in 2013 due to battery and electrical systems,
but would return to service a few months later.
From program launch to entry into service,
the A330-800 took about six years, while it was about eight years for the 787-8.
As you can see from the key dates provided, the 787-8 is almost a decade older than the
A330-800 if we are comparing their respective entries into service.
Let’s now examine the key metrics and technical specifications of each aircraft.
As you can see from the chart here, both aircraft have a similar fuselage length.
Indeed, the overall length of the 787-8 is roughly
two meters (or 6 and a half inches) shorter than its Airbus counterpart.
According to modernairliners.com, the Dreamliner’s maximum cabin width is 5.49 Meters (18 Feet),
compared to 5.26 m (17 ft 3 in) for the A330. This nearly one-foot of additional
cabin width has allowed operators of the 787 to squeeze in an additional
seat to each row of economy class seating - something we’ll examine later in this video!
With the aircraft being similarly sized we can see that passenger capacity is comparable as well.
Airbus’ official website data states that the A330-800 can carry a maximum
of 406 passengers while typical seating is estimated to be 220-260.
For the 787-8, Boeing states on its website that a two-class configuration allows for 248
passengers. However, it fails to provide any official figure for maximum capacity.
Referring to EASA’s type-certificate data sheet however, the 787-8 is certified to fly
up to 381 passengers as long as there are eight cabin crew members. For comparison,
Airbus’ 440-passenger capacity is only allowed if there are nine cabin crew members available.
Considering the wide gap in maximum capacities while offering comparable cabin sizes,
we imagine one factor would have to be regulatory limits, largely influenced by emergency exits.
But when it comes to range, the A330-800 is stated to be able to fly 8150 nautical miles,
or 15094 kilometers. The 787-8, despite its composite fuselage,
only has a maximum range of 7,305 nautical miles (13,530 km).
This difference can be explained by the different fuel capacities of the jets.
The A330-800 can hold 139,090 liters (36,750 US gallons of fuel. The 787-8, on the other hand,
only has room for 126,206 liters (33,340 US gallons). Indeed, the A330-800 has 10% greater
fuel capacity than the Dreamliner, which explains much of the difference in stated maximum range.
More fuel capacity and potentially more passengers makes the A330-800
a heavier aircraft, with a maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) of 251 metric
tons. This is slightly heavier than the 227.9 tons of the 787-8.
When examining cargo capacities of these aircraft,
Airbus notes that the A330-800 can accommodate 27 LD3 containers in its belly.
This is one fewer than the 28 LD3 containers that the 787-8 can hold.
Examining the numbers, the Airbus A330-800 looks to be a heavier aircraft,
capable of flying more passengers further.
These advantages come at a cost, however, as the Airbus jet will require more fuel to reach its
maximum range. This makes it a heavier aircraft likely to have a higher fuel-burn rate than its
Boeing rival - although specific numbers for this metric (from official sources) are unavailable.
The passenger experiences for the two aircraft have their big
differences - even before all the customizations offered by airlines.
The Dreamliner’s electronic, dimmable windows will be one big difference,
as the A330neo family is only fitted with conventional plastic window shades. The dimmable
windows will either be a feature or a drawback depending on the passenger. It also depends on
the airline and if they have a policy of locking windows at certain times of certain flights!
Staying on the topic of windows, the 787’s are also bigger than the A330’s,
and thus offers passengers a better view of the world outside.
And while the choice of seating is up to each airline customer,
it’s worth noting that the overwhelming majority of 787-8 aircraft are configured
with a 3-3-3 layout in economy class as opposed to a nicer 2-4-2 layout. As we alluded to earlier,
the 787’s slightly wider fuselage allows operators to squeeze in an additional seat
at each economy class row. This comes at the cost of seat width for all seats in the class.
As we noted in one Simple Flying article and video,
many of Japan Airlines’ 787s stand apart from its fellow Dreamliner-operating flag
carriers. This is because the carrier has maintained an eight-across (2-4-2) layout
in economy class for its internationally operated Dreamliners. This equates to wider
seats for economy passengers - obviously at a cost to capacity for the airline.
The last passenger experience point we’ll touch on
is air quality - or cabin humidity and air pressure to be more precise.
As highlighted by Business Insider, many airliners have a cabin air pressure equivalent to an
altitude of 8,000 feet. However, the 787’s air pressure is closer to 6,000 feet. Additionally,
the Wall Street Journal notes that the humidity level onboard 787 cabins is 10% to 15%, compared
to the 4% to 7% you would typically find in other aircraft. This difference can be huge in terms of
jet lag impact and dry-air-discomfort experienced in the nasal passages and throats of passengers.
While we’re sure Airbus has made improvements to the passenger experience over what is found
on the A330-200, its metal fuselage doesn’t allow for the same internal air pressure and
humidity as its Boeing rival. Thus, while the A330-800 would win in terms of seat layout,
the 787 should offer a better environment in terms of air quality.
The airline experience is something worth considering as well. At least to some extent.
The 787 program seems to have experienced many more issues during its service life.
From battery problems early on, to engine issues associated with
the Trent 1000 - some operators have had a hard time keeping their Dreamliners flying.
More recently, Boeing had to endure a lengthy delivery stoppage due to FAA oversight and
regulatory concerns. This has resulted in many airlines waiting one or two years past the
original scheduled delivery date to receive their 787s. Hopefully, these are issues that Boeing can
put behind it as it continues to become a more transparent company with aviation regulators.
On the Airbus side, it appears that no members of
the A330neo family have yet to encounter any issues to the same level of concern.
But finally, we’ll have to address the topic of
sales - which are honestly quite bleak for the Airbus A330-800.
At the time of producing this video, the A330-800 has only garnered orders
for just 11 airframes - far less than the 277 A330-900s ordered by airlines.
At the moment, seven of these 11 -800s have been delivered,
while the remaining four - ordered by Garuda Indonesia - remain in limbo. This disappointing
performance thus far has earned the type a place in our “unpopular aircraft variants” video.
It’s a very different story for the 787-8 which, according to official Boeing data
at the time of this video’s production, has amassed orders for a whopping 656 airframes.
Unfortunately, you’ll have to take this figure with a grain of salt as
we notice unadjusted and unfilled orders included in this number.
This includes 18 ordered by Aeroflot in 2007, and 27 ordered by Qantas in 2006. For the record,
Aeroflot doesn’t operate the 787 while Qantas only operates the 787-9.
Despite these discrepancies, it’s clear that the 787-8 is a highly sought-after aircraft - much
more than the A330-800, even if Boeing has had 10 more years to accumulate orders.
We discuss the A330-800’s lack of popularity in another video,
so it’s worth checking that out as well. Whether or not airlines will eventually
replace their aging A330-200s with -800s is questionable as we should have seen
some of those orders come in already - even if they are for a few years into the future.
It ultimately seems like the 787-8 is an overall better aircraft for
airline operators - and in some aspects, a better aircraft for passengers as well.
Airlines would appreciate the 787’s lighter operating weight while still being able to
fly sufficiently long intercontinental services. These factors, combined with
commonality with the 787-9 and -10 make it a good option for airlines wanting maximum versatility.
And while the A330-800 and its 2-4-2 capacity is great in terms of economy passenger seating,
it would appear that its economics and commonality with other A330 family members are just not
as attractive to airlines. Its superior range doesn’t seem to be a huge selling point either.
But what do you think of this aircraft comparison? Is the 787-8 a better aircraft for airlines? Or is
the A330-800 being overlooked? Share your thoughts by leaving a comment!