Rivals cross swords

Airbus was the first manufacturer to enter the true ultra-long-range (ULR) market, when it launched the four-engined A340-500 in 1997. By the time that Boeing’s response – the 777-200LR twinjet – enters service early next year, the A340-500 will have built up over two years of in-service experience with the likes of Air Canada, Emirates, Singapore Airlines and Thai Airways International.

Although their ULR capability enables airlines to open up new city- pair routings previously beyond the reach of long-haul airliners, these “hot-ship” short-fuselage derivatives also offer more robust performance on shorter long-range routes, enabling year-round operations to be flown with greater payloads and more cargo.

In pure range terms, the 777-200LR can fly around 750km (400nm) further than the most capable version of the A340-500 – 17,450km – but this requires three auxiliary fuel tanks (ACT) in the rear cargo hold to do it. “With three ACTs, the -200LR’s range is a nose ahead,” concedes Airbus director of product marketing, A330/A340, Alan Pardoe. However he points out that with integral fuel capacity only – the A340-500 does not have an ACT option – the -500 flies slightly further (see table).

There are two fuel capacity options offered for the A340-500, but this is achieved by increasing the size of the integral centre tank to boost volume by 7,200 litres (1,900US gal), rather than by adding ACTs.

Airbus uses the -500’s four-engined configuration as a unique selling point, claiming that the lack of extended twin-engine operations (ETOPS) requirements gives it fly-anywhere flexibility and requires less line maintenance, which has a direct impact on maintenance costs.

“The A340-500’s direct operating cost per seat is 3% lower than the -200LR,” says Pardoe. This is assuming a typical 11,100km mission with the A340-500 carrying 313 passengers, compared with the -200LR’s 304.

Pardoe points out that the A340-500 has a fundamental capacity advantage: “We can put more seats into a comfortable ultra-long-range type interior in the A340-500 than in the -200LR.”

He explains that the A340’s standard business-class layout has six-abreast seating, compared with seven in the 777, while the typical economy layout is eight abreast – one less than the Boeing.

“Do you really think that airlines are going to put seven-abreast seating into business class for flying 18h?” asks Pardoe.

Boeing view is slightly different, with Boeing Commercial Airplanes’ vice-president marketing Randy Baseler stating that “the 777-200LR can fly farther and faster than the A340-500, and can carry more passengers and cargo, all the while consuming less fuel per passenger”.

Boeing says the -200LR’s fuel consumption advantage can be as much as 25%. Baseler says a 777-200LR operating SIA’s Singapore-Los Angeles A340-500 route could carry 21 more passengers and 11t more cargo, using 20% less fuel.

And as the table reveals, the raw statistics show that overall there is little to separate the two rivals. The 777’s list price is greater than the A340’s, while maximum payloads are similar. However, the 777’s operating empty weight is 15t lower.

After the -200LR enters service next year it should become more clear who can claim to be the ULR champion.

Notes

a With three auxiliary fuel tanks in rear cargo hold

b Highest weight offered

c Excludes additional commitments for up to 31 aircraft

d 2004 price

Source: Airbus/Boeing

MAX KINGSLEY-JONES/LONDON

Source: Flight International