Since they only have four of those and have added several smaller -200s lately, what do they plan to do with that smaller sub-fleet. All four are former Dragonair's, delivered to KA in 1995, '96, '97 and 2001, and part of TS' fleet since 1999 (1), 2009 (1) and 2011 (2)

https://www.planespotters.net/productio ... us=current

What should be the problem with running 4 A330-300 beside 14 A330-200?

I don't think we'll see too many A330s making it to 30 years in service, aside from maybe some gov't examples (A340s). The OP is probably referring more to age. I suspect they will all be replaced gradually with the A330Neo.

mjoelnir wrote:

What should be the problem with running 4 A330-300 beside 14 A330-200?

I didn't say it's a problem, in fact my question is very open. I only added a few facts regarding their histories and current status.

Very good question. According to planespotters.net, one of four A333s (C-GTSD) appears to be in a C12Y334 config instead of the regular C12Y363. I guess this particular frame is treated as “A332” for seat maps. I wonder why they prefer the A332 over the A333 as many airlines seem to be leaning toward the -300 in recent years. Also, the amazing thing at Transat is the sheer amount of frames that sit on the ground in YUL and sometimes don’t move for days.

I believe that their future is flying for someone else but under the TS AOC. Are these A333 leases power-by-the-hour operating leases? If so, I see their future as flying for airlines like XL Airways France or anywhere where a wet-lease is needed. Many of the A332s and A310s are power-by-the-hour operating leases, making it cheaper to pay parking fees at YUL rather than lease payments to the lessors based on flight hours. (When sitting on the ground, no lease payments are owed.)

Airliner World had on its February issue an article on Air Transat.

Fleet plan is to have 7 A321ceos, 10 A321LRs, 20 A330s and 13 to 15 Airbus single aisle jets on short term lease/seasonal work. B737s are on the way out as they intend to focus on Airbus fleet only.

Fleet list suggests that currently, Air Transat has 18 A330s. Most of them are leased from Aerocap, Avolon. There is nothing mentioned if older A330s will be replaced for newer ones. I don't think so.

It will be interesting to see how significant competition (for Canada anyhow) in the long range market will affect prices and new routes. Air Canada is adding 787s and even 737 Max (east coast Europe capable) focusing on international long hauls for expansion. Westjet is adding 787s with its first real push into long hauls (the 767s to LGW are.not a comprehensive strategy in my view) then Air Transat expansion. Here in Vancouver we have the highest air fares of any Canadian city so some extra choice here would be welcome. I also see the likes of Halifax and some secondary airports like Hamilton offering new routes to avoid the yyz or yul hubs.

C-GTSD is the plane to fly on if you can - it's the only airplane in the fleet that is configured at 2-4-2, all others are 3-3-3. GTSD has similar range to the A332's because it's MTOW is 233T. The other -300's are either 215T or 217T MTOW.

Although I don't know when, I have heard that C-GKTS will be the first A330-300 removed from the fleet.

Maybe ts should fly to Australia seasonally in northern winter only. Ac seems to be making a killing on yvr bne (monopoly on nonstops ) + daily yvr syd & now yvr mel flights. A one stop strategy would work. Plenty of pacific nations would kill for a nonstop north american service even if only twice a week, or they would simply do a splash & dash anywhere, if they have aircraft parked a few days a week.

tribird1011 wrote:

C-GTSD is the plane to fly on if you can - it's the only airplane in the fleet that is configured at 2-4-2, all others are 3-3-3. GTSD has similar range to the A332's because it's MTOW is 233T. The other -300's are either 215T or 217T MTOW.

Although I don't know when, I have heard that C-GKTS will be the first A330-300 removed from the fleet.

C-GTSD can indeed be used in place of an A332 even from the West Coast, that's why they choose to reconfigure the other three to higher density in order to reduce CASM on their scheduled flights to LGW and CDG, even though during winters only Paris seems to see them.

C-GKTS is not only the oldest in TS fleet but also the one manufactured in 1995 and part of the first KA batch that replaced their L1011s. Wonder if its the one Airbus sent to GVA as part of an air show of sort ?

tribird1011 wrote:

C-GTSD is the plane to fly on if you can - it's the only airplane in the fleet that is configured at 2-4-2, all others are 3-3-3. GTSD has similar range to the A332's because it's MTOW is 233T. The other -300's are either 215T or 217T MTOW.

A 230-233t A332 (which is what TS has) should have more range than a 233t A333, on account that the A332 has a center fuel tank, and the 233t A333s dont. Airbus only recently activated the center fuel tank on the latest built 242t A333s.

SpaceshipDC10 wrote:

what do they plan to do with that smaller sub-fleet.

Those planes are probably the best money makers for TS. TS doesn't need the range of the A332 on most of it's routes. The leasing rates on those A333s are probably very competitive, they have a lower max takeoff weight (meaning less airport and air navigation fees). High density configuration. All of this means more money in TS's pockets at the end of the day.

USAOZ wrote:

Maybe ts should fly to Australia seasonally in northern winter only. Ac seems to be making a killing on yvr bne (monopoly on nonstops ) + daily yvr syd & now yvr mel flights. A one stop strategy would work. Plenty of pacific nations would kill for a nonstop north american service even if only twice a week, or they would simply do a splash & dash anywhere, if they have aircraft parked a few days a week.

TS would need an A330-800neo for YVR-Australia.

YVR-SYD (12,484km) is out of reach for a 233t A332. Plus with 345 seats, they would need to take a massive payload hit just to operate the route. BNE is slightly shorter, but still pushing it, and let's not even start about MEL. Anyways, besides SYD, nothing else makes sense for TS down under.

Not a single A332 operator out there flies +12,000 km route. Longest one is AR on EZE-FCO, 11,136 km.

Thenoflyzone wrote:

SpaceshipDC10 wrote:

what do they plan to do with that smaller sub-fleet.

Those planes are probably the best money makers for TS. TS doesn't need the range of the A332 on most of it's routes. The leasing rates on those A333s are probably very competitive, they have a lower max takeoff weight (meaning less airport and air navigation fees). High density configuration. All of this means more money in TS's pockets at the end of the day.

You're probably right. I'm still curious to see how long they'll be around (meaning number of years since manufacturing - same as the A310s or not) and if TS plan to replace them with others having similar MTOW?

Thenoflyzone wrote:

tribird1011 wrote:

C-GTSD is the plane to fly on if you can - it's the only airplane in the fleet that is configured at 2-4-2, all others are 3-3-3. GTSD has similar range to the A332's because it's MTOW is 233T. The other -300's are either 215T or 217T MTOW.

A 230-233t A332 (which is what TS has) should have more range than a 233t A333, on account that the A332 has a center fuel tank, and the 233t A333s dont. Airbus only recently activated the center fuel tank on the latest built 242t A333s.

SpaceshipDC10 wrote:

what do they plan to do with that smaller sub-fleet.

Those planes are probably the best money makers for TS. TS doesn't need the range of the A332 on most of it's routes. The leasing rates on those A333s are probably very competitive, they have a lower max takeoff weight (meaning less airport and air navigation fees). High density configuration. All of this means more money in TS's pockets at the end of the day.

USAOZ wrote:

Maybe ts should fly to Australia seasonally in northern winter only. Ac seems to be making a killing on yvr bne (monopoly on nonstops ) + daily yvr syd & now yvr mel flights. A one stop strategy would work. Plenty of pacific nations would kill for a nonstop north american service even if only twice a week, or they would simply do a splash & dash anywhere, if they have aircraft parked a few days a week.

TS would need an A330-800neo for YVR-Australia.

YVR-SYD (12,484km) is out of reach for a 233t A332. Plus with 345 seats, they would need to take a massive payload hit just to operate the route. BNE is slightly shorter, but still pushing it, and let's not even start about MEL. Anyways, besides SYD, nothing else makes sense for TS down under.

Not a single A332 operator out there flies +12,000 km route. Longest one is AR on EZE-FCO, 11,136 km.

No suggested one stop eg. Nou, apw or nan or rar.

Nou being french territory would probably be easiet traffic rights wise although apw or rar should be easy to. Nan would not allow pax to get on or off unless going to a 2ndary port like ool , cbr or avv (not sure in ntl can take a 330 ?) in Australia but could be a tech stop.

Thenoflyzone wrote:

tribird1011 wrote:

C-GTSD is the plane to fly on if you can - it's the only airplane in the fleet that is configured at 2-4-2, all others are 3-3-3. GTSD has similar range to the A332's because it's MTOW is 233T. The other -300's are either 215T or 217T MTOW.

A 230-233t A332 (which is what TS has) should have more range than a 233t A333, on account that the A332 has a center fuel tank, and the 233t A333s dont. Airbus only recently activated the center fuel tank on the latest built 242t A333s.

SpaceshipDC10 wrote:

what do they plan to do with that smaller sub-fleet.

Those planes are probably the best money makers for TS. TS doesn't need the range of the A332 on most of it's routes. The leasing rates on those A333s are probably very competitive, they have a lower max takeoff weight (meaning less airport and air navigation fees). High density configuration. All of this means more money in TS's pockets at the end of the day.

USAOZ wrote:

Maybe ts should fly to Australia seasonally in northern winter only. Ac seems to be making a killing on yvr bne (monopoly on nonstops ) + daily yvr syd & now yvr mel flights. A one stop strategy would work. Plenty of pacific nations would kill for a nonstop north american service even if only twice a week, or they would simply do a splash & dash anywhere, if they have aircraft parked a few days a week.

TS would need an A330-800neo for YVR-Australia.

YVR-SYD (12,484km) is out of reach for a 233t A332. Plus with 345 seats, they would need to take a massive payload hit just to operate the route. BNE is slightly shorter, but still pushing it, and let's not even start about MEL. Anyways, besides SYD, nothing else makes sense for TS down under.

Not a single A332 operator out there flies +12,000 km route. Longest one is AR on EZE-FCO, 11,136 km.

No suggested one stop eg. Nou, apw or nan or rar.

Nou being french territory would probably be easiet traffic rights wise although apw or rar should be easy to. Nan would not allow pax to get on or off unless going to a 2ndary port like ool , cbr or avv (not sure in ntl can take a 330 ?) in Australia but could be a tech stop.

Goodyear wrote:

I don't think we'll see too many A330s making it to 30 years in service, aside from maybe some gov't examples (A340s). The OP is probably referring more to age. I suspect they will all be replaced gradually with the A330Neo.

mmm ...not sure where you got that idea from..? the A330 is a very capable and profitable aircraft even in its older iterations, and if well taken care of, can age gracefully with no major issues. If maintenance takes care of the gradual upgrades made available for the variant, even an old A330 can still be very competitive; cue SN Brussels Airlines, who fly the absolute oldest A333 in service, on long-hauls, when these frames where delivered around 1996 to Air Inter for domestic French flying. Tells quite a bit about the aircraft, no?
I think we will indeed see lots of A330s maturing into 30YO flying birds, pretty much like the DC-10 did.
The reason why the Neo is not selling as well as initially hoped is because the current 330 is still an excellent aircraft 'as is', and in some instances (specific routes/specific configurations) even comparable to the 787.

Now the A340 is another beast altogether.....

oldannyboy wrote:

cue SN Brussels Airlines, who fly the absolute oldest A333 in service, on long-hauls, when these frames where delivered around 1996 to Air Inter for domestic French flying. Tells quite a bit about the aircraft, no?

They were delivered 3/'94, 12/'93 & 2/'94 respectively and 12/'94 & 5/'95 for the two former LTU birds. Aren't they supposed to be replaced by newer A333s soon? If so, will they fly again after SN or will it be the end of the road for them?

SpaceshipDC10 wrote:

oldannyboy wrote:

cue SN Brussels Airlines, who fly the absolute oldest A333 in service, on long-hauls, when these frames where delivered around 1996 to Air Inter for domestic French flying. Tells quite a bit about the aircraft, no?

They were delivered 3/'94, 12/'93 & 2/'94 respectively and 12/'94 & 5/'95 for the two former LTU birds. Aren't they supposed to be replaced by newer A333s soon? If so, will they fly again after SN or will it be the end of the road for them?

So, yes, there you go. Proves my point exactly.

I seem to remember that they are acquiring some much newer second-hand examples?

I'd think that given SN's highly regarded maintenance standards they will find another use. They'll probably be 'well oiled' to say the least, but surely still very safe and perfectly usable cheap haulers.

andrej wrote:

Airliner World had on its February issue an article on Air Transat.

Fleet plan is to have 7 A321ceos, 10 A321LRs, 20 A330s and 13 to 15 Airbus single aisle jets on short term lease/seasonal work. B737s are on the way out as they intend to focus on Airbus fleet only.

Fleet list suggests that currently, Air Transat has 18 A330s. Most of them are leased from Aerocap, Avolon. There is nothing mentioned if older A330s will be replaced for newer ones. I don't think so.

Apparently TS is about add a former MU A332.

https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/ ... es/LO3juaQ

If replaces the 4 A330-300? I would like to replace by 4 A330NEO or as you say by A330-243 ??

LC1002368 wrote:

. Also, the amazing thing at Transat is the sheer amount of frames that sit on the ground in YUL and sometimes don’t move for days.

Wintertime, yes.

Those A330s are too big for a lot of Canada-sun markets. Hence why they can sit around YUL all day in winter. TS does lease these planes to Europe during the winter season. They've been pretty lucky this year. They leased one frame to Travel Service Poland and they were able to secure another lease to Condor.

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... -nov-2017/

They've leased some A330s quite extensively to XL Airways France in the last few winter seasons as well. In the past, they've also wet leased some A330s to Indonesia for the Hajj pilgrimage during the summer months.

Maybe some Canadian stargup is using ts spare capacity in northern winter to operate flights to Australia with 1 stop somewhere ?

They did well from the MON collapse in the UK as well as they were doing re-pat flights for at least a week maybe two and knowing the UK CAA they will have paid a very big amount to secure frames for these ops

AIRTRANSAT767 wrote:

If replaces the 4 A330-300? I would like to replace by 4 A330NEO or as you say by A330-243 ??

Unless they get a deal they can't refuse for A330NEO, I don't think they'd need them. Second hand A330s are the cheapest way to evolve, even if their first A330s were indeed newly-built aircraft, IIRC.

Thenoflyzone wrote:

Those A330s are too big for a lot of Canada-sun markets. Hence why they can sit around YUL all day in winter.

Are they on a power by the hour lease?

The A330Neo would be good choice but later in 3 years or 4 years to replace the A330s