The A330 300 has a passenger capacity of 440 pax with airlines like Cebu Pacific operating with configurations very close to the limit. I F only allows 287 pax making it unrealistic when flying airlines like Cebu Pacific on I F. I think this should be changed as it would be easy to implement and would improve realism.
Edit: The A330 300 also has a Maximum Landing Weight of 187t whereas I F has it as 185t.
8 Likes
287 is too low for sure. Even Air Canada has over 290.
Btw the limit needs to about 10% higher than IRL limit because IF uses a lower pax weight.
3 Likes
I posted this in the 21.4 thread but I figured it would be worth x-posting over here also:
Iām not sure what happened there, but some how the A330-300 got shorted by 1/3rd of its seat capacity
2 Likes
Also discovered by doing more research the a330 300 has a MLW of 187t instead of 185
2 Likes
Yup, I hope this isnāt something that sticks around.
Would be very annoying if it did
2 Likes
@Jetcentric Unfortunately, everything that youāve said, isnāt entirely true. Thereās a big difference between āCertifiedā and what a āTypical seatingā configuration is. Its no different than what an aircraftās takeoff weight is. Even though it says XXX.X kgs/lbs, the takeoff weight is actually higher than what is published. Much higherā¦ Why? Because this is what the aircraft was certified for during structural testing during live and computer testing to ensure that an aircraft is capable of withstanding loads greater than what they plan to offer as ānormalā
That said, Infinite Flight is more accurate than what you are crediting. Now to debunk everything that youāve said to this point regarding the seating capacity, I have provided you with information straight from Airbusā website which I encourage you to look over. It will quickly prove what youāve said to be not entirely true.
Its ok that you arenāt sure which is why Iām correcting the erroneous things that youāve mentioned so far. They didnāt short the seating. Infinite Flight was simply going by what the typical seating capacity is as found in the information below.
That all said, please, please, please research your information prior to making statements as such.
@Harryc Airlines can choose to vary their seating volume per order. It would be fair to say that Infinite Flight was not specifically looking at one particular airline for the number of seats to include. Instead, the Airbus published numbers straight from the manufacturer, are the most accurate in this case. This offers a happy medium to be used across all sorts of air carriers.
2 Likes
@DeerCrusher So why canāt it be increased to accommodate all the operators of the a 330 on I F?
1 Like
Because the typical seating configuration is 250-290seats. Being at 287, youāre asking for a raise of 3 seats. As mentioned, higher than typical is ācustomā to those airlines due to their want of a higher seat volume.
1 Like
@DeerCrusher Iām asking for a raise to 440 seats to accommodate all the operators of the type on IF
1 Like
That is outside of the Typical Seating Configurationā¦ 440 is a certified number
2 Likes
Why do you offer a maximum of 503 pax for the 777 300 thatās hardly typical.
Youāll also find that Air transatās a330 offers 346 seats.
Aer Lingus offers 317 seats
Sri Lankan offers 297
Egypt air offers 301
Cebu Pacific offers 436
Cathay Pacific offers 317
To name a few.
7 Likes
That seems to be a departure from every other aircraft released in the past couple years. All of which seat up to the exit limits.
Which in this case would be the full 440
In any case your assertion of 287 being typical is not entirely correct.
Only 9 of the 30 have fleets with fewer than 287 seats, with the majority sitting at 300-310, and the highest being Cebu with 436, Air Transat has 346/375.
Is 287 in the ballpark? Sure. But it only covers a portion of the operators we got.
Further more, you say that 440 is unrealistic, yet A330s with north of 400 pax in all economy plied the skies over Asia and the Middle East for years until COVID slowed that down.
Lastly, to your point to ādo research before postingā you and I were quoting the exact same data, each with a different point. Funny how that works sometimes.
5 Likes
ohh now I understand whyā¦ well explained!
For the 777 I cannot answer because Iām not a developer. For that reason, Iād rather not answer to prevent providing errorneous information. Iām only providing you with actual data from an aircraft manufacturer.
Not my number. Keep that in mind. Its a number that falls within range of Airbusā values. If you work for Airbus and this number is clearly wrong, then Iām sure the devs would be all ears to get more information.
Never said 440 is unrealistic. If you read again š, I mentioned that 440 is a certified number. Its what the aircraft was certified for in regards to structural limits. Its a number that is beyond conservative should the aircraft be pushed beyond its normal operating envelope.
Still holds true. I hate using this card because Iām a rather humble, but take what Iām saying from a pilot who has flown airline jets. I understand the logic behind weights, speeds, operational envelopes, etc. Airliners are often overbuilt because the manufacturers know pilots will beat the plane to living hell. That alone is a fact. I donāt make the information that I type up. I do my own research. Youāre picking and choosing information that you seem to believe is to be correct when Iām telling you that its not. Canāt really argue this one. š
@DeerCrusher the figure that you used is what Airbus states is a typical 3 class configuration. Many A330 operators donāt operate 3 class configurations.
4 Likes
Endless circle of information