In Australian Service – Airbus A300

Subsequent production aircraft were of either the 82 or 84 series powered by the General Electric CF6-50C (51,000lb st) or CF6-50C2 (52,5001b st) or the Pratt & Whitney JT9D-59A1 (53,000lb st), wing span is 147ft 1in, length 175ft 11in and height 54ft 3in. The 82 family features reduced gross weights and range compared with the 84 series. For example the A30082-200 has a maximum takeoff weight of 313,0601b and range with maximum payload of 1,190nm while the A30084-100 has a maximum takeoff weight of 347,2301b and 2,470nm range with max payload. A total of 248 82/84 versions have been delivered.

The A300 series has grown to the current A300-600R powered by the General Electric CF6-80C2 or Pratt & Whitney PW4000, with a maximum takeoff weight of 378,5001b, fuel capacity of 19,300 US gal and a 4,350nm range with full passenger load. The typical passenger load is 28 plus 239 (first + economy) up to a maximum 375 at 28 and 30 inch pitch. Despite the modest 1ft 6in fuselage length increase to 177ft Sin with the A300-600/ A300-600R family, the passenger capacity has been usefully increased by using the A310 rear fuselage. Other notable refinements are various wing improvements, the use of A310 nacelles and a reshaped pylon and the smaller A310 tailplane.

The success of other members of the Airbus family is well known. Both the A300 and A310 continue to sell well, the A320/ 321 is absolutely galloping ahead with over 600 sales and options while the high capacity A330 and very long range A340 are mirroring the earlier A320/321 success story with substantial firm orders and options well in advance of their first flights. By the middle of 1989, sales of all Airbus types had passed the magic 1,000 mark of which over 500 were in service with 65 operators. Since then further significant sales have added additional lustre to the international order book.

Apart from the obvious sales success, Airbus have also proven themselves notable innovators. In the A300, they pioneered the twin-aisle twin engine configuration, automatic wind shear protection, two man crews on widebody jets and the use of composites which were further extended iri other Airbus aircraft. Important new powerplants such as the General Electric CF6-80C2 and Pratt & Whitney PW4000 were also first flown on Airbus aircraft.

Airbus Industrie is now in a position to provide a wide range of passenger aircraft offering serious competition to the other established manufacturers. What makes this all the more remarkable is that this has been achieved by an organisation formed just 20 years ago.

TAA had shown interest in the Airbus concept since the late 1960s and this was further enhanced when the A30081 prototype, then re-registered as F-OCAZ, arrived in Darwin on 13 May 1974 at the start of an Australian demonstration tour. It flew to Sydney the following day and then to Melbourne on 15 May for inspection by both Ansett and TAA after which it flew to New Zealand before passing through Darwin on 28 May on the return flight. Not to be outdone, Lockheed chartered TriStar JA8506 from All Nippon prior to delivery, and this aircraft arrived in Brisbane on 20 May, before visits to Melbourne on the 21 May and Canberra and Sydney two days later before it was delivered by the All Nippon crew to Japan. TAA was also interested in the DC-10 and consequently an Air New Zealand DC-10-30 ZK-NZN arrived at Tullamarine on 18 May where TAA duly inspected it. If TAA were to go for a widebody airliner the choice was to be made between these three aircraft. Their serious interest in the Airbus A300B, Douglas DC-10 and Lockheed L1011 TriStar was noted in their 1969/70 annual report and there is no doubt that TAA was keen to acquire one of these large aircraft.

What should be remembered, however, is that the decision to opt tor a wide body airliner was a substantial move upwards from their existing equipment. In the late 1970s, the largest aircraft in Australian domestic operations was the Boeing 727-200 Advanced with a 191,000lb maximum takeoff weight powered by the 15,500lb st Pratt & Whitney JT8D-15. Now TAA was planning the introduction of the Airbus A30084 with potentially double the passenger capacity of the 727, a gross weight of 347,2001b and powered by the high bypass 52,5001b st General Electric CF6-50C2. It was the biggest technological step forward by an Australian domestic airline since the introduction of jet airliners in 1964.

The difficulty in predicting market trends was no easier during the 1970s than it is today. After a dismal 1975/76 result in which TAA saw their passenger volume shrink by 1%, the market was showing strong growth during 1978/79 and both TAA and Ansett were criticised for not having ordered larger aircraft to cope with the traffic upsurge. Based on their predictions, TAA wanted to order wide bodied aircraft for introduction into service during late 1981 or early 1982 while Ansett felt that the right time was somewhat later. On 10 December 1979, Sir Robert Law-Smith Chairman of the Australian National Airlines Commission and Mr Hugh Tansley the Regional Sales Manager for Airbus lndustrie, signed the order for four Airbus A30084s plus two options. Deliveries of two aircraft were to be made during October 1981, one each on May 1982 and June 1983 while the options were for 1984/85. The eventual timetable of deliveries differed from this projection and, in addition, TAA were to ultimately order five aircraft.

The Airbus era for TAA was heralded with the arrival of VH-TAA at Tullamarine on 13 July 1981 at the end of its delivery flight. Regular wide body services in Australia were launched by this aircraft on 22 July. The deliveries continued and by July 1982 TAA had received their fourth Airbus.

Unfortunately for TAA, the market growth predictions of the 1970s were defeated by an economic downturn which was unexpectedly severe. Ansett reacted to the lack of passenger growth by deferring deliveries of their new Boeing 767s and deliveries of four 767s set for December 1982 through January 1983 were now rescheduled to commence in June 1983. However, TAA were placed in the unenviable position of having four large capacity airliners in their fleet which were incapable of being economically operated. Ansett were much better positioned to cope with the trying conditions, having taken delivery of their 12 Boeing 737-277s during 1981/82 and had in these, an aircraft more attuned to the prevailing market conditions.

Apart from the lack of traffic growth TAA had other initial problems. Under normal circumstances, airlines normally have about a 2½ to 3 year lead time from the time of placing an order for a new aircraft until the eventual introduction into service. This gives an adequate period to prepare all the maintenance, training and myriad other items which need to be arranged. In the case of the A3::0, TAA only had 20 months to prepare for an aircraft which was much larger and more complex than its previous equipment. Much of the support equipment it had was too small and they were also faced with the need to obtain a significant amount of specialised handling equipment. These demands were overcome but other problems which loomed were not so easily solved.

Frank McMullan, TAA’s Engineering Director summed up the situation when in 1986 he told me, “Two things spoilt the A300, the timing of their introduction and the fact that Ansett did not follow with a similar type. None of the experts predicted the drop in traffic which occurred in mid 1981. Ansett was better placed to exploit the situation with the greater number of smaller aircraft that they had to give them better timetable flexibility. The public were used to a high level of frequency and TAA could not deliver. Our A300s then had a 269 passenger capacity and were only obtaining load factors in the 50% region. Even when we reduced the seating to 230 we were still faced with load factors in the low 60s. We are now (in 1986, Ed) obtaining load factors of over 70% which is a much better state of affairs”.

When the passenger traffic downturn was at its worst, TAA found that their A300s were carrying Boeing 727 loads but at greatly increased trip costs. TAA was then prompted to consider other aircraft to replace the A300s and the Boeing 757 and Airbus A310 came into contention. The Boeing 757 which could carry around 175 passengers in a three class configuration and the A310 with a 219 seat capacity both had appeal. Despite the interest in both these types, the decision was made to retain the A300s and not proceed with their replacement with smaller aircraft.

However, other measures were taken to reduce the over capacity in the TAA fleet. An initial step was the deferment of delivery of the fifth Airbus A300 VH-TAE. It first flew on 29 October 1982 but the dismal traffic outlook prompted TAA to place it in storage at Toulouse and eventually take delivery of it in December 1983, a year later than originally intended. During the latter part of 1983, attempts commenced to seek the lease or sale of their first two A300s. This led to the departure of both VH-TAA and VH-TAB from Tullamarine during March 1984 on charter to Lufthansa until the end of October. Both aircraft were painted in the colours of the Lufthansa subsidiary Condor prior to their departure and were operated by that airline during the peak European holiday season. To adjust their fleet to more effectively cope with traffic demands, TAA then chartered the Ansett Boeing 727 VH-RMZ while the two A300s were overseas. This skilful capacity management paid dividends and during 1984 an improvement in market share, profitability and yield was achieved.

A longer term charter was arranged with Air Niugini. Soon after the termination of its Lufthansa lease, VH-TAA commenced a lease with Air Niugini on 27 November 1984 which concluded early last year. A shorter term lease for VH-TAC took place during December 1987/January 1988, also to Air Niugini (who were so satisfied with the A300 that they ultimately acquired the A310 for their own fleet). Apart from these lease arrangements, one of the A300s was eventually sold. On 28 March 1987 VH-TAB left Melbourne as JA8263 for an overhaul in Bordeaux prior to delivery to its new owners, TOA Domestic Airlines in Japan.

Eventually, the extremely depressed conditions of the early 1980s gave way to the overseas tourist boom and the tremendous domestic holiday upsurge created by both Expo and the Bicentennial celebrations. The overcapacity of a few years ago was displaced by the boom conditions of the late 1980s. The A300 was then in its element and the benefits of this large capacity aircraft were all too obvious. However the events of the past decade illustrate the dilemma faced by airline planners, past, present and unfortunately, the future. With all the present dire predictions being touted about our economic future, will history repeat itself? The unpredictability of airline planning could have no greater example than events in Australia over the past year or so. The strength of the market in 1988, fuelled by the Bicentenary and Expo, was the best tonic the Australian airlines had experienced for years. However 1989 could hardly have offered a greater contrast. With a domestic economy in decline, tourism from overseas at least gave some measure of support to declining passenger loads. But it was industrial troubles which really threw a spanner in the works. The dual problems of the air traffic controllers followed by the devastating pilots’ dispute has created problems which will take both time and much goodwill to heal.

This year promises to be one of the most important and interesting in the history of Australian domestic aviation. The effects of deregulation will put all the players on their best mettle. The strength of the established airlines will be tested by the enthusiasm of any new entrant keen to establish a presence on our air routes.

The selection of reliable, economic equipment will be important to all the participants. The Australian Airlines’ A300 fleet, which certainly doesn’t owe anything after several years operation, is sure to serve well into this decade at the very least on both passenger and as recently seen, for freight use. In this latter role, the capacious underfloor capacity of the A300 has been tapped for overnight freight use.

In discussions with both senior Australian Airlines technical personnel and aircrew, the impression gained is that there is absolutely no doubt that the A300 is held in the highest regard. In the quest for even more efficient equipment during the 1990s, it seems certain that more of the Airbus family will join the A300 and A320 aircraft already here. Whether they will be A310, A321 or A330 only time will tell. If Ansett realises its international ambitions perhaps even Australian registered A340s are a possibility. But whatever happens, the A300s have provided a strong foundation for all the other Airbus aircraft which are sure to arrive in Australia in the years ahead