Print from Airliners.net discussion forum http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5541898/ |
Topic: 2 RG 772 At MZJ Not Up For Purchase? Username: olddominion727 Posted 2012-08-17 14:59:52 and read 2233 times.Curious about something... I see 2 RG 772's @ MZJ. Why wouldn't DL, AA, UA take them into their fleet and replace a few older 76X, or even US add them to their fleet to do the PHL-PVG route they were awarded? Wouldn't they go for cheap? |
Topic: RE: 2 RG 772 At MZJ Not Up For Purchase? Username: NorthStarDC4M Posted 2012-08-17 15:02:00 and read 2245 times.From what I've read:
Condition isn't the greatest
They are 777-200A models (short range early build)
Maintenance Record issues as well? |
Topic: RE: 2 RG 772 At MZJ Not Up For Purchase? Username: Stitch Posted 2012-08-17 15:04:25 and read 2233 times.Per Airfleets, one (PP-VRD) was parted out at ARG and the other three are with new customers (TransAero for PP-VRI and PP-VRJ; Afrijet for PP-VRC). |
Topic: RE: 2 RG 772 At MZJ Not Up For Purchase? Username: TC957 Posted 2012-08-17 15:13:02 and read 2182 times.I believe the ex-RG birds are in a bad way and only worth scrap value from what I read on previous posts here on this subject. If US want to start PHL - PVG, they surely could do no worse than make Airbus an offer for the two ex-Kingfisher A345's sitting around in TLS gathering dust. At least they'll have crew commonality so less training expenses to start the route up. |
Topic: RE: 2 RG 772 At MZJ Not Up For Purchase? Username: Stitch Posted 2012-08-17 15:55:13 and read 2059 times.Quoting TC957 (Reply 3): If US want to start PHL - PVG, they surely could do no worse than make Airbus an offer for the two ex-Kingfisher A345's sitting around in TLS gathering dust. |
Far better for US to make a play for someone's A340-300 for that mission.
|
Topic: RE: 2 RG 772 At MZJ Not Up For Purchase? Username: Boeing773ER Posted 2012-08-17 16:11:33 and read 2001 times.
Exactly, I don't see why they should bring in another fleet type (777) which would require training, maintenance, ect. Even if these planes were at a great price they wouldn't be worth it. The A340 would be more economical with training, and maintenance. Now if they should pick up the A340-300/500 is an other story. The A340-500 would carry more people, and may be cheaper since the A340-500 isn't that desirable.
From what people are saying about these RG 772 they also probably wouldn't make it from PHL-PVG.
|
Topic: RE: 2 RG 772 At MZJ Not Up For Purchase? Username: n471wn Posted 2012-08-17 16:16:54 and read 1966 times.
Are you looking at an old picture? These are no longer there and one was scrapped but as poster #3 pointed out the other ones are alive and well-----only two 777's have been parted out and they are line #8 and line #19. Two others have been written off due to accidents so a total of only 4 777's have gone to heaven.
|
Topic: RE: 2 RG 772 At MZJ Not Up For Purchase? Username: Stitch Posted 2012-08-17 16:37:57 and read 1902 times.Quoting Boeing773ER (Reply 5): From what people are saying about these RG 772 they also probably wouldn't make it from PHL-PVG. |
As they are A Model planes, they wouldn't make it (with a payload) if they were brand new. 
Airfleets says VG's 777-200ERs went to Aeromexico and Transaero.
|
Topic: RE: 2 RG 772 At MZJ Not Up For Purchase? Username: jfk777 Posted 2012-08-18 17:47:12 and read 1188 times.Quoting Stitch (Reply 7): Airfleets says VG's 777-200ERs went to Aeromexico and Transaero. |
ILFC leased Varig to new 777-200ER with GE 90 engines, those were re-leased to AeroMEXico. RG had a very diverse and motly 777 fleet with seating from their original operators. The 777-200(no ER) referred to here were originally with BA and had huge First Class cabins. Its sad RG ended the way it did, they operated a very odd long haul fleet with 767, 747, MD-11 and 777's.
|
Topic: RE: 2 RG 772 At MZJ Not Up For Purchase? Username: AR385 Posted 2012-08-18 18:09:27 and read 1147 times.Quoting Stitch (Reply 7): Airfleets says VG's 777-200ERs went to Aeromexico and Transaero. |
And those were PP-VRA and PP-VRB.
|
The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved. http://www.airliners.net/ |