Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5670533/

Topic: Why Were A332s Short-lived With LH?
Username: Tango-Bravo
Posted 2013-01-23 19:27:17 and read 11978 times.

Why did Lufthansa ever operate only 5 A300-200s? ...all which were acquired secondhand, for only 3 years (2003-06). Seems like 332s would have been an ideal long-term replacement for their A310-300s serving on 'thinner' intercontinental routes and would have nicely complemented their sizeable fleet of 333s and 340s.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ralf Meyermann

Topic: RE: Why Were A332s Short-lived With LH?
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-01-23 19:33:04 and read 11968 times.

They were leased to fill in while awaiting A333 deliveries. See: Lufthansa Getting 2 X A343 And 5 X A332 On Lease. (by Hkgspotter1 Sep 21 2002 in Civil Aviation)

Topic: RE: Why Were A332s Short-lived With LH?
Username: Tango-Bravo
Posted 2013-01-23 20:59:21 and read 11658 times.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 1):
They were leased to fill in while awaiting A333 deliveries

While this makes perfect sense (thank you also for the link), it seems that LH had/has enough routes for which the A332 would be 'right-sized' whereas the larger A333s might be somewhat oversized. To clarify, that was the context of my question.

That said, further research shows, ironically, that LHs A332s had a C48Y182 seating configuration...which adds up to 9 total seats more than their larger A333s which accomodate F8C56Y165...although LH may well have (re-)configured their A332s with a total somewhere betweeen an A313 and A333 had they decided to make A332s part of their long-term fleet plan.

Which leads me to ask...since LH's A332s were configured similar to their domestic/intra-European fleet of the time (lack of F), on what routes did LH typically operate their A332s?

Topic: RE: Why Were A332s Short-lived With LH?
Username: AeroWesty
Posted 2013-01-23 21:33:10 and read 11526 times.

Quoting Tango-Bravo (Reply 2):
Which leads me to ask...since LH's A332s were configured similar to their domestic/intra-European fleet of the time (lack of F), on what routes did LH typically operate their A332s?

Ah, gotcha. The only other thread that came up in my search was this one:

Lufthansa Route Cuts And New A332 Destinations (by Johnnybgoode Jan 30 2003 in Civil Aviation)

The thread starter is a bit confusing, but it seems to indicate the 332s were initially scheduled to operate from FRA to ATL, PHL, BOS, CCS, CAI and on the third daily flight to JFK, but that doesn't seem right for only 5 frames, does it.

Hopefully someone else can do better.

Topic: RE: Why Were A332s Short-lived With LH?
Username: Hirnie
Posted 2013-01-24 01:59:29 and read 10793 times.

I was on an A332 from BOS to FRA. The interior was not from LH. I think it was Sabena interior.

At that time I was told that LH wanted to go for the higher revenue with F class for which the A332 is too small. The A333 has only marginal higher operational costs compared with the 332 but that can be outwighted by more selling seats in the expensive classes.

Topic: RE: Why Were A332s Short-lived With LH?
Username: Rara
Posted 2013-01-24 08:57:48 and read 8022 times.

The A332s were never more than a stop-gap in LH's fleet and didn't get much love. One was even painted wrongly with the crane in an awkward location on the tail - which is unusual for LH.

As to whether A332s wouldn't make sense in LH's destination network, remember that LH can always do with a bit more space compared to other airlines because of their premium-heavy configurations. That's why they can happily operate all those A380s and 747s in markets where those planes would be oversized for other airlines.

Topic: RE: Why Were A332s Short-lived With LH?
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-01-24 12:28:36 and read 5487 times.

Quoting Hirnie (Reply 4):
I was on an A332 from BOS to FRA. The interior was not from LH. I think it was Sabena interior.

All A332s operated by LH were either ex-Sabena or ex-Swissair, after those carriers went bankrupt. I believe a couple of Swissair A332s that LX didn't want or need were leased by LH for a while, in addition to the ex-Sabena aircraft.

Topic: RE: Why Were A332s Short-lived With LH?
Username: Fiedman
Posted 2013-01-24 12:53:26 and read 5173 times.

Quoting Rara (Reply 5):
One was even painted wrongly with the crane in an awkward location on the tail - which is unusual for LH.

do you happen to remember the registration of that particular aircraft?

Topic: RE: Why Were A332s Short-lived With LH?
Username: Rara
Posted 2013-01-24 13:47:41 and read 4529 times.

Quoting Fiedman (Reply 7):
do you happen to remember the registration of that particular aircraft?

Yes, it was D-AIME.. today an A380.

Topic: RE: Why Were A332s Short-lived With LH?
Username: flyingalex
Posted 2013-01-24 13:52:09 and read 4453 times.

As others have said, the A332s were simply too small for LH. They didn't need the extra range that the A332 offers over an A333 (they have plenty of A340s to cover those missions), and it was one additional sub-type to manage. They no longer needed them once additional aircraft were delivered.

Topic: RE: Why Were A332s Short-lived With LH?
Username: earlynff
Posted 2013-01-25 06:38:53 and read 1490 times.

I doubt they were ever scheduled to CCS...


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/