Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will VS Really Take The 777?  
User currently offlineIntheknow From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9531 times:

According to "Galley FM"

We are ordering them soon

we are flying to Seoul, Hyderrabad, Kano, Osaka soon as we can

we are going back to ORD and YYZ asap

and it looks like we might start flying to a whole new continent....no not OZ but South America! Gotta love that Rio!!!

82 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBobs89irocz From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 632 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9364 times:

Sorry for being ignorant but i had a brain fart. What airline is VS?

What is "gally Fm"


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9332 times:

If you believe for one second that VS really buys-into that "4engines4longhaul" horsecrap that Airbus had it spewing during the A346 intro, then I have a bridge to sell you  Big grin

Whether VS can get the 777 to fit within its model and cost structure, when A340NGs are already there... is another story. It's true however that few longhaul airlines have had problems fitting into the 777s, and VS is certainly no TG  Big grin


User currently offlineIntheknow From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9331 times:

Hi,

VS = Virgin Atlantic

Galley FM = gossip on flights about whoever and whatever in the company!!

cheers


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9324 times:

Bobs,
VS is Virgin Atlantic


User currently offlineGoAibusGo From Netherlands, joined Mar 2001, 275 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9292 times:

Bobs89irocz

VS is Virgin Atlantic

"gally fm" dunno.


ps: You have a '89 Camaro IROC-Z (International Race Of Champions)


User currently offlineRickb From United Kingdom, joined May 2003, 243 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9258 times:

Richard Branson has used the slogan of '4 engines 4 longhaul' for many years as the longstay of his attacks on BA. Therefore buying twin engined aircraft at this time will be a huge U turn for him and his airline. A man of integrity, commitment to his ideals etc. would never do that.

So consider that deal for the 777's signed !!!  Wink/being sarcastic

RickB



User currently offlineBobs89irocz From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 632 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9234 times:

I thought it was Virgin but i couldnt believe that they would buy some 777s when they have a very well set up international fleet with the Airbus and 747's. Dont get me wrong i think it would be awsome for VS to get the 777's but doesnt seem like something they would do to me. I hope my feeling is wrong.

GoAirbusGo- Even though i can tell by your name we wouldnt get along very well with airplanes (lol jk, but im a big boeing fan) Yes i do have 2 iroc-z's. One is a race car (drag racing) another is a street car with lots of goodys on it too. I use to be a big camaro guy but i have recently got big into motocycles and have been having the time of my life ridding them.


User currently offlineJkw777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9226 times:

VS With 777's Embarrassment! I am sure that they bought/had borrowed a few 767's (long time ago) as well, that never really caught on! (Please correct me with the correct info)

Imagine how one of those babies would look in that VS Colour Scheme!?! Big grin  Smile


User currently offlineSteve6666 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 414 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9212 times:

If Virgin fly to South America it will be to Sao Paulo not Rio - BA's 4 weekly flights from Rio fill about half the economy section and 2 people elsewhere in the plane. Business demand for Rio is miniscule compared to Sao Paulo.


eu nasci ha dez mil anos atras, e nao tem nada nesse mundo que eu nao saiba demais
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9184 times:

I am sure that they bought/had borrowed a few 767's (long time ago) as well, that never really caught on!

They wetleased a 763ER from Martinair for intra-Europe as well as Orlando/Newark service.


Richard Branson has used the slogan of '4 engines 4 longhaul' for many years as the longstay of his attacks on BA

Actually, the slogan was essentially Airbus'. It was adopted by Branson at Farnborough in July of 2002.

His notable slogan from 1997 onward was "No way AA/BA"


User currently offlineGoAibusGo From Netherlands, joined Mar 2001, 275 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9142 times:

Bob89irocz :

You were right on my name, I am more a Airbus guy.

I like dragracing too. But this is a aviation site, so I won't get into details.

Still nice see some car related names etc. on this site


Have a nice one, and go easy with those V8s <:->


User currently offlineILoveORD From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 220 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9137 times:

"we are going back to ORD and YYZ asap"

Great news!! I've missed those VS 747s and A340s these past few years at ORD; can't wait to see them again!! A few questions though: anyone how soon VS will return to ORD and which aircraft will likely operate the route: I'm guessing a combination of 744 and A340?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui




Backhanding the left into submission, one activist judge at a time.
User currently offlineMoPac From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 215 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 9053 times:

That's funny because just yesterday I was reading the Oct 6 issue of Fortune and they profiled Branson.

In the article they were listing his daily routine and mentioned phone calls to Phil Condit of Boeing "to see if he can talk him down on the price of his 747s for Virgin Atlantic". I thought WTF?... Branson wouldn't be buying new 74s at this time, and dismissed it as trying to talk down the terms of the current aircraft, re-finance or something. Or maybe even trying to haggle Boeing down on a new widebody order so he could take that offer to Airbus and beat them over the head with it. But now that you mention the 777 maybe that's what Branson was talking to Condit about and the reporter just didn't have the sense to note the difference. Hmmm.


The reporter for this article was following Branson during the summer sometime while he was on Necker, and that's when those conversations would have taken place.


User currently offlineTekelberry From United States of America, joined May 2003, 1459 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 8984 times:

I'm guessing a combination of 744 and A340?

They're not going to take a dropped route and just start flying 744s there again. If they start flying to ORD again, it'll probably be their smallest A340.


User currently offlineRickb From United Kingdom, joined May 2003, 243 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 8884 times:

Actually - now is a typical time for Virgin to order new aircraft. The market is depressed and the 744 isn't exactly selling like hotcakes. It would be a very good time for Branson to order new 744's - he would get them at a great price, they wouldn't be in service for a couple of years (so the market should of picked up). This is pretty much what he did when first ordered 744's and A343's - he wanted (according to his book Virginity) to just get PTV's added to his fleet of 742's - but couldn't get the financing. He contacted both Airbus and Boeing and asked them about supplying 744's and A343's with PTV's and he got them to supply both all with PTV's and supply the financing. Branson was happy because it was around the time of the first Gulf war and no one was buying aircraft - so he got a good deal and he got the PTV's he wanted..and the finance !!

Plus new 744's wouldn't hurt his image like the 777 would. He's also not solely an Airbus fan !!

RickB


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 8770 times:

RickB,
past press releases (that maybe 0.001% of the population is actually going to remember) aside....

...how exactly would operating a member of what's currently the longest ranged and most technologically-advanced aircraft family in commercial service, going to 'hurt' Branson's image??


User currently offlineRickb From United Kingdom, joined May 2003, 243 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 8721 times:

Concordeboy,

Nothing to do with the technical specs of the 777 - its a superlative aircraft - you wont have any argument with me on that one (no looker mind !!).

Branson is embroiled on a long term and often bitter dispute with BA - originally it was no way AA/BA, then a serious advertising campaign stating '4 engines 4 long haul' followed by the Concorde debacle.

The 4 engines 4 longhaul slogan was an attack on BA's extensive use of the 777 (obviously a twin). He played it in a way that implied that 4 engines where safer than a twin for longhaul (transoceanic) journeys. If all of a sudden he now buys a twin - not only is he joining BA - but its like admitting he was wrong all along.

We all know the 4 engines bit is pure BS but Branson has made his bed - probably not a good PR move to change beds at this point !!

RickB


User currently offlineCarduelis From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2001, 1586 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 8701 times:

"Therefore buying twin engined aircraft at this time will be a huge U turn for him and his airline. A man of integrity, commitment to his ideals etc. would never do that."

A man of integrity - are you talking about Branson?






Per Ardua ad Astra! ........ Honi Soit Qui Mal y Pense!
User currently offlineRickb From United Kingdom, joined May 2003, 243 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 8661 times:

Carduelis,

You must of missed the bit where I said 'Consider that deal for the 777's signed' !!

The integrity bit was sarcasm !!

RickB


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 8592 times:

RickB, perhaps I should repeat it....
"past press releases (that maybe 0.001% of the population is actually going to remember)"


Tell me, do you honestly think that vacation-makers and corporate travelers who find a respective lowest fare and/or best departure time on VS are actually going to seek travel elsewhere, when/if VS renegs on its 4engine PR?

If nothing else, those same people would have left VS when the PR started last year: due to the seeming hypocrisy of its past 763ER wetlease, expressed public interest in the twinjet Sonic Cruiser.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Omar Zekria



User currently offlineRickb From United Kingdom, joined May 2003, 243 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 8548 times:

Concordeboy,

I honestly dont think the vast majority of the people flying today actually have any interest in what they are flying on - so from that perspective - it wont make any difference. However - it will damage Branson's pride - and he knows it - it will be brought up in various interviews etc. and as someone who craves publicity of the sort he can engineer in his favour - to his own ego it wont make good reading.

For that reason the purchase of 777's will make him look bad - it wont make his airline look bad and it certainly wont deter passengers - but his ego will take a beating and im not sure he is the kind of person who will go for that.

RickB


User currently offlineBehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4802 posts, RR: 44
Reply 22, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 8481 times:

VS would do well from YYZ if it flies via LHR and not LGW daily with A 346s or B 744s. From LHR pax can then go to Africa and India...2 key markets out of YYZ.

As for ORD...a daily A 346 is fine to test it.

Sao Paulo too daily with A 343s or 346s is perfect.

As for HYD-India...its a wise move as only LH thus far fly from there WEST so a 3-4 times a week A 343 is an ideal aircraft for this route. But VS should too try and use its influence on getting additional frequencies to DEL and starting BOM and CCU flights ASAP with 346s and 744s!!!




User currently offlineFutureFO From Ireland, joined Oct 2001, 3132 posts, RR: 21
Reply 23, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 8342 times:

You didn't know that Sir Richard signed an LOI woth Boeing for the 777-300ER for the new services. Also VS will become the first new member of Star after the first of the year. Or maybe those are just pipe dreams. Oh well. Would be nice to see the 777-300ER in VS livery.



Sean from MCO



I Don't know where I am anymore
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 24, posted (11 years 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 8246 times:

As for ORD...a daily A 346 is fine to test it.

I think a 343 would be better to test it, yes daily. Maybe even twice.

N


25 Luisca : can someone in europe tell me if they had any TV adds with the 4engines4longhaul crap?
26 RickB : Luisca, I dont remember seeing any TV adds with the 4engines4longhaul slogan - however there where plenty of billboards and posters advertising Virgin
27 David_itl : When is the UK-India bilateral up for negotiation? As far as I know, all possible frequencies have been allocated so for VS to go to Hyderabad, it wo
28 Na : Why should Virgin order the 777? Don´t see a need for them and wouldn´t like to see VS do the BA thing. More 744s or A340s seem more likely especial
29 Post contains images Leezyjet : Intheknow, From what I've heard, they would have ordered the 777-300ER instead of the A346, but they were not going to be ready in time. Not heard any
30 Intheknow : Leezyjet, Love it! Ground Staff FM! I guess we shall just have to wait and see. I guess this is part of why I love working at Virgin, never a dull mom
31 Manni : Will VS start flying to ICN, as the thread starter mentioned this? Anyone can confirm this?
32 CitationX : My guess is that Virgin is looking for an "off-season" transatlantic replacement for the high-trip/seat-mile costs of the A340-300, as well as a more
33 Gigneil : I think Branson is looking to have Boeing cut him a deal much like Singapore's and swap older, A340s for 777s. Yeah a "deal" that's continued to cost
34 Planesarecool : I hope Virgin Atlantic doesn't buy the B777. It doesn't suit them and it would ruin their image. G-VROC is currently on order for them (A B747-400) an
35 Greg : In regard to the Singapore deal..don't say 'NEVER'. While Boeing may not have been particularly pleased that the excess Airbus aircraft didn't move ve
36 Behramjee : Virgin will make good money out of DXB if it sends a daily A 346 or B 744 to DXB...they should definitely start DXB asap with an A 346 and then based
37 VSMike : No 777. "intheknow"... I don't think so. VSM
38 Hamlet69 : "For that reason the purchase of 777's will make him look bad. . ." Don't forget that Virgin has already come very close to ordering the 777 before. I
39 ConcordeBoy : Yeah a "deal" that's continued to cost Boeing tons of money. And your source on this is....? Not only did the now-famous "SQ-F.U." allow Boeing to ver
40 Dynkrisolo : Gigneil: Yeah a "deal" that's continued to cost Boeing tons of money. This was a stupid idea when it happened, and its a stupid idea now. Boeing will
41 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Brilliantly stated Dynkrisolo
42 Rickb : Dynkrisolo, Any proof that Airbus lost money on the A340's it placed ? Documents? Weblinks? Manufacturer statements? Financial accounts? RickB
43 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : RickB, given the case Dynkrisolo laid out... common sense would indicate that Airbus lost money. A much more compelling case would be to come up with
44 Gigneil : allow Boeing to very publically embarrass Airbus twice (the measure of which is invaluable) In your 5 year old child's sort of way, maybe. Public emba
45 Rickb : Concordeboy, How so? Your the ones making the accusations - innocent until proven guilty I believe!! Prove it RickB
46 Dynkrisolo : Rickb: Why haven't you shown the same kind of doubt about speculation that Boeing lost money on the SQ deal? Not everything has to have proof. In this
47 Rickb : Dynkrisolo, Airbus received full payment from SQ and Boeing for the A340's it sold at a rather healthy profit margin. Imagine buying a car from a Ford
48 Wingman : What do you mean by "healthy profit margin" and how do you know this? SQ hasn't provided a healthy profit margin to either manufacturer in years, pres
49 Solnabo : Can someone explaine to me why Qantas didn´t order the 777´s? G´bye Michael/SE
50 Rickb : Wingman, Yeah but whatever margin Airbus made - Boeing HAD to make less RickB
51 AvObserver : "If all of a sudden he now buys a twin - not only is he joining BA - but its like admitting he was wrong all along. We all know the 4 engines bit is p
52 CitationX : The Airbus A340 is a fine airplane and meets the needs of the many airlines who choose not to go the ETOPS route. I am not an "A v.s. B" debater, I'd
53 Dynkrisolo : Why both RickB and Gigneil are not reading what I was trying to say. I didn't say anything about Airbus losing money on SQ's 343s. I said Airbus lost
54 FutureFO : The A343 is a bad airplane all around. They are extremely slow and have poor performance compared to the 777. I hope that VS takes the 772/3 over top
55 Dynkrisolo : VS was planning to phase out the 10 343s and replacing them with 10 346s. Now, the 343s are not leaving the fleet as quickly as originally intended. P
56 Gigneil : Sean- What brilliant logic to follow up several posters in-depth analysis. Thanks. Dynkrisolo - No, you're right NW isn't the best example but its the
57 Post contains images Leezyjet : "The A343 is a bad airplane all around. They are extremely slow and have poor performance compared to the 777. ." What utter rubbish. The A343 does wh
58 Boeing nut : This 4 engine arguement has come full circle. Boeing jumped all over Airbus back in '72 when the A300 came out. Boeing was pushing that the 747 was sa
59 Post contains images RickB : Dynkrisolo, Can I just clarify my reasoning for you behind why Airbus wouldn't of made a loss on the subsequent 35 aircraft it sold after Boeing took
60 Dynkrisolo : RickB: Here is some quick maths - X=build cost of aircraft, A=Airbus Profit, B=Boeing Profit. A new A340 would cost Airbus a minimum of $X thousand do
61 MD-11 forever : Dynkrisolo: Boeing's salesmen are not that stupid to pay SQ their original paying price. Do you think Airbus salesman are stupid? If they were, Airbus
62 Dynkrisolo : MD-11 forever: Where did I say or imply Airbus salesmen were stupid? If you want to reply, read carefully before you do!
63 MD-11 forever : I did read carefully. But to me the message was that ONLY Boeing sales guys can do smart deals and Airbus is doing the stupid deals............ Cheers
64 RickB : Dynkrisolo, Again you have no facts to back up your opinion. What is it with the anti-airbus crowd - you make sweeping statements based on a whim and
65 Dynkrisolo : MD-11 forever: Don't put words in my mouth. When RickB claimed that Boeing had to pay SQ extra money on top of SQ's original purchasing price, then Ri
66 RickB : Dynkrisolo, So whilst I have to take you on your word - you wont accept anyone elses word? hmm.... I have proven my point - if you cant grasp basic ma
67 Dynkrisolo : RickB: BTW, don't label me. I am not anti-Airbus. Go search my posts see if you can find any bad thing I said about the rest of the Airbus family othe
68 Dynkrisolo : RickB: See who's not listening. Your math is flawed. Why don't you go talk to a businessman and see if anyone will pay original purchase price + margi
69 Planesarecool : Calm it down people. Isn't this topic supposed to be on VS and the B777. Not about maths and how airbus and boeing made/lost money with other airlines
70 Rickb : Dynkrisolo, Thanks mate - you made my point excellently 'Why don't you go talk to a businessman and see if anyone will pay original purchase price + m
71 Ka : Here are some people discussing with numbers nobody will ever get to know. Or does anybody think A or B will tell us how much money they are loosing o
72 Rickb : Ka, My point exactly - people make sweeping statements saying 'Airbus lost lots of money on 35 aircraft' or vice versa yet they have no idea about the
73 Ka : RickB Bravo! KA.
74 Dynkrisolo : RickB: Sorry mate, you have not made your point. Boeing had a hard time moving those planes, because Airbus was undercutting Boeing. Think what you ha
75 Rickb : Dynkrisolo, Airbus was able to undercut Boeing for precisely the reasons I listed - they had more margin to play with - yet you stick to your accusati
76 Dynkrisolo : Did I say I expect you or others to treat what I said as gospel? No I didn't. If I did, I would not have used words like "likely", "might", etc. Your
77 Planesarecool : Does it really matter? Calm it down people -Stephen
78 Post contains images MD-11 forever : @Dynkrisolo "You claimed Airbus made a healthy margin on the SQ's 343s. How do you know?" How do YOU know they didn't? Do you know the actual numbers
79 Motorhussy : Y A W N ! I'm glad you guys aren't in the business of designing and marketing aircraft. You'd never agree on anything! Move on... they both make grea
80 Post contains images Dynkrisolo : MD-11 forever: Sure I don't, but I do know Airbus had paid SQ money for not meeting a few guarantees specified in their contract. I also know the UK g
81 Post contains images MD-11 forever : @Dynkrisolo "Perhaps, you have your own personal agenda? " I happen to have a life besides this board and therefore I don't need to have a personal ag
82 Post contains images Dynkrisolo : MD-11 forever: Well, you can only assume what I do know and what I don't know. I believe it had happened to you before that you couldn't disclose some
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will AirTran Finally Take The 737-800? posted Mon Nov 6 2006 22:51:43 by AkjetBlue
Will KL/AF Take The Ex-TAM F-100's? posted Thu Jun 16 2005 17:50:55 by KL911
Who Really Made The 777? posted Sun Oct 7 2001 05:39:29 by Lehpron
Will Qantas Eventually Get The B 777-200ER/300ER? posted Fri Mar 9 2001 04:11:37 by United Airline
Will Delta Go For The 777-300? posted Sat Dec 23 2000 07:57:34 by ILUV767
Will Aeromexico Go For The 777? posted Tue Oct 3 2000 04:57:22 by Dellatorre
Will Alaska Airlines Take The Nestea Plunge? posted Mon Feb 14 2000 23:04:03 by FrontierMan
Will Boeing Let The 777 Die? posted Fri Oct 27 2006 04:13:11 by KSUpilot
Will VS Order The 748I? posted Tue Aug 1 2006 20:09:30 by NYC777
Airbus, Why Not Take On The 777? posted Sun Jul 2 2006 06:26:10 by Tangowhisky