Joleb From Belgium, joined Oct 2003, 290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (11 years 10 months 9 hours ago) and read 12965 times:
because they got much more 777's than 340 and 330's.
Their most people moving or most revenue getting destinations are already operated by 777. also on the 777 is 2-3-2 in C and 3-3-3 in Y
compared to 2-2-2 in c with airbus. dunno about coach airbus
Pilot21 From Ireland, joined Oct 1999, 1427 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (11 years 10 months 9 hours ago) and read 12801 times:
When the A340-600 project was launched, AF publicly stated that unless more then 1 engine maker was included in the project it would not be ordering any A346's as it didn't have or like the RR engine choice. Flight International ran a big article on the dispute after RR was choosen as the sole supplier of the new A340 engines.
Mindscape From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (11 years 10 months 9 hours ago) and read 12768 times:
I would rather love to see A346 on AF fleets than B773.
But the choice of the B773 is much more strategic regarding AF long haul policy, freighter business, cost cutting.
Two main reasons among others are :
1) it is not possible to have GE engines on A345 and A346, while AF only takes aircraft that use GE/Snecma engines : cost optimization on one family product
2) freighter capacity on pax configuration. Indeed, the B773 offers the same cargo capacity with passenger than the first version of the B747. Therefore, on the same destination, AF can increase its revenues with passengers on one side and freighter on the other.
NW747-400 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 506 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (11 years 10 months 8 hours ago) and read 12472 times:
The AF long haul fleet sort of appears like the airline is marketing their product as airlines did in the pre-deregulation era: Fly our airline because we fly the coolest airplanes. Its similiar to when the 747 was unveiled; anyone who was anyone had the 747 because it was the cool ride.
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 55
Reply 13, posted (11 years 10 months 8 hours ago) and read 12398 times:
AF went with the B773 for one very important reason, they are extremely happy with the B772 performance and wanted more of the same, thus, they went with the B773.
AF does have a wide variety of longrange types - they try to match route requirements with aircraft type a bit more precisely than most. Why does AF fly both the A343 and B772 (most airlines go with one or other and consider the two types competitors)? AF sees the A343 and B772 in 2 different segments: The A343 for thin long haul routes and very long haul routes and the B772 for higher density long haul. The 773 will likely replace the 744 on some premium routes and the displaced 744s will go on to eventually replace the remaining 743s flying AF leisure routes to destinations like the French Caribbean and other high density lower yeild services.
There is also the rumor that AF may eventually phase out the A343 (not immediately, but over the next 5 years) and replace the type with a mix of A332s and B777s (surprise, the same types that KLM went with!).......could happen, AF has already disposed of its A342s. Finally, AF has no intention of purchasing the A345 as they simply do not require the ultra-long range type in their route system.
Roberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 10 months 8 hours ago) and read 12366 times:
What makes less sense is why AF chose the 772 after also ordering the 343
Having both A/C allows Air France to match very explicitly, the most appropriate route with the appropriate plane.
Both aircraft have there advantages, Air France decided that the A343 is more efficient on long thinner routes while the 777 is on heavier routes. The A340 are also configured with higher economy seats and are ideal for Leisure Destinations like SXM, whereas the 777 is appropriate for routes such as GRU HKG and BJS. The presense of both Aircraft also allows AF to adapt to changing markets quickly and get maximum benefit.
Qb001 From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2053 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (11 years 10 months 6 hours ago) and read 12036 times:
I think that if AF could go back in time, it wouldn't order the 343. Former AF CEO - Blanc, Leblanc, don't remember exactly - caused some sort of a commotion in France 10 years ago or so when he declared that AF's ideal fleet would be made of Airbus for narrow bodies and Boeing for large bodies. The "Boeing" part didn't go well.
Actually, because of its geography and the market it serves, 777 are quite a logical choice for AF. In my view, a 4-engine is really only needed over the Pacific, maybe the South Atlantic. Other than that, twin engines are good enough. And since AF doesn't have to fly over the Pacific, they don't need 4-engines planes, except for the very large markets that will be served by the 380 (JFK, NRT, LAX, HKG, YUL, etc).
I think AF is flying the 343 simply because they are stuck with them. If you're looking to buy some second-hand 343s, give AF a call. I'm pretty sure someone would call back: "Vous voulez acheter nos 343 ? Mais bien sûr Monsieur"...
Never let the facts get in the way of a good theory.
Leskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 68
Reply 19, posted (11 years 10 months ago) and read 11830 times:
There's nothing new in this thread that didn't get mentioned in the numerous threads about the same subject in the last weeks...
Air France did not prefer the 773ER over the A346 because...
... the Boeing is the far better choice
... they're thinking of dumping their A343s in favor of B777s
... they cannot get rid of their other Airbusses
... they've got a 2-3-2 config in C-class and 3-3-3 in Y-Class**
... of whatever other ridiculous A vs B reason someone here will come up with.
**: this really must be one of the strangest things that I've ever heard of being listed as an advantage of the B777 over the A346...
Others have written it in this thread, I've written the same in numerous other threads as well: Air France does not operate aircraft who's engines are not made by GE/Snecma.
That is THE reason why AF did not order the A346 - unfortunately, GE chose not to offer an engine, although - as I understand it (from several posts by, among others, ConcordeBoy and Gigneil) - Airbus does not have an exclusivity contract on the A340NGs as Boeing does on the B777NGs, so - should GE at any point want to offer an engine, they still could.
Which, at least in the case of AF would be academic: the B773ER already has GE engines, AF has already ordered them and is taking delivery of them, so I very much doubt that they'll switch over to the A346.
Both are great aircraft. Both do their jobs. Both will be in service for very long times. Both are very well capable of making money for their operators.
Get over this constant A vs B crap - or at least back up your comments with facts and proof, not just things like "I heard from so-and-so" or "X looks better than Y": the fact that just about half of the discussions on a.net have to end in an A vs B discussion really is disappointing.
Starlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17492 posts, RR: 66
Reply 20, posted (11 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11716 times:
4 engines may well be the same weight or lighter than two for corresponding MTOW since a 2 holer needs each engine to be able to lift the entire plane, while the 4 holer only need do the same job with three.
The engines on the A340 are much smaller individually than those on the B777.
Also 4 holers have the outer engines further outboard than 2 holers, meaning less bending moment and potentially a lighter wing.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."