Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Did AF Get The B773 And Not The A346?  
User currently offlineSjoerd From Belgium, joined Aug 2003, 361 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 12058 times:

Apart from the A333, A345 and A346 AF operated, operates or will operate all off the Airbus series. Why did they go for Boeing instead of Airbus with the B773 ?


Flanders + Wallonnia + Brussels = the UNITED STATES of BELGIUM
81 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBrons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3015 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 11855 times:

Some suspect due to existing deposits with Boeing that they would have forfeited. These deposits ran into the 100's of millions in USD, so they ordered the 777 series.


Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
User currently offlineJoleb From Belgium, joined Oct 2003, 290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 11850 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


User currently offlineJoleb From Belgium, joined Oct 2003, 290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 11825 times:

and also financial reasons for sure

User currently offlineHorus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 59
Reply 4, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 11800 times:

When it comes to its long-haul fleet AF management said they operate different aircraft to suite every market, hence the wide variety; 332s, 343s, 772ERs, 773ERs, 743s, 744s and soon the A380.


EGYPT: A 7,000 Year Old Civilisation
User currently offlineBrons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3015 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 11797 times:

There's some articles about AF and the 777 on the following web site:

http://www.airtransportbiz.com/

It might be notable also that Snecma has a large risk share portion on the GE90.



Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
User currently offlineRoberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 11764 times:

Why not, They already have the 772ER, so there is no commonality issues. Infact the 773's will balance the AF Boeing fleet nicely with the Airbus.

User currently offlinePilot21 From Ireland, joined Oct 1999, 1384 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 11686 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.


Aircraft I've flown: A300/A310/A320/A321/A330/A340/B727/B732/B733/B734/B735/B738/B741/B742/B744/DC10/MD80/IL62/Bae146/AR
User currently offlineMindscape From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 11653 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.



User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 11606 times:

I would rather love to see A346 on AF fleets than B773.

why?

AF's choice is unique in that they're the only non-Asian airline to ever order a 773 model.


User currently offlineNW747-400 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 502 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 11458 times:

Maintenance: 2 engines vs 4 will save a lot in maintenance, fewer systems, less weight, fewer things to check in inspections...

User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16307 posts, RR: 56
Reply 11, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 11406 times:

The 773 makes sense due to commonality with the 772.

What makes less sense is why AF chose the 772 after also ordering the 343. Very few airlines order both competing types.

The AF assortment of 332/343/772/773/744/380 types for longhaul is unnecessarily complex.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineNW747-400 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 502 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 11357 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.

User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 13, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 11283 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.


User currently offlineRoberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 11251 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.

I think it is good to see airlines with both A/C


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dimitris Triadafillou
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Corey Karls



User currently offlineHorus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 11181 times:

Yyy717

'Very few airlines order both competing types'

Here is a list of airlines who operate both the A340 and B777:

Egyptair
Cathay Pacific
Air France
Austrian Airline Group
Thai (when their A345/6s are delivered)
Kuwait airways
Emirates
Singapore Airlines

Have I missed any?



EGYPT: A 7,000 Year Old Civilisation
User currently offlineYUL332LX From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 820 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 11093 times:

The AF assortment of 332/343/772/773/744/380 types for longhaul is unnecessarily complex.

Not really. Commonality tends to lose importance as fleet grows especially with 40+ 772/773 and 35+ 330/340 and 30+ 744 (including F version)



E volavo, volavo felice più in alto del sole, e ancora più su mentre il mondo pian piano spariva lontano laggiù ...
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 17, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 11055 times:

Flight International ran a big article on the dispute after RR was choosen as the sole supplier of the new A340 engines.

GE could easily have offered a plane, as could have PW. They chose not to at the time.

They are smart, Boeing is a far better choice.

Yet another carefully measured response from the peanut gallery.

Maintenance: 2 engines vs 4 will save a lot in maintenance, fewer systems, less weight, fewer things to check in inspections...

Untrue.

N


User currently offlineQb001 From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2053 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 10921 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.
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 19, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 10715 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.

Regards,
Frank



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17068 posts, RR: 66
Reply 20, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 10601 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."
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 10585 times:

and potentially a lighter wing.

...wing has to be sufficiently fortified to hold the outboard engines.


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4970 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 10556 times:

A simple answer would be the fact that AF's fleet are solely GE powered & the A345-A346 are only available with RR power plants!  Big thumbs up  Big thumbs up

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17068 posts, RR: 66
Reply 23, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 10544 times:

Thus the "potentially"  Big grin

Anyway I have this to say for A vs B: http://www.reallifecomics.com/daily.php?strip_id=1172



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineAzmd80 From Italy, joined Nov 2003, 290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (10 years 6 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 10403 times:

Mindscape,
are you sure that B773 freight capacity is larger than A346? The reasons You have posted in favour of 773 are the same than in favour of A346.

In my opinion the main difference are two:
1. the maintenance cost of a two engine powered instead of four
2. the preference of GE engine.

Probably also the internal config of 777 are preferred by AF: remember that only these aircraft will mantain 3 class configuration, that means that all the high revenue route will be flown by 777.

bie


25 KLMflyer : I think it's more a Marketing-driven choice. AF plans to customize all markets according to demand and required type of service. The intercontinental
26 Mindscape : Salve Azmd80, I don't think the internal 3 class configuration on B777 is a good reason, they could do so on the A346 as well. I don't think that the
27 Post contains images Solnabo : Dont worry about 773ER, they gonna look like Cessna´s when AF A380 lands on CDG!! Michael//SE
28 Phollingsworth : I don't think that the cost maintenance of 2 engines intead of 4 is lower. There is a tremendous amount of evidence that 2 engines reduces O&S cost si
29 LMP737 : Stationblue: In the event of engine failure on takeoff run the 777 is capable of flying on one engine. In addition the four engines on the A340-500/60
30 Post contains images Planespotting : this thread could be nothing BUT Airbus vs. Boeing. Obviously the triple 7 is the better airliner
31 Srbmod : In some markets, AF flies both the A340-300 and the 777-200. ATL is one for example. The afternoon flight is an A340 while the evening flight to CDG i
32 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : I don't think that the cost maintenance of 2 engines intead of 4 is lower. The first three words of that statement sum it up quite nicely I am pretty
33 LH423 : And since AF doesn't have to fly over the Pacific, they don't need 4-engines planes... Ah...one forgets their CDG-LAX-PPT rotation. While not the enti
34 Boeing767-300 : Dont worry about 773ER, they gonna look like Cessna´s when AF A380 lands on CDG!! Michael//SE You may be right but a full 773ER will be a very profit
35 Roberta : hhmm yes the 773 is going to more profitable than an A380, of course both will be nowhere near as profitable than the 737 due to the smaller capacity
36 Pacificjet : You guys wouldn't stop for a minute and actually think that the B777-300ER may have significantly better economics than the A340-600. 1. Seat Count 2.
37 Post contains images GKirk : RE: The 343 and 772....the answer is obvious AF were thinking of the customers - some people like fast climbs(343), and others like slow climbs(772)
38 FLYSSC : LH423, LAX-PPT is really not THAT long : 8h05 ... 3558nm (4095mi or 6590km) just like a YYZ-ZRH or YUL-FCO...
39 Mark777300 : without getting involved in this A vs B junk, the reason behind AF choosing the 773ER over the A346 is based on the engine selection. All of it's fle
40 Shenzhen : AF will be retiring/selling the A340 in the not too distant future. There is little doubt that they won't be buying 340-3s to replace them (so why buy
41 FLYSSC : Shenzhen, AF will NOT buy any kind of A343. AF will NOT buy the 7e7 (well not within the next 10/15 years...) The A343 is the next type scheduled to l
42 ND : Wow FLYSSC You seem to have this voice of absoluteness when making such statements. What are the warrants behind these? How do you know that there is
43 Adria : The fact that they are the only non-Asian carrier that use the 773ER says it all. I think the A345/-346 are going to be a part of the AF fleet in the
44 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : I think the A345/-346 are going to be a part of the AF fleet in the future. ...based on?
45 Roberta : I think we can really put this thread to bed by saying that AF chose the 773ER due to the choice of engines. They are never going to get A345/6's beca
46 Adria : ...based on? The engines probably weren't the main reason why AF got the 773ER. It is more economical to have the A346 because of the commonality with
47 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : The engines probably weren't the main reason why AF got the 773ER *buzz* Wrong, try again It is more economical to have the A346 because of the common
48 Copaair737 : Will AF transfer the LAX-PPT route to SFO? If the 773ER is going to be used on LAX, but not PPT, and SFO will get the 744, will the flight run CDG-SFO
49 ConcordeBoy : Will AF transfer the LAX-PPT route to SFO? They've shown no intention thereof thus far.
50 Post contains images Adria : "*buzz* Wrong, try again ", "Sorry slugger, but you couldn't have struck out harder on this one Even if AF was the type of airline to consider commona
51 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : and because the A346HGW is coming Only according to external press releases. Sorta funny that there's no official evidence at all to suggest such a mo
52 Adria : "Only according to external press releases. Sorta funny that there's no official evidence at all to suggest such a model is in development"........ we
53 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : we're talking about Airbus not Boeing ...how astute of you to notice
54 DfwRevolution : we're talking about Airbus not Boeing Airbus has never published anything regarding an A346HGW, mentioned it in any press release, ext. It is in some
55 Adria : "Airbus has never published anything regarding an A346HGW, mentioned it in any press release, ext. It is in someways more of a "paper airplane" than t
56 FLYSSC : ND, AF buying A345/346 or 7e7 would be a nonsense and would go against the policy of the airline in matter of fleet rationalization decided the last y
57 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Anyway, the A345 can't fly nonstop CDG-PPT or CDG-NOU... and the B772LR won't be able to fly it nonstop either. Not true. Both aircraft have the specs
58 Post contains links and images FLYSSC : ConcordeBoy, Can the A345/B772LR fly nonstop FULL load CDG-PPT / CDG-NOU ? The answer is No. Could they fly these routes with load restrictions ? Sure
59 Adria : "Also, UU just opted to lease another 772ER. Ironic that two of the three longhaul French carriers are shunning Airbus for their longhaul Flagship nee
60 Rjpieces : "AF is the ONLY non-Asian carrier for this aircraft and because the A346HGW is coming it will probably stay so." Way to make sense! AF stated that the
61 ConcordeBoy : Could they fly these routes with load restrictions ? Sure ! just like an A332 flew TLS-SYD or TLS-MEL (can't remember ) Get real. There exists a signi
62 Anthsaun : Could it be just because it is better?
63 MATURRO727 : Hey ! personally I think that Boeing is a better option for AF, its my opinion... Cheers. MATURRO727
64 Adria : "that BA,KL, and AZ have ALL been rumored to be looking at 773ERs.".......you dais it yourself.......been rumored Alitalia probably won't order any ai
65 Roberta : Also, UU just opted to lease another 772ER. Ironic that two of the three longhaul French carriers are shunning Airbus for their longhaul Flagship need
66 Adria : "...how astute of you to notice "........don't worry, you just got it wrong(again)
67 Rjpieces : about as ironic as when an airline, which at one point was virtually Boeing Airways, has emassed a fleet of almost 150 Airbus planes Most airlines wer
68 Adria : "But if you hear that an airline is looking at a plane and might order it, the rumor is still active. There was a thread on A.net a few weeks back abo
69 ConcordeBoy : hmm what about Northwest? What about them? And AF operates the A343 also ...course, the fact that AF opted for the 772ER not long after operating the
70 Post contains links Roberta : Only according to external press releases. Sorta funny that there's no official evidence at all to suggest such a model is in development http://www.a
71 YUL332LX : Thanks for the links Roberta. So MTOW is 376 tonnes for the A346HGW compared to 365 tonnes for the A346.[Edited 2004-04-26 02:44:24]
72 DfwRevolution : Ahh.. about time. Thanks Roberta. Just to save everyone from having to read through the article- The deal signed this morning includes two A321s, eigh
73 Adria : "...course, the fact that AF opted for the 772ER not long after operating the A343 says quite a bit. Compound that with the fact that their A343s will
74 Roberta : Doesnt the 773ER weigh 170 tonnes. you got a link to those figures DFW
75 Dionysus : Simple answer: GE/Snecma over RR
76 AV757 : the difference in weight between the normal A346 and the heavy gross weight model is only 11 tonnes. Out of which you have to take into account that H
77 Post contains links DfwRevolution : you got a link to those figures DFW No problem- http://www.boeing.com/assocproducts/aircompat/acaps/777rsec2.pdf The data you are looking for is on pa
78 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Good work Roberta.... so Airbus finally acknowledges their Dream-on Liner. Good stuff
79 Post contains images Roberta : Dream-on Liner It beats the Wet-Dream liner It says 145 for the 772LR and 167 for the 773, so now im very confused. I googled it today and got 160t fo
80 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : cant Boeing just publish ther empty weight on their website It's on there... but not in the technical specs summary of the 777 family aread Dig for it
81 DfwRevolution : Yeah.. the AIrbus Orders/Deliveries data is pretty crummy as well
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...
Why Did LY Pick 777-200 And Not 777-300? posted Thu Apr 4 2002 00:26:45 by Shlomoz
Why Did Mexicana Get The CFM56 Engine? posted Tue Sep 21 2004 00:05:39 by Ar385
Why Did Twa Sell To Aa? And The Twa Story? posted Sat Feb 7 2004 22:57:23 by Bmi330
Where Did BA Get The GE-powered A319s And A320s? posted Fri Dec 19 2003 22:02:53 by Thrust
Why Did AF Not Buy The Mercure? posted Mon Dec 18 2000 07:12:13 by Astrojet
Why Did Midway Get Rid Of The A320? posted Tue Sep 26 2000 07:06:32 by Rotate777
Why Did AF Not Choose The 330? posted Fri Jun 23 2000 12:40:32 by Maidoftheseas
Why Did GSO Expand The Airport posted Thu Aug 10 2006 09:12:37 by Gsoflyer
Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320? posted Sat Aug 5 2006 06:20:10 by MSPGUY
Why Did Airbus Make The A350 Wider? posted Sat Jul 15 2006 02:22:34 by 787KQ