Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Who Will Buy The Singapore A340-500's?  
User currently offlineVsa340600 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2004, 37 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 23535 times:

Hello,

With all the talk of Singapore replacing the A345's with B777LR'S on routes to Los Angeles and New York, Who would buy them if Singapore chose to sell them. I know that Emirates has a few A345's in their fleet and would fit in quite nice, but what other airlines. Virgin Atlantic could find a use for them in replacing the A343's but they are buying loads of the A346's and may not fit in. Lufthansa has a large A330/340 fleet and Lufthansa could find a few routes to fly them too. Iberia could use them into Latin America alongside the A346's. Air France could also use them into South America alongside the B744's.

Anybody got any idea's to what Singapore airlines would do with them.

Cheers and have a great 2005.

VSA340600


Virgin Atlantic all the way!!!
202 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAirCascadia From Canada, joined Dec 2004, 41 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 23314 times:

AC could do with them,they are still looking aircraft and already only have 2 of them

User currently offlineHorus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 60
Reply 2, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 23306 times:

I would say Iran Air is a possibilty. They tried to get their hands on AC's A345s when the Canadian carrier deferred the delivery of their aircraft. And if reports on this website are true that they'll lease Blue Wing A332s, then the A345 would make sence and allow them to retire the 7 B747s they currently operate that have an average age of 27 years.

Horus

p.s. Happy New Year Everybody...My first post of 2005!

[Edited 2005-01-01 18:26:35]


EGYPT: A 7,000 Year Old Civilisation
User currently offlineA388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9692 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 23229 times:

Air France can be ruled out as they are loyal to GE-powered aircraft.

A388


User currently offlineAlitalia744 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 4741 posts, RR: 45
Reply 4, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 23207 times:

AF is committed to the 777 family for many reasons, including the aforementioned GE engine choice, but more importantly, due to the aircraft's capabilities.

-g



Some see lines, others see between the lines.
User currently onlineEddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7558 posts, RR: 43
Reply 5, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 23140 times:

Is SQ really going to get rid of its A345's? So far I don't think that SQ has placed an order for 772LR's.

If SQ indeed replaces the A345's with 772LR's, it would be interesting to see if the new planes are configured with executiveconomy seats and Raffles class only or if a more traditional economy/Raffles/First or economy/Raffles configuration is chosen.

As for who would buy them, I wish it were MX for the long-rumored flights to Asia. I would think that an A345 would be perfectly capable of doing MEX-TIJ-PVG (hopefully someone can confirm). I know, however, this is wishful thinking. Maybe AC would get them.



Next flights: MEX-GRU (AM 77E), GRU-GIG (JJ A320), SDU-CGH (G3 73H), GRU-MEX (JJ A332).
User currently offlineBMED From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2004, 860 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 23107 times:

SQ don't seem to have much success with A340's. The last lot they had ended up been sold for boeing a/c. Shame really. Maybe bmi will to fly longer destinations from MAN. I wish!


Living the jetset life! No better way to be
User currently offlineGreaser From Bahamas, joined Jan 2004, 1096 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 23064 times:

If SQ indeed replaces the A345's with 772LR's, it would be interesting to see if the new planes are configured with executiveconomy seats and Raffles class only or if a more traditional economy/Raffles/First or economy/Raffles configuration is chosen.

Hopefully it will be 3-class, as I know of quite a few passengers who don't understand how a premium (at least for economy passengers) flight does not allow them to have first class seats. Alot of rich people who don't fly Business want to do SIN-LAX/EWR/JFK nonstop.



Now you're really flying
User currently offlineBMED From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2004, 860 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 23045 times:

It always seems a waste of space to have 3 class on an a/c like the 345!


Living the jetset life! No better way to be
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 9, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 22992 times:

Well, first of all, SQ has to order B772LRs - and while I agree that this is probably more of a question of "when" than "if", it still has to happen first.

Then, it's a question of what type of deal Boeing offers SQ - I doubt they'll be offering the same deal as with the A340-300s, because the market for A340-500s is much smaller than for the -300, so it would be a lot harder for Boeing to place the aircraft.

In other words, SQ will either have to find new owners for the planes - or, they might keep them and use them for long-hauls on which either the capacity of the B772LR is not needed (and they could fit a First Class on the planes), or where a First Class is not needed.

As for other carriers for the planes - I really don't see what LH or VS could do with A340-500s - both have no routes that would need the range.

I guess that either AC or EK are probably the most likely candidates.

Regards,
Frank



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlinePlaneSmart From New Zealand, joined Dec 2004, 870 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 22979 times:

A number of airlines must be re-evaluating transits thru US airports, following increased transit formalities - QF, BA, Air NZ

If the price is right, any number of ME and Asian-based airlines, plus throw in FedEx and UPS if a fire sale price.


User currently offlineSunriseValley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 4811 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 22873 times:


Don't forget that SQ are permitted very accelerated depreciation and thus can put these on the used market with relatively low hours/cycles and at substantial discounts to new frames if they wish.


User currently offlineAC7E7 From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 644 posts, RR: 23
Reply 12, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 22737 times:

I agree, AC should acquire them if possible.


Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.
User currently offlineAndrewuber From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2528 posts, RR: 41
Reply 13, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 22593 times:

Hell, I bet Sheikh Moe (EK) will write them a check for them. He seems to collect Airbuses. Maybe he'll order a few hundred more this year - I'm sure he can find SOMETHING to do with them.  Big thumbs up


[Edited 2005-01-01 20:40:37]


I'd rather shoot BAD_MOTIVE
User currently offlineSlawko From Canada, joined May 1999, 3799 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 22201 times:

Last I heard ACA isnt entirely happy with them either...


"Clive Beddoe says he favours competition, but his actions do not support that idea." Robert Milton - CEO Air Canada
User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 22140 times:

If anything, they would be transferred across to SALE and leased on. I doubt whether Boeing would want burning again on aircraft as they were with the A343 fleet.

SQ could also retain them for route development. All I've seen so far is speculation and idle gossip, nothing concrete or confirmed. There are areas in which SQ has no major presence at the moment for which the four holers could be deployed, or even detanked to increase their payload over shorter distances. There is also the commonality issue as the A380 fleet will have broadly similar cockpits, and cranking up the hours on an A345 would make transition to the A380 faster and cheaper for flight crews.

Far too many variables. Nothing but speculation so fat.


User currently offlineJoFMO From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 2211 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 21537 times:

It would makes me wonder if SQ still operates the 345 in 5 years. Nearly everybody here expects them to replace their 345 with 772LR in the mid-term.

I expect there are quite a few others who would like to operate an 345, but are not financially healthy enough.
EK, AC, SA, QF, TG, MH all have an interest in C-class aircrafts and could take SQ's 345 if the price is right.


User currently offlineAC7E7 From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 644 posts, RR: 23
Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 21002 times:

Last I heard ACA isnt entirely happy with them either...

Please explain; what is it they aren't happy with?



Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.
User currently offlineRj777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1772 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 20922 times:

Wonder what SQ are going to name the 772LRs?

Leadership 7?


User currently offlineUnited_fan From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 7442 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 20855 times:

Greaser,I read that the reason SQ doesn't have F class on the 345's is because they're weight-restricted and the F class seats weigh too much.


'Empathy was yesterday...Today, you're wasting my Mother-F'ing time' - Heat.
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 20, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 20492 times:

One possibility is that as SQ starts to take delivery of B777-200LRs to serve LAX and EWR, the A340-500s will temporarily be deployed on new nonstops to SFO and ORD until SQ has enough B777-200LRs to serve those markets. It is conceivable that SQ might order 5 B777-200LRs with options on 5 more, then serve LAX and EWR with the B777-200LRs and SFO and ORD with the A340-500s until loads and yields can be determined, and only then decide whether or not to exercise the options for the additional 5 B777-200LRs.

User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3238 posts, RR: 22
Reply 21, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 19890 times:

I'm sure SQ can "persuade" Boeing to buy their A345s, especially if a large
7E7 order is on the table, in addition to the 777-200LR one. And, if anything
else, can anyone think of a better promo for the 777-200LR than an airline
dumping its competitor to buy it? Come on... Boeing will do everything possible
for that to happen... But will it happen? Only time will tell.

Happy New Year everyone! 2005 is set to be a very interesting year for aviation!

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12082 posts, RR: 18
Reply 22, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 19186 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Boeing offers SQ - I doubt they'll be offering the same deal as with the A340-300s, because the market for A340-500s is much smaller than for the -300, so it would be a lot harder for Boeing to place the aircraft. EK would snap them up quickly for expansion and more direct flights. The A345 are popular on Australian direct flights


A number of airlines must be re-evaluating transits thru US airports, following increased transit formalities - QF, BA, Air NZ NZ is a big no. NZ have ordered the B777 and have big options on more B777 family members. NZ have stated that they don't need the range of the B772LR and A345, so no need for the A345. Qantas is considering the B772LR and A345. I think a QF order will be announced early this year. One of our Aussie friends can confirm. I don't think BA would get the A345 as they don't have any A340s in the fleet. B772LR would be the most likly ultra long-range aircraft.

The B772LR can hold about 30 more passengers then the A345.


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3238 posts, RR: 22
Reply 23, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 18987 times:

777ER,

Qantas is considering the B772LR and A345. I think a QF order will be announced early this year.

Hang on... Wasn't it Qantas who explicitly said (very recently) that they didn't
need such a long range plane (777-200LR or A340-500), as it makes more
economic sense for them to put more people in a larger plane, even if they
have to stop for fuel on the way?

But I totally agree with you on the BA comment. If they need the range, the
B777-200LR would be the only option for them.

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offline9V-SVC From Singapore, joined Oct 2001, 1796 posts, RR: 10
Reply 24, posted (9 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 18981 times:

How are the load factors for the SIN-LAX and SIN-EWR flights ? I don't think there is a need for an increase of capacity for these flights.


Airliners is the wings of my life.
25 Dalecary : Qantas is considering the 773ER and 346 and not the 345 or 772LR.
26 N743AS : SAA maybe? I heard from a Springbok Pilot that they aren't too happy with the A346. The A350 may make more sense... My namesake is being scrapped... -
27 Sebring : I agree, AC should acquire them if possible. I thought that until recently, but I don't think that is going to happen. AC is looking for a more compre
28 Soaringadi : I think that there is a possibility of AI leasing them
29 Airindia : maybe even 9W. since the GOI has cleared the path for private carriers to fly intl routes. 9W cud use them for the european routes.
30 B747-4U3 : I read somewhere that Ait Tahiti Nui were considering the 345 for non-stop routes to Paris. Perhaps they would take them?
31 Post contains images Udo : Hell, I bet Sheikh Moe (EK) will write them a check for them. Who? Is that one of Mickey Mouse's cousins? He seems to collect Airbuses. I still don't
32 777ER : I read somewhere that Air Tahiti Nui were considering the 345 for non-stop routes to Paris. Perhaps they would take them? I think I read on here that
33 Post contains images Behramjee : SAA are in $ 1 billion debt so no buying spree from them for a while!!! Thyere returning many A 319s and few A 340s as well. Airlines that have the ca
34 CaptainTim : i'm sorry this might seem stupid but would orient thai buy these A340-500 or are they too new/ expensive fora budget airline like them to afford?? sor
35 Leskova : SAA maybe? I heard from a Springbok Pilot that they aren't too happy with the A346. Nope - SAA is quite happy with them. But, as Behramjee mentioned,
36 StickShaker : Qantas is considering the 773ER and 346 and not the 345 or 772LR. Sorry my mistake Qantas' press releases on this issue have been somewhat vague. If
37 Aviation : Wouldn't it be a possibility that SQ would keep the craft and perhaps replace some other older craft don't know much about their fleet but could this
38 Anxebla : WHEN and just when SQ do it (that replacement) it's possible talking about what airline could buying the SQ's A340-500's, but not now. It's a non-sens
39 AlitaliaMD11 : hey, if SQ where to let go of there A340-500s which would make me really sad becuase I love those planes, than I would guess that Thai might try to na
40 Karan69 : If all the comittes in the great indian civil ministry allow it AI or IC could get their hands on them. we could well see one of Indias private carrie
41 Post contains images AirbusfanYYZ : With current operators of the 345 being limited to SQ, AC, and EK the most likely choice is EK. But I hope AC picks them up, it will really help their
42 Keesje : It seems the authorities are in no hurry to grant the 772LR ETOPS330 & that is likely not the greatest selling point of the 777LR sofar.. (anybody not
43 Planesarecool : I think any operator in the Middle East/West Asia could benifit from them. Airlines like Pakistan International, Kuwait, Uzbekistan, Air India could g
44 GKirk : PIA have the 777-200LR on order, they have no need to go for the 345 as well
45 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : It seems the authorities are in no hurry to grant the 772LR ETOPS330 ...'course, not having even begun flight testing might have some'n to do with tha
46 Sebring : With current operators of the 345 being limited to SQ, AC, and EK the most likely choice is EK. But I hope AC picks them up, it will really help their
47 Trex8 : Boeing is not going to takea bunch of nearly brand new planes in exchange for anything after their experience with the SQ A343. They were stuck with t
48 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Their refusal to take CIs almost brand new A343s in a similar exchange to that they gave SQ was why CI went for A333s 2 years ago. Heck, even Airbus r
49 WingnutMN : Funny, no one has mentioned NW yet, they seem interested in both the 7E7 and the A350. Both offer long range, and low to mid 200 hundreds payloads. Wh
50 SunriseValley : Sebring........... Your statement is quite a teaser ! It should be good enough to extend the "thread" for at least 50 posts as some of the "re-equipme
51 Post contains images AirbusfanYYZ : Sebring, care to elaborate? You can't leave us hangin like that! Cheers, Kaz
52 ConcordeBoy : Funny, no one has mentioned NW yet ...because the suggestion falls just shy of ridiculous? and help NW on their way to an all-airbus fleet. ...a path
53 Post contains images Boeingfever777 : and help NW on their way to an all-airbus fleet. Yeah ok.... since they are making huge attempts to rid themselves of all those Boeing a/c. I think so
54 777ER : Wouldn't it be a possibility that SQ would keep the craft and perhaps replace some other older craft don't know much about their fleet but could this
55 Spike : All that martketing over-hype of the 'Leadership' and they're scrapping the thing! What a waste of money.
56 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : All that martketing over-hype of the 'Leadership' and they're scrapping the thing! What a waste of money. Not really. SQ ordered the A345 because it w
57 Spike : You'd not catch me flying 16 hours on a twin.
58 NumberTwelve : N743AS: "SAA maybe? I heard from a Springbok Pilot that they aren't too happy with the A346. The A350 may make more sense..." And the boss of the Spri
59 Philsquares : Spike, Can I ask why?
60 WingnutMN : All I was saying is that they would fit into NW business idea......and if you look at NW aircraft orders over the last 15 years, you can see this: Boe
61 Spike : Sure - preety much the same way that I'd be pissed off if a 757 turned up at the gate for a 8 hour flight. Four engines should be compulsory for trans
62 Philsquares : Interesting concept. Care to share your reasoning?
63 Spike : No, can't be arsed. I just wouldn't want a 16hr stint in a twin engined aircraft.
64 Philsquares : Well, that's interesting. I guess I don't get No, can't be arsed
65 Spike : Interesting. Which part of 'No, can't be arsed' dont you get?
66 Philsquares : Spike, I guess you're just another person who's opinions are not based in fact. Another professional armchair aviator who knows everything. LOL....thi
67 Spike : Excuse me, but my opinions are based on fact. I would not want a 16hr stint in a twin engine plane. Fact. What part of that don't you now understand?
68 Philsquares : No, excuse me. Your initial statement was no one would catch you flying 16 hours in a twin. I merely asked you why. Your response was 4 engines should
69 777ER : Four engines should be compulsory for trans-pacific flights. Even thou two engines are more safer and less prone to break down then four engined.
70 Planesarecool : "PIA have the 777-200LR on order, they have no need to go for the 345 as well" I was well aware of that, however i was just using it as an example to
71 Trex8 : Concorde boy If you can read Chinese and ever read any of the local Taiwan press, you would realize you are not in the loop in regards to decision mak
72 Philsquares : Spike, Have you considered therapy? All I did was ask a simple question. I hate to burst your bubble but ETOPS is statistically much more reliable tha
73 Post contains links and images Gilesdavies : They would fit GF's fleet perfectly! They have quite a good relationship with SQ for purchasing their A340-300's. This would allow GF to operate non-s
74 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : If you can read Chinese ...which I can; next! and ever read any of the local Taiwan press ...which I do, hell, I have a friend on-staff at the Apple D
75 Spike : My bet on who would buy them (A340-500s) is Virgin America for their Trans-Am and Pacific routes. Buy Bye United.
76 Trex8 : Concordeboy If you really have been reading their press you will know that what I said has been reported. Whether its all true I cannot say for certai
77 Boeing nut : Sure - preety much the same way that I'd be pissed off if a 757 turned up at the gate for a 8 hour flight. Four engines should be compulsory for trans
78 Milan320 : Slawko: Last I heard ACA isnt entirely happy with them either... Did you not mean AC's 343 by any chance, instead? Just asking, as according to Milton
79 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : The Apple Daily, as you should well know is about as reliable as the National Enquirer. Though to be fair by East Asian standards, much of the Taiwan
80 SU184 : Would hate to see SQ get rid of A340's again, Boeing seems to be doing a good job, lets see what happens with the A380's two years after they receive
81 WhiteHatter : The "volcanic encounter" you mention did not involve a twin... My friend was captain of that flight! I'll shut up now....
82 Jacobin777 : "You'd not catch me flying 16 hours on a twin. " hmmm...aren't some flights already boardering on that...i.e. EWR-HKG? Leave Thu, Jan 27 Continental A
83 ConcordeBoy : Would hate to see SQ get rid of A340's again why? ...if they no longer want them, and they once again fall second-rate to the 777 on the mission profi
84 WingnutMN : No 777, but their was a the Air Transat A330 that almost went in the drink......And was the volcanic ash flight the British Airways flight over Indone
85 WhiteHatter : There was the ET 767, but that was in a hijack situation and it was ditched close to a beach. I'vee got no problems flying in a big twin over ten hour
86 HAWK21M : Jet Airways [9W] or Air Sahara [S2] probably. With permission to go International on.Maybe they could look at these. regds MEL
87 777ER : My bet on who would buy them (A340-500s) is Virgin America for their Trans-Am and Pacific routes. Virgin America is a LCC providing Domestic flights i
88 Zeus419 : >> "You'd not catch me flying 16 hours on a twin. "
89 Philsquares : I guess I am confused. On a 3-4 engine aircraft, granted it can continue on to it's destination, although I as a Captain of one those, would probably
90 Zeus419 : >> Speaking as a 744 Captain, I have no problems going anyplace on a 2 engine aircraft. Statistically, the odds of a IFSD are lower on a Twin ETOPS th
91 Philsquares : Zeus, I guess I still don't get it. 1) I would be very surprised to see a fully loaded 340 maintain above FL300 and near normal cruise speed on 3 engi
92 Post contains images Zeus419 : >> I would be very surprised to see a fully loaded 340 maintain above FL300 and near normal cruise speed on 3 engines, especially a -300 2) If, as you
93 Planesarecool : About 6-7 years back i was on a British Airways B747-400 flying from Gatwick-Nairobi-Mauritius. Just as we were over the African coast, one of our out
94 777ER : A340s HAVE continued to their destinations in a few cases And same with B777s and other two engine aircrafts
95 Post contains images Zeus419 : >> And same with B777s and other two engine aircrafts
96 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : And as far as an operator is concerned, with four engines the aircraft can carry on to the destination if one engine fails. "can", but often "don't"..
97 Spike : 'Failureship' is what the 777LR will be termed as. I'm never going to fly that one across the big pond. SQ are nuts if they do this.
98 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : ...ah yes, since I'm sure they'd sorely miss your annual sale-fare patronage
99 Spike : C'est vraiment possible maintenant avec le Virgin Galatic. Tant piss. Ausis, mon patronage de l'avion est beaucoup cher et beaucoup des temps chaque a
100 Soaringadi : ***"Boeing & FAA want to extend ETOPS diversion time limits so much now, that basically they would have it removed altogether to suit their B777 natio
101 Philsquares : spike, who asked you? No one really cares what you think because it's irrelevant. Zeus, No, by fully loaded, I meant just what you did. Why are you ju
102 Spike : And who asked you fullosquares? What a ranting load of bollocks.
103 Sebring : Your statement is quite a teaser ! It should be good enough to extend the "thread" for at least 50 posts as some of the "re-equipment experts" on the
104 N79969 : I believe the driftdown altitude for a 777 following an engine shutdown is 26,000ft MSL and not 15,000ft which seems to be a wild (and intentional) ex
105 Zeus419 : >> ...for one thing, the primary reason modern twins are restricted from transHimalayan operations is because no one's yet to ponied-up the certificat
106 Post contains images Boeing nut : Twins have had some issues with twin shut downs, but it would have brought down, 2, 4, 6, 8 engined aircraft as well. (fuel starvation and volcanic en
107 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Ausis, mon patronage de l'avion est beaucoup cher et beaucoup des temps chaque annee. I'm sure if you keep telling yourself that, you may actually bel
108 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : I gave the volcanic encounter reference to point out that the extra two engines on the 747 made no difference. I'm aware, I simply followed up with th
109 Post contains links CM767 : "The A350 is offered as a sister-ship to the A330 and completes the Airbus wide-body Family with two models, the A350-800 and the A350-900, allowing A
110 Zeus419 : PhilSquares, you maintain that "2) The only aircraft the engines for the 380 will fit is the 400 and that's through the nose. It won't fit through the
111 ConcordeBoy : I have seen news of a 737-200 taking off with one engine, and the other left behind on the runway, a 330 with a simulated engine failure on rotation,
112 Zeus419 : Soaringadi, from your post above:- >> ***"Boeing & FAA want to extend ETOPS diversion time limits so much now, that basically they would have it remov
113 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Yep, That's right! Indeed, he is Your "technology and performance" now means we may hang precariously over a sea full of sharks for around four hours,
114 PlaneSmart : We seem to be a bit off topic, but seeing you've started......... ETOPS is all about managing risk. Manufacturers, airlines, the insurance industry an
115 9V-SPJ : Many airlines operate the 777-200ER over the pacific, KE, UA, SQ, JL, CO, DL for eg. I flew SQ29/30 a B772ER from LAX-SIN via TPE, wonderful aircraft.
116 ConcordeBoy : ETOPS is not about zero risk, it's about acceptable risk. As true as the statement may be... keep in mind that ETOPS operations have a incident/safety
117 Post contains images 777ER : I.M.O. Boeing & FAA want to extend ETOPS diversion time limits so much now, that basically they would have it removed altogether to suit their B777 na
118 Leskova : Regarding ETOPS, wasn't there something about the B747-400 and A340-series already being built to ETOPS specifications, because of the expected expans
119 Nrt1011 : Back to the original question. Being a Canadian, I'd love to see Air Canada pick them up. They already have 2 of them and with Asian travel exploding
120 777ER : Regarding ETOPS, wasn't there something about the B747-400 and A340-series already being built to ETOPS specifications, because of the expected expans
121 Post contains images Zeus419 : 777ER, from your post: >> I.M.O. Boeing & FAA want to extend ETOPS diversion time limits so much now, that basically they would have it removed altoge
122 Post contains images Boeing nut : Believe me, no maintenance is flawless. I have considerable experience in that subject matter. Which airline do you work for again?
123 N79969 : Zeus419, For someone that claims to be knowledgeable about aircraft mx, you seem to misstate and misunderstand a lot of concepts. I am not an A&P but
124 Post contains images Zeus419 : N79969, from your post:- >> Taking the ETOPS risk managment idea further would NEVER result in single engine airplanes. That is deliberate and silly d
125 N79969 : Zeus, Since you have spent a great deal of time presenting melodramatic and highly unlikely scenarios as imminent risks and also have some sort of axe
126 Wdleiser : Spike How ignorant can you get? Twin Engine jets are certified to fly for countless hours only on 1 Engine. A 744 can fly on 2 engines.... but only if
127 Zeus419 : >> Twin Engine jets are certified to fly for countless hours only on 1 Engine
128 RT514 : >> Twin Engine jets are certified to fly for countless hours only on 1 Engine
129 Post contains images Bwi757 : I''m suprised no one has yet postulated the theory that NW should buy these to replace the DC-9's
130 Boeing nut : >> Twin Engine jets are certified to fly for countless hours only on 1 Engine
131 1millionflyer : So explain the A330 then? why didn't everyone just buy the A340 ? Airbus sells ETOPS too.
132 Zeus419 : >> which airline do you work for? . . . . I'll make it a point to avoid your airline like the plague
133 Mlsrar : I don't work for an airline Seeing as his occupation is listed as a "Journalist," and his short tenure on this board either tell me that he is: 1. A
134 Zeus419 : 1millionflyer:- >> So explain the A330 then? why didn't everyone just buy the A340 ? Airbus sells ETOPS too.
135 BENNETT123 : Several points on this issue of 2 vs 4 engines, (ignoring the point that it is off topic). After all why should I keep on topoc if no one else does. 1
136 AirbusCanada : People have been mentioing how safe is 777 compared to 744/707/DC-10/MD-11/L-1011, since the 777 have zero hull loss so far. I don’t’ think it’s
137 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : 1. A resurrection of LHR001 Nah, he is indeed back, but under another name which rarely posts lately. Go and look at the mission specs. They differ co
138 Post contains links Boeing nut : none of the fly by wire widebodies have crashed so far. WRONG, sorry to tell ya He's right kids. An A330 crashed during early flight testing. http://w
139 N328KF : For that matter, there have been A343s (EK) that have crashed as well. They just weren't fatal crashes.
140 AirbusCanada : WRONG, sorry to tell ya Can u enlightened me with a list of fatal crash of 777/330/340?
141 Post contains links Boeing nut : For that matter, there have been A343s (EK) that have crashed as well. They just weren't fatal crashes. Incorrect. The only hull loss of an A340 occur
142 Boeing nut : AirbusCanada, See post #138.
143 N328KF : Where did I say "hull loss?" I did say "crash." A collision with any object at speed can be considered a "crash." Am I not correct?
144 Post contains images Boeing nut : If that's your classification of a "crash", then nearly every aircraft ever made has had a crash of some type.
145 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Can u enlightened me with a list of fatal crash of 777/330/340? No 777 has ever experienced a hull loss. The A330 and A340 have... with the former's b
146 Gigneil : The A340 has never had a crash despite ConcordeBoy's allusion that it did. There was a ground fire that destroyed the plane. N
147 Post contains links A350 : aviation-safety.net shows the following: A330: - one crash due to test pilots errors while certificion flights - one etched by leaking canisters of co
148 ConcordeBoy : The A340 has never had a crash despite ConcordeBoy's allusion that it did. Hate to shatter your lil' fantasy, but I never once stated nor insinuated a
149 1millionflyer : Zeus419, different missions for 777 and A330? tell me what exactly you are smoking? I want some
150 N79969 : Wdleiser and Zeus, Both of you gratuitously exaggerate the truth. Two-engine are airplanes are not approved for countless hours flying on a single eng
151 BENNETT123 : Concordeboy To the man in the street 4 engines will always be better than 2 regardless of the facts. If an airline advertises that all of it's planes
152 ConcordeBoy : To the man in the street 4 engines will always be better than 2 regardless of the facts. *sigh* Okay... let's try this one more time..... Since you do
153 PlaneSmart : Notwithstanding customer awareness 2 v 3 v 4 engines, both the insurance and finance markets apply a different risk profile (premium & margin) to twin
154 BENNETT123 : Did you actually READ my reply. To people who are worried about flying, safety is an issue. A surprising number of people are concerned, perhaps not
155 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Did you actually READ my reply. Indeed I did, which immediately would prompt me to ask the same of you Yes, I'm aware that plenty of people fear flyin
156 BENNETT123 : Have you actually asked anyone if they would prefer 4 engines over 2. My opinion is that even if it was a little more, then many people would chose 4
157 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Have you actually asked anyone if they would prefer 4 engines over 2. Uh no. I couldn't possibly care enough to... what's your point? My opinion is th
158 PlaneSmart : Much as it grieves me to agree with ConcordeBoy, because of the way he makes his points, the reality is that most customers don't care abt 2 engines v
159 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Much as it grieves me to agree with ConcordeBoy, because of the way he makes his points However, the percentage that do care increases the longer the
160 Post contains images A350 : Something gives me the impression that this thread will soon be closed
161 ConcordeBoy : ...like what, your own lame-ass attention-draw?
162 Daedaeg : Much of this fear about 2 engines being unsafe over large bodies of water has been created by Airbus' unsuccessful attempt to scare the flying public
163 Jacobin777 : what happened to the discussion regarding the original post (RE: Who Will Buy The Singapore A340-500's)?? I'm a bit confused about that!!
164 Nrt1011 : It's a shame that this thread degenerated into such a boring discussion on the usual A vs B discussion. I am new to this board and frankly I'm fed up
165 BeechNut : Here's one to consider in the ETOPS twin vs 4-holer debate. Are engine failures the only thing to worry about? What about a fire on board. Think Swiss
166 Post contains links and images LH600 : IRAN AIR needs them badly!!!!!!! It would be great to finally replace these..... View Large View MediumPhoto © WEIMENG
167 BENNETT123 : As Beechnut says this is a matter of gut instinct not logic. The point is that passengers especially nervous ones are not logical. Clearly it was in
168 ConcordeBoy : Clearly it was in the interests of Virgin and Airbus to play on this Apparently it isn't; as BA isn't exactly devoid of former premium customers... an
169 BENNETT123 : BA were not going to push the Virgin line for two reasons; Firstly, BA has the B777 which is a long haul twin. Secondly, BA would be very reluctant t
170 AirbusDriver : That's one reason why many pilots feel safer flying ETOPS twins. Sorry Beechnuts your are completely wrong on this most pilot rather a 3 or 4 engine o
171 Boeing nut : Soon enough, ETOPS won't be the rule, it will be LROPS. For the reasons Beechnuts mentioned. Here's one to consider in the ETOPS twin vs 4-holer debat
172 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : simple question for an even simpler poster... sorry you dont like it
173 Post contains links BeechNut : "That's one reason why many pilots feel safer flying ETOPS twins. Sorry Beechnuts your are completely wrong on this most pilot rather a 3 or 4 engine
174 Boeing nut : simple question for an even simpler poster... sorry you dont like it So am I bud, ... so am I.
175 Trex8 : >So give me the aircraft that has the better on-board fire supression systems any day. isn't the ETOPS improved fire suppression etc related to cargo
176 BeechNut : "isn't the ETOPS improved fire suppression etc related to cargo hold etc and not the ceiling of the cockpit??" Sure, but in any fire situation you wan
177 Trex8 : > Perhaps a better example for the fire issue would be the SAA 747 Combi that crashed into the Indian Ocean due to a cargo compartment fire. does ETOP
178 ConcordeBoy : haven't they pretty much banned combi operations?? No, though it's pretty well known that the FAA isn't keen on certifying anymore aircraft to carry p
179 Ualonghaul : I have been told many times by SQ upper management that they ARE NOT getting rid of the A345. This talk of buying a 772LR is nothing but pure ANET fal
180 Jetboyflyhi : I heard though the grape vine Mesa Airlines was looking at widebody aircraft to start Trans Atlantic flights from PIT.
181 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : I have been told many times by SQ upper management that they ARE NOT getting rid of the A345. ...sure you have This talk of buying a 772LR is nothing
182 Boeing nut : and they had the same answer, "No way will SQ dump the A345" Ualonghaul, They've done it before, what makes you so confident they won't do it again?
183 Rj111 : Which is why no less than four of the aviation world's most reliable media sources also reported the impending likelihood, right? Did they say they we
184 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : Did they say they were definitely considering it, because I seem to recall they were just speculating themselves. read what I wrote A. The answer is i
185 Post contains images Anxebla : A week outside from a.net and when I come back... what do I find?? this thread-rumor goes on! How unbelievable is this topic all-based on a rumor! I d
186 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : In fact, that plane (772LR) will have a record: The worst-seller on the aviation History Big grin WRONG The 772LR may have a pitiful sales number; and
187 Post contains links and images Anxebla : >""...what on Earth or you talking about""> From airbus.com about the LROPS issue: LROPS-certified twins will be able to exceed the maximum 180-minute
188 Post contains images ConcordeBoy : LROPS-certified twins will be able to exceed the maximum 180-minute diversion time, subject to special permission. ...the 777 can already do that und
189 BENNETT123 : What is the A340-8000.
190 Post contains links and images ConcordeBoy : What is the A340-8000 The A340-8000 was Airbus' attempt to give the A342 up to 8000nm range and increased payload. Not a single airline ordered, and t
191 Post contains images 777ER : After reading the LROPS page on airbus.com. Airbus said on the page: Airbus, our advantage. As what Concordeboy said ...the 777 can already do that un
192 Post contains images KDTWFlyer : When is 777-200LR first flight supposed to be?
193 Zvezda : B777-200LR rollout is scheduled for February 2005 and first flight in March 2005. First delivery is scheduled for January 2006 (to PIA).
194 Post contains images Anxebla : 777ER: don't be silly, please! CAN you understand that text about the LROPS issue? I can, and English is not my first language (and my English is not
195 Post contains images Anxebla : dumbass is dumb-ass or it's another different thing? If I'm insulted, at least I must be aware about it I'm sure Airbus is very very worried because t
196 9V-SVC : From this post, its getting out of hand. A vs B war, I wont mention names but this is getting silly and childish. Why don't you just appreciate both A
197 KEESJE : ccboy, so why is the 777LR not selling in your opinion? thnx
198 Anxebla : Don't forget also Bombardier and Embraer.... and yes, I agree with you, 9V. Less competition, the worst!
199 ConcordeBoy : so why is the 777LR not selling in your opinion? I'd attribute that mostly to its price, and secondarily to its late debut on the market. No way airli
200 Rj111 : ...tell me: do you think Boeing just spun a bottle, and decided to give said deal to whatever airline's name it landed upon? It's besides the point wh
201 Post contains images Rj111 : ....as well as you Besides SQ are yet to disprove my opinion. If the A345's leave within 5 years, regardless of whether they buy 772LR's, then and i'l
202 ConcordeBoy : Besides SQ are yet to disprove my opinion ...nor probably will then until the bird is flight tested. Then they'll make their decision: yea (as is expe
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...
Who Will Take The Dumped A340-500/600s? posted Thu Oct 13 2005 06:49:37 by Kaitak744
Who Will Get The First A340-500? posted Wed Jul 31 2002 16:20:44 by Andie007
Who Will Buy The Shares In Thai? posted Tue Apr 11 2000 22:53:04 by FITPilot
Who Do You Think Will Buy The Boeing Sonic Cruiser posted Sun Aug 12 2001 18:53:41 by DeltaOwnsAll
Who Will Supply The Parts For Airbus? posted Mon Nov 6 2006 19:34:25 by Idlewild
Who Will Have The Airport Hotel At IND? posted Fri Jun 23 2006 14:48:01 by 7E72004
Who Will Lease The A380? posted Thu Jan 19 2006 18:53:22 by B777A340Fan
Who Will Take The 28 FlyI A-319's? posted Mon Jan 2 2006 19:53:01 by UAL747-600
WHO Will Place The Last A Or B Order Of The Year? posted Wed Dec 28 2005 06:47:54 by Anthsaun
Delta Bankruptcy..Who Will Buy Buy LGA Gates? posted Mon Sep 12 2005 18:10:43 by Oneworldman