A360 From Portugal, joined Jun 2005, 434 posts, RR: 8 Posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3400 times:
Now that EK has received all of their 10 A340-500's, they can't say they don't have the planes to fly ultra long haul.
I mean... they still say they lack planes, which mean than they have to use the 345's in average routes... so they have to receive more 77W's and maybe even some 346HGW's to be able to "free" the 345's from the medium/long haul routes to the planed ultra long haul flights to west coast USA and south america.
But for now, what are the 10 EK 345's doing?
Does anyone has a schedulle for this planes or something?
I know that they fly to JFK, ZRH, SYD and MEL I think... how many are used in these routes? Not all of them for sure...
So it seems that all these aircraft are used, although I think on all those routes they could use the 773ER. I guess once they have more aircraft like 773ER and the A380's start arriving they will free up A345's to open up ULH routes to US West coast and South America.
Quoting Planemanofnz (Reply 1): and they will be flying them to Perth this season too I believe.
The second PER flight was scheduled as a 345 but has been delayed, I believe due to a lack of aircraft, or was it even that they have used all there current landing rights in Australia?
Quoting PM (Reply 3): I've seen them at ZRH (and they look great) but I've never understood why they need such a capable plane on what is not a long flight. Anyone know?
I always wondered the same, but this thread gave me an idea: They have 10 A345s now, and they are all in use, no backup a/c for mx or unforeseen events. Maybe the plane to ZRH IS the backup and can be replaced by a 772ER or a A343 if necessary. Any thoughts?
Photography - the art of observing, not the art of arranging
Could well be. It would make sense since they really don't need an A345 on this route. But if they do have a spare 777 that could do the route, why not use it all the time and keep the A345 back? Are they still training up crews and need to utilise these planes as much as possible? Whatever, the reason, I hope they don't pull them off the ZRH route before I have a chance to fly on one!
Karan69 From India, joined Oct 2004, 2891 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2721 times:
Quoting A360 (Reply 8): As for the ZRH "mistery", I've read a thread in here, a while ago, that said EK was using the 345 to ZRH because some swiss company had reserved 1st class seats for a long period of time on the 345's.
That company should need frequent flights to DXB, and instead of sending a private jet they would send their people on the 345's first class which is superb!
And that would be he reason why EK operates he 345's to ZRH(because no other aircrafts have that fantastic 1st class).
CayMan From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 905 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2693 times:
There are unconfirmed reports that they will launch 3x weekly DXb YYZ service in the 345s, and maybe daily after that. Word has been for a long time they want daily to YYZ but perhaps they are willing to settle for 3x week for now.
AlitaliaMD11 From Spain, joined Dec 2003, 4068 posts, RR: 13
Reply 11, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2581 times:
I was wondering if the second daily flight to JFK would be flown by the B777-300ER? Emirates stated the delay in starting their second daily to JFK was because of the delays at Boeing in receiving more B777-300ERs. Of course this could also mean that they need to keep that second A340-500 on one of those SYD flights until more B777-300ERs arrive.
Emirates777 From Tanzania, joined Feb 2000, 655 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2278 times:
The B777-300ER will most likely take over one of the JFK daily flights from Summer 2006 onwards, thereby freeing up 2x A345. My sense is that these aircraft will be used to start South America flights and/or Canadian services. Additional A345s may get freed up enabling improvement of frequencies as Emirates deploy the B77W on the non-stop Australia services.
Thanks for the heads up on the amendment to the UAE-Canada bilateral. Have they by any chance increased the entitlements for the carriers - or at least a provision to allow them to increase their frequencies ? I would assume each carrier is allowed 3x weekly flights ?
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8018 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2207 times:
Speaking of EK, I wonder has the airline seriously looked at buying the 777-200LR? Given the plane's commonality with the 777-300ER's EK ordered, it would allow the airline to fly more really long routes in the future (I can see EK fly DXB-LAX using the 772LR).
A360 From Portugal, joined Jun 2005, 434 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2106 times:
Quoting RayChuang (Reply 20): Speaking of EK, I wonder has the airline seriously looked at buying the 777-200LR? Given the plane's commonality with the 777-300ER's EK ordered, it would allow the airline to fly more really long routes in the future (I can see EK fly DXB-LAX using the 772LR).
DXB-LAX will happen... sooner or later... but they already have the 345's to do it.
There's virtually no route(realistic route at least) out of the 345's range from DXB.... so they don't need the 772LR for the range alone... but the may/will probably buy it, to have more ULR aircrafts.
PS: MEX-DXB probably wouldn't be possible, because of MEX being hot and high. Don't know if a 772LR could do it either...
Kiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8572 posts, RR: 13
Reply 22, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2099 times:
Quoting PurpleBox (Reply 15): Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 14):
Wonder if DXB-AKL non stop is still in the plans? This would be an A345 route.
This sector is 8824mi (or 7668nm) - is this possible for the A345?
Can't see it - SQ does SIN-EWR at 8285 nm - so technically it is feasible - but the yield on SIN-EWR is ( I would imagine largely in USD ) a helluva lot better than that on DXB-AKL ( in South Pacific Pesos ...ooops , I mean NZD)
Also EK's AKL and CHC flights are more a means of getting the a/c off the aprons in SYD/MEL/BNE thus avoiding hefty charges than of earning revenue in their own right . EK have talked a lot about DXB-AKL nonstop happening eventually - but I am not holding my breath waiting
Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
YOWza From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 4897 posts, RR: 15
Reply 24, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2057 times:
Quoting Emirates777 (Reply 18): Thanks for the heads up on the amendment to the UAE-Canada bilateral. Have they by any chance increased the entitlements for the carriers - or at least a provision to allow them to increase their frequencies ? I would assume each carrier is allowed 3x weekly flights ?
You're spot on with the 3x weekly. The small problem is that AC are pushing for 5th freedom right to other Middle East destinations ex DXB and that is proving sticky. Further to this problem for AC is that their 340s are already working very hard on other important routes, so we'll have to wait and see.
ZK-NBT From New Zealand, joined Oct 2000, 5344 posts, RR: 11
Reply 25, posted (8 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1995 times:
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 22): Also EK's AKL and CHC flights are more a means of getting the a/c off the aprons in SYD/MEL/BNE thus avoiding hefty charges than of earning revenue in their own right . EK have talked a lot about DXB-AKL nonstop happening eventually - but I am not holding my breath waiting
Not to mention freight! I am surprised we have never seen an EK 744F in AKL.
DXB-AKL gives a 1 stop to Europe and EK are becoming more known in NZ, there was talk of an AKL-SIN-DXB service aswell.