Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
End Of A300/A310 - When?  
User currently offlineKensukeAida From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 217 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4530 times:

Okay, so would it be fair to say then when all current orders are filled (UPS seems to be the only major one for the A300-600), that Airbus will shut down production of this type?

It certainly seems as if the A300/A310 has been milked about as much as it's going to be milked. Many carriers are actively dumping them from pax service. If it weren't useful as a freighter, it would be gone by now.

Any ideas?

- John

29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offline1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6536 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4523 times:

After the 767 is discontinued.


The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
User currently offlineFedex From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4511 times:

I think FedEx just ordered another 6 or 8 new A306's.

User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4491 times:

They did...

Its quite clear that the A300 will have lived a longer life than the 767, despite not being as successful.

If Airbus had designed a 6000nm A300-600R, this might be a different story. They bet wrong.

It doesn't make any sense, really. The A300's wing is bigger... it should have easily supported more fuel, payload, and cargo than the 767-300ER and been a good compliment to the bigger A330.

N


User currently offlineCol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2116 posts, RR: 22
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4491 times:

Don't see where all the airlines are dumping them? There are about 4 x 306 in storage, which are probably awaiting FR conversion. Such is the shortage of frames in the second hand market Fedex purchase new. UPS apparently cancelled 37, but with fuel prices as they are, they might surprise us with keeping some of those orders?

The old Airbus really ain't that bad, the 787 will be its main replacement.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4471 times:

Col-

UPS cancelled those A306s because the US and intra-region markets have topped out. The money is in US-Eur, US-Asia, and Eur-Asia. They're going to downsize their DC-8 fleet (which is a pretty big plane) without really negative effect on lift.

Watch the worldwide A310-300 fleet disappear quickly into the Fedex fold. They're adding as many as they can get their hands on, as some of their A310-200s are really quite old and the A310-300 is much more capable and efficient (and modern, in terms of systems).

Those A300-600s and A310s are going to live on practically forever.

M


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31684 posts, RR: 56
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4445 times:

As a Freighter the A300s still have a life.
regds
MEL



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineKensukeAida From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 217 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4434 times:

Quoting Col (Reply 4):
Don't see where all the airlines are dumping them?

From pax service they are. JAL is dumping theirs next year for instance. KLM sold their A310s to FedEx. KAL has had massive reductions in their A300 fleet size. Ditto for LH. I doubt AA wants them around as soon as a viable alternative comes up.

And in any event, the thread is about new airframes. It is obvious that many of the current ones out there will live on as freighters for FedEx and the like. The freighter orders are not that big to keep the line open as opposed to consolidating and developing an A330 freighter.

The A300 vs. B767 is like the DC-8 vs. 707. One was more successful than the other in pax service, but the other will live on for a lot longer in cargo service.

- John


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4429 times:

Arguably, the 707 died as a result of the USAF snapping up used frames for parts for KC-135s.  Smile

N


User currently offlineTrevD From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 327 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4364 times:

The only reason there are more A300/A310/A306 conversions to freighter than 767's is that the residual values of the 767's are still too high to convert whereas the A300 series values have plumetted to the $10-$15M price range where it's economical to convert.

Believe we'll start seeing 767's starting to be convert in about 2 years...in fact Boeing and ANA just announced a deal that launches the 767-300P-F conversion program.


User currently offlineIvo From Belgium, joined Sep 2000, 470 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4293 times:

Quoting KensukeAida (Reply 7):
And in any event, the thread is about new airframes.

There are 15 A300 to be delivered:

6 UPS
6 Fedex
2 Air HongKong
1 Galaxy Airlines (Japan)

Ivo


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4291 times:

Quoting KensukeAida (Thread starter):
would it be fair to say then when all current orders are filled (UPS seems to be the only major one for the A300-600), that Airbus will shut down production of this type?

No, it wouldn't. It is built on the same line with the other Airbus widebodies (except the WhaleJet) so the A300 will continue to be offered as long as Airbus are making 222 inch diameter fuselages. Since Airbus just committed to the A350, that would probably be at least another 10 years.


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10037 posts, RR: 96
Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4282 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Fedex (Reply 2):
I think FedEx just ordered another 6 or 8 new A306's.



Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 6):
As a Freighter the A300s still have a life.

It's worht bearing in mind that the recent FEDEX order also had options attached (10 I think, but don't have it to hand right now...)


User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4251 times:

I think the end of production is near. There are no more A310s and just a bunch of A300Fs to be built. Selling cargo planes while the passenger line is dead happens to a lot of aircraft, like the MD-11, or even the 744.

The A310s and A300 will be around as cargo planes for a very long time, considering how many DC-8s, or 727s, you still see flying cargo.


User currently offlineBA319-131 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 8546 posts, RR: 54
Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4173 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KensukeAida (Reply 7):
JAL is dumping theirs next year for instance

A rather sweeping and incorrect statement.

Perhaps a few of the older non -600 models, but not many at all.

The JAL A300 & 767 fleet are both being replaced by the 787.

M



111,732,3,4,5,7,8,BBJ,741,742,743,744,752,762,763,764,772,77L,773,77W,L15,D10,30,40,AB3,AB6,A312.313,319,320,321,332,333
User currently offlineA319XFW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4136 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 12):
No, it wouldn't. It is built on the same line with the other Airbus widebodies

No it's not - they are built in a different hangar to the A330/A340 FAL.
Last I heard was that Airbus is planning on supporting them till at least 2040!


User currently offlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2956 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4107 times:

Quoting KensukeAida (Reply 7):
JAL is dumping theirs next year for instance. KLM sold their A310s to FedEx. KAL has had massive reductions in their A300 fleet size.

JL is phasing out the old A300B2/B4, the -600s aren't going anywhere until the 783 arrives. JL even has the last pax A300 (for now).
KE has phased out the older -600s (mostly non -600Rs) but willl retain those that are left for sometime. Their order for 788 isn't really a good replacement option but KE does use its AB6 fleet well for those short-haul Asian flying similar to what LH does on intra-European routes. ICN nor GMP are slot constrained, so KE may opt to downgauge AB6 flying to 739 or 739X and increase frequency.


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10037 posts, RR: 96
Reply 17, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4076 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting A319XFW (Reply 15):
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 12):
No, it wouldn't. It is built on the same line with the other Airbus widebodies

No it's not - they are built in a different hangar to the A330/A340 FAL.
Last I heard was that Airbus is planning on supporting them till at least 2040!

Not my quote, so sorry. The quote belonged to Zvezda

FWIW I agree with you.
A


User currently offlineCandid76 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 735 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3946 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 6):
As a Freighter the A300s still have a life.

Would have thought they were ideal for the growing India-Middle East market, maybe IC should convert them not scrap them (as per the 737s)

Quoting TrevD (Reply 9):
The only reason there are more A300/A310/A306 conversions to freighter than 767's is that the residual values of the 767's are still too high to convert

Well I don't see customers queueing up at Victorville to snap up the United 762 fleet. Plus a number have been, or are being scrapped. This comment may however be basically true for 763s which are still in high demand for pax.


User currently offlineA342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4682 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3866 times:

Quoting TrevD (Reply 9):
Believe we'll start seeing 767's starting to be convert in about 2 years

It has already started, but as you say, -300 conversions start now.

Quoting Candid76 (Reply 18):
Well I don't see customers queueing up at Victorville to snap up the United 762 fleet. Plus a number have been, or are being scrapped.

The A306s and A310s are in higher demand as freighters as they have a wider fuselage. The 767 can take 2 88-in pallets side-by-side, but the highly curbed walls are limiting the wall-side height of those pallets VERY much. It´s not as dramatic with the busses.


Quoting A319XFW (Reply 15):
Last I heard was that Airbus is planning on supporting them till at least 2040!

Maybe because some A310s will be converted to the military MRTT versions.



Exceptions confirm the rule.
User currently offlineCandid76 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 735 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3769 times:

Quoting A342 (Reply 19):
The A306s and A310s are in higher demand as freighters as they have a wider fuselage. The 767 can take 2 88-in pallets side-by-side, but the highly curbed walls are limiting the wall-side height of those pallets VERY much. It´s not as dramatic with the busses.

Would I be right in saying that this makes them more suitable for package companies (such as ABX and UPS) rather than general cargo airlines?


User currently offlineA342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4682 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3738 times:

Quoting Candid76 (Reply 20):
Would I be right in saying that this makes them more suitable for package companies (such as ABX and UPS) rather than general cargo airlines?

Which planes do you mean here ? Both the A300/310 and the B767 are operated by package companies in large numbers.



Exceptions confirm the rule.
User currently offlineCandid76 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 735 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3705 times:

I meant the 767 as opposed to the Airbus models.

User currently offlineA342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4682 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3695 times:

Quoting Candid76 (Reply 22):
I meant the 767 as opposed to the Airbus models

Ah, but I really have no clue.



Exceptions confirm the rule.
User currently offlineScorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 5032 posts, RR: 43
Reply 24, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3496 times:

Quoting TrevD (Reply 9):
The only reason there are more A300/A310/A306 conversions to freighter than 767's is that the residual values of the 767's are still too high to convert whereas the A300 series values have plumetted to the $10-$15M price range where it's economical to convert.

Not a financial analyst, but could the main reason be the operator base for these planes? A300 and A310 were sold mostly in Western Europe and the Far East, where most 767s were sold in North America and Japan. Airlines in Western Europe on average replace their planes earlier than US and Japanese airlines. That means relatively more A300/A310s end up on the second hand market at a younger age. More planes on offer => value goes down. US and Japanese airlines tend to keep their planes longer, thus less planes on the second hand market => higher value. This tendency has little to do with the manufacturer, as e.g. you can already see European mainline carriers starting to dump relatively new 767-300ERs (SAS, AF, KLM), something no US major is doing.

Also, don't forget that for package freighters the A300/310 can be more attractive as it offers more cargo volume than the 767, thanks to the wider fuselage.


25 Gigneil : Well, that, and the A300 has a superior cargo profile. Actually, it isn't. Great quote. You add so much to the conversation. N
26 Carpethead : You are half correct about Japanese airline. I'll give you JL because they operate planes until they cycle out. NH isn't like that. They replace plan
27 Airways45 : The A310 isn't actually being sold by Airbus - the only orders on the books are ancient orders from Iraqi Airways that won't be delivered... If a cust
28 Scorpio : Thank you for another extremely valuable contribution. Everyone will no doubt see you as a shining example of how to make a post from now on. Don't y
29 Col : It is so bad you can't get hold of one for love nor money. Also, on my previous post I was trying to make the point that there are very few frames av
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...
End Of A300 Deliveries Coming Soon? posted Tue Jan 22 2002 23:17:00 by Rj777
When Does An Airliner Reach The End Of Its Life? posted Sun Jun 4 2006 18:51:59 by BA787
When Will We See The End Of The A343? posted Mon Nov 10 2003 02:51:01 by ACB777
Future Of The A300/A310 posted Wed May 10 2000 23:57:12 by N-156F
A330F By End Of 2009... posted Fri Nov 24 2006 16:47:48 by Jdevora
The End Of Spotting In Changi posted Mon Nov 20 2006 04:29:46 by Ryanair!!!
A350 Decision By The End Of November posted Tue Nov 14 2006 16:39:30 by Thorben
OS: End Of Lauda Air posted Fri Nov 3 2006 15:54:27 by Macc
End Of Blocked Seats On BA posted Tue Oct 31 2006 14:08:42 by TLVFred
The End Of The Original 748 In Europe? posted Mon Oct 16 2006 23:24:14 by DHHornet