This basically confirms that a) the A380 issue has been resolved and b) that Thai Airways will order 8 additional A330-300s. It appears that the aircraft targeted for replacement are the 10 B737-400, 2 B747-300 and several A300-600s. Will be interesting to see what they will do with the A300-600s - it appears that TG currently thinks that the A330-300 is the better people-mover for intra-Asia to date as it is larger (traffic is growing) and not the similar-sized B787-3.
CHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 63 Reply 3, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3275 times:
I've been writing their credit report and spent much of yesterday trying to make head and tail of their fleet - some odd decisions there, but they do ok, and you'd be absolutely amazed how profitable they are. They are no mugs thats for sure, but with a little tinkering they could be absolutely awesome. Some very impressive numbers I must say.
I genuinely cannot tell you how this is going to go - as with everyone else they will be forced to choose between 787 and A350.
* 772ER vs A333X - messy.
* Two different powerplants on their A306s - not ideal. I've been told the A300 will continue in the fleet for a while yet. 787 replacement maybe? Who knows?
* 744 replacement - NOT getting the upgrades in F, C, and Y that the A340s already have anytime soon and thats a surprise, but I guess thats due to them looking to replace their 744 fleets which they do work incredibly hard. Their early 744s must be very, very high on cycles. My heart says A346HGWs in large numbers, and I do think she has a geniune chance at a real swansong at TG but my head says 77W.
* 734 replacement - I think they will either not replace the narrowbody stuff and transfer it all to NOK Air, or get lots more - A320/737NG - too close to call, but I think A and B will see that as a chance to sweeten any widebody deal with value added "bolt on" orders.
* A345 and A346 - keep hearing things from a number of people (mainly Americans on here it must be said) that they think the A345 isnt up to scratch, but i've spoken to people from TG who say no complaints - fine aircraft. Difficult to call. If they go for large numbers of the 77W to replace the 744s, then logic dictates 77LR but I am just not convinced.
Ideally - I'd like to see a much simplified fleet - but they are bureaucratic and politically led ie: led by people who are installed politically and who have a political agenda (not that thats always a bad thing) but they know what they are doing, and TG are an interesting case where you can play SimAirlineManager where money is (almost) no object.
They are very progressive and like Malaysian, only need a little tweak to be far larger and more influential than they are - ie: SQ levels.
CHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 63 Reply 5, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3189 times:
Quoting Flying-Tiger (Thread starter): it appears that TG currently thinks that the A330-300 is the better people-mover for intra-Asia to date as it is larger (traffic is growing) and not the similar-sized B787-3
The 787-3 is somewhat smaller than the A333 isnt it?
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
Similar-sized to the A300-600 I intended to say - IMO unlikely that they will go for a capacity 1:1 replacement but rather a capacity + X% growth option replacement. And that´s where I see additional A330-300s.
ThaiA345 From Indonesia, joined Oct 2006, 850 posts, RR: 17 Reply 10, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2495 times:
Well guys, this is TG we are talking about and they are notorious about not being true or sticking to their words. But if I were to be systematic (i.e. no influence from politicians!!) 1st, get rid of all AB6 and 2nd B734. Its way due for them to start rationalising their fleet!
And maybe earlier versions of B744 can be replaced by A346HGW?? Just a thought as the wait list is not long on these babies.
I think B77W is the way to go for TG.
Maintain the newer refurbed B744s where capacity warrants it, and put the B77Ws on other European sectors (MXP, FCO, MAD etc). The twins are well within range to all European destinations, and could be used to Australia if required.
NA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10054 posts, RR: 11 Reply 14, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2236 times:
A dozen 747-8Is for expansion and to replace the 744s which are not replaced by A380s are very likely to me. A350s in different versions I see having a high chance as well. 773ERs and A346s unwise and unlikely, as they will be surpassed by 748Is and 350s.
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 58 Reply 15, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2202 times:
I am not sure that Thai Airways actually plans its fleet.......it just buys a few of each type produced!!
Actually, thats not very nice and I have had good experiences flying with Thai, but their fleet has always been and continues to be a mystery to me.......I realize that fleet and engine choices at Thai have been influenced by politics, the military, various managment changes and probably some underhanded side deals over the years, but it is very very difficult to try to figure out what he airline has in mind.
Its interesting that Thai has now determined that the A330 would be a suitable replacement for the A306s, until now Thai took the posiiton that the A333 was too much airplane for many of the missions flown by the A306.
Thai has 772ERs on the way (to join the existing 772A/773A fleet), new A333s on the way (to join the very early build less capable A330s currently in the fleet) and presumably some A388s on order......and now another 46 airplanes will be ordered, thats an ambitious plan, lets see what happens.
As for the A345/A346, its my understanding that Thai has no particular issue with the airplanes, its simply that the ULH routes from BKK to LAX and JFK were not showing a profit. There was discussion that Thai would re-route the US services via another Asian city to increase revenue and loads, making the A345 unnecessary, and that is how the rumor Thai was unhappy with the A345 and looking to get rid of them got started. Of course, in typical Thai Airways fashion, days after the information concerning the lack of profitability on the BKK-JFK/LAX routes was circulated, Thai increased frequency on the routes, so who knows what to think?