Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
EX-UA 744 For Iran Air  
User currently offlineAmax1977 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 207 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9927 times:

Hi,
It seems N176UA ended up in THR... http://www.iraviation.com/Picture/OnePicture.aspx?id=101325

Cheers

23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9855 times:

What is it, a wet lease? Iranair could really do with some new or newish planes.

User currently offlineNorcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1447 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9691 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 1):
What is it, a wet lease?

From who? Can't be a US company, can it?



If you're going through hell, keep going
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9269 posts, RR: 29
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9650 times:

...........with the friendly help of neighbouring Armenia (EK).

The old wisdom prevails, always be three steps quicker than the bureaucrat running behind you. Bazaris and the Wolrd's best traders cut a deal circumventing the embargo.  Wink

on the other hand, I would not want to be on a 744 that is 4 numbers too big for the carrier that operates it and for which IR cannot get spares direct, unlike for those aircraft that they have on their own register.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlinePronto From Canada, joined Mar 2000, 328 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9601 times:

Wasn't this a British company? I could swear I saw in a past issue of Airliner World a picture of this aircraft with a British reg'n.(G-CEFE); now with Armenian? Could it be a "shadow" name for Iran Air? The mystery continues...

User currently offlinePoitin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9602 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 3):
on the other hand, I would not want to be on a 744 that is 4 numbers too big for the carrier that operates it and for which IR cannot get spares direct, unlike for those aircraft that they have on their own register.

Who ever wet leased it, which is what I suspect happened, is going to have a hard time getting it fixed. Boeing will be told to not send spares. That will cause the grey market to supply parts at much higher rates. However, I am sure whoever owns the plane knows that and is being paid for it.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12134 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9585 times:

Quoting Norcal773 (Reply 2):
From who? Can't be a US company, can it?

No.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 3):
The old wisdom prevails, always be three steps quicker than the bureaucrat running behind you. Bazaris and the Wolrd's best traders cut a deal circumventing the embargo.

on the other hand, I would not want to be on a 744 that is 4 numbers too big for the carrier that operates it and for which IR cannot get spares direct, unlike for those aircraft that they have on their own register.

I see no problem with IR leasing/buying US built airplanes through a third party. I suspect this deal was sealed somewhere in Europe. IR would not have gotten this B-747-400 if getting spare parts was going to be a problem.

Is this the first of several B-747-400s they want?


User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25049 posts, RR: 46
Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9520 times:

Quoting Poitin (Reply 5):
Who ever wet leased it, which is what I suspect happened, is going to have a hard time getting it fixed. Boeing will be told to not send spares. That will cause the grey market to supply parts at much higher rates. However, I am sure whoever owns the plane knows that and is being paid for it.

Why should there be any issues getting spares for the planes?

Aircraft dont belong to Iran Air, they belong to a 3rd party operator whom Boeing would have absolutely no problem dealing with.

Anyhow much of IR's current B747 fleet is kept up thanks to the help of KLM and Lufthansa. While adding a middle-man, IR secures its needed supplies without much of a problem. Matter of fact one of the B747SP is currently in a D-check, something that would be impossible without a whole lot of replacement parts.

IR's real only recent problems had to with its A310 fleets GE engine overhauls, however they managed to work the issue thru with Turkish Airlines doing the work.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineMnik101 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 173 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9489 times:

I have a feeling that picture is of a charter flight, but if its true, more power to IR. Correct me if I'm wrong but could'nt IR simply lease the aircraft from a third party, and as part of the terms of the lease have the third party responsible for maintance.

Hypothetical scinario, IR leases planes from a UAE based company. The planes are registered in the UAE but are in full IR livery. The UAE company does all the maintance for the planes, and sends IR a bill for it.

Can that be done or is that also illegal?


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9455 times:

Quoting Mnik101 (Reply 8):
Correct me if I'm wrong but could'nt IR simply lease the aircraft from a third party, and as part of the terms of the lease have the third party responsible for maintance.

Hypothetical scinario, IR leases planes from a UAE based company. The planes are registered in the UAE but are in full IR livery. The UAE company does all the maintance for the planes, and sends IR a bill for it.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 5):
Boeing will be told to not send spares.


If its wet leased, Iran Air won't be maintaining it and it will probably be maintained in another country. This would also apply to the A340 that they are leasing.

[Edited 2007-07-25 19:05:29]

User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25049 posts, RR: 46
Reply 10, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9400 times:

Quoting Mnik101 (Reply 8):
Can that be done or is that also illegal?

Absolutely legal. Thats how airlines such as Mahan manage to operate A320s.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © A.Mahgoli




From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlinePoitin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9358 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 9):
Quoting Poitin (Reply 5):
Boeing will be told to not send spares.


If its wet leased, Iran Air won't be maintaining it and it will probably be maintained in another country. This would also apply to the A340 that they are leasing.

If the A340 has Rolls Royce engines, there is very little the US government can do. However, in the case of Boeing, who is a very large defense contractor, a private word from the State Department, would suddenly make spare parts "out of stock" when whoever has the airplane asks for spares, help, information, etc. That is what I meant when I said "Boeing will be told to not send spares." It has happened before and it will happen again.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25106 posts, RR: 22
Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 8940 times:

Quoting Poitin (Reply 5):
Who ever wet leased it, which is what I suspect happened, is going to have a hard time getting it fixed. Boeing will be told to not send spares. That will cause the grey market to supply parts at much higher rates. However, I am sure whoever owns the plane knows that and is being paid for it.

Last October the US government approved the export of GE engine parts for Iran Air Airbus engines to comply with an FAA airworthiness directive. The exception was made on safety grounds. Relevant press release:
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2006/73811.htm


User currently offlineA340313X From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 8815 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 9):
If its wet leased, Iran Air won't be maintaining it and it will probably be maintained in another country. This would also apply to the A340 that they are leasing.

I'm going to presume the A340 tehy are leasing is an older one? If memory serves an A340-211? If that's the case it'll have CFM56-5C2 engines, CFM being a joint venture between General Electric and some other parties. Should be no issue getting engines for that though.


User currently offlineOceansWorld From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 8774 times:

Quoting A340313X (Reply 13):
I'm going to presume the A340 tehy are leasing is an older one? If memory serves an A340-211?

Yes, the 31st off the production line.

Quoting A340313X (Reply 13):
CFM being a joint venture between General Electric and some other parties.

The other party being the French Snecma.


User currently offlineUnitedTristar From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 8681 times:

According to Airfleets, Mahan is getting an Ex UA bird, could this be the second one? Maybe the Caption was in error.

http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-b747-24363.htm

-m



[Edited 2007-07-26 02:57:36]

User currently offlineMCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8670 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (7 years 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7435 times:

I hope all goes well for this ex UA machine.

Hunter



Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9269 posts, RR: 29
Reply 17, posted (7 years 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7257 times:

The deal is that IR gets spares for whatever they had in their Boeing fleet before the embargo took place, but does not get new planes delivered.

That is why they don't have problems with D checks. The relation to Lufthansa Technik dates back more than 40 years, I met the then IR tech rep in Hamburg once in 67. IR is absoluteley capable of doing the maintenance, it's just another operating environment and it is more difficult than without the embargo.

The opeator, whoever that is, registered the plane in Armenia, spares officially go to that country. Omn every export declaration it says that "diversion is contrary to US law". This is indeed a grey zone and whatever is done in grey zones does not make the operation safer.

.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineShenzhen From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 1710 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (7 years 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 6408 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 17):
The deal is that IR gets spares for whatever they had in their Boeing fleet before the embargo took place, but does not get new planes delivered.

That is why they don't have problems with D checks. The relation to Lufthansa Technik dates back more than 40 years, I met the then IR tech rep in Hamburg once in 67. IR is absoluteley capable of doing the maintenance, it's just another operating environment and it is more difficult than without the embargo.

I'm sure they get spares for their Boeing Airplanes, but it isn't directly from Boeing. There are plenty of middle men out there who will buy parts, mark them up 25 percent then sell them to you. Many airlines that can't get parts from Boeing/Airbus due to millions owed on their spare parts credit go thru these brokers as well.

Vietnam Airlines wet leased 767 airplanes long before the embargo was lifted.


Cheers


User currently offlineBofredrik From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (7 years 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5450 times:

It is terrible with this sanctions that give the iranian airline passengers less security than us.

User currently offlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9269 posts, RR: 29
Reply 20, posted (7 years 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5281 times:

Quoting Bofredrik (Reply 19):
It is terrible with this sanctions that give the iranian airline passengers less security than us

It's up to them to get the ban lifted.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 21, posted (7 years 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5220 times:

Thats great, great news - I am so pleased.

IR are a wonderful airline and I am so pleased to see them get some really capable 744s. It really will be a quantum leap ahead for them after the classics they have so faithfully kept going. At last they have something that can really do the business on their THR-LHR route. I would think it has the range to do CCS as well non-stop.

Tehran is definitely on my "must see again properly" list of cities. Wonderful people and wonderful Persian hospitality. Sad that politics has caused this magnificent airline to suffer as badly as it has. The media here would have us believe the Iranians are all stone age barbarian suicide bombers, but that just is not the case. Yes, their Government has some distinctly archaic and repressive policies, but it is nowhere near as bad as Saudi Arabia. I dislike Ahmadinejad and I dislike Bush, but that doesnt mean I wont enjoy visiting Iran and the US regardless. I am just very lucky that I am able to, and have the freedom to do so.

Good on them for moving on up and making steps forward. I just hope the Americans do not find some way of stopping this deal going through like they did with the Blue Wings A330s.

Congrats IR - look forward to seeing these big birds at LHR soon!



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineRayPettit From United Kingdom, joined May 2002, 608 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4820 times:

Here is a thread with some background info. http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?p=1043124#post1043124

Just wondering where else these aircarft have been seen. Do they only operate within the Middle East?


User currently offlineMnik101 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 173 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (7 years 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3550 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 20):
Quoting Bofredrik (Reply 19):
It is terrible with this sanctions that give the iranian airline passengers less security than us

It's up to them to get the ban lifted

Safety should not come second to politics. Especially when it comes to flying


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...
A340-200 D-ASFB Ex-Brunei For Iran Air Force? posted Thu Dec 5 2002 13:23:50 by Alpha
3 Ex UA 744's On UK Register posted Tue Oct 3 2006 11:20:46 by Steady Eddie
"New" 747 For Iran Air posted Mon Sep 18 2006 21:54:37 by NA
New Boeings For Iran Air? posted Wed Jun 7 2006 03:12:34 by Amax1977
So Now What For Iran Air..... posted Sun Feb 5 2006 01:15:51 by Scalebuilder
US To Allow Spare Parts For Iran Air posted Fri Mar 11 2005 23:16:37 by Planenutz
MD-90 For Iran Air Tours, Any News? posted Sat Jan 1 2005 04:07:08 by 717fan
Any Suggestion For Iran Air New Color Scheme? posted Wed Sep 24 2003 02:21:11 by Pouyazad
New Livery For Iran Air posted Mon Jul 14 2003 12:31:36 by Na
No More UA 744 For Atlantic Flight posted Fri Oct 19 2001 19:17:15 by Jiml1126