Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Did EI Get Rid Of 767  
User currently offlineEI737NG From Ireland, joined Feb 2007, 48 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5874 times:

What were the reasons for ordering it and then why did they get rid of the 767 so quickly as it didn't stay in the fleet for very long, despite the fact that they still hadn't taken delivery of some of the ones they had ordered?

Thanks

11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineShamrock321 From Ireland, joined May 2008, 1597 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5860 times:

I didnt know EI had actually ordered new 767s from Boeing, I always thought they were to fill the gaps in the transition period between the 747s and A330s?

User currently offlineSeemyseems From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2009, 967 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5722 times:

Weren't they just a temporary lease like the MD-11's?

I love their A330's, they look so cool!



seemyseems
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12428 posts, RR: 37
Reply 3, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5672 times:



Quoting Shamrock321 (Reply 1):
I didnt know EI had actually ordered new 767s from Boeing, I always thought they were to fill the gaps in the transition period between the 747s and A330s?

These aircraft were -3Y0(ER)s, leased from GPA. They were originally intended to operate the DUB-LAX route, but the govt of the time refused to relent on the SNN stopover rule, so that route wasn't operated.

They were then scheduled to operate the DUB-SNN-ORD route, but this didn't materialise either; one of them ended up with Aeromexico and another with TWA.

However, although the decision to lease them out in 1992 was understandable, what was not as understandable was the fact that for a long time, one of them was sitting on the apron at DUB, all white, doing nothing - and because EI was still leasing them, it was costing them a lot. Through no fault of EI, a lease to Air Aruba fell through, as did a lease to Royal Nepal. However, given that their fleet at the time consisted of ageing 747s, they could have pressed that 767 into service.

They did actually use a 767 in service on the DUB-SNN-BOS route for a time, but by the time the 767s' lease came to an end, in 1997, they already had the A330 in service and once the A330s had arrived, the need for 763s evaporated.

So, although some circumstances occurred which were outside EI's control, I think that EI could have made better use of them; trouble is, of course, it's quite hard to justify use of a single long haul aircraft. Better to try and get rid of it, which they tried to do, but without success.

I had the oportunity to fly on an EI 767, from DUB to SNN; it was a nice aircraft, but the A330 beat it in every conceivable yardstick, so once the A330 became a possibility, that was it, as far as the 767 was concerned.


User currently offlineAmricanShamrok From Ireland, joined May 2008, 2887 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5630 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 3):
They were then scheduled to operate the DUB-SNN-ORD route

So they stopped the ORD service for a time in the 1990s because they had no aircraft for it didn't they? But wasnt it supposed to be SNN-DUB-ORD and not the other way around?



Shannon-Chicago
User currently offlineBestwestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7117 posts, RR: 57
Reply 5, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5570 times:

Dont forget Gulf war 1, and travel recession that surrounded the industry at the time. EI had already started a DUB LAX cargo service at the time, and the 767s were to replace this with a passenger and cargo service.

EI learnt some valuable lessons over the 767 'fiasco' - since then they have had the ability every winter to hand back leased long haul aircraft, which saved their bacon in the winter of 2001.



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlineEI737NG From Ireland, joined Feb 2007, 48 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 5343 times:

Sorry, but I still don't see why they got rid of them in favour of the A330. Why order/lease it in the first place, why not just opt for the A330 and not bother with it? Surely when they were evaluating the replacement for the 747 surely the A330 was in the mix along with 767 or 777?Why order the 767 and then revert to the A330? Doesn't really make sense

User currently offlineAer Lingus From Ireland, joined May 2000, 1560 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 5317 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 3):
although the decision to lease them out in 1992 was understandable



Quoting EI737NG (Reply 6):
Sorry, but I still don't see why they got rid of them in favour of the A330.

well the A330 was only a new aircraft and had just started coming into service in 93/94. the need for the 767's was 91/92 and the need at that was only for two airframes for LAX. The 330 has more cargo capacity which kept EI's transatlantic service alive in the early to mid ninties and when the time came around to replacing the 747s the A330 was the best option for a complete fleet replacement overall.


User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12428 posts, RR: 37
Reply 8, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 5304 times:



Quoting EI737NG (Reply 6):
Sorry, but I still don't see why they got rid of them in favour of the A330. Why order/lease it in the first place, why not just opt for the A330 and not bother with it? Surely when they were evaluating the replacement for the 747 surely the A330 was in the mix along with 767 or 777?Why order the 767 and then revert to the A330? Doesn't really make sense

The A330 was, of course, not available when the 767s were ordered via GPA in 1990 (or thereabouts); consideration was given to going to an all-767 fleet (which would have required about six aircraft), but the big failing of the 767, as fine an aircraft as it undoubtedly is, is its cargo capacity. When EI looked at the A330, it had an aircraft with MORE cargo capacity than the 747 (and vastly more than the 767), had pax capacity about 80% of the 747, but burned about half as much fuel. It was an excellent aircraft. The 767 just wasn't in the game from that point on.


User currently offlineBramble From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 5277 times:



Quoting Bestwestern (Reply 5):
Dont forget Gulf war 1, and travel recession that surrounded the industry at the time.



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 3):
but the govt of the time refused to relent on the SNN stopover rule, so that route wasn't operated.

My understanding was that these 2 reasons were the death knell of the short lived EI B767 relationship.

Quoting EI737NG (Reply 6):
why not just opt for the A330 and not bother with it?

Correct above. The A330 only started flying in 1993/4. EI got in quite quickly and operated MSN 54(-SHN), 55(-DUB), 59(-ORD), 70(-CRK), 86(-JFK),

EI I believe also were the first ETOPS operator of A330 over the Atlantic.


User currently offlinePilot21 From Ireland, joined Oct 1999, 1384 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 5059 times:



Quoting Bramble (Reply 9):
EI I believe also were the first ETOPS operator of A330 over the Atlantic.



Quoting Bramble (Reply 9):
Correct above. The A330 only started flying in 1993/4. EI got in quite quickly and operated MSN 54(-SHN), 55(-DUB), 59(-ORD), 70(-CRK), 86(-JFK),

Both correct - also EI got a great deal on the original A330's from Airbus as Air France had taken over Air Inter and told Airbus they wouldn't be filling the rest of the latters A330 order - hence EI ordered the planes in March 94 and recieved the first in May from what I remember.

Pilot21



Aircraft I've flown: A300/A310/A320/A321/A330/A340/B727/B732/B733/B734/B735/B738/B741/B742/B744/DC10/MD80/IL62/Bae146/AR
User currently onlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25117 posts, RR: 22
Reply 11, posted (5 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4736 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Reply 8):
Quoting EI737NG (Reply 6):
Sorry, but I still don't see why they got rid of them in favour of the A330. Why order/lease it in the first place, why not just opt for the A330 and not bother with it? Surely when they were evaluating the replacement for the 747 surely the A330 was in the mix along with 767 or 777?Why order the 767 and then revert to the A330? Doesn't really make sense

The A330 was, of course, not available when the 767s were ordered via GPA in 1990 (or thereabouts)

And even if the A330 had been available, I don't think the early A330-300s had the range for economic DUB-LAX nonstop service, and the A330-200 hadn't even been launched when the 333 went into service.


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...
Why Did FCA Get Rid Of An A321? posted Sun Sep 26 2004 00:12:39 by A340600
Why Did SAA Get Rid Of Their A320's? posted Fri Jan 3 2003 19:34:13 by American 767
Valujet: Why Did AirTran Get Rid Of DC9-21 posted Tue Nov 12 2002 00:35:57 by BR715-A1-30
Really Why Did BA Get Rid Of Their 'tails'? posted Sat Oct 13 2001 14:31:51 by Braniff Place
Why Did Delta Get Rid Of Their A310? posted Wed May 2 2001 19:06:05 by Oliver
Why Did Midway Get Rid Of The A320? posted Tue Sep 26 2000 07:06:32 by Rotate777
When Did VS Get Rid Of The Flag Carrying Lady? posted Mon Aug 13 2007 23:16:38 by Stealth777
When Did Delta Get Rid Of Ex-Pan Am Airbus A310s? posted Sat Aug 24 2002 23:12:09 by Bobcat
When Did United Get Rid Of The Friend Ship? posted Thu Apr 26 2001 05:29:38 by KonaB777
When Did COAir Get Rid Of Their 747 posted Mon Oct 16 2000 22:58:46 by Critter592