Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
No More Onboard Lounges On Qatar's A340-600s  
User currently offlinePlaneHunter From Germany, joined Mar 2006, 6903 posts, RR: 77
Posted (5 years 7 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 11329 times:

Qatar Airways has announced that the lounges on the A340-600s will be replaced by 44 Economy Class seats.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Konstantin Von Wedelstaedt



"Akbar al Baker, the carrier's CEO said the lounges were not used often enough to justify the extravagant use of space."

http://www.ameinfo.com/191356.html


The question is which carrier will follow next...


PH

[Edited 2009-04-05 03:59:35]


Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (5 years 7 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 11283 times:

Very interesting.

Quoting PlaneHunter (Thread starter):
will be replaced by 44 Economy Class seats.

Isn't the lounge between F and C class? Do they move C class seats away from the end of that class to the lounge space to put new Y seats in the end of the C class section? And why 44? In a 2-4-2 layout that would be 5.5 rows of seats.

Quoting PlaneHunter (Thread starter):
The question is which carrier will follow next...

EY? Finally putting some windows in?


User currently offlineLH4116 From Sweden, joined Aug 2007, 1714 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (5 years 7 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 11144 times:

Is there even a point for them to do this kind of seat re-arrangements? Aren't the A346's leaving the fleet i 2010, anyway?


SAS Plus is Business Class made faux!
User currently offline1stfl94 From United Kingdom, joined May 2006, 1455 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 7 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 11016 times:



Quoting LH4116 (Reply 2):
Is there even a point for them to do this kind of seat re-arrangements? Aren't the A346's leaving the fleet i 2010, anyway?

It could be being done to make the aircraft more attractive to a future buyer as there aren't that many airlines that are going to want onboard lounges. Plus they might as well try and make a few more $$$ out of the aircraft before retirement


User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 7 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 10871 times:



Quoting 1stfl94 (Reply 3):
Quoting LH4116 (Reply 2):
Is there even a point for them to do this kind of seat re-arrangements? Aren't the A346's leaving the fleet i 2010, anyway?

It could be being done to make the aircraft more attractive to a future buyer as there aren't that many airlines that are going to want onboard lounges. Plus they might as well try and make a few more $$$ out of the aircraft before retirement

Depends on much work the change takes. Planes will lose some operating time for this. However, is it certain they will leave in 2010? That may have been the original plan, but in the current economic climate they might not get a good sum for them and might have problems financing whatever they need to replace them.

IIRC they were supposed to go to Orynx leasing. But who could lease them? I read that UX was looking for 2 A346 for flights to Mexico.


User currently offlinePlaneHunter From Germany, joined Mar 2006, 6903 posts, RR: 77
Reply 5, posted (5 years 7 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 10484 times:



Quoting Thorben (Reply 4):
However, is it certain they will leave in 2010? That may have been the original plan, but in the current economic climate they might not get a good sum for them and might have problems financing whatever they need to replace them.

Haven't heard of a deadline recently, but I guess the planes' value is indeed an important aspect. Here's what QR's CEO has said only a few weeks ago:

"If I could, I would throw them away. These planes are not efficient at all."

http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=15907


PH



Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (5 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 9740 times:



Quoting PlaneHunter (Reply 5):
Haven't heard of a deadline recently, but I guess the planes' value is indeed an important aspect. Here's what QR's CEO has said only a few weeks ago:

"If I could, I would throw them away. These planes are not efficient at all."

Maybe LH should give QR a little development aid. It seems they know how to use them efficiently.


User currently offlinePlaneHunter From Germany, joined Mar 2006, 6903 posts, RR: 77
Reply 7, posted (5 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 9472 times:



Quoting Thorben (Reply 6):
Maybe LH should give QR a little development aid. It seems they know how to use them efficiently.

From QR's point of view, with both the A346 and the 77W in the fleet, it would make sense to get rid of the less fuel efficient aircraft. And apart from that, eliminating one type always saves costs. However, it is still nonsense to claim that the A346 is "not efficient at all".


PH



Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
User currently offlineSeemyseems From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2009, 970 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (5 years 7 months 4 weeks ago) and read 9002 times:

Does the CEO of QR not like them because of their economy? (as in the money side of things)

Wonder who will buy them.



seemyseems
User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 27251 posts, RR: 60
Reply 9, posted (5 years 7 months 4 weeks ago) and read 8951 times:

I was wondering when airlines would start to look at these things. I also wonder what and who will be next. SQ/EK and their A380's maybe ??

User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 8497 times:



Quoting PlaneHunter (Reply 7):

From QR's point of view, with both the A346 and the 77W in the fleet, it would make sense to get rid of the less fuel efficient aircraft. And apart from that, eliminating one type always saves costs. However, it is still nonsense to claim that the A346 is "not efficient at all".

Regardless of what the B marketing department claims, it is non-sense to have a sub-fleet of 4 of a type, when you 17 of its direct competitor coming. The A346 certainly has the advantage of commonality with the rest of QR's Airbus fleet, although the A330s do have GE engines. As pointed out in that great, but unfortunately deleted post, there is certainly some search for attention in Al Baker's statement. If he had a critical press and a critical owner, he would not talk like that about planes he ordered himself. Airbus will forgive him his comments, as he has at least 85 of their wide-bodies on order.


User currently offlineAF-A319 From France, joined Oct 1999, 603 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 8280 times:

The idea was crazy in the first place. Al Baker should turn down his arrogance and acknowledge that they made a mistake by implementing this feature without any customer tests. Rant over!

User currently offlineGT4EZY From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2007, 1800 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8138 times:

Is this the 747/DC 10 all over again?

Lounges on the upper deck converted for more seats.



Proud to fly from Manchester!
User currently offlinePellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2480 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6122 times:

Too bad, I wanted to try it on the IAD-DOH route (before they switched to 77Ws), their A346s looked delicious.  Smile I can't see them fitting 44 seats in that much space though, it looks like about the length of 3 rows of Y to me?  Confused


oh boy!!!
User currently offlinePlaneHunter From Germany, joined Mar 2006, 6903 posts, RR: 77
Reply 14, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 5907 times:



Quoting Thorben (Reply 10):
The A346 certainly has the advantage of commonality with the rest of QR's Airbus fleet, although the A330s do have GE engines.

Commonality is an important aspect - but it's very likely that it's still more expensive to have the A346 (with its RR engines) in the fleet than standardizing on the A330/777 combo.


PH



Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20246 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5898 times:



Quoting AF-A319 (Reply 11):
The idea was crazy in the first place. Al Baker should turn down his arrogance and acknowledge that they made a mistake by implementing this feature without any customer tests. Rant over!

I've always wondered if space-users like this make more revenue than they cost. If VA has it, why doesn't BA?


User currently offlineANstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5303 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5359 times:

Having an F only lounge area was always going to fail. I mean the F seats are so comfy anyway, why do you need another lounge area??

If it were a sit up bar and open to business class as well it may have been more successful and used less room!


User currently offlineBabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5258 times:

I've got a nasty suspicion QR are having a problem balancing their books. Hissy fits over the A340 and now the lounge being written off...umm.

We forget that without the West consuming it's not worth anyone else producing. Our recession has global implications.


User currently offlineBdak From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 89 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5192 times:



Quoting DocLightning (Reply 15):

I've always wondered if space-users like this make more revenue than they cost. If VA has it, why doesn't BA?

Actually I believe Virgin are removing their on-board lounge bars as well.


User currently offlineFly-K From Germany, joined May 2000, 3158 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5019 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

With just 266 seats in the 346, the aircraft is certainly not efficient for QR...


Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been...
User currently offlineFlying Belgian From Belgium, joined Jun 2001, 2399 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4319 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

You don't have to be strong and expert in maths to acknowledge the difference between a "lounge" and 44 pax seats on an aircraft like the A346. An aircraft that is already not easy economics wise in QR's case...


Life is great at 41.000 feet...
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4036 times:



Quoting PlaneHunter (Reply 14):
Commonality is an important aspect - but it's very likely that it's still more expensive to have the A346 (with its RR engines) in the fleet than standardizing on the A330/777 combo.

Considering their current situation, yes. However, had their A330s RR engines (the most sold on this type it seems), and had they ordered A345/346 instead of 777NG, they might actually be better off. However, when an airline gets to having 100-200 planes, they are wise to use them from both A and B. 777NG is also a nice ground breaker for the 787, so QR was not having to rely solely on the A350, of which they were actually a customer before the XWB-change.

Quoting Fly-K (Reply 19):
With just 266 seats in the 346, the aircraft is certainly not efficient for QR...

That might be the best layout in financial terms, if they can sell the F and C seats at the right price.


User currently offlineTonystan From Ireland, joined Jan 2006, 1445 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3877 times:

Qatar Airways works in a very strange way, its CEO is all about pomp and ceremony and one upmanship. He ordered the A340-600s despite there being more efficient aircraft available at the time just because he could claim to be the first to have the IGW version. Despite knowing that they 777's would be arriving he still insisted on having the lounge installed for First just to make a point about being a 5 star airline. Now just two years on he is slating Airbus and the A340 and now removing the lounge as if he was forced into having both!


My views are my own and do not reflect any other person or organisation.
User currently offlinePnwtraveler From Canada, joined Jun 2007, 2280 posts, RR: 12
Reply 23, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3669 times:

I think if the downturn continues and has legs, we will see First Class sections reduced and more economy seats and seat sales to fill planes. The idea of pay bars for economy may generate enough cash to warrant the space. We will see once someone actually tries it and how popular they are. With more and more executives being bumped down to economy from first/business due to restrictions on travel budgets, they may compensate themselves by imbibing more.

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...
No More DL 764s On ATL-FL Routes Eff. Summer 08 posted Wed Dec 19 2007 15:23:13 by 1337Delta764
Why No More Intl First On US posted Sat Dec 2 2006 01:58:02 by Boeing 747-311
No More Royal Barge On 747 posted Mon Dec 19 2005 17:39:19 by ThaiAggie
No More BA 757s On Domestic Flights From April posted Fri Sep 2 2005 12:24:23 by Gkirk
No More Guaranteed Seat On DL Shuttle posted Thu Jan 27 2005 23:33:18 by Deltaffindfw
No More SJC-LAS On AA posted Mon Dec 8 2003 21:27:13 by Mikesairways
No More Domestic Widebodies On NW posted Tue Oct 29 2002 22:26:36 by JohnJ
No More Mileage Upgrades On AA.com? posted Tue Oct 8 2002 05:51:37 by Milemaster
No More PIT-MDW On AirTran posted Thu Jul 4 2002 05:30:27 by Pitrules
No More AA A300's On TransAtlantic posted Wed Jan 30 2002 16:22:23 by CactusA319