Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing Pitching More 777s To Thai?  
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12436 posts, RR: 37
Posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 7061 times:

Boeing is pitching more 777s, particularly the 777-300ER, to Thai, to meet a new requirement for medium and long haul aircraft.

See attached article: http://www.bangkokpost.com/business/...n/26304/boeing-pitches-777-to-thai

I could see the 777-300ER as being a likely replacement for some of the older 747-400s. Can't see a requirement for 777-200LRs as the ULH for which the A345 was originally acquired are no longer operated. The older 777-200s are likely to be replaced by A330s - some of which are still on order, although I think the ones on order are mainly to replace older A300-600s.

On a different matter, Thai had a requirement some time ago for A321s, but I don't think they ever firmed up the order.

20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineOhsopc From Thailand, joined Jul 2006, 108 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 7051 times:

sounds great. THAI needs 747 and AB6 replacements

User currently offlineDTWLAX From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 789 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 7024 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Thread starter):
as the ULH for which the A345 was originally acquired are no longer operated

Not true...
The A345 is still in operation on the BKK-LAX route


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6895 posts, RR: 63
Reply 3, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6907 times:

It was rumoured a few months back that Thai had secured A350-1000 delivery slots. I know that no order has been announced and I forget the details but there seemed to be substance to the rumour.

User currently offlineZK-NBT From New Zealand, joined Oct 2000, 5320 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6814 times:



Quoting Kaitak (Thread starter):
I could see the 777-300ER as being a likely replacement for some of the older 747-400s.

I thought thats what the 6 A380s would do, replace the 6 oldest 744s.

I did hear something awhile back re TG and 77Ws, they seem to want to operate every aircraft offered, they already have 6 A346s which are a very comfortable aircraft.

They were linked to the 747-8I at one stage aswell, which I see does get a mention in the article!


User currently offlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2954 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6613 times:

Chalk up another engine type operated by the most diversified airline fleet in the world (at least for its size).

User currently offlineJfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8344 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 6322 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting DTWLAX (Reply 2):
Not true...
The A345 is still in operation on the BKK-LAX route

LAX to Bangkok could be operated by 77W's.


User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 6280 times:



Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 6):
LAX to Bangkok could be operated by 77W's.

Yes, it could and that was never questioned. The response was in reply to a comment that the A345 were no longer in service with Thai.


User currently offlineFRNT787 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1321 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5983 times:



Quoting AirNZ (Reply 7):
Yes, it could and that was never questioned. The response was in reply to a comment that the A345 were no longer in service with Thai.

...and he was simply mentioning that the 77W could as well...in order to add something to think about on this thread about Thai possibly talking to Boeing about gettting 77Ws...



"We have a right to fail, because failure makes us grow" --Glenn Beck
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12436 posts, RR: 37
Reply 9, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5639 times:



Quoting AirNZ (Reply 7):
The response was in reply to a comment that the A345 were no longer in service with Thai.

That's not what I said; sorry about my messy phraseology, but I meant to say that the routes for which the A340-500 were acquired are no longer; I accept that I'm wrong in that, but I knew the A345s are still operated (and thank God for that, because TG A345s ... just the most gorgeous aircraft flying  Wink)


User currently offlineBehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4773 posts, RR: 43
Reply 10, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5612 times:

If I was working for TG and part of these negotiations with Boeing, I would do the following:

Would gladly replace entire B 744 fleet with B 77Ws as well as entire A 346 fleet with B 77Ws if and only if Boeing take away all of my A 346s and A 345s and adjust the market price of these A 340NGs against the price large B 77W order. The A 345s I would replace with B 772ERs.

This would be similar to how SQ got rid of their 8 A 343s by exchanging it for a large B 777 order many years ago  Wink


User currently offlinePellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2438 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5570 times:



Quoting Carpethead (Reply 5):
Chalk up another engine type operated by the most diversified airline fleet in the world (at least for its size).

So true. Big grin It seems TG has operated every modern widebody with the exception of a few variants of course.

Quoting Behramjee (Reply 10):
If I was working for TG and part of these negotiations with Boeing, I would do the following:

Would gladly replace entire B 744 fleet with B 77Ws as well as entire A 346 fleet with B 77Ws if and only if Boeing take away all of my A 346s and A 345s and adjust the market price of these A 340NGs against the price large B 77W order. The A 345s I would replace with B 772ERs.

This would be similar to how SQ got rid of their 8 A 343s by exchanging it for a large B 777 order many years ago

I hope not, that would make for a boring fleet and TG has a rather good relationship with Airbus right now.



oh boy!!!
User currently offlineBehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4773 posts, RR: 43
Reply 12, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5546 times:

What is my proposal got to do with "boring"? lol...at the end of the day Im proposing whats in TG's best financial interests and the deal if brokered would be a big win win for TG $$$ wise!

TG would then have a fleet of :

A 380s
B 77Ws
B 772ERs
A 333s
B 737s


User currently offlineKiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8557 posts, RR: 13
Reply 13, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5525 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 11):
It seems TG has operated every modern widebody with the exception of a few variants of course.

Almost .... they did actually place either an order or an LOI for 767-200ERs many years ago but never went ahead with it other than that they have had 747-200/300/400 A300A310( inherited from the domestic Thai Airways ) A330/340 777 DC-10 MD11 , about the only Western built widebody missing ( apart from the already-mentioned 767) must be the L1011



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlinePellegrine From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2438 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5413 times:



Quoting Behramjee (Reply 12):
What is my proposal got to do with "boring"?

Guess I'm just a fan of A345/346 in TG's fleet and I'd hate to see them go away prematurely.



oh boy!!!
User currently offlineYellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6129 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5019 times:



Quoting Behramjee (Reply 10):
Would gladly replace entire B 744 fleet with B 77Ws as well as entire A 346 fleet with B 77Ws if and only if Boeing take away all of my A 346s and A 345s and adjust the market price of these A 340NGs against the price large B 77W order. The A 345s I would replace with B 772ERs.

This is how you go broke. I think Boeing did it because SQ was a very large customer



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineBehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4773 posts, RR: 43
Reply 16, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 4823 times:

yeah well Im looking at it from TG's perspective and what sort of deal favors them the fullest.

User currently offlineSean-SAN- From United States of America, joined Aug 2002, 769 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3259 times:

The real question is how many tons of shrimp does one 77W cost?

User currently offlineHamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2744 posts, RR: 58
Reply 18, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2838 times:

Behramjee,

FWIW, since Boeing made the SQ deal ('97?), at least two airlines have approached Boeing about doing the same thing. Both China Airlines and LAN wanted Boeing to buy their A340's in exchange for a 772ER order. In both cases, Boeing politely declined the offers (whether because of the price the airlines wanted for the Airbus's or other factors, I don't know). There could also be other airlines, but those are the olny two I can confirm.

Would Boeing do it for TG? Well, the market has changed. TG is potentially looking at more frames than CI, and certainly more than LA. And Boeing might be more open to taking back it's own 744's, instead of A340s. Especially if they can line up more BCF customers. But are these factors enough? IMO, no.


Pellegrine,

TG's relationship with Airbus isn't quite as good as it once was, from what I understand. After re-evaluating their fleet plans, word is they decided they didn't need the A380 anymore. However, as TG had already taken the compensation payment from Airbus, they (rightfully, IMO) told TG they were obligated to take the planes and could not convert them to other models. Now TG is stuck with a plane they no longer feel they need.

Regards,

Hamlet69



Honor the warriors, not the war.
User currently offlineFXMD11 From Thailand, joined Aug 2004, 184 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2651 times:



Quoting DTWLAX (Reply 2):
The A345 is still in operation on the BKK-LAX route

....plus are they used on the BKK-OSL route. These are the ones which were in service on BKK-JFK 2years ago. However, TG was never able to sale them, hence they got them a new, yet limited, future.


User currently offlineBehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4773 posts, RR: 43
Reply 20, posted (4 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2296 times:



Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 18):
Behramjee,

FWIW, since Boeing made the SQ deal ('97?), at least two airlines have approached Boeing about doing the same thing. Both China Airlines and LAN wanted Boeing to buy their A340's in exchange for a 772ER order. In both cases, Boeing politely declined the offers (whether because of the price the airlines wanted for the Airbus's or other factors, I don't know). There could also be other airlines, but those are the olny two I can confirm.

Would Boeing do it for TG? Well, the market has changed. TG is potentially looking at more frames than CI, and certainly more than LA. And Boeing might be more open to taking back it's own 744's, instead of A340s. Especially if they can line up more BCF customers. But are these factors enough? IMO, no.


Pellegrine,

TG's relationship with Airbus isn't quite as good as it once was, from what I understand. After re-evaluating their fleet plans, word is they decided they didn't need the A380 anymore. However, as TG had already taken the compensation payment from Airbus, they (rightfully, IMO) told TG they were obligated to take the planes and could not convert them to other models. Now TG is stuck with a plane they no longer feel they need.

Regards,

Hamlet69

Thank you for your post. Pretty interesting...TG should then consider selling its A 380s to interested airlines if it really sees no need for the aircraft. Do you think anyone would be interested in buying them off TG if the price was attractive?


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...
Thai Airways - No More First To Australia posted Wed Feb 6 2008 06:59:31 by QF175
Taag To Get More 777s? posted Mon Oct 1 2007 03:39:35 by MD90fan
Can Boeing Add More Test Pilots (to Hasten Cert)? posted Tue Sep 11 2007 16:34:36 by Bringiton
El Al:why No More 777s And 744s To CDG? posted Tue Oct 3 2006 15:56:51 by LY777
Qatar To Buy 20 *more* 777s? posted Sun Sep 24 2006 06:27:10 by Tak
Boeing CEO Sees Potential To Re-engine 737. posted Thu Sep 3 2009 21:49:28 by Art
BelleAir Launches 2 More Routes To Italy posted Tue Aug 18 2009 08:02:42 by LIPZ
Consequences To Boeing If It Has To Cancel The 787 posted Thu Jul 30 2009 15:58:31 by Mikesbucky
Continental: 4 More B753's To Join The Fleet? posted Sat Jul 11 2009 11:49:42 by American 767
Children More Likely To Survive Plane Crashes? posted Wed Jul 1 2009 07:52:19 by Elite