LAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25719 posts, RR: 50 Posted (7 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 30705 times:
Following last weeks announcement of large loss and negative outlook for 2014, the carrier has placed 18 frames for immediate sale.
4 x A340-500
4 x A300-600
8 x 737-400
2 x ATR-72
Deliveries available between Q2 and Q3.
Some might remember, TG tried to sell its A345's last year and did enter into and agreement with a Saudi VIP operator to only cancel the deal at the last minute due to complaints that the agreed price was below the debt on the aircraft which would have left TG taking a loss on the sale.
Lets see how they do this time. Maybe PeoplExpress can consider the 734's.. lol
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
So they want to sell the types almost every other airline would like to get rid of as well.
-A340-500. With SQs also for sale and some being scrapped already they´ll need a lot of patience until someone with a small purse will come along to buy these thirsty Rolls-Royces. They would make great VIP planes, maybe to replace SPs from the 1970s, but this type of plane is bought one by one.
-The A300s are rotting away since years, why didnt they sell them 5 years ago, what sense does it make to offer them now when they are worth half of what they were when being phased out?
-737-400? The market is being flooded by them at the moment. If they are older than 20 years the scrappers will be the best clients for them.
-ATR-72, ok these will have the best chance.
EddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7591 posts, RR: 42
Reply 14, posted (7 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 19071 times:
QF 734 fleet has been completely disposed of? I wonder if TG will have "competition" selling the 734s if QF is still in the process of selling theirs.
Quoting na (Reply 12): They would make great VIP planes
Or for a head of state.
Quoting MaxiAir (Reply 13): they are 24 years, so they won't have a good chance either! (HS-TRA & TRB)
Oh wow, I would have also thought they'd be the most desirable, but at such age, who knows. I was even going to suggest they might make sense for Mexico's VW (Aeromar) but at that age, maybe they should become soda cans.
DTWPurserBoy From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 1679 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (7 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 17225 times:
Weren't some of the TG A300's damaged when the airport flooded a couple of years ago? I seem to recall pictures of them standing in water over the tops of their wheels.
The A345 is a gorgeous machine but definitely a niche aircraft. Possible South African would take them at a good price for some long, thin routes but my guess is they will be sold off individually as VVIP aircraft for governments or individuals. Wish I had the cash!
Didn't SQ manage to trade their A345's back to Boeing? Anyone know what happened to them since?
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
Non-disclosure of nuclear energy vs. weapons programme, human rights abuses, open declaration of aggression toward Israel - are the real problem, the sanctions are a result of them. The Govt. of Iran knows what it needs to do in order to embrace the 21st century.
Re: the A345's. There are a few floating around now and as I see it they'd be perfect for SA who have the hot and high requirement as well as the long-distance one. Personally, I'd love to see NZ take a sub-fleet of them and open routes from AKL to EZE, GRU and MEL-JNB.
motorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3221 posts, RR: 9
Reply 31, posted (7 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 11549 times:
Quoting na (Reply 30): Again hard to explain why they are trying to sell them now and not 12 months ago. Were they kept in reserve so far or what?
Quite possibly held in reserve waiting for an upturn in the tourism/aviation/business sector but the recent political issues and violence will have exacerbated the industry volatility and worsened the overall environment/market. Now they really have to sell, whereas before they just should have.
mcoflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8683 posts, RR: 16
Reply 33, posted (7 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 10723 times:
The 744's are old. I wonder how much life is left in them. Some of the 734's leased from aercap were built in 98. I hope these a/c find new owners but my prediction is some will go to the scrap yard and be coke cans.
According to planespotters and airfleets two of those aging 744s are still active (the ones for sale are the oldest 744s in the fleet). Maybe someone like Air Atlanta will take them to offer them to Garuda and the like for one or a few Hadj-seasons. If a D-check is pending it will mean they´ll have to go for finals though. 93.000 - 99.000 flight hours is a bit below average to retire a 744 but not unsual these days.
The other types are surprisingly low on flight hours. Those ATRs are old indeed but they havent flown too much, just a few hours each day.
CF-CPI From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 1077 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (7 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 9136 times:
Quoting mcoflyer (Reply 33): The 744's are old. I wonder how much life is left in them.
Yes, and another post mentioned having six of them left. Why not park some of them and let the A340-600 fill in the gap? I had been hearing that the -600 is more efficient on a seat mile basis than the 747-400, and takes more cargo. Is there another reason they are unloading the Airbus and not the older Boeings?
KarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 12065 posts, RR: 34
Reply 38, posted (7 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 8870 times:
Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 36): Yes, and another post mentioned having six of them left. Why not park some of them and let the A340-600 fill in the gap? I had been hearing that the -600 is more efficient on a seat mile basis than the 747-400, and takes more cargo. Is there another reason they are unloading the Airbus and not the older Boeings?
The 747s are double the age of the A340s and I expect they have been paid off. And with about 100 more seats, the 747 offers more revenue.
Thai Airways is not the only one, VS will also ditch their A340-600s before the 744s for similar reasons, despite the better payload capabilities of the former.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
B-HOP From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2000, 646 posts, RR: 1
Reply 41, posted (7 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7736 times:
I am sure ATR's can find good home and maybe the A300 either to IR or for F converison with start up, as those 734 I have serious doubt they will fly again apart from beer can,as you can get 738 from lessor or Ryan at a cheap rate, beside there are huge risk when 737 MAX arrives its value would dip further. 345, well, it is never a right plane really, I see either a VIP, tanker converison or early beer can.
N14AZ From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2757 posts, RR: 25
Reply 47, posted (6 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4012 times:
I thought it was in this thread but it seems it was in a previous thread where someone mentioned that the visual appearance is that in Bangkok there are always a lot of TG-widebodies standing arround.
I can confirm this, whenever I land in Bangkok it looks as if a huge part of TG's fleet has been grounded, similar to how it looks in FRA during Christmas and New Years Eve, when LH grounds a part of their fleet. This is of course just an assessment based on the visual appearance and no statistical analysis but I have the feeling there are more TG-aircrafts in Bangkok than LH-aircrafts in FRA. Wonder if there are any statistics about TG's widebody fleet utilization...
lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13248 posts, RR: 100
Reply 49, posted (6 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3646 times:
Quoting na (Reply 12): -ATR-72, ok these will have the best chance.
Even though they are old, if Thai accepts a fair price, they will sell. I agree the others are tough sales and IMHO are unlikely to fetch the debt on the airframes.
Quoting LAXintl (Thread starter): Some might remember, TG tried to sell its A345's last year and did enter into and agreement with a Saudi VIP operator to only cancel the deal at the last minute due to complaints that the agreed price was below the debt on the aircraft which would have left TG taking a loss on the sale.
A345 resale values have dropped faster than their 'on the book depreciation.' If they insist on selling for more than the debt, Thai will be stuck with those frames a long time...
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 45):
2 x B747-400BCF MSN 24458 & 24459 have been added to the aircraft available for purchase.
Last I looked, BCF resale values were... poor.
Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
No wonder when about 25 are for sale, and the market is maybe 8 frames a year maximum at the moment.
Thai isnt very enduring with their cargo division, first the 777Fs which were dumped due to their expensive fixed price (leasing), now the 744BCFs. They are the oldest 744s in the fleet and if the third-oldest has flown 99.000 hours, the freighters have clocked more. All depends on how long they have got until the next D-check. If the last was done when they were converted then its about 4 years more.
Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 48): IIRC QF sold all of there's to some outfit in Miami, maybe for cargo conversion?
Right, some have been converted, if all will be remains to be seen.
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 49): I agree the others are tough sales and IMHO are unlikely to fetch the debt on the airframes.
The 744s and 734s are certainly payed for and are anyway rather close to scheduled final retirement, its the A345s which are the real problem. The A300s appear to have reached their cycle limit and wont go anywhere but the scrappers.
Asiaflyer From Singapore, joined May 2007, 1140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 51, posted (6 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2753 times:
Quoting N14AZ (Reply 47): I can confirm this, whenever I land in Bangkok it looks as if a huge part of TG's fleet has been grounded,
Although TG might not have the highest WB utilization, that might be a bit deceiving. TG is flying almost only WBs, so alot of the short/medium haul routes turns in BKK for some hours. Hence you see TG WBs from KUL,SIN,CGK,HKG etc etc sitting in BKK while turning.
If you on the other hand look after 1am when all intercontinental and longer regional flights have left BKK, very few TG WBs are sitting around.
Those figures don't seem to be accurate any more. According to an article in this Airbus Fast magazine, the Limit of Validity (LOV) has been extended beyond the original Design Service Goal (DSG) by developing Extended Service Goals (ESG). This applies to all A300/310 family members. At the time of publication, it seems that even a second ESG was under development for the A300-600 to increase life beyond 42,500 cycles / 89,000 hours.
Extremely detailed article explaining the process, starting at page 23 of the document. Page 27 contains a table of the life limits for all A300/310 faimily members, while page 29 contains a table which separately lists extended life limits for the aircraft systems: