jbs2886
Posts: 1813
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Wed Dec 06, 2017 6:10 pm

Arion640 wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
TedToToe wrote:
It sounds like they were in lieu of late 787s. Can somebody else confirm?


IIRC there was a connection to A380 delays, which were significant (I would consider that a "bad run in with Airbus").


When has a new aircraft programme actually been on time recently? Look at the 787, years late. It can be expected and most airlines do.

I think VS when it ordered the A330's had probably decided it didn't want the A380's. Ordering the A380 was another publicity stunt from Branson at the time. Wanting casinos and bars etc etc.


I understand that, but expected or not, both Airbus and Boeing paid penalties for late deliveries.
 
TC957
Topic Author
Posts: 3143
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:12 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Wed Dec 06, 2017 6:34 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Maybe unrelated, but VS just re-activated an A340-600 from storage:

Airbus A340 -642 622 G-VNAP Virgin Atlantic Airways ferried 06dec17 LDE-TLS-MNL after storage ex F-WWCE


Or is VS bringing in A340 capacity instead of A330s?

That to me makes more sense rather than leasing in those A332's. I suppose the VS bean counters have been busy tapping into their calculators the pros & cons of bringing back the stored A346's as a temporary measure for the grounded 789's.
Perhaps they'll base VNAP up at MAN to cover the SFO & LAS flights. Be interesting to see what seating configuration VNAP will have after returning from MNL overhaul, as I believe the 346's had their interiors stripped out at LGW before being sent off to LDE storage.
 
User avatar
aeromoe
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:34 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Wed Dec 06, 2017 7:03 pm

NWAROOSTER wrote:
...Qantas has a Rolls powered A380 , VH-OQA, that exploded in flight due an oil leak caused by a failed oil seal on one of it's engines which successfully returned to Singapore...


I know what you mean and the outcome of the flight but your wording suggests the A380 exploded in flight.
AA AC AS BA BD BF BN BR BY B6 CO CZ DG DL EA EI EN FL FT F9 HA HP ICX JI J7 KE KS LH MC NW OC OO OZ(1) OZ(2) PA PI PT QQ RM RO RV(1) RV(2) RW SK SM SQ S4 TI TS TW UA UK US UZ VS VX WA WN WS W7 XV YV YX(2) ZZ 9K
 
anstar
Posts: 3103
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:49 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Wed Dec 06, 2017 7:15 pm

Arion640 wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
TedToToe wrote:


I think VS when it ordered the A330's had probably decided it didn't want the A380's. Ordering the A380 was another publicity stunt from Branson at the time. Wanting casinos and bars etc etc.



I think when VS ordered A380's LHR was still closed to competition via the Bermuda agreement. Once Bermuda was scrapped and LHR was open to bmi, Delta, Northwest, US Airways, Continental etc the need and rational for A380's was dead.

Gone are the days they flew twice daily to Boston and Washington and could fill multiple 747's to JFK.
 
User avatar
XAM2175
Posts: 1093
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 2:25 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Wed Dec 06, 2017 7:39 pm

NWAROOSTER wrote:
It took a year to repair the aircraft and Rolls Royce had to cover the cost of the repair and lost revenue


One should bear in mind there that QF are rather protective of their no-hull-loss-accidents record for jet operations, meaning that while yes it did take a year to restore the aircraft to service, it cannot be assumed that that there were not other options like scrapping OQA and taking a new frame in its place. Certainly they did pursue Rolls-Royce for compensation but I do not believe they received anything unreasonable.

Consider also that after VH-OJH became unusually acquainted with the runway overrun area at DMK in 1999 QF spent an extraordinary amount of effort getting it flying again, and since then it has been fairly solidly established that they paid more for the repair than they would have had they declared it a total loss and simply bought a new 744.
 
bmibaby737
Posts: 1554
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 1:07 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Wed Dec 06, 2017 7:50 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Maybe unrelated, but VS just re-activated an A340-600 from storage:

Airbus A340 -642 622 G-VNAP Virgin Atlantic Airways ferried 06dec17 LDE-TLS-MNL after storage ex F-WWCE


Or is VS bringing in A340 capacity instead of A330s?


Virgin Atlantic use to lease G-VNAP from "Socrates 622 Limited" (no idea who they are) who took back the aircraft on 26-February-2015 (Aircraft was WFU 09-January-2015 and stored at LDE 24-February-2015 according to Planespotters.net)... however, just a few days ago on 27-November-2017 the ownership was transferred to Virgin Atlantic Airways per the CAA "G-INFO" website. Almost three years after being withdrawn from use.

So if they've taken this A340 as a stop-gap, then they've had to *purchase* the aircraft to do so.
 
JamesCousins
Posts: 289
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:10 pm

bmibaby737 wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
Maybe unrelated, but VS just re-activated an A340-600 from storage:

Airbus A340 -642 622 G-VNAP Virgin Atlantic Airways ferried 06dec17 LDE-TLS-MNL after storage ex F-WWCE


Or is VS bringing in A340 capacity instead of A330s?


Virgin Atlantic use to lease G-VNAP from "Socrates 622 Limited" (no idea who they are) who took back the aircraft on 26-February-2015 (Aircraft was WFU 09-January-2015 and stored at LDE 24-February-2015 according to Planespotters.net)... however, just a few days ago on 27-November-2017 the ownership was transferred to Virgin Atlantic Airways per the CAA "G-INFO" website. Almost three years after being withdrawn from use.

So if they've taken this A340 as a stop-gap, then they've had to *purchase* the aircraft to do so.


If they've bought it then I presume they're planning to use it for a little while and/or have a customer lined up for it later on... It's an expensive stop gap! Good to see another A346 in the sky, but the on-board product on this A/C - no thanks :?
A320-200, A321-200, 737-500, 737-800, 747-400, 757-200, 787-9
 
Arion640
Posts: 1984
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:12 pm

anstar wrote:
Arion640 wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:



I think when VS ordered A380's LHR was still closed to competition via the Bermuda agreement. Once Bermuda was scrapped and LHR was open to bmi, Delta, Northwest, US Airways, Continental etc the need and rational for A380's was dead.

Gone are the days they flew twice daily to Boston and Washington and could fill multiple 747's to JFK.


Agreed, another problem for VS was they had hardly any feed.
319 320 321 333 346 359 388 733 73G 738 744 752 753 763 772 77E 773 77W 788 789 E145 E175 E195 RJ85 F70 DH8C DH8D AT75

“No bumps, no bangs - Concorde”
 
JamesCousins
Posts: 289
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:14 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Maybe unrelated, but VS just re-activated an A340-600 from storage:

Airbus A340 -642 622 G-VNAP Virgin Atlantic Airways ferried 06dec17 LDE-TLS-MNL after storage ex F-WWCE


Or is VS bringing in A340 capacity instead of A330s?


Seems a tad confusing to me, especially given it's off-season - quite the bump in capacity from the 789's! They may have had some sort of great deal on the 346 to make up for any passenger load disadvantages though. That being said maybe VS is missing the capacity on key routes that have been downsized from A340s to 787s, such as JFK. Maybe we will see routes such as LHR to JFK/SFO/LAX upgraded to A35Ks once they come in, the pressure to offer a superior on board product (provided by the 787) must be big on these routes, given the high competition.

Just my 2 cents :D
A320-200, A321-200, 737-500, 737-800, 747-400, 757-200, 787-9
 
JamesCousins
Posts: 289
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:29 pm

JannEejit wrote:
Armodeen wrote:

There are no 787s at MAN, the A332s will be replacing VS's own A333s.


Going by Jethro's fleet listings, Virgin have received 14 789's with 3 more to come in 2018 and further options up to 20. Does anyone see the type 'breaking out' of the LHR network and being deployed elsewhere, perhaps at MAN or within the leisure fleet ? I know the A350 will displace the leisure fleet 744's on current plan. I just see the 789 being a slightly better fit on regional services such as GLA-MCO than the A350-1000. Thoughts ?


I'm guessing the 789s will stay LHR, with some LHR A330s perhaps moving up north if need be. I say this for a couple of reasons, competition at LHR is strong and Virgin need to offer the best product possible to compete, the 789 and upcoming A350 doing that. The 787s so far are also pretty heavy biz config and I can't see them adjusting seat configs too much on remaining orders.

The A350s, from what I know, will basically be a like for like swap with the 744s and some A340s. If some 789 routes are up-gauged tothe A35K (I see LAX, SFO & JFK being potential candidates) that could see some mroe wiggle room in the 787 fleet, although I see 330s shifting up north as being more probable.
A320-200, A321-200, 737-500, 737-800, 747-400, 757-200, 787-9
 
JamesCousins
Posts: 289
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:43 pm

DobboDobbo wrote:
Whilst MAN is having to play the poor relation to LHR, this is no great surprise given (aside from anything else) the slot position at LHR. I have no problem with this.

On the positive side, it feels like VS are going to a decent amount of effort to keep the MAN programme going. I don't know whether any B744s will remain based at MAN (I assume at least 1, most likely 2) but if all 4 A332 are based at MAN and are essentially turned into VS aircraft (paint and interior) that's certainly no bad thing.


I agree. I mean as sad as it is that MAN may not be 'prioritized' in many situations (I say that loosely) it's the end of peak season, as a pose to mid summer, the capacity down gauge makes good business sense at this time of the year, and VS have to keep satisfied a core base of business travelers at LHR, which arguably make up well over half of their business.
A320-200, A321-200, 737-500, 737-800, 747-400, 757-200, 787-9
 
Tedd
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 11:22 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:03 am

XAM2175 wrote:
NWAROOSTER wrote:
It took a year to repair the aircraft and Rolls Royce had to cover the cost of the repair and lost revenue


One should bear in mind there that QF are rather protective of their no-hull-loss-accidents record for jet operations, meaning that while yes it did take a year to restore the aircraft to service, it cannot be assumed that that there were not other options like scrapping OQA and taking a new frame in its place. Certainly they did pursue Rolls-Royce for compensation but I do not believe they received anything unreasonable.

Consider also that after VH-OJH became unusually acquainted with the runway overrun area at DMK in 1999 QF spent an extraordinary amount of effort getting it flying again, and since then it has been fairly solidly established that they paid more for the repair than they would have had they declared it a total loss and simply bought a new 744.


I don`t understand NWAROOSTER`s point in bringing the issue up in the first place, a comment more associated with things
you might see on YouTube rather than on these pages, but in relation to the Qantas A380 incident, which obviously caused
all parties terrible inconvenience, wasn`t it universally acknowledged that RR did an excellent job in investigating the cause,
& putting in place a remedy to guard against any similar occurrence? I`m sure the same attention to the blade issues will be
given to it`s customers, & that they will be duly compensated for the inconvenience. It`s unfortunate, but in the world of mechanical
engineering, things can go wrong, it happens to RR, PW, GE & others, no one can guard against it. Will it hurt RR`s reputation?
I don`t doubt it will. Will it make some of it`s customers turn to GEnx? I doubt that very much.
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 2031
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:35 am

USAirKid wrote:
catdaddy63 wrote:


So one of the features of the 787, is that the engine model isn't fixed based on the airplane delivery. I know this was mainly a feature for lessors, but would there be any chance of VS switching their 787s over to GE?

No it isn't.

The interoperability thing is to cut costs at Boeing. Nothing more, nothing else. They just have to design and fly one architecture to which either the GE or RR engine can be connected to.

No lessor will willingly remove $30 million or more in engine value and spend that again to re-engine an airframe. It's just not viable.
 
sjoh1271
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 5:17 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:39 am

Given VS now own VNAP, perhaps this will now be the last A346 they retire? They could retire another A346 earlier than planned and thus save lease costs to pay for the depreciation....
 
DobboDobbo
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 1:02 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:58 am

JamesCousins wrote:
DobboDobbo wrote:
Whilst MAN is having to play the poor relation to LHR, this is no great surprise given (aside from anything else) the slot position at LHR. I have no problem with this.

On the positive side, it feels like VS are going to a decent amount of effort to keep the MAN programme going. I don't know whether any B744s will remain based at MAN (I assume at least 1, most likely 2) but if all 4 A332 are based at MAN and are essentially turned into VS aircraft (paint and interior) that's certainly no bad thing.


I agree. I mean as sad as it is that MAN may not be 'prioritized' in many situations (I say that loosely) it's the end of peak season, as a pose to mid summer, the capacity down gauge makes good business sense at this time of the year, and VS have to keep satisfied a core base of business travelers at LHR, which arguably make up well over half of their business.


Yes, there is certainly a glass half full interpretation of this. If the A332 sub fleet remains MAN based all year for 4/5 years, it makes you wonder what else becomes possible.

For example, I understand the A333 didn't quite have the legs to do SFO in the winter. Same likely applies for LAX. SFO year round and LAX now become more realistic.

It also makes you wonder about what other winter propositions VS could now think about. BOM is a major unserved market ex MAN as is DEL. A winter seasonal route to CPT might also be a good idea on 2/3x weekly frequency if, say BOS, couldn't be sustained all year. Food for thought.
 
TC957
Topic Author
Posts: 3143
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:12 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:50 am

Would love to see VS back into CPT seasonally and re-instate BOM, but I suspect DL would rather have them feed more flights into their US hubs if they want to expand. The believe the remaining 7 346's were due to leave gradually next year as the remaining 789's come in, but I guess the plan now is to keep them a bit longer given the RR Trent troubles.
No doubt VNAP will come from it's MNL maintenance in time for the Christmas peak, as previously mentioned it'll be interesting to see if the interior will be as other 346's or more of a leisure configuration like the 744's.
 
OMAAbound
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2016 12:43 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:51 pm

I wrote a thread about this just a few months ago

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1370323&p=19722811#p19722811

At the time we were planning to pick up the 767, but that looks to have come into play already by us ‘handing’ flights (JFK & ATL) to them.

As of today 7/12/2017, we will only have 6 787’s In operation today. There talk that Seattle will go to a Delta 777 as of late to end of January.

It is correct that they are coming from Air Berlin, they will also have the full VS livery. On the inside the cabin and feature will be the same, same fabrics, carpet, etc Premium will be retro fitted to the aircraft as well.

These will be based at MAN permanently to stop any swapping and making it difficult to position aircraft from LGW.

OMAA
Right hand seat of a 787. Also can be found eating sandwiches, drinking coffee and attempting to understand Chinese ATC!
 
Armodeen
Posts: 1027
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:17 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:18 pm

Thanks for the update OMAA. If the 332s are not a temporary measure and they are getting the full VS product then this is actually a good thing for MAN. Do you know if MAN is keeping the 744s as well? Much will depend on that really, since running 332s on the MCO route will be a significant drop in capacity.

Thanks.
 
OMAAbound
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2016 12:43 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:45 pm

Not 100% sure they’ll have the current Biz seat, or whether they’ll keep the Air Berlin biz seats, but with the VS colours etc, it’s not clear on our Intranet site whether that’s the case or not.

It sure makes some of yer routes much easier, when the SFO was run, they had to give up 5 Biz seats as Crew rest, I think the AB 330’s may already have a crew rest installed so it will make operating that route more lucrative.

All in all tho, good for MAN, as for then 747’s, id imagine theyll have 1/2 there too operate the MCO/LAS rotation as they are normally full flights.

OMAA
Right hand seat of a 787. Also can be found eating sandwiches, drinking coffee and attempting to understand Chinese ATC!
 
User001
Posts: 724
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2016 2:18 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:11 pm

MAN is keeping 2 B744 to operate MCO/LAS. This means 4 A332 coming in to replace 2 A333 and 1 B744. Therefore, one wonders what they intend to do with the 4th A332?

It also looks like a permanent MAN fleet has enabled SFO and BOS to go year round, as currently bookable right into November via the DL codeshare.
 
BlueShamu330s
Posts: 2584
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 3:11 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:17 pm

They're coming from Air Berlin lessors.
Eventually, they will be fitted out in full VS interiors, but initially will not have PE.
Seems to be quite a long short-term issue..
Flying around India
 
OMAAbound
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2016 12:43 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:30 pm

Well from what I can see on the system

- 1 747 MCO
- 1 747 LAS/Spare
- 1 A330 JFK
- 1 A330 ATL
- 1 A330 SFO/BOS
- 1 A330 BGI/Spare

That looks about roughly how they’ll be distributing the fleet give or take.

It also give them the opportunity to possibly open up a 2/3x Weekley 2nd JFK with the Slack on the BGI for example.

OMAA
Right hand seat of a 787. Also can be found eating sandwiches, drinking coffee and attempting to understand Chinese ATC!
 
User001
Posts: 724
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2016 2:18 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:35 pm

I would expect a 2nd JFK to cover the loss of seats that were previously increased by using a 3rd B744.

Also, the BGI fits into the BOS/SFO frame so if that’s moved to its own frame then there is also slack in the SFO/BOS one. Either way, still all accounts for the equivalent of one unused aircraft.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:40 pm

OMAAbound wrote:
It is correct that they are coming from Air Berlin, they will also have the full VS livery. On the inside the cabin and feature will be the same, same fabrics, carpet, etc Premium will be retro fitted to the aircraft as well.


Sounds like a lot of effort just for a few months downtime of the 787 fleet.

Why not leasing some capacity from Hi Fly?
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
JamesCousins
Posts: 289
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:44 pm

BlueShamu330s wrote:
They're coming from Air Berlin lessors.
Eventually, they will be fitted out in full VS interiors, but initially will not have PE.
Seems to be quite a long short-term issue..


How long are these on lease for?! To have full VS interiors and liveries, with PE being added, this can't just be short term??
A320-200, A321-200, 737-500, 737-800, 747-400, 757-200, 787-9
 
OMAAbound
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2016 12:43 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:45 pm

They won’t be able to fit the BGI into the same frame as SFO/BOS as the Sunday Departure has been changed. Hence why it now has it own frame, even with 2 weekly, we could easily launch a 2nd JFK at 3/4x a week to make up.

The only other option that springs to Mind, would maybe launching a 3/4x Weekley DEL, as there is a good population around the Manchester ans northern area, plus the new Jet Airways Codeshare will increase cargo between the 2 cities. But that’s just a thought really.

OMAA
Right hand seat of a 787. Also can be found eating sandwiches, drinking coffee and attempting to understand Chinese ATC!
 
JamesCousins
Posts: 289
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:48 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
OMAAbound wrote:
It is correct that they are coming from Air Berlin, they will also have the full VS livery. On the inside the cabin and feature will be the same, same fabrics, carpet, etc Premium will be retro fitted to the aircraft as well.


Sounds like a lot of effort just for a few months downtime of the 787 fleet.

Why not leasing some capacity from Hi Fly?


100% agree with your first point, the effort here is huge. With Premium being retrofitted, surely this is a longer term project, possible VS capacity expansion once the 787s come back in, or an acceleration of A346 retirement, surely they won't retrofit PE for a matter of months service?!

I don't think VS would want to lease from Hi Fly to be honest, they sell because of their brand image and on board product. People in the UK fly VS on holiday particularly for a premium experience, and getting on a product inconsistent with VS wouldn't distinguish Virgin Holidays (and thus VS) from its much cheaper competitors.
Last edited by JamesCousins on Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A320-200, A321-200, 737-500, 737-800, 747-400, 757-200, 787-9
 
JamesCousins
Posts: 289
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:52 pm

TC957 wrote:
Would love to see VS back into CPT seasonally and re-instate BOM, but I suspect DL would rather have them feed more flights into their US hubs if they want to expand. The believe the remaining 7 346's were due to leave gradually next year as the remaining 789's come in, but I guess the plan now is to keep them a bit longer given the RR Trent troubles.
No doubt VNAP will come from it's MNL maintenance in time for the Christmas peak, as previously mentioned it'll be interesting to see if the interior will be as other 346's or more of a leisure configuration like the 744's.


How gradually, because there's only 3 more 789's to arrive? Plus the 789 and A346 aren't exactly a straight swap with their capacity. I was under the impression they'd got a great deal extending 346 leases, so that these left gradually with the 744s as they A35K came in?
A320-200, A321-200, 737-500, 737-800, 747-400, 757-200, 787-9
 
User001
Posts: 724
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2016 2:18 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:53 pm

OMAAbound wrote:
They won’t be able to fit the BGI into the same frame as SFO/BOS as the Sunday Departure has been changed. Hence why it now has it own frame, even with 2 weekly, we could easily launch a 2nd JFK at 3/4x a week to make up.

The only other option that springs to Mind, would maybe launching a 3/4x Weekley DEL, as there is a good population around the Manchester ans northern area, plus the new Jet Airways Codeshare will increase cargo between the 2 cities. But that’s just a thought really.

OMAA


I’m not 100% on DEL, and if Spicejet do start as intended, could end up being a crowded market. I wouldn’t put it past them to fit a LAX or the likes in, keep the fight at MT’s door.

I’m just happy they seem to be going year round on SFO, because for the business links they claimed to be doing SFO for, it needs that year round connectivity.
 
OMAAbound
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2016 12:43 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:55 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
OMAAbound wrote:
It is correct that they are coming from Air Berlin, they will also have the full VS livery. On the inside the cabin and feature will be the same, same fabrics, carpet, etc Premium will be retro fitted to the aircraft as well.


Sounds like a lot of effort just for a few months downtime of the 787 fleet.

Why not leasing some capacity from Hi Fly?


From what I’ve heard, they’re on an initial 12 month lease, which has the option to be extended long term depending on “Route Performance” as these aircraft have no where to go afterwards.

I don’t think it’s a case of covering the 787, more of a small expansion, but also being able to base the exact same aircraft at MAN and not have to worry about constantly swapping A330’s & 747’s out of LGW.

OMAA
Right hand seat of a 787. Also can be found eating sandwiches, drinking coffee and attempting to understand Chinese ATC!
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:59 pm

Possibly I missed it, but what sort of lease period are we talking about here?

I do hope the A330-200s will appear in full Virgin livery. The -200 is sporty-looking and we need something new in the trans-at arena. Those A350s are looking so old by now. ;)

Sometime back, Virgin picked up a 767-300 on lease (Martinair as I recall) and it got a nice Virgin paint job, so there's a precedent.
 
JamesCousins
Posts: 289
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:06 pm

OMAAbound wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
OMAAbound wrote:
It is correct that they are coming from Air Berlin, they will also have the full VS livery. On the inside the cabin and feature will be the same, same fabrics, carpet, etc Premium will be retro fitted to the aircraft as well.


Sounds like a lot of effort just for a few months downtime of the 787 fleet.

Why not leasing some capacity from Hi Fly?


From what I’ve heard, they’re on an initial 12 month lease, which has the option to be extended long term depending on “Route Performance” as these aircraft have no where to go afterwards.

I don’t think it’s a case of covering the 787, more of a small expansion, but also being able to base the exact same aircraft at MAN and not have to worry about constantly swapping A330’s & 747’s out of LGW.

OMAA


Thanks for this OMAA, seems a very sensible decision on VS' part, on the bright side this 787 downtime is allowing for possible expansion. I'm guessing they'll end up doing some more far fetched destinations out of MAN. One thing to note is that I believe all of these 332's are PW equipped, going against VS' norm of RR engines. Would also be interesting which frames they take, there's some fairly old ex-Berlin ones, as well as some slightly newer frames (11 - 18 years)
A320-200, A321-200, 737-500, 737-800, 747-400, 757-200, 787-9
 
skipness1E
Posts: 4191
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:06 pm

The Virgin B767 was indeed from Martinair but lacked proper Virgin branding and replaced a brand spanking new A340-300 on the Orlando.
The precedent is MAN lose new metal back to London and get leased second hand kit instead. See also the Air Atlanta B747-200 lease.
 
TC957
Topic Author
Posts: 3143
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:12 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:08 pm

Only the 6 789's in service ?? I can't possibly see how VS can maintain HKG/PVG/JNB/DEL/LAX x 2 some SFO with just 6 frames !
 
OMAAbound
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2016 12:43 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:14 pm

TC957 wrote:
Only the 6 789's in service ?? I can't possibly see how VS can maintain HKG/PVG/JNB/DEL/LAX x 2 some SFO with just 6 frames !


Back up to the dizzy heights of 8 in operation tomorrow!

OMAA
Right hand seat of a 787. Also can be found eating sandwiches, drinking coffee and attempting to understand Chinese ATC!
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:50 pm

bmibaby737 wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
Maybe unrelated, but VS just re-activated an A340-600 from storage:

Airbus A340 -642 622 G-VNAP Virgin Atlantic Airways ferried 06dec17 LDE-TLS-MNL after storage ex F-WWCE


Or is VS bringing in A340 capacity instead of A330s?


Virgin Atlantic use to lease G-VNAP from "Socrates 622 Limited" (no idea who they are) who took back the aircraft on 26-February-2015 (Aircraft was WFU 09-January-2015 and stored at LDE 24-February-2015 according to Planespotters.net)... however, just a few days ago on 27-November-2017 the ownership was transferred to Virgin Atlantic Airways per the CAA "G-INFO" website. Almost three years after being withdrawn from use.

So if they've taken this A340 as a stop-gap, then they've had to *purchase* the aircraft to do so.

It will have cost petty cash. And if related to 787 engine issues, perhaps RR has contributed, including a sweetener (Total Care discount) on the entire fleet of VS A340's.

Lease syndicates choose some interesting names, though Airbus and Boeing are ultimately the largest A340 owners on the planet. You can accrue airport charges in a non-operative company name, but not fly it.
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 6:07 pm

jbs2886 wrote:
Arion640 wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:

IIRC there was a connection to A380 delays, which were significant (I would consider that a "bad run in with Airbus").


When has a new aircraft programme actually been on time recently? Look at the 787, years late. It can be expected and most airlines do.

I think VS when it ordered the A330's had probably decided it didn't want the A380's. Ordering the A380 was another publicity stunt from Branson at the time. Wanting casinos and bars etc etc.


I understand that, but expected or not, both Airbus and Boeing paid penalties for late deliveries.

Off topic, but the penalties paid explain why certain A380 customers are still shown, by both Airbus, and in their own financials, as having outstanding A380 orders.

Those who took accepted penalties where no money changed hands at the time (increased value of A380 deposit) got model hopping flexibility and other concessions. Those who took, and have already spent the cash (or credit) didn't.
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 867
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 6:20 pm

NWAROOSTER wrote:
Rolls Royce almost caused the demis of the Lockheed 1011 aircraft as its engine had problems and the British government had to bail Rolls Royce of out of bankruptcy. Qantas has a Rolls powered A380 , VH-OQA, that exploded in flight due an oil leak caused by a failed oil seal on one of it's engines which successfully returned to Singapore. It took a year to repair the aircraft and Rolls Royce had to cover the cost of the repair and lost revenue. Rolls Royce better get it's ducks in a row. :old:

I believe it was a manufacturing defect on an oil pipe that caused the QF A380 incident. This defect was also found on other A380s. It was something that should have been caught before the engine was ever installed. I get where your coming from as Rolls Royce has had many issues in the past and has in the present and is not immune to issues like some fanboys or nationalistic people out there seem to think, but Rolls Royce isn’t the only one. In this Trent 1000 case maybe they would have been better off getting with the times and putting carbon composite fan blades instead of the old hollow titanium that only they are really using anymore. One of the best parts about carbon is that it isn’t metal so it won’t corrode like this. GE has made it work for many years and no P&W has too, yet RR is still many years away for some reason.
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T
 
OMAAbound
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2016 12:43 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 7:18 pm

G-VNAP is coming back as a straight replacement for a A340 which has to be returned to the lessor, it not possible to extend this lease as the lessor took out some form of ‘gap insurance’ To protect the value of the aircraft, so it has to go back.

The only problem is that G-VNAP has a list of defects as long as Route 66!

OMAA
Right hand seat of a 787. Also can be found eating sandwiches, drinking coffee and attempting to understand Chinese ATC!
 
TC957
Topic Author
Posts: 3143
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:12 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 7:26 pm

OMAAbound wrote:
G-VNAP is coming back as a straight replacement for a A340 which has to be returned to the lessor, it not possible to extend this lease as the lessor took out some form of ‘gap insurance’ To protect the value of the aircraft, so it has to go back.

The only problem is that G-VNAP has a list of defects as long as Route 66!

OMAA

How come ? Wasn't it cared for down in LDE storage ? Or did VS send it there with defects thinking that's the last they'll see of it ?
 
OMAAbound
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2016 12:43 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 7:32 pm

TC957 wrote:
OMAAbound wrote:
G-VNAP is coming back as a straight replacement for a A340 which has to be returned to the lessor, it not possible to extend this lease as the lessor took out some form of ‘gap insurance’ To protect the value of the aircraft, so it has to go back.

The only problem is that G-VNAP has a list of defects as long as Route 66!

OMAA

How come ? Wasn't it cared for down in LDE storage ? Or did VS send it there with defects thinking that's the last they'll see of it ?


No idea, it went back to the lessor in early 2015, I’d imagine it’s just sat there every since and not moved. I believe we’ve now purchased it to fill the one being returned, my friend has said the HMU is a huge defect and problem they’ve found so far

OMAA
Right hand seat of a 787. Also can be found eating sandwiches, drinking coffee and attempting to understand Chinese ATC!
 
xxcr
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 6:37 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Thu Dec 07, 2017 7:40 pm

I believe ANZ is having the same issues to, they've been canceling or delaying their flights with the 789
 
TC957
Topic Author
Posts: 3143
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:12 pm

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Sun Dec 10, 2017 1:11 pm

Looks like the 1st A332 heading for VS will be ex-AB D-ALPB which has become G-VMIK.
 
RB211trent
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 11:35 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Sun Dec 10, 2017 1:20 pm

767333ER wrote:
NWAROOSTER wrote:
Rolls Royce almost caused the demis of the Lockheed 1011 aircraft as its engine had problems and the British government had to bail Rolls Royce of out of bankruptcy. Qantas has a Rolls powered A380 , VH-OQA, that exploded in flight due an oil leak caused by a failed oil seal on one of it's engines which successfully returned to Singapore. It took a year to repair the aircraft and Rolls Royce had to cover the cost of the repair and lost revenue. Rolls Royce better get it's ducks in a row. :old:

I believe it was a manufacturing defect on an oil pipe that caused the QF A380 incident. This defect was also found on other A380s. It was something that should have been caught before the engine was ever installed. I get where your coming from as Rolls Royce has had many issues in the past and has in the present and is not immune to issues like some fanboys or nationalistic people out there seem to think, but Rolls Royce isn’t the only one. In this Trent 1000 case maybe they would have been better off getting with the times and putting carbon composite fan blades instead of the old hollow titanium that only they are really using anymore. One of the best parts about carbon is that it isn’t metal so it won’t corrode like this. GE has made it work for many years and no P&W has too, yet RR is still many years away for some reason.


I’m not sure why people assume it’s something to do with fan blades. It’s got nothing to do with fanblades so composite or not it won’t make any difference.
 
RB211trent
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 11:35 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Sun Dec 10, 2017 1:23 pm

Also I don’t know why historical issues are relevant in this, all engine manufacturers have issues from time to time, they are well documented. What is relevant how these issues are dealt with.
 
RB211trent
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 11:35 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Sun Dec 10, 2017 2:16 pm

OMAAbound wrote:
TC957 wrote:
OMAAbound wrote:
G-VNAP is coming back as a straight replacement for a A340 which has to be returned to the lessor, it not possible to extend this lease as the lessor took out some form of ‘gap insurance’ To protect the value of the aircraft, so it has to go back.

The only problem is that G-VNAP has a list of defects as long as Route 66!

OMAA

How come ? Wasn't it cared for down in LDE storage ? Or did VS send it there with defects thinking that's the last they'll see of it ?


No idea, it went back to the lessor in early 2015, I’d imagine it’s just sat there every since and not moved. I believe we’ve now purchased it to fill the one being returned, my friend has said the HMU is a huge defect and problem they’ve found so far

OMAA


A HMU change takes about 2 hours...huge defect?
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 2031
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Sun Dec 10, 2017 3:26 pm

RB211trent wrote:
I’m not sure why people assume it’s something to do with fan blades. It’s got nothing to do with fanblades so composite or not it won’t make any difference.

The GE fanboys do like their moment in the sun, to bash Rolls Royce.

That includes the ridiculous notion that the Trent XWB is affected too. That's a completely different engine and doesn't even use the same technologies in the affected area. The Trent 1000 versions affected are earlier models, and RR has a fix. What is a problem now is simply shop time. The parts are deep in the core and that means specialist shop time to dismantle, replace, rebuild and then test the affected engines.

Newer deliveries are not affected. The Trent 1000-TEN is the new build standard and also incorporates the "fix" of a more resilient turbine blade coating. If anything it's the Trent XWB backwards-donating the fix to the earlier engine that has saved the day for Rolls; now if shop time can be found then it can be rolled out fleetwide.

meanwhile GE's issues with both the GEnx and the Passport are still ongoing. We don't seem to see much bashing over that, do we?
 
Tedd
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 11:22 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Sun Dec 10, 2017 3:52 pm

767333ER wrote:
NWAROOSTER wrote:
Rolls Royce almost caused the demis of the Lockheed 1011 aircraft as its engine had problems and the British government had to bail Rolls Royce of out of bankruptcy. Qantas has a Rolls powered A380 , VH-OQA, that exploded in flight due an oil leak caused by a failed oil seal on one of it's engines which successfully returned to Singapore. It took a year to repair the aircraft and Rolls Royce had to cover the cost of the repair and lost revenue. Rolls Royce better get it's ducks in a row. :old:

I believe it was a manufacturing defect on an oil pipe that caused the QF A380 incident. This defect was also found on other A380s. It was something that should have been caught before the engine was ever installed. I get where your coming from as Rolls Royce has had many issues in the past and has in the present and is not immune to issues like some fanboys or nationalistic people out there seem to think, but Rolls Royce isn’t the only one. In this Trent 1000 case maybe they would have been better off getting with the times and putting carbon composite fan blades instead of the old hollow titanium that only they are really using anymore. One of the best parts about carbon is that it isn’t metal so it won’t corrode like this. GE has made it work for many years and no P&W has too, yet RR is still many years away for some reason.


I would definitely take issue with the above. The hollow titanium fan blades are a non issue in relation to recent
troubles on the T1000. It has to be said that RR are famous for the manufacture of these blades in there quality
& there reliability. RR have always said that until something better comes along, that they will continue to use them.
They have been testing composite blades for sometime now, so this tech isn`t new to them, so when they deem
such a use is beneficial, they will use them, the fact they don`t doesn`t make their engines inferior, just look at
what is generally regarded as one of the finest engines ever made in the T-XWB.
It also has to be said that up until this turbine blade corrosion problem, the T-1000 has been a supremely reliable
engine, & has never given anything away in comparison to the GEnx, another terrific engine, both in terms of
reliability or fuel efficiency. With hindsight, RR will have wished they hadn`t changed their production process
on these blades. but they will do what it takes to correct the problem, & get the T1000 back to where it was,
& to compensate it`s inconvenienced customers as quickly as possible.
 
DobboDobbo
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 1:02 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Sun Dec 10, 2017 8:18 pm

It sounds like VS are loading the new seatplans (i.e. for A332) on their schedules.
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 867
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: VS to lease 4 A332's to cover 789 downtime

Sun Dec 10, 2017 8:54 pm

RB211trent wrote:
I’m not sure why people assume it’s something to do with fan blades. It’s got nothing to do with fanblades so composite or not it won’t make any difference.

Earlier on in the thread people used the term “fan” which could only mean the fan. Upon further research it’s not the fan and that’s my bad there.
Channex757 wrote:
The GE fanboys do like their moment in the sun, to bash Rolls Royce.

I’m a GE fanboy for believing misleading replies about the fan being the issue and saying that among the many advantages of CFRP as used on the GEnx’s fan, the lack of corrodsion is one of them which is why everyone has switched and RR is trying to do it too. I mean someone has to be first and inevitable someone will be last, in this case RR is last by many years, but whatever. Am I a fanboy for also saying that a manufacturing defect that caused a fan disk to self destruct is inexcusable? It’s not like I’m saying only RR has had inexcusable manufacturing defects because that’s not true and I never said anything of the sort. You may chose to see that in my reply but it does not exist in real.
Tedd wrote:
I would definitely take issue with the above. The hollow titanium fan blades are a non issue in relation to recent
troubles on the T1000. It has to be said that RR are famous for the manufacture of these blades in there quality
& there reliability. RR have always said that until something better comes along, that they will continue to use them.
They have been testing composite blades for sometime now, so this tech isn`t new to them, so when they deem
such a use is beneficial, they will use them, the fact they don`t doesn`t make their engines inferior, just look at
what is generally regarded as one of the finest engines ever made in the T-XWB.
It also has to be said that up until this turbine blade corrosion problem, the T-1000 has been a supremely reliable
engine, & has never given anything away in comparison to the GEnx, another terrific engine, both in terms of
reliability or fuel efficiency. With hindsight, RR will have wished they hadn`t changed their production process
on these blades. but they will do what it takes to correct the problem, & get the T1000 back to where it was,
& to compensate it`s inconvenienced customers as quickly as possible.

Again I read some earlier replies and was mislead about what the problem with these engines is. Others used the term “fan” and there is only one fan on a Trent 1000 so that’s where my thought came from. Fans however generally either are a problem or aren’t. I don’t see how a fan on a Trent 1000 is more reliable than on GEnx, CFM56, or something like a PW1000G. Being apparently famous for manufacturing something that almost never is the prob,el on a turbofan in the first place isn’t saying much, but this is not saying that RR is bad in any way. When fans fail, they fail badly. If they don’t which they almost never do they are reliable. The XWB has only been in service for a couple of years, I don’t think it’s been around long enough yet to be considered one of the finest engines ever made. That’s a fanboyish remark because it takes time to prove such a thing. In a few years if it keeps going as spotless as it is now as engines like the RB211 or later CFM56 iterations did, then we can say that. Until now the Trent 1000 has been rather good in terms of reliability, but it does seem to give away in comparison to GE in terms of performance which is why they are making a new version of the engine, hardly relevant here, but that seems to be the way it is.
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos