mrcomet
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 5:53 am

Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:18 pm

With airlines already dumping them for being inefficient, sales unlikely to reach the 500 level and their future sales growth stunted by Airbus's own A350 and B777, should the A340 series be relegated to the list of failed commercial aircraft?
The dude abides
 
godbless
Posts: 2680
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2000 5:26 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:20 pm

Easy to answer: No!

Max
 
jush
Posts: 1495
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 2:10 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:21 pm

simple as that:
not at all...
thx

Regards
jush
There is one problem with airbus. Though their products are engineering marvels they lack passion, completely.
 
RAFVC10
Posts: 1344
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 9:48 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:22 pm

I don´t think so. Airbus made this aircraft to try to compete with the 747 and 777 and Airbus got a great demand in this model.

I think that is one of then best aircrafts ever built and only see that most airlines has based more of it´s long-haul flights in the 340 family: Iberia (343,346), Air France (342, 343), LH (342, 343, 346),...
El dia que los gilipollas vuelen, no podremos ver la luz del sol!
 
mrcomet
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 5:53 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:26 pm

Come on.

It won't make the money invested. It wasn't a derivative meaning it cost a lot to design. It has four big redesigns yet 350 plus sales. It's not going to sell more than about another 100 copies.

I'm not saying its not a comfortable plane to fly or not a nice looking airplane. But from a sales and airline standpoint (some were not happy with it), it seems like .... well, lets be polite, certainly less successful than Airbus wanted it to be and probably a money loser.

[Edited 2005-09-15 11:27:55]
The dude abides
 
TaromA380
Posts: 275
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 12:35 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:39 pm

A340 is just a quad-engine version of the A330.

Looking at the sales of the A330/340 family, I'd rather say the opposite: it was a huge success.
 
DAL767400ER
Posts: 5084
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:47 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:40 pm

While the A340 family itself wasn't a failure (though it could have performed better), its family member A342 was definitely a failure, as airline could just opt for the A343 and get a bigger plane with the same capabilities.
 
Udo
Posts: 4288
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:16 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:42 pm

Quoting MrComet (Thread starter):
With airlines already dumping them for being inefficient

So how many airlines have done so or are planning to do so? One, two, three or more?

Quoting MrComet (Thread starter):
sales unlikely to reach the 500 level

Sure, but the mistake in your analysis is the fact that the A340 is part of the A330/340 family. A330 and A340 were not developed apart from each other.

Quoting MrComet (Reply 5):
It won't make the money invested. It wasn't a derivative meaning it cost a lot to design.

As I said, add the A330 to the financial analysis and then let's talk again.

Quoting MrComet (Reply 5):
It has four big redesigns yet 350 plus sales.

Turning the A340 classic into A340-500/600 is one "redesign" - and the others are...?



Regards
Udo
Me & You & a Plane Named Blue...
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:45 pm

Quoting MrComet (Reply 5):
well, lets be polite, certainly less successful than Airbus wanted it to be and probably a money loser.

So far, it's got 385 orders, and I'm quite sure that it will grow to 400+. While that does not make it into a huge commercial success, I'm quite sure that Airbus has earned money on this plane.

Quoting MrComet (Reply 5):
It wasn't a derivative meaning it cost a lot to design.

The A330/A340 was designed as a family. They have so much in common so much of the design cost was also common to both types. And so far, that family has 929 orders, and Airbus is picking up new orders for the family the whole time.

The A330 has 544 orders today. Wihtout the A340, I doubt if the A330 would have received so many orders, because some airlines order those planes as a package.

If the A340 had never been developed, then my guess is that the A330 would have gotten maybe only 400 orders, and the design cost of the stand-alone A330 would have been higher.
Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2303
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:52 pm

For those that chose it, the A340 has been well recieved.

The only company i can really think of that hasn't been so happy is Air France.
There has been some small fleet changes (ei - SQ) but no big A340 operator seems to have any major problems.

Indeed Virgin Atlantic, Cathay, Lufthansa, SAS, Air Canada, Gulf Air,
SAA, China Eastern, Lan Chile, Iberia, Aerolineas, all seem to be doing very well with the A340 on long-range routes. You'd hardly call that a failure.
That and the fact that as the programs where developed together, some weight needs to be given to the A330 orders as well (when comparing against 777 etc). In this day of the A346 that isn't as straight forward as it was back when it was just A343 and A333 vs 777, but it shouldn't be totaly ignored either.

By Comparison, the DC-10 has 386 civil versons built.
200 MD-11s were built
about 229 767-200s were built
about 260 or so A310s

Given that the project came out of one program (a330/a340) the total deliverys for this project is around the 660 mark. Hardly a failure as a project by any means. Given that, if we look at certain Aircraft, such as the 764 or the A342, nobody could consider those individual models a success. But as part of a wider program, it worked.
 
Maersk737
Posts: 654
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 3:37 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:57 pm

The A340 alone is not a big success. Together with the A330, it is quite a big success  bigthumbsup 

Cheers

Peter
I'm not proud to be a Viking, just thankfull
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 7:01 pm

I suppose that true 'success' in this field amounts to producing a classic like the DC3, the 707, the 737, or the 747, that goes on selling in numbers for a generation, and recoups its development cost many times over.

The A340 clearly won't ever be a 'success' in those terms; but on the other hand it probably wasn't a commercial failure to the extent of not having recouped its costs of development for Airbus (especially since, presumably, a proportion of the 'launch aid' won't have to be repaid).

Thing is though, it's not a prospect for future longhaul sales; having four engiines to pay for, feed, and maintain, it simply can't compete with ETOPS types like the 777 and 787, or even the A350. So it's a 'failure' in the sense that it failed to establish and maintain its planned position in the marketplace.

'2 Engines 2 Make Money' looks like proving to be a better slogan than '4 Engines 4 Longhaul'.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
Thorben
Posts: 2713
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 7:06 pm

Quoting MrComet (Thread starter):
With airlines already dumping them for being inefficient, sales unlikely to reach the 500 level and their future sales growth stunted by Airbus's own A350 and B777, should the A340 series be relegated to the list of failed commercial aircraft?

No. The whole A330/340 family has 929 orders to date. I think a failure is something like the MD-11. Besides, they are still very efficient. And who is dumping them for being inefficient??? Singi sold theirs to Boeing, because of a good deal, but I don't know anyone else who gave his away. The A342 was caught by the A332, ok, but what else went wrong??

Quoting RAFVC10 (Reply 4):
I don´t think so. Airbus made this aircraft to try to compete with the 747 and 777 and Airbus got a great demand in this model.

747 is way bigger and the 777 didn't even exist when the A340 came out.

Quoting MrComet (Reply 5):
It won't make the money invested.

How do you know???

Quoting MrComet (Reply 5):
It wasn't a derivative meaning it cost a lot to design.

It was based on the A300. Also the A332, A333, A345, and A346 are its derivatives, so the money invested brought back something.

Quoting MrComet (Reply 5):
It's not going to sell more than about another 100 copies.

I don't think they will sell more than ten A343s. A346 HGW might actually become a good seller.

The whole A340/A330 was and is a big success in my eyes. It replaced the DC-10 and the L-1011 and even kicked out the MD-11.

And to all the people who complain about the lack of speed:

1. Unless you're driving in Germany, you don't even know what speed is.

2. It could go faster, but it would use more fuel, so why do it?

3. How important are 30 minutes on an ten-hour-flight??

4. Flying is like being with a woman. It's supposed to be safe and comfy, not fast.
France 1789; Eastern Germany 1989; Tunisia 2011; Egypt 2011
 
WINGS
Posts: 2312
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 1:36 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 7:10 pm

Quoting MrComet (Thread starter):
With airlines already dumping them for being inefficient, sales unlikely to reach the 500 level and their future sales growth stunted by Airbus's own A350 and B777, should the A340 series be relegated to the list of failed commercial aircraft?

Oh not again, How many time do we have to explain that the A340 belongs with the A330/340 project. The investment was shared for both projects, with excess of 900 sold, and still going strong.

Quoting Udo (Reply 8):

Sure, but the mistake in your analysis is the fact that the A340 is part of the A330/340 family. A330 and A340 were not developed apart from each other.

Bingo Udo.

Quoting Udo (Reply 8):

As I said, add the A330 to the financial analysis and then let's talk again.

Bingo once again


Regards,
Wings
Aviation Is A Passion.
 
mrcomet
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 5:53 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 7:10 pm

Good points. I back off the contention that the A340 is unprofitable if it has manufacturing commonality with the A330 which has done well.

I think it might still be fair to say the A340 has been a disappointment vis-a-vis the A330.

[Edited 2005-09-15 12:13:02]
The dude abides
 
WINGS
Posts: 2312
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 1:36 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 7:14 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 12):
(especially since, presumably, a proportion of the 'launch aid' won't have to be repaid).

Ok NAV20, we get what your up to. Just give it a rest for once.

Quoting Thorben (Reply 13):
I don't think they will sell more than ten A343s. A346 HGW might actually become a good seller.

I too am confident that the HGW version of the A340-500/600 will allow the A340 family to grow even further.

Regards,
Wings
Aviation Is A Passion.
 
Arniepie
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:00 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 7:16 pm

Quoting MrComet (Reply 15):



Quoting MrComet (Reply 15):
I think it might still be fair to say the A340 has been a disappointment vis-a-vis the A340.

I think the general consensus is that it is not a failure but it isn't the smashing success it was hoped to be either.

I suspect in the end they got their investments back and made some profit but nowhere near as much as they hoped to do.
[edit post]
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 7:20 pm

WINGS, I'd have thought that it was common ground, even between us, that launch aid only has to be repaid out of the proceeds of sales?
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
Thorben
Posts: 2713
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 7:22 pm

Quoting WINGS (Reply 16):
too am confident that the HGW version of the A340-500/600 will allow the A340 family to grow even further.

Is there actually going to be a A345 HGW??
France 1789; Eastern Germany 1989; Tunisia 2011; Egypt 2011
 
Magyarorszag
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 5:53 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 7:25 pm

As others said the A330/A340 family is a single program.

Total orders/deliveries for that family stand at: 929/669.

A340-200/300: 244/239 (orders / deliveries)
A340-500: 26/19
A340-600: 115/48
Total A340: 385/308

Sources: Airbus.

Note too bad for an airliner that is in commercial service since 1993.
 
Scorpio
Posts: 4797
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 7:37 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 18):
WINGS, I'd have thought that it was common ground, even between us, that launch aid only has to be repaid out of the proceeds of sales?

And what exactly is it that makes you think that the A330/A340 project, with over 900 sales and counting, is not going to recover costs?
 
aerosol
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2000 10:31 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 7:56 pm

1. Opinion of the author is clearly indicated in the question, so why answer it?
2. No indication of willingness to discuss the topic based on economical facts ("Airlines dumping them for being inefficient"?!?).
3. According to you Mr Comet, what would have been the strategic alternative for Airbus? Producing bananas or diapers?

Safe your energy guys the whole topic is rubbish!
 
Arniepie
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:00 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:08 pm

Quoting Magyarorszag (Reply 20):
As others said the A330/A340 family is a single program.

Total orders/deliveries for that family stand at: 929/669.

A340-200/300: 244/239 (orders / deliveries)
A340-500: 26/19
A340-600: 115/48
Total A340: 385/308

Sources: Airbus.

Note too bad for an airliner that is in commercial service since 1993.

That is actually a surprise for me (I am not very knowledged about the order volumes for airliners in general I must admit), I tought it would be a lot less.

I just had a search for B777 (all models) orders on the Boeing website and it says that from oct16-1990 on (UA 16 planes) up until present (unidentified customer 1 x777-200ER) ,the 777 program amassed "only" 703 firm orders.
I was always under the impression that the B heavily outsold the A in this segment of the market (or maybe I'm comparing apples and oranges here?  Confused ).
[edit post]
 
Udo
Posts: 4288
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:16 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:11 pm

Quoting ArniePie (Reply 23):
I was always under the impression that the B heavily outsold the A in this segment of the market (or maybe I'm comparing apples and oranges here?

Yes, there are a few apples and oranges.  Wink The A330-200 does not compete with any B777 version, it has been a B763 and B764 competitor.


Regards
Udo
Me & You & a Plane Named Blue...
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4837
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:12 pm

As has been said many times in this thread and elsewhere, the question is whether the A340 should be seen as a stand-alone model or merely a variant of a family.

In favour of the 'family' approach is the total (so far) of 900+ sales for the A330/340.

Calling that argument into question is that Airbus have needed six models (A332/333/342/343/345/346) and five engines (CFM56/Trent700/Trent500/CF6/PW4000) to get there. That cannot have been cost effective.

For comparison, the 767 has sold very comparable numbers (964 according to today's Boeing website). But they did it largely on the basis of just three engines (versions of the JT9/PW4000/CF6) [OK - and the RB211 if you insist] and I suspect that resulted in better economies of scale than Airbus have enjoyed on the A330/340. Equally, Boeing has also needed six models (-200/200ER/300/300ER/3ERF/400ER) to reach 900+. In Boeing's favour is that a significant majority (54%) of the planes off the line have been just one model: 522 -300ERs. Nothing in the Airbus line can claim success like that. (Yet! The A332 is having a decent stab at it.) Of course, that also means that many of the other five 767 variants only enjoyed modest sales. (128 x -200; 121 x -200ER; 104 x -300; 51 x 300ERF; 38 x -400ER). No-one would suggest that the 767 as a whole was anything but a success but individual models must have been disappointing.

And I think that's where the A340 belongs: disappointing. Yes, it can be seen as but part of a successful programme but I don't think anyone can deny that Airbus would have liked better sales of the A342/A343. In the late '80s - rightly or wrongly - the A343 was perceived as being pitched against the MD-11 and 777-200ER. The McD jet sold just 200 and the A343 a touch more than that but Boeing have sold 422 777-200ERs and they must be seen as the "winner" in that race. Airbus no doubt hoped for at least some of those sales. Two quick examples: both Thai and Malaysia were early customers for the A330 but neither chose the A343, preferring the 772ER.

In that sense, the A340 (at least the A342/A343) may not be a "failure" but it has been a bit of a disappointment.

And as for the A346...? Still perhaps just a bit too early to call. (But I bet there are some worried faces in Toulouse!)
 
HEGAN
Posts: 204
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 1:11 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:14 pm

I can imagine why NAV20 thinks that...

Quoting WINGS (Reply 16):
I too am confident that the HGW version of the A340-500/600 will allow the A340 family to grow even further

I hope that, because we must admit that the 773 is selling much better than the 346.

Agur,
HEGAN
HEGAN: Euskadiko Aeronautikako eta Espazioko Clusterra
 
Udo
Posts: 4288
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:16 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:20 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 25):
both Thai and Malaysia were early customers for the A330 but neither chose the A343, preferring the 772ER.

Thai was an early customer of the MD-11 and had operated the type quite some time before the A330s started arriving. There wasn't really a gap for the A343. And Thai's early B777s were non-ER models for regional routes, not longhauls


Regards
Udo
Me & You & a Plane Named Blue...
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:22 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 25):
I don't think anyone can deny that Airbus would have liked better sales of the A342/A343.

I don't think anyone can deny that Boeing would have liked better sales of the 737...

Quoting PM (Reply 25):
both Thai and Malaysia were early customers for the A330 but neither chose the A343, preferring the 772ER.

Thai bought the 772 for short hops within Asia. There was absolutely no reason tu buy an A343 for that.
Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13471
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:24 pm

Quoting MrComet (Thread starter):
With airlines already dumping them for being inefficient, sales unlikely to reach the 500 level and their future sales growth stunted by Airbus's own A350 and B777, should the A340 series be relegated to the list of failed commercial aircraft?

Concordeboy, is that you?  sarcastic 

Airbus has always considered the A330 & A340 as a family of aircraft. Since the family has nearly hit 1,000 sales, I don't think Airbus sees it as a failure. You can see it how you like.

As with any family, there's always one relative you wish you didn't have!  wink 
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4837
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:35 pm

Quoting Udo (Reply 27):
Thai was an early customer of the MD-11 and had operated the type quite some time before the A330s started arriving. There wasn't really a gap for the A343. And Thai's early B777s were non-ER models for regional routes, not longhauls



Quoting RedChili (Reply 28):
Thai bought the 772 for short hops within Asia. There was absolutely no reason to buy an A343 for that.

Yes, I know what Thai bought, when and why. But they recently ordered 6 777-200ERs when, as an operator of A330s and with A345s/A346s on order, they could as easily have chosen the A340-300. They didn't.

And neither of you challenge the example I gave of Malaysia...

Then what about Air France? They already flew A343s before they chose to build up a big 772ER fleet. EK is another example. They have happily bought several Airbus products (including 29 A330s) but still preferred the 772ER.

We can split hairs and argue over individual examples but the reality is that the 777-200ER has sold as many as the MD-11 and A343 combined. I'm no critic of the A340 and nor do I hold any brief for Boeing but it seems to me that the numbers speak for themselves. The A342 + A343 will do well to reach the 250 total that the TriStar achieved. Airbus must have expected better. My argument remains: not a failure but a disappointment.
 
CHRISBA777ER
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:49 pm

I dont see it that way. I look at the airlines that operate it: OTTOMH

Air France
Lufthansa
Virgin
SAS
TAP
Iberia
Swiss
Air Europe
Air Jamaica
BWIA
South African
French Government
Egyptair (not sure if they still have theirs)
Virgin Nigeria
Olympic
Turkish
Austrian
Aeroflot
Air Canada
LanChile
Aerolineas Argentinas
Kuwait Airways
Gulf Air
Emirates
Qatar Airways
State of Oman
Etihad
Air Mauritius
Royal Jordanian
Jet Airways
Air Sahara
Sri Lankan
Royal Brunei
Thai
Singapore Airlines
Cathay Pacific
Philippines
Air China
China Eastern
China Northern
Air Tahiti Nui
China Airlines


Not a bad list for a failed aircraft.  

[Edited 2005-09-15 13:52:58]
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
Udo
Posts: 4288
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:16 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:51 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 30):
But they recently ordered 6 777-200ERs when, as an operator of A330s and with A345s/A346s on order, they could as easily have chosen the A340-300.

The B772ER carries more payload and will offer engine commonality with existing B772As. The A343 would have been a realistic option at the beginning of the 90s, but not after TG introduced the B777.

Quoting PM (Reply 30):
And neither of you challenge the example I gave of Malaysia...

Why would I? I do not deny the B772ER outperforms the A343. What I challenged was your Thai example.


Regards
Udo

[Edited 2005-09-15 13:52:09]
Me & You & a Plane Named Blue...
 
HEGAN
Posts: 204
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 1:11 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:55 pm

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 31):
Aeroflot

Sure???

Agur,
HEGAN
HEGAN: Euskadiko Aeronautikako eta Espazioko Clusterra
 
mandala499
Posts: 6459
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:55 pm

A342/A343 is in my opinion an utter disappointment... However... it's not fair for us to say that the A340family as a whole is a failure...

Maybe the intial investment into the A342/3 didn't pay off, BUT, it was part of the A330/A340 programme, and the A330 has in my opinion more than paid off...

Then the research and investment done into subsequent A345 and A346 are more effective because it isn't investing in a new aircraft, but a derivative with redesigns... hence much cheaper to develop.

Oh not again, How many time do we have to explain that the A340 belongs with the A330/340 project. The investment was shared for both projects, with excess of 900 sold, and still going strong.

YEAPS! We're there again allright!

Mandala499
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:57 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 30):
Yes, I know what Thai bought, when and why. But they recently ordered 6 777-200ERs when, as an operator of A330s and with A345s/A346s on order, they could as easily have chosen the A340-300. They didn't.

That makes sense. What doesn't make sense is the Thai widebody fleet. They will soon have A300, A333, A345, A346, B743, B744, B772, B772ER, B773, M11. A total of ten widebody types!

Quoting PM (Reply 30):
And neither of you challenge the example I gave of Malaysia...

Because there is nothing to challenge. Malaysia did choose the 772, but why they did, I don't know.

Quoting PM (Reply 30):
The A342 + A343 will do well to reach the 250 total that the TriStar achieved. Airbus must have expected better. My argument remains: not a failure but a disappointment.

If you choose to look at the A342/343 separately, then I would guess that it's correct that sales are disappointing. The Airbus shareholders, on the other hand, probably don't care so much about single models as they do about the whole family, which is making lots of money.
Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
 
WINGS
Posts: 2312
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 1:36 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:01 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 18):
WINGS, I'd have thought that it was common ground, even between us, that launch aid only has to be repaid out of the proceeds of sales?

I understand your point on this, but like Scorpio explained the A330/A340 are part of one family with excess of 900 orders and counting. Am sure that all loans will be paid off.

Quoting Thorben (Reply 19):
Is there actually going to be a A345 HGW??

Well I know that all future models of the A340-600 will be delivered as the HGW. With Qatar to be the first airline to receive theirs late next year, followed by Emirates.
As for the A340-500 it would just be natural also to introduce these improvements to combat the B777-200LR.

Regards,
Wings
Aviation Is A Passion.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17117
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:01 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 25):
As has been said many times in this thread and elsewhere, the question is whether the A340 should be seen as a stand-alone model or merely a variant of a family.

In favour of the 'family' approach is the total (so far) of 900+ sales for the A330/340.

Calling that argument into question is that Airbus have needed six models (A332/333/342/343/345/346) a

Six models indeed, but the 747 is on the fifth variant and maybe moving to the sixth.


The commonality between 330 and 340 is so great they could easily be called the same plane.
- The fuses are identical between the versions apart from length.
- Identical cockpits apart from engine instruments and controls.
- Identical tails. There are two versions. Larger for 332/333/345/346 and smaller for 342/343.
- Identical wing apart from the outer pylon addition for the 34x. Yes, the inner pylon on the 34x is the same as the pylon for the 33x.
- Identical landing gear apart from the middle leg on the 34x.
- Identical systems apart from engine systems.

We are very much hung up on engine number as an identifier for aircraft type, but the A330 and A340 are the same plane in different versions apart from the number of engines.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
aerosol
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2000 10:31 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:05 pm

Quoting Mandala499 (Reply 34):
A342/A343 is in my opinion an utter disappointment... However... it's not fair for us to say that the A340family as a whole is a failure...

I would love to hear your opinion about the 747-300, 747SP, 767-400, 757-300...
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:14 pm

Quoting ArniePie (Reply 17):
I think the general consensus is that it is not a failure but it isn't the smashing success it was hoped to be either.

I suspect in the end they got their investments back and made some profit but nowhere near as much as they hoped to do.

I think this sums it up quite well. The A340 has been a mediocre success.
 
RedChili
Posts: 1440
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:22 pm

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 31):
Aeroflot

SU has never operated any A330 or A340.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 37):
but the 747 is on the fifth variant

Well, you could actually say that the 747 has eight types:
741
741SR
747SP
742
743
744
744D
744ER
Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
 
MidnightMike
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:07 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:25 pm

Quoting MrComet (Thread starter):
should the A340 series be relegated to the list of failed commercial aircraft?

Not at all, the A340 may have not been a huge success, but, it kept customers from potentially purchasing Boeing aircraft & brought Airbus in a small profit.
NO URLS in signature
 
OHLHD
Posts: 2903
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 6:02 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:25 pm

Quoting MrComet (Thread starter):
With airlines already dumping them for being inefficient

Who is doing so. Do you refer to OS for selling their 342?
Which are the other airlines you are refering too?
 
Rivet42
Posts: 604
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:26 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:25 pm

It's quite astonishing (or maybe just depressing) that people are prepared to embarrass themselves with sweeping statements when they exhibit a clear lack of knowledge of their subject, and/or a blatant bias which undermines the credibility of their comments.

In pure commercial terms, there is no meaning to the 'success' or 'failure' of a variant to a common airframe, since it is the total sales of the airframe across all variants that will determine its economic viability. Boeing would not consider the 747 a failure because the SP variant was not sold in large numbers, so it doesn't make any sense to state that Airbus should consider the 330/340 family a commercial failure due to the limited sales of the 340-200.

Indeed, one could consider that Airbus had actually scored a direct hit with the 340, since Boeing resorted to buying them off customers before they had been built in order to push the 777. If that's not commercial flattery, I don't know what is!

PhiL P
I travel, therefore I am.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:34 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 25):
Calling that argument into question is that Airbus have needed six models (A332/333/342/343/345/346) and five engines (CFM56/Trent700/Trent500/CF6/PW4000) to get there. That cannot have been cost effective.

For comparison, the 767 has sold very comparable numbers (964 according to today's Boeing website). But they did it largely on the basis of just three engines (versions of the JT9/PW4000/CF6) [OK - and the RB211 if you insist] and I suspect that resulted in better economies of scale than Airbus have enjoyed on the A330/340. Equally, Boeing has also needed six models (-200/200ER/300/300ER/3ERF/400ER) to reach 900+.

Comparing the number of models is misleading though. The A330/340 family has three major subfamilies with very distinct differences, while the 767 models represent incremental evolution of the base model. You also have to taken into account the significant performance improvement programs that have been applied to the A330/A340 family members, as they introduce significant minor variants of several model numbers.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
MidnightMike
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:07 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:37 pm

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 44):
Comparing the number of models is misleading though. The A330/340 family has three major subfamilies with very distinct differences, while the 767 models represent incremental evolution of the base model. You also have to taken into account the significant performance improvement programs that have been applied to the A330/A340 family members, as they introduce significant minor variants of several model numbers.

If there are any comparisons, wouldn't you have to compare the A330/A340 to the 757/767 family?
NO URLS in signature
 
CHRISBA777ER
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:37 pm

RedChilli,

Aeroflot are getting the Austrian A342s last time I looked. They are to leave the fleet as the ex-Lauda 772ERs arrive, so any day now.
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
CHRISBA777ER
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:40 pm

Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 43):
It's quite astonishing (or maybe just depressing) that people are prepared to embarrass themselves with sweeping statements when they exhibit a clear lack of knowledge of their subject, and/or a blatant bias which undermines the credibility of their comments.

Phil P - you sound just like Philb!! Big grin

Agree with what you say though.
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
eha
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:35 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:48 pm

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 37):
Identical wing apart from the outer pylon addition for the 34x. Yes, the inner pylon on the 34x is the same as the pylon for the 33x.

Wrong, new wing for A340-600.

E.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:50 pm

Quoting MidnightMike (Reply 45):
If there are any comparisons, wouldn't you have to compare the A330/A340 to the 757/767 family?

They share much less in common than the A330/A340, with signficant differences in fuselage width and missions.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Time To Call The A340 A Failure?

Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:51 pm

Well my take on it is that the A340 got very unlucky. Airbus beat Boeing's 777 by two to three years. This should have given Airbus the sales advantage to win them some customers. Unfortunately the early nineties was a downturn in the aviation industry. Many airlines couldn't justify the new planes. Both NW and CO wanted them, but had to cancel or not excersize their orderd because of the airline slump.

Meanwhile, Boeing was able to design its new 777 to be better than the A340 because the design came a few years later. Boeing had an advantage and when the 777 came to life, the economy was picking up and it won orders from a large number of airlines. Boeing was late to the game, but came out with arguably the best product and won the sales.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!