CX747
Topic Author
Posts: 5576
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:22 am

This is not A vs B so please, lets not make it into one. Virgin Atlantic Airways operates a large variety of aircraft but seems to planning their future long haul fleet around the A340-600. Within the past several months, the market has seen the 777-300ER skyrocket. Most individuals would state that the 777 is a better performing aircraft. Is Virgin going to continue to expand their fleet of A340-600s or will they look into the 777-300ER again? Again, this is not A vs B. The A340-500/600 family is a fine platform but the 777-300ER is rapidly dominating this segment. I just find it odd for VS to be going the opposite way of other carriers. Is there a particular reason why the A340 fits so well into the VS model?
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:28 am

I'm a relative newbie here, so can anyone tell me why the A346 won out over the T7 at VS? Branson does seems wedded to Airbus products (Virgin Blue notwithstanding). The price of oil is on the run up again, so VS has to be concerned.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23074
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:29 am

I believe VS will continue with the A346HGW.

It fits their "4 engines 4 longhaul" philosophy, they are now familiar with the airframe and engine platform and they have existing facilities to support it (improving dispatch reliability).

The 773ER has it's strengths over the A346, but for an operator like VS, the acquisition and conversion costs probably far outweigh the benefits those strengths bring to the table.
 
mNeo
Posts: 718
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 8:12 am

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:31 am

I have not heard anywhere that VS has any problems with their A346 series. One would think that the cost of aqiering a new type with GE engines Vs the RR for the 346 would play a big role in the desion.

Rumor has it that SRB got a great deal on the A346.

Its not that the A346 is a better aircraft, its price and fleet comunality is something that suits airlines like VS LH IB SA and others to the A346 than the 773ER.

By the looks of it VS is making money, so if it aint broke, dont fix it.
Powered by Maina
 
Tifoso
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:15 pm

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:36 am

Are the VS A346's leased or owned? Or a mixture of both?
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8572
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:40 am

Quoting CX747 (Thread starter):
s Virgin going to continue to expand their fleet of A340-600s or will they look into the 777-300ER again?

The fuel savings gained by a small fleet of additional aircraft needed by VS aren't likely sufficent to overcome the increased overhead caused by two completly different fleet types.

VS re-evaluated the 773ER in 2003-2004 and came to the conclusion that there isn't likely to be any fuel price that would now offset the fuel savings versus fleet complexity.
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:48 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 5):

The fuel savings gained by a small fleet of additional aircraft needed by VS aren't likely sufficent to overcome the increased overhead caused by two completly different fleet types.

VS re-evaluated the 773ER in 2003-2004 and came to the conclusion that there isn't likely to be any fuel price that would now offset the fuel savings versus fleet complexity.

Well said, its very very unlikely that Virgin would consider adding the 773ER to its fleet at this time.
 
boeingbus
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 12:37 am

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlanti

Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:51 am

Quoting MNeo (Reply 3):

Its not that the A346 is a better aircraft, its price and fleet comunality is something that suits airlines like VS LH IB SA and others to the A346 than the 773ER.

These airlines you mentioned decided to go for the A346 during a period where price of oil was not their #1 concern. The A346 has advantages when it comes to comforts and it ends there. During that same time, the 773ER was geared for airlines who were conscious of the bottom line. Conversly, the A346 are for airlines who wanted passenger comfort, like VS LH IB SA.

But since oil is only going up... and the Iran situation will only make it worse... The A346 is fast becoming a dinosaur... I personally don't see a major A346 order ever. The 773ER is probably the most efficient in that segment. I do see future larger variants of the A350 and when that happens it will most likely replace the A346....

Virgin may either switch to the A350 or go Boeing... IMHO, I see the A350 in Virgins future and not the 773ER or more A346's.

Cheers,

Ric
Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
 
GVWOW
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 7:09 am

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:56 am

VS has been trying to create a relationship with Airbus so they can get a deal on the A380. They announced at one point that they would slowly switch to an all-airbus fleet.
The A346 also has some serious hype...
 
TheSonntag
Posts: 4303
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 7:23 pm

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:56 am

LH also considered the 777 vs the A340-600, but they also kept the A340.

Don't forget, the A340-600 might use more fuel than the 777, but it is still one of the most efficient airliners ever built, so it is considerably more economical than older airframes have been. The planes have been purchased and will be used for a certain amount of years, for which they have made a lot of calculations (fuel prices, maintenance costs, crew training, just to name a few things). Even if fuel prices get higher than planned, there are still many things which have been put into consideration when buying the planes, so ordering more A340s can very well make sense, as a higher fuel price can, for example, be outweighed by a lower acquisition cost, at least to a certain extent...
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:03 am

VS will probably stay with the A346, there is no need for them to switch..it would be much too expensive and they are more than happy with their birds...

Also, Branson did say though fuel costs were more on the 346 versus 777, the "extra cost of fuel is worth more than the disaster of a twin going down over an ocean"....

if anything, look for VS to get some A330's or A350's for their non trans-ocean flights..but thats about it..and I don't see that happening for a while (if even at all)....especially given they will be getting their A380's in the next few years...
"Up the Irons!"
 
DIA
Posts: 3053
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 2:24 pm

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:08 am

What you see above this post has been correct for the most part. The price of switching a whole fleet, with training for all crews, etc. (in a nutshell) would be inefficient at this point in the game. VS also got a great bang-for-their-buck on the A346.

Branson also has a good deal on fuel...ever since he threatened to start his own fuel consortium to undercut the current suppliers (talk about having fuel suppliers' ears at a moments notice) I bet they shuddered at the thought of Branson starting a refinery of his own...because if he wanted to, he could...and they know that.

In the end...the A346 will be flying a long time to come with VS.

[Edited 2006-01-21 02:10:13]
Ding! You are now free to keep supporting Frontier.
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:19 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 1):
I'm a relative newbie here, so can anyone tell me why the A346 won out over the T7 at VS?

A lot of people will tell you the A340-600 was the more economical or logical choice.

It was however in my opinion probably more a matter of price and incentives. Being a launch customer may carry some risks, but financialy you usualy get a killer deal. I wouldn't be surprised if VS only paid 50% of the list price on their first batch of A346's. Such deals are not unheard of for launch customers, regardless of manufacturer.

Branson is no fool, he'll go for the deal that gets him the biggest bang for his buck. Airbus undoubtely gave him that and he signed up.

The consequent follow on order last year was dictated by fleet commonality and associated costs. As has been mentioned above, it would not have made sense to add another fleet type.
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:29 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 10):
Also, Branson did say though fuel costs were more on the 346 versus 777, the "extra cost of fuel is worth more than the disaster of a twin going down over an ocean"....

Isn't VS half owned by SQ, currently the world's largest 777 operator?
 
User avatar
uka330
Crew
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 6:59 am

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:37 am

In the next 3 years Virgin will be adding 11 more A340-600 to their fleet and have another 13 options. So I don't think that they will be getting rid of them anytime soon.
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:39 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 10):
"extra cost of fuel is worth more than the disaster of a twin going down over an ocean"

...something that's never happened after millions of hours of ETOPS operations, which have now entered their third decade with NEVER a relevant fatality.

Statistically, anything that's going to cause a dual shutdown in a twin would cause a total shutdown in any aircraft, regardless of engine count.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 10):
look for VS to get some A330's or A350's for their non trans-ocean flights.

You aren't seriously still buying that 4engines crap, right?

That was nothing but marketing, pure and simple... as evident by:
  • VS has flown twinjets over water in scheduled service before (see Reply# 11 in this thread)
  • VS showed more interest than any other airline in Boeing's defunct Sonic Cruiser... an intercon twin concept.
  • Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
     
    N79969
    Posts: 6605
    Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlanti

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:17 am

    Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 7):
    During that same time, the 773ER was geared for airlines who were conscious of the bottom line. Conversly, the A346 are for airlines who wanted passenger comfort, like VS LH IB SA.

    I do not buy the argument that the A346 is somehow more comfortable. Premium service airlines like SQ, EK, and CX have all chosen the 777 instead. And from what I understand, Iberia is not the most premium airline.

    Not only that, I think bottom line considerations helped the A346 a couple of years ago since Boeing was so expensive at that time.

    [Edited 2006-01-21 03:21:49]
     
    trex8
    Posts: 4603
    Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:30 am

    Quoting N79969 (Reply 18):
    Not only that, I think bottom line considerations helped the A346 a couple of years ago since Boeing was so expensive at that time.

    more like the 773Er wasn't available then!
     
    luisca
    Posts: 1530
    Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2001 11:37 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:31 am

    Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 7):
    Conversly, the A346 are for airlines who wanted passenger comfort, like VS LH IB SA.

    you beat me to it N79969

    Quoting N79969 (Reply 18):
    I do not buy the argument that the A346 is somehow more comfortable. Premium service airlines like SQ, EK, and CX have all chosen the 777 instead. And from what I understand, Iberia is not the most premium airline

    IB is the most awfull airline crossing the atlantic. and their A346's are even more uncomfortable than their 747's. It is like they deliveratly try to make you have a miserable flight.
    If it ain't Boeing (or Embraer ;-)) I ain't Going!
     
    cloudyapple
    Posts: 1261
    Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 7:01 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:44 am

    Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 16):
    Statistically, anything that's going to cause a dual shutdown in a twin would cause a total shutdown in any aircraft, regardless of engine count.

    One engine out on a twin you have an immediate diversion and the associated delay, inconvenience to customers, engine delivery, aircraft recovery, etc. Re: Air France diversion to the middle of nowhere in Russia - remember what happened there to clean up the mess? One engine out on a quad you can still continue. It's not a safety issue. It's a PR and image issue.

    Especially for Branson - he tries his hardest to avoid bad press. You see him inaugurating planes, trains, mobiles, etc. But you only get to see low key Virgin spokesman when things go t!ts up. Aside, you always get a free ticket with Virgin when sh!t happens - I suppose sh!t is unlikely to happen but a significant cost when it does.
    A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
     
    WAH64D
    Posts: 744
    Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:14 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 3:16 pm

    Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 16):
    Statistically, anything that's going to cause a dual shutdown in a twin would cause a total shutdown in any aircraft, regardless of engine count.

    Lets see those statistics then please. Are you saying that an aircraft with 4 Rolls Royce Trent 556s is somehow twice as likely to have an engine failure as an aircraft with 2 GE-90s or Trent 890s? I seriously doubt it. The Trent 556s on the A345/6 are at least as reliable as anything fitted to a twin. One could reason on that basis that a twin is twice as likely to have all engines fail as an A346.

    I realise that both engines failing on a twin is so rare an occurence as to be almost inconceivable, but to say that you're just as likely to lose 4 on a quad with engines of the same generation is just plain wrong.
    I AM the No-spotalotacus.
     
    atmx2000
    Posts: 4301
    Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 3:25 pm

    Quoting Wah64d (Reply 22):
    Lets see those statistics then please. Are you saying that an aircraft with 4 Rolls Royce Trent 556s is somehow twice as likely to have an engine failure as an aircraft with 2 GE-90s or Trent 890s? I seriously doubt it. The Trent 556s on the A345/6 are at least as reliable as anything fitted to a twin. One could reason on that basis that a twin is twice as likely to have all engines fail as an A346.

    I realise that both engines failing on a twin is so rare an occurence as to be almost inconceivable, but to say that you're just as likely to lose 4 on a quad with engines of the same generation is just plain wrong.

    What he is getting at is that there are events that would lead to multiple engine failure that would knockout all engines. These events are more likely than two independent engine failures, which is what ETOPS requirements are designed to make extremely unlikely.
    ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
     
    N79969
    Posts: 6605
    Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 3:33 pm

    Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 21):
    One engine out on a twin you have an immediate diversion and the associated delay, inconvenience to customers, engine delivery, aircraft recovery, etc. Re: Air France diversion to the middle of nowhere in Russia - remember what happened there to clean up the mess? One engine out on a quad you can still continue. It's not a safety issue. It's a PR and image issue.

    Statistically speaking the difference between these events is non-significant. More simply stated, it is a bullshit distinction that was once peddled by Airbus until they figured out the A350 would replace the A340-200/300.

    Quoting Wah64d (Reply 22):
    Lets see those statistics then please. Are you saying that an aircraft with 4 Rolls Royce Trent 556s is somehow twice as likely to have an engine failure as an aircraft with 2 GE-90s or Trent 890s? I seriously doubt it. The Trent 556s on the A345/6 are at least as reliable as anything fitted to a twin.

    No he is not saying the probablility of failure is 2x as high. The reliability standards for for quads are far below than those for twins. The Trents do not need to be as reliable.
     
    jacobin777
    Posts: 12262
    Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 3:56 pm

    Quoting Glom (Reply 14):

    Isn't VS half owned by SQ, currently the world's largest 777 operator?

    49%.....but VS is run independently.....

    Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 16):
    something that's never happened after millions of hours of ETOPS operations, which have now entered their third decade with NEVER a relevant fatality.

    don't hear me arguing?

    Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 16):
    You aren't seriously still buying that 4engines crap, right?

    That was nothing but marketing, pure and simple... as evident by:
    # VS has flown twinjets over water in scheduled service before (see Reply# 11 in this thread)
    # VS showed more interest than any other airline in Boeing's defunct Sonic Cruiser... an intercon twin concept.

    who says I'm buying it? I just quoted what he recently said (as evidenced by my quotation marks)

    obviously my username just goes to show as to what I think of "4 engines 4 longhaul"..... Wink
    "Up the Irons!"
     
    WAH64D
    Posts: 744
    Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:14 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 3:58 pm

    Quoting N79969 (Reply 24):
    No he is not saying the probablility of failure is 2x as high. The reliability standards for for quads are far below than those for twins. The Trents do not need to be as reliable.

    I'm well aware of the reliability standards for twins. The Trent 556s may not need to be quite as reliable, the fact is that they're every bit as reliable as any engine fitted to a twin today.

    By stating that events leading to a dual shutdown in a twin would result in a quad shutdown on a 4 engined aircraft is a little bit of a generalism to say the least. While we are aware that fuel contamination/starvation, volcanic ash, total electrical failure and such things would result in all engines failing on any aircraft, such a general statement is effectively implying that quad aircraft are twice as likely to lose an engine than twins which is utter rubbish at best.

    ConcordeBoy is well known for being a "twin supremacist" so I take his comments on anything twin related with a pinch of salt. I have no preference either way but what I do believe is that while being exceptionally unlikely, an independant failure of both engines on a twin is twice as likely as an independant failure of all engines on an aircraft of the A346s generation.

    [Edited 2006-01-21 08:00:12]
    I AM the No-spotalotacus.
     
    JeffSFO
    Posts: 806
    Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 2:55 pm

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 4:38 pm

    Quoting MNeo (Reply 3):
    I have not heard anywhere that VS has any problems with their A346 series.

    VS had some very notable teething problems after the A346 was introduced into service. You can read about them here.

    However, I believe it's doubtful that VS would switch over to the 773 ER as they seem committed to the A346 as it is.
     
    atmx2000
    Posts: 4301
    Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 6:18 pm

    Quoting JeffSFO (Reply 27):
    VS had some very notable teething problems after the A346 was introduced into service. You can read about them here.

    However, I believe it's doubtful that VS would switch over to the 773 ER as they seem committed to the A346 as it is.

    I don't think they are big enough to handle a switch or to operate enough 773ERs to make a sizable enough fleet so commonality concerns aren't an issue. Besides it would be an embarassment considering their marketing and advertising slogans.
    ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
     
    sevenforeseven
    Posts: 124
    Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:59 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 7:23 pm

    You are all forgetting cargo. The A346 will carry more cargo with a full payload of pax further nonstop than any 777 will.
    VS as with many airlines make a lot of money on cargo.
     
    bigb
    Posts: 727
    Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 7:26 pm

    Quoting Sevenforeseven (Reply 29):
    You are all forgetting cargo. The A346 will carry more cargo with a full payload of pax further nonstop than any 777 will.
    VS as with many airlines make a lot of money on cargo.

    More and farther than the 773ER?
    ETSN Baber, USN
     
    bennett123
    Posts: 7440
    Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:02 pm

    I was not aware that VS used the B767, which routes was this on.

    I note from Jet Airliner Production List that it was leased for about 9 months and that the picture is at Faro.
     
    Gofly
    Posts: 1579
    Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 4:12 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:05 pm

    The "four engines for longhaul" is marketing. Pure and simple.

    The A346's were bought because VS decided they were the right aircraft for them at the time. (And the mentioned killer deal.....  Wink ) They were not bought because Branson believed four engines were safer than two. Buy the airplane....... then do the marketing.

    Had VS bought a twin, Branson would be telling the world that it was safer. "Two big ones are better than 4 tiny ones" or some other slogan.

    Love them or hate them, VS has some of the best marketing around. In fact so good, some of you seem to have it confused with fact.  Wink

    -Gofly  Smile
    Living the high life on my ex-Airliners.net Moderator pension...
     
    Glom
    Posts: 2051
    Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:17 pm

    Quoting WAH64D (Reply 26):
    While we are aware that fuel contamination/starvation, volcanic ash, total electrical failure and such things would result in all engines failing on any aircraft, such a general statement is effectively implying that quad aircraft are twice as likely to lose an engine than twins which is utter rubbish at best.

    You are drawing a specious conclusion here because you are looking at it the wrong way. Saying that a quad is twice as likely to lose an engine implies you are considering them as independent systems, which must fail independently. But the entire point is that multiple independent failures are so small as to be non-existent. The point is about systemic failures due to a common cause like the ones you mentioned. In this case, the engines cannot be regarded as independent systems, but as part of a single system. A quad has a single power system. A twin has a single power system. In this case, the probability of this system failing is just as likely regardless of how many engines it involves.

    We're not talking about losing "an engine", we're talking about losing the entire power system due to a systemic cause. In which case, trying to draw probabilities about an individual engine is a rather invalid way of looking at it. So, it's not utter rubbish if you look at the problem properly.

    Think about it this way, do you believe the probability of fuel starvation is lower on a quad than a twin?
     
    SKA380
    Posts: 141
    Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:46 pm

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:17 pm

    I think both the 773 and the A346 are fantastic aircrafts, but when it comes to passenger comfort the A346 is superior in my opinion.

    I've been on both business and Economy class in both aircraft types, and i must say i definitely prefer the cabin comfort on a A346.

    When it comes to the 4engines 4longhaul thing, i agree that this is BS in 2006.
    BUT, that is because we are aircraft nutties, and we know all about how ETOPS works and how safe a twin is today. If you ask a regular passenger if he knows what ETOPS is, he will probably think its some kindda new rockband.
    So from a PR standpoint towards the ignorant passenger, going for the "4engines 4longhaul" is genius.
    I've even heard an old granny comment by the gate "we cant go on a 13 hour flight on that aircraft! its only got 2 engines!"

    So it has nothing to do with how safe it is to fly a twin, and SRB knows perfectly well how safe this is. It has to do with what his customers feels more safe in.

    Leif
     
    Crosscountry
    Posts: 123
    Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 8:04 pm

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:27 pm

    The 767 was leased from Martinair and operated the routes from MAN for short time.
    Virgin never intended on permenantly having a twin in its fleet.
    Some of the comments on here around SRB really annoy me.
    "I won't fly VS" "SRB is a moron"
    Having flown across the pond with AA, BA, CO, DL and VS, I can say VS was easily the most comfortable, even in coach, had the most pleasant crew, the best IFE and the best food.
    The A340-600 fits the Virgin model and after a few teething troubles is operating nicely.
    I have no preference beteen Airbus and Boeing products, I want a safe, comfortable and as short as possible flight/
    Whether I'm on a 777, 767, 747 or A340 I feel that is exactly what I'm going to get when the wheels come off the ground
     
    flight7e7
    Posts: 96
    Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 7:26 pm

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:43 pm

    I must admit, either the Boeing (if it's boeing it's going an F/A friend of mine still says till today) or Airbus equipment-arguably, safety comes first-and of late, with precision engineering you almost have to create a scenario for failure, which we know is most unlikely.

    There is something though about the SQ A340-500/EWR-SIN (I am on this flight 2-3x month)...those RR triple spool, and that long, soft-powered take off that just speaks volumes for the airplane and it's engineering. I have flown hundreds of thousands of miles over many years in many aircraft types....including AF Concorde....but one of the most enjoyable and fully exhilirating rides is the takeoff of the SQ EWR/SIN flight.....way to go Airbus and RR.

    Cheers
     
    Glom
    Posts: 2051
    Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:43 pm

    Quoting SKA380 (Reply 34):
    So from a PR standpoint towards the ignorant passenger, going for the "4engines 4longhaul" is genius.

    Maybe, but that doesn't make it right. To play on ignorant fears to boost your sales is low.
     
    RichardPrice
    Posts: 4474
    Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:49 pm

    Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 10):
    Also, Branson did say though fuel costs were more on the 346 versus 777, the "extra cost of fuel is worth more than the disaster of a twin going down over an ocean"....

    Is there any chance of an origin for this quote? It doesnt sound like something he would say.

    Not saying you made it up, just curious.
     
    boeing767-300
    Posts: 621
    Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 11:23 pm

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 9:00 pm

    Getting back to original topic there is absolutely no doubt that the A346 is safe with Virgin. Given SRBs comments about 4 engines for long haul and so forth you can imagine the press if he changed to 777 which ain't going to happen.

    SRB will use the 77W to "screw" Airbus on any pricing for future orders as Airbus would obviously lower beyond any Boeing price to stop another A346 customer changing to the more efficient 77W.

    I think CX who were a launch customer for A346 and vocal 4 engines for long haul and loyal Rolls Royce customer sums up the current A346/77W issue with their order for 16 77Ws. If Virgin were to change that would be extremely embarrasing for the A346 program and that folks A would never let happen. SRB is in an enviable position when buying A346 that the fact they use more fuel, carry less cargo won't matter a great deal for the price he will be able to negotiate.
     
    Glareskin
    Posts: 1002
    Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:35 pm

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 9:22 pm

    Please stop this ridiculous bashing of the A340, Virgin and Branson!

    • the A346 is a magnificent aircraft
    • VS is very profitable
    • SRB might be uncommon but a true businessman: money is money
    • if the A346 is not profitable (anymore) VS will get rid of them
    • VS marketing is working for most of the pax (is VS customers)
    • I just like it when companies do things different
    • wouldn't it be a boring world if all airlines would fly T7?

    There seems to be a part of the Boeing fanclub that is very sensitive when it comes to 777 competition. Even if you don't like the A340, why bash all the airlines that fly them and the people involved? And why not appreciate a good #2?

    Quoting SKA380 (Reply 34):
    I think both the 773 and the A346 are fantastic aircrafts, but when it comes to passenger comfort the A346 is superior in my opinion.

     checkmark 

    Quoting SKA380 (Reply 34):
    So from a PR standpoint towards the ignorant passenger, going for the "4engines 4longhaul" is genius.

     checkmark 

    Quoting Gofly (Reply 32):
    Had VS bought a twin, Branson would be telling the world that it was safer. "Two big ones are better than 4 tiny ones" or some other slogan.

     checkmark 
    There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
     
    User avatar
    garpd
    Posts: 2308
    Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlanti

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 9:47 pm

    Glareskin, do you enjoy being a hypocrite?
    You tell others to stop bashing Airbus, but you agree with points here that paint the A346 as superior.

    Your own comments are heavily biased toward the Airbus and SRB.

    People here have raise a few valid points. I do not see any need for your childish outburst.

    [Edited 2006-01-21 13:50:45]
    arpdesign.wordpress.com
     
    bennett123
    Posts: 7440
    Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:03 pm

    The point is that one day a B777 will crash mid ocean, if the cause of the crash is engine related, (i.e a Quad would not have crashed) then you can all recite the ETOPS rules you like, the man in the street will demand quads.

    The fact is that the public are not logical.

    As for those who say that a B777 will never crash, I say Titanic.

    On a related issue, I seem to remember MOL saying that the only things that could stop the LCC tide is their own mistakes or a major crash.
     
    Glareskin
    Posts: 1002
    Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:35 pm

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:11 pm

    Quoting GARPD (Reply 41):
    Glareskin, do you enjoy being a hypocrite?

    It would be hypoctite to tell you to stop bashing the A340 and bash another aircraft (like the T7) myself. But I din't do that.

    Quoting GARPD (Reply 41):
    You tell others to stop bashing Airbus, but you agree with points here that paint the A346 as superior

    I don't think you've read it very well. I agreed with points that praised the VS / RSB marketing and a point that stated that both A340 and 777 are fantastic. Oh yes, I did agree with the better 340 comfort. That is no strong bias and doesn't mean I bash the T7. I think both aircraft have it's qualities.

    Quoting GARPD (Reply 41):
    People here have raise a few valid points.

     checkmark  I never said they didn't.

    Quoting GARPD (Reply 41):
    childish outburst

    Hmm, I cannot see it being childish nor being an outburst. But I have to say I felt an urge to act as a counterweight. I like the T7 a lot and understand that it is the leading aircraft due to it's economics. But that doesn't mean that the A340 is lousy.

    BTW, do you disagree with one of the points I've mentioned in my summary?
    There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
     
    RichardPrice
    Posts: 4474
    Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:15 pm

    Quoting GARPD (Reply 41):
    Glareskin, do you enjoy being a hypocrite?
    You tell others to stop bashing Airbus, but you agree with points here that paint the A346 as superior.

    Your own comments are heavily biased toward the Airbus and SRB.

    People here have raise a few valid points. I do not see any need for your childish outburst.

    I dont think his comment was an outburst, childish or not.

    He simply agrees with a few opinions, they certainly dont paint the A340 as superior. This is a discussion channel, people are welcome to state their opinions and others are welcome to agree with them. Maybe you should stop being so single minded.

    The opinions he agreed with were:

    1. Passenger comfort was superior - this differs from person to person and its unlikely that you will ever get a consensus.

    2. Bransons PR is brilliant - agreed, its PR and thats what PR is supposed to do. Citing the benifits of your own product is central to PR.

    3. If Branson had gone with something else, he would have another slogan - again, PR and thats what PR is for.

    GARPD, you just painted yourself perfectly as the type of person that Glareskin was talking about - can you actually accept another point of view or are they all horrific to you?
     
    bigb
    Posts: 727
    Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:19 pm

    Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 40):
    The point is that one day a B777 will crash mid ocean, if the cause of the crash is engine related, (i.e a Quad would not have crashed) then you can all recite the ETOPS rules you like, the man in the street will demand quads.

    This argument holds no ground since no twin hasn't crashed yet. Once a twin crash, then bring the argument. But for now, no ground sir.

    Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 40):
    As for those who say that a B777 will never crash, I say Titanic.

    Point out to where anyone has said the 777 will never crash?
    ETSN Baber, USN
     
    boeing767-300
    Posts: 621
    Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 11:23 pm

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:28 pm

    Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 40):
    The point is that one day a B777 will crash mid ocean, if the cause of the crash is engine related, (i.e a Quad would not have crashed) then you can all recite the ETOPS rules you like, the man in the street will demand quads.

    The fact is that the public are not logical.

    As for those who say that a B777 will never crash, I say Titanic.

    This is probably the worst post I have seen and was quite suprised to see your age was 36-45 bracket.

    Perhaps you should look at the millions of hours logged in ETOPS without a fatality. Apart from fuel starvation(Air Transat MX Fault) or AC Gimli glider (fuel loading error) I can't recall a double failure and in fact most IFSDs are precautionary.

    I trust you have voiced your concerns to Airbus re their A350 and advised them to make A350 a quad. While you are at it you may as well order your BMW with another powerplant in the boot in case one fails.

    Seriously you are talking crap and fortunately the market does not agree with your theory.  banghead 
     
    RichardPrice
    Posts: 4474
    Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:48 pm

    I agree with the above posts, to cite that a quad is safer on most routes than a twin is basically false. You are equally safe in both situations - the difference being that a quad can legally continue in most circumstances while a twin cant, it must divert.

    The 777 was the aircraft that got Boeing out of the doldrums, they needed something to get them back into commercial aircraft in the face of a fine competitor, and they succeeded. The very fact that ETOPS208 was granted to the 777 shows that, and this shouldnt be overlooked.
     
    8b775zq
    Posts: 201
    Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 3:01 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:07 pm

    Bennet123 remember the reason behind the Titanic disaster was the fact that Certain CEO's wanted lot's of PR. With that being said I cannot think of anyone who loves more PR than SRB but I will admit he's a genius with it.Personally both the A340 and B777 are both excellent aircraft as matter of fact I believe all aircraft are wonderfully engineered and should be respected as such regardless of manufactor
     
    WAH64D
    Posts: 744
    Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:14 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:18 pm

    Quoting Glom (Reply 31):
    You are drawing a specious conclusion here because you are looking at it the wrong way. Saying that a quad is twice as likely to lose an engine implies you are considering them as independent systems, which must fail independently. But the entire point is that multiple independent failures are so small as to be non-existent. The point is about systemic failures due to a common cause like the ones you mentioned. In this case, the engines cannot be regarded as independent systems, but as part of a single system. A quad has a single power system. A twin has a single power system. In this case, the probability of this system failing is just as likely regardless of how many engines it involves.

    No, this is the point you are trying to make, not the general theme of the thread. Is it me you're trying to convince or is it yourself? I ask this as you conveniently neglected to quote the second half of my post where I specifically mention INDEPENDANT engine failures. Seeing as you chose/forgot to include it, I'll do it for you.

    Quoting WAH64D (Reply 24):
    ConcordeBoy is well known for being a "twin supremacist" so I take his comments on anything twin related with a pinch of salt. I have no preference either way but what I do believe is that while being exceptionally unlikely, an independant failure of both engines on a twin is twice as likely as an independant failure of all engines on an aircraft of the A346s generation.

    There is no getting away from this fact. The twin is by its very nature, twice as likely to lose all engines to independant failure than the quad with equally modern engines. Your argument that engine failures induced by another system malfunctioning are just as likely to happen on a quad as a twin doesn't exactly enhance the reputation of twins over quads, does it?

    I remain non-partisan in the twins vs quads argument. However, what I have said re independant failures is simple mathematics and is undisputable.

    [Edited 2006-01-21 15:44:04]
    I AM the No-spotalotacus.
     
    bennett123
    Posts: 7440
    Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:33 pm

    The fact that something has not happened yet does not mean that it can not or will not happen in the future.

    The fact that people here do not agree is their right, as is my right to point that that the man in the street will react badly if/when it happens.

    The problem that that regardless of the fact that aviation is 99.999999% safe it will never be 100%.

    The public see a plane crash and they think that aviation is dangerous.

    They also tend to latch onto one issue, if the plane crashes mid ocean following engine failure, then you will see just how irrational customers can be.

    Thinking back to the Titanic, it had more lifeboats than the number required, but the owners and passengers were quite unconcerned about the fact that there was only enough for 25% of those on board because the ship would not sink. In much the same way as many think that ETOPS means that it can not crash.

    Incidentally I flew a B777 to JFK last year.

    The whole point that I making is just because those on this forum accept that flying is basicly safe, does not mean that the general public, (who know nothing of ETOPS agree). How many people on here have been on a course to cure a fear of flying.
     
    Amy
    Posts: 1109
    Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 9:48 am

    RE: The Future Of The A340-600 With Virgin Atlantic

    Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:34 pm

    Irrespective of the 2 or 4 engine argument, i cannot see VS, with a fleet of A340-300 and A340-600 moving away from the -600 towards the T7, it just doesn't make sense on this scale.

    I expect VS to order the A340-600X or whatever it will be dubbed when it's released.
    A340-300 - slow, but awesome!

    Who is online