leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:00 pm

Emirates Airline looks set to defer deliveries of its Airbus A340-600s which are due to start by the middle of next year, as it waits for the manufacturer to clarify its plans for an enhanced version of the aircraft.

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...in+place+of+high+gross+weight.html
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
trex8
Posts: 4577
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:19 pm

makes sense, anyone who would take a HGW and not an E version if its available is crazy unless they need the plane right away
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:30 pm

This kind of looks bad for ROI on the HGW.
 
CRJ900
Posts: 1937
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:43 pm

I thought the A346HGW was due for delivery to EK in 2006, not 2007...

Well, from other threads here on A.net, it sounds like EK's fast-paced growth has hit a big bump lately, so perhaps there is not such a massive need for umpteen new aircraft right now anyway... deferring the A346 may be a smart decision. Perhaps they will renegotiate the deal to a joint A346E/A350-order. If the two types will be quite similar technically, they may be a force to be reckoned with...
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
trex8
Posts: 4577
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:44 pm

Quoting Glom (Reply 2):
This kind of looks bad for ROI on the HGW.

but wouldn't they have had to do the wing strengthening work anyway for the E version which is where most of the money went?? IIRC the E was a HGW with new engines incorporating Trent 1000 tech and some other minor tweaks.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 9:03 pm

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 1):
makes sense, anyone who would take a HGW and not an E version if its available is crazy unless they need the plane right away

From EK's comments in the article it seems they are concerned not so much about capability/performance but the residual value on the HGW airframes. They didn't order the HGW expecting its noncompetitiveness, but they are going to be really concerned if its value drops the second its flown out of Toulouse due to future developments, either a significant update or maybe even a lack of future model sales leading to a small pool of A340NGs that makes it hard to sell the aircraft to other airlines.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
astuteman
Posts: 6340
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 9:40 pm

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 5):
From EK's comments in the article it seems they are concerned not so much about capability/performance but the residual value on the HGW airframes.

I reckon you're spot on. The catch-22 for Airbus is the A345/6E prospect itself damaging A345/6HGW sales.

Much as I love the A380, I think this could well turn out to be an issue if/when the A388R/A389 get discussed/launched (if it isn't an issue already....).
A
 
Tifoso
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:15 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 9:56 pm

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 5):
From EK's comments in the article it seems they are concerned not so much about capability/performance but the residual value on the HGW airframes.

Well, EK could negotiate a guaranteed sale price on their frames like IB did with Airbus when they purchased their A346s.

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 3):
Well, from other threads here on A.net, it sounds like EK's fast-paced growth has hit a big bump lately, so perhaps there is not such a massive need for umpteen new aircraft right now anyway

Makes me wonder whether Emirates is trying to divert attention away from itself by claiming that the order is being deferred because of the inferiority of the A346HGW, as opposed to their not requiring this much capacity.

Also, how is this going to impact the on-going 773ER vs A346 evaluation at Qatar?

[Edited 2006-03-17 13:58:52]
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9751
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:28 pm

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 6):
I reckon you're spot on. The catch-22 for Airbus is the A345/6E prospect itself damaging A345/6HGW sales.

In my view they will need to package it, either offer replacement aircraft in a few years, or offer an engine upgrade like the 343x with a trent 1700 to replace the trent 500.

Some current EK 340s have been "back to factory" for upgrades.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 6):
Much as I love the A380, I think this could well turn out to be an issue if/when the A388R/A389 get discussed/launched (if it isn't an issue already....).

Fedex last year was saying it hoped to pick up 200 second hand A380s for cargo conversion. I would see this as part of the life cycle of the aircraft.

Quoting Tifoso (Reply 7):
Makes me wonder whether Emirates is trying to divert attention away from itself by claiming that the order is being deferred because of the inferiority of the A346HGW, as opposed to their not requiring this much capacity.

I think they need the capacity, they are just having problems staffing it. EK has just started their first road show for pilots, similar to what they did/doing for cabin crew.

Pilots and cabin crew a leaving (hearing an average of close to 2 pilots and 10 cabin crew a day), this put higher demand on the ones left, the ones left get overworked, they leave. Understand presently up to 30 flights a day are being cancelled due to lack of staff.

Quoting Tifoso (Reply 7):
Also, how is this going to impact the on-going 773ER vs A346 evaluation at Qatar?

Might means some very cheap interim airframes available at short notice.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Var

Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:41 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 8):
Fedex last year was saying it hoped to pick up 200 second hand A380s for cargo conversion. I would see this as part of the life cycle of the aircra

No, David Sutton of FedEX said he anticipated 200 A388F/A389Fs in the marketplace (all operators) in twenty years, new builds as well as conversions.
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
Emirates773ER
Posts: 1318
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 9:10 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:53 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 8):
Pilots and cabin crew a leaving (hearing an average of close to 2 pilots and 10 cabin crew a day), this put higher demand on the ones left, the ones left get overworked, they leave. Understand presently up to 30 flights a day are being cancelled due to lack of staff.

Do you have any sources based on the claim you made? Cancelling 30 flights a day is no joke!
The Truth is Out There ---- Face It!!!!!
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:07 pm

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 6):
Much as I love the A380, I think this could well turn out to be an issue if/when the A388R/A389 get discussed/launched (if it isn't an issue already....).

How so? The A380 is the cornerstone of EK's plan for "world domination".  Wink

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 5):
From EK's comments in the article it seems they are concerned not so much about capability/performance but the residual value on the HGW airframes.

Why doesn't Airbus guarantee the resale value? Reportedly they did it for Iberia.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:17 pm

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 10):
Cancelling 30 flights a day is no joke!

Too right.......sounds like crisis level.

Zeke (or anyone), do you know the reason(s) for staff leaving in such numbers?
"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: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:28 pm

EK and QR both pushing for the A346E? That would make it very likely to become reality. From what I've read about the E version it seems to be a really great aircraft. Who will take the dumped 773ERs, then?
France 1789; Eastern Germany 1989; Tunisia 2011; Egypt 2011
 
Cruiser
Posts: 920
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:08 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:34 pm

Quoting Thorben (Reply 13):
Who will take the dumped 773ERs, then?

There won't be any dumped 773ER's, so no one will get them.

James
Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:44 pm

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 11):
Why doesn't Airbus guarantee the resale value?

That would be a risky move. Having already made the sale, why should Airbus take on that sort of risk?
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:48 pm

Best case scenario, in 5, maybe six years, we have an A340-600E, which performs as well as a 777-300ER, you know, or just buy the 773ER now?

I think Emirates' growth is either going to mellow out, or they'll run the risk of their buble bursting.

They would rather have their be surplus demand for their seat than surplus seats for their demand.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9751
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:49 pm

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 10):
Do you have any sources based on the claim you made? Cancelling 30 flights a day is no joke!

The source was a friend of mine that I caught up with last week, he is an EK capt, he is also leaving. He said last month resignations amongst pilots was 55, and over 300 cabin crew.

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 9):
No, David Sutton of FedEX said he anticipated 200 A388F/A389Fs in the marketplace (all operators) in twenty years, new builds as well as conversions.

Thanks.

Quote:
Meanwhile, FedEx has an eye on the ex-passenger A380 fleet for the longer
term, having traditionally bolstered its fleet of new-build freighters with
secondhand, cargo-converted aircraft. "As the passenger airlines take
the -900, they'll push their -800s over for passenger-to
freighter-conversions - probably around 2020," said Sutton.

A converted -800 would be "a less capable aircraft" than the new-build
A380-800F as it has lower operating weights, but would be "ideal for US
domestic or regional missions, as well as some international flying", said
Sutton. He added that Airbus has taken the conversion of passenger A380s to
freighters into consideration during the design stage, which should help to
simplify the modification effort when the time arrives.

Airbus currently holds firm orders for 27 A380Fs from four customers -
Emirates (two), FedEx (10), UPS (10) and lessor International Lease Finance
(five). Sutton says he expects that there will be "a fleet of 200 A380
freighters in the marketplace over the next 20 years".



Quoting NAV20 (Reply 12):
Zeke (or anyone), do you know the reason(s) for staff leaving in such numbers?

Working too hard, crossing many times zones with min rest, he was saying like on a AKL trip they would only have 12 hrs off between flights, sometime cabin crew will go on from one port when the pilots are swapped, sometime getting less rest than the pilots. At one stage they were not counting bunk time in flight as pilot flight time, effectively working them 1300 hrs a year. Pay is not that great, cash is about 5000 pounds a month for a captain near the end of his career (seems like a lot, compare that to other non aviation senior managers working shift work), lifestyle in DXB is all gloss, "great to visit", under the gloss he said living there is horrible, poor law and order, e.g. 5 locals have hit his vehicle, no police investigation for any of them it goes on and on.

He could work for airlines like Jet Airways based out of LHR "at home" living with his family with better rest, pay, and lifestyle.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
Thorben
Posts: 2713
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:50 pm

Quoting Cruiser (Reply 14):
There won't be any dumped 773ER's, so no one will get them.

No? If the A346E holds half of what it is promising, then some 773ER operators will be very sad.
France 1789; Eastern Germany 1989; Tunisia 2011; Egypt 2011
 
flyinghippo
Posts: 688
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:48 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:00 am

I noticed in the article, Mr. Clarke said the order is for 12 firm and 8 options, instead of 20 backlog orders stated by Airbus.

Quoting Thorben (Reply 13):
EK and QR both pushing for the A346E? That would make it very likely to become reality. From what I've read about the E version it seems to be a really great aircraft. Who will take the dumped 773ERs, then?

Three flaws I see in this statement, IMO...

1. When A356E is finally developed, Boeing probably will have more improvements on the 773ER, or have Y3 on the drawing board.
2. There is no guarantee that A356E will BEAT the performance of 773ER. I'm sure they'll be able to match it, but airlines won't waste the money to dump 773ERs for another plane that matches, or beats it by a small margin.
3. 773ER is still a relatively new plane, by the time the first A356E is delivered, there will probably be a lot of 773ERs backlogged to be delivered to airlines. I don't think airlines will dump any 773ERs before taking deliveries of it.
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:10 am

Thanks Zeke - guessed as much. As far as I know all Emirates' flights are out-and-return from Dubai; good business in terms of cutting overseas accommodation costs, but it looks like they're pushing people too hard. Only 12 hours between longhaul flights sounds more than 'hard', I'd say it's actually dangerous.

I can see why lifestyle would play a part too - and maybe even politics. By coincidence I just got an email from a pal who lives in Saudia - saying that, for the first time in many years, he's thinking of moving on; he says there's a lot more tension in the air recently, even there.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
Cruiser
Posts: 920
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:08 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:11 am

Quoting Thorben (Reply 18):

No? If the A346E holds half of what it is promising, then some 773ER operators will be very sad.

I am curious...would you mind posting what it is promising?

Thanks...
James
Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8545
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:14 am

Quoting Thorben (Reply 13):
Who will take the dumped 773ERs, then?

QR never signed the 777LR order from mid-2005. No 773ER would be dumped.

Quoting Thorben (Reply 13):
From what I've read about the E version it seems to be a really great aircraft.

I don't know what you've read, but it essentially only matches the 773ER's economics nearly a decade after it's debut.

The A346E would trump the 773ER's range, because the A346 has greater fuel volume than the 777 to compensate for its inferior SFC. Match the 777LR's fuel burn and the extra volume gives the A346 more range.

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 4):
IIRC the E was a HGW with new engines incorporating Trent 1000 tech and some other minor tweaks.

It also includes graphting the A350 lightweight fuselage and introducing new aerodyanamics to the A340 structure. It isn't a minor upgrade: it would likely be another billion dollars or so, which would demand multiple customers.

http://www.flightglobal.com/assets/getAsset.aspx?ItemID=10584

I would also venture to guess that Boeing could find some way to enhance the 773ER in the five to six years before the A340-E would debut. Another Ge PIP, a weight reduction campaign, or just boosting MTOW and fuel volume could really diminish the allure of the A340-E.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 15):
That would be a risky move. Having already made the sale, why should Airbus take on that sort of risk?

I agree.

From EK's perspective, this is a very tough decision. Hindsight is 20/20, and they had no way to know the 773ER would end-up matching the A346 range and carrying a greater payload and doing so more economically. I suppose they concievably fault Boeing's savy for putting them in this quandary!

If they opt for the A346-E in 2011-2012, I believe they would do so because they had no other option with Airbus. With the 2005 order for additional 777LR, will they not have adaquet capacity until 2011? It's assured that Boeing has line capacity after 2011, so it's not a stretch to say Boeing could easily absorb the A346 order.

But what to do with the A346-HGW order? My scenarios:

1. They keep the A346-HGW delivery in 2006-2007.

2. They convert the A346-HGW into -E and take delivery in 2011

3. They cancel the A346 order, place an additional 777 order, and consider converting the A346 order into one of the following types:

a. A330 - definitly not, A332 already on the way out
b. A340 - obviously not
c. A350 - very strong contender for a conversion, perhaps Airbus best asset to win the RFP. Boeing is still lobbying hard and offering EK an almost WN-like role in defining the aircraft, not easy to reject.
d. A380 - do they need any more?

- and the wild card -

e. A320 - why not? We know they focus on huge units of capacity, but they could concievably get the A346 order off their books very quickly and take delivery of an aircraft with outstanding residual value. EK could just spin-off a regional subsidiary with ~30 aircraft, opperate them for 5-10 years, then sell them off it was such a hassle. Who would have thought SQ would enter the LCC fray with Tiger Airways?

I doubt EK would fully default on the order, so a conversion sceanario of some sort seems most likely.
 
AT502B
Posts: 329
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 11:17 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:14 am

Quoting Thorben (Reply 18):
No? If the A346E holds half of what it is promising, then some 773ER operators will be very sad.

I think you are missing the point here- The A346E is only going to EIS in 2011 with similar performance to what the B773ER has today, why would an airline wait to get a A346E in 2011 that may not live up to promises?
I think Airbus is better off going back to the drawing board and start working on a competitor to the Y3, which Boeing is already working on albeit on the drawing boards.
I love the smell of jet fuel in the morning.
 
CRJ900
Posts: 1937
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:23 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 17):
Quoting NAV20 (Reply 12):
Zeke (or anyone), do you know the reason(s) for staff leaving in such numbers?

Working too hard, crossing many times zones with min rest, he was saying like on a AKL trip they would only have 12 hrs off between flights, sometime cabin crew will go on from one port when the pilots are swapped, sometime getting less rest than the pilots. At one stage they were not counting bunk time in flight as pilot flight time, effectively working them 1300 hrs a year. Pay is not that great, cash is about 5000 pounds a month for a captain near the end of his career (seems like a lot, compare that to other non aviation senior managers working shift work), lifestyle in DXB is all gloss, "great to visit", under the gloss he said living there is horrible, poor law and order, e.g. 5 locals have hit his vehicle, no police investigation for any of them it goes on and on.

Sounds like the magic bubble is just about to burst...
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
Hamlet69
Posts: 2460
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2000 2:45 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:46 am

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 1):
anyone who would take a HGW and not an E version if its available is crazy unless they need the plane right away

. . . but of course, the Enhanced won't be available until 2011 at the earliest, probably not until 2012. That's 6 years from now. So in this case, "right away" is a relative term.

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 5):
From EK's comments in the article it seems they are concerned not so much about capability/performance but the residual value on the HGW airframes.

You are definitely on to something here. Would Airbus once again guarantee the resale value of the HGW's to EK like they did to IB to ensure that EK doesn't delay/cancel/convert the A340 order? It's an open question at this point, as it seems discussions continue ad nauseum. . .

Quoting Thorben (Reply 18):
No? If the A346E holds half of what it is promising, then some 773ER operators will be very sad.

Then I suggest you read the artile in Flight International again, this time perhaps without the rose-colored glasses. Actually, to avoid the hassle, let's summerize:

Background
- Boeing claims the 777LR's fuel burn is @ 20% better than the A340NG, varies by model, of course
- Airbus claims that number is only @ 5%
- Industry analysts (and common sense) have pegged the real number at around 8-11%.
- When it comes to range, the A340NG's are weight-limited. The 777LR's are fuel-volume limited.
- The 777LR's carry a greater payload, and have a higher capacity than their competitors (based on known configurations and floor space, not manufacturer claims)

Proposal
- Airbus and RR aim to develop a "Trent 1500" - essentially taking the Trent 500 fan and replacing the core with the one developed for the 787/A350
- Using the aluminum-lithium fuselage in development for the A350, reducing OEW. However, not using the carbon fibre center or outer wing box
- Using the A350 cabin, slightly increasing comfort/capacity

Conclusion
- The engine upgrade alone is proposed to reduce the 777LR's 8-11% fuel burn advantage to @ 2-4%. The lighter fuselage would supposedly attempt to reduce that advantage even further, hopefully negating it altogether
- With reduced fuel burn and less weight, more fuel can be carried and range extended. This should give the "-600E" roughly 500-800nm more range than the current 773ER, and should allow the "-500E" to match the current -200LR range
- Payload capacity is a question, however. As the 787 and A350 have shown, simply being lighter doesn't mean it can carry more v. the 777. IMO, what we will see with the A340E will be more flexibility. For instance, with the -600E, operators will have a choice - either fly the same amount of payload the same range as the current -300ER, burning roughly the same amount of fuel. Or fly less payload farther than the 777.

Final Conclusion
- The A340E, if launched, will be able to deliver in 2011 or 2012 a very competitive aircraft, finally matching what Boeing has now with the 777LR's. There is even the possibility that they could slight improve upon the 777's current benchmarks.
- The question is, will anyone want to wait? QR appears ready, while EK is considering it. . .

Regards,

Hamlet69
Honor the warriors, not the war.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9751
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 1:23 am

Hamlet69

Excellent post, many thanks for taking the time to put it together.

 bigthumbsup 
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 1:26 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 15):
That would be a risky move. Having already made the sale, why should Airbus take on that sort of risk?

EK is one of their premier customers, representing >25% of the firm orders for its flagship, the A380. I would want to keep these guys happy at all costs.

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 24):
Sounds like the magic bubble is just about to burst...

Concur. This appears the short term bottleneck to their expansion plans.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:25 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 27):
EK is one of their premier customers, representing >25% of the firm orders for its flagship, the A380. I would want to keep these guys happy at all costs.

Yes, they need to keep EK happy, but at what cost? You have an airplane just starting to be flight tested, that could be improved within 6 years? Thats not good for business, since it makes it hard for your clients to accept the financial penalties until the 'E' version arrives. Plus the additional expense of essentially re-engineering an almost brand new design. Airbus is getting painted in a very tight corner with this.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Var

Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:30 am

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 3):
Well, from other threads here on A.net, it sounds like EK's fast-paced growth has hit a big bump lately, so perhaps there is not such a massive need for umpteen new aircraft right now anyway... deferring the A346 may be a smart decision. Perhaps they will renegotiate the deal to a joint A346E/A350-order. If the two types will be quite similar technically, they may be a force to be reckoned with...



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 6):
I reckon you're spot on. The catch-22 for Airbus is the A345/6E prospect itself damaging A345/6HGW sales.

they had a choice between dumping or not ordering the 777-300ER and the A346, they made their choice.........doesn't seem to me if EK are telling Boeing to "fix your -300ER's..

to me, this is a nice way for EK to tell Airbus...."this plane is inferiour in its present condition....go fix it before you sell it to us"....

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 9):
No, David Sutton of FedEX said he anticipated 200 A388F/A389Fs in the marketplace (all operators) in twenty years, new builds as well as conversions.

exactly.....I think he knows/educated hunch there will be a bunch of A388's on sale from passenger operators...I wonder who they will be......

Quoting Thorben (Reply 13):
EK and QR both pushing for the A346E? That would make it very likely to become reality. From what I've read about the E version it seems to be a really great aircraft. Who will take the dumped 773ERs, then?

 rotfl 

Quoting AT502B (Reply 23):
think you are missing the point here- The A346E is only going to EIS in 2011 with similar performance to what the B773ER has today, why would an airline wait to get a A346E in 2011 that may not live up to promises?

and thats if it lives upto its expectations and if Boeing doesn't do anything in the mean time.......I doubt we'll see Boeing sitting around doing nothing, if anything, they will take technologies from the 787 program and include it to the -300ER.....
"Up the Irons!"
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:34 am

Can someone please elaborate on the differences between the two models (HGW vs E)
One Nation Under God
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8545
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:41 am

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 30):
Can someone please elaborate on the differences between the two models (HGW vs E)

See Reply #22 and click on the link. In summary:

Enhanced A340 to take on 777
 
Tifoso
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:15 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:42 am

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 25):
When it comes to range, the A340NG's are weight-limited. The 777LR's are fuel-volume limited.

Is one of them a bigger dis-advantage than the other?

I suppose for an aircraft that is fuel limited, you can add additional tanks, but that would eat into cargo revenue.
 
Flying Belgian
Posts: 1906
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 12:45 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:45 am

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 30):
Can someone please elaborate on the differences between the two models (HGW vs E)

Indeed, this would help me a lot too !! I'd like to know what can justify 4 years of difference in the delivery slots (2007 compared to 2011).

FB.
Life is great at 41.000 feet...
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:19 am

Here's the thing. The 777 is significantly wider than the A340. 772LR carries 6,000 fewer gallons of fuel than A340-500, and flies a few hundred miles further. Boeing could pack more fuel tanks into the fuselage .... but is there that much demand for it. I'm sure if Qantas asked for 11,000 miles of range, they could accomodate.

You know would Boeing would need to make the A346E obsolete before it ever comes to market? GE to give them a new engine. If GE scaled the GEnx up to GE90 size, they'd drop another few percent in fuel burn. 777 can already seat 9 abreast, where A340 can only do 8, 777 is more comfortable, because of its larger, wider, more spacious fuselage. So airlines can chose, a less spacious aircraft in 6 years from now, or one just as good, with more room today.

Hard call, huh?
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:21 am

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 34):
777 can already seat 9 abreast,

Don't some airlines (EK?) go 10 abreast already?
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
astuteman
Posts: 6340
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:37 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 8):
offer an engine upgrade like the 343x with a trent 1700 to replace the trent 500.



Quoting Zeke (Reply 8):
Some current EK 340s have been "back to factory" for upgrades.

I can't help but think that a new gen 55 000lb - 60 000lb engine (like the proposed T1500) with between 6% - 10% better SFC than its predecessors (depending on what they are) is a good candidate for a fair number of upgrading applications (A345/6, 744, A300/310, 767.....).

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 11):
How so? The A380 is the cornerstone of EK's plan for "world domination".

Imagine though, how "dominating" they would consider themselves, with higher MTOW A380's with next gen engine performance - more lift AND more range - megalomaniacs please step forward  Smile

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 25):
Industry analysts (and common sense) have pegged the real number at around 8-11%.

The articles I've read cite 8% - 9%, including those linked in this thread (sorry to be picky). As you say - a common sense view.

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 25):
This should give the "-600E" roughly 500-800nm more range than the current 773ER, and should allow the "-500E" to match the current -200LR range

This I don't quite understand. Happy that the A346E should have c 8 650 Nm - 8 750 Nm range, but if this is the case, I would expect the A345E to be nudging 10 000 Nm - substantially more than "matching" the current -200LR.
The existing "base" A345 has an 1 150nm advantage over the existing "base" A346. I would expect that to grow proportionally.
Regards
 
PlaneHunter
Posts: 6512
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:17 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Var

Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:37 am

Quoting Thorben (Reply 18):
No? If the A346E holds half of what it is promising, then some 773ER operators will be very sad.

Why would they after making enormous money for a almost decade with their B77Ws?

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 29):
I think he knows/educated hunch there will be a bunch of A388's on sale from passenger operators

It's not more than a guess. There could be just a small number of pax A380s available for converting 20 years from now.


PH
Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:42 am

Quoting PlaneHunter (Reply 37):
It's not more than a guess. There could be just a small number of pax A380s available for converting 20 years from now.

if he knew the future, he would be richer than Bill Gates.... Smile
"Up the Irons!"
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Var

Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:53 am

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 36):
The existing "base" A345 has an 1 150nm advantage over the existing "base" A346. I would expect that to grow proportionally.

Not necessarily. Reducing SFC would increase the range advantage of the A340-500E vs the A340-600E, however, reducing the weight of the fuselage would bring the OEWs closer together and reduce the range advantage of the A340-500E vs the A340-600E. In other words, the range difference between the A340-500E and the A340-600E might be smaller or greater than the range difference between the A340-500 and the A340-600. We'll have to wait and see.
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:56 am

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 36):
I can't help but think that a new gen 55 000lb - 60 000lb engine (like the proposed T1500) with between 6% - 10% better SFC than its predecessors (depending on what they are) is a good candidate for a fair number of upgrading applications (A345/6, 744, A300/310, 767.....).

IIRC, the only successful commercial airplane re-engine program was the DC-8 70s series, of which about 100 were done. This also had the effect of making the airframe much more valuable.

New engines for all these airplanes, and the A340, might be doable, but not necessarily cost effective. The wing and other systems will need to be tweaked to accept the new engine. At the same time, replacing the engine will call for additional service time required of the airplane to recoup the costs.

I have not seen many commercial airplanes being re-engined, I may assume incorrectly that most times this is not cost effective enough to do this very often.
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:57 am

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 36):
Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 25):
Industry analysts (and common sense) have pegged the real number at around 8-11%.

The articles I've read cite 8% - 9%, including those linked in this thread (sorry to be picky). As you say - a common sense view.

And to be fair to Boeing, these are about the levels they always claimed to be the difference in trip fuel between the two airplanes.

The 20+% number was a per seat number based on the greater floor area and the presumably higher seat count of the 773ER.
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 4:31 am

So basically, this confirms what I've said a few days ago, and for which I got attacked by some A.net members...

http://www.airliners.net/discussions...ion/read.main/2656481/6/#ID2656481

I know the idea of a superior A340 is simply unacceptable for some persons, but with the A340E, there is a real prospect to see it materialize.

Thanks Hamlet69 for your good summarize, which is right on; seems you have understood what this -600E version is all about!

I'd just like to add the A340E would most likely go for much less as the 777-300ER or 777-200LR (as do the A340NGs), which would give it yet another killer advantage.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 36):
If the A346E should have ca 8,650 Nm - 8,750 Nm range, I would expect the A345E to be nudging 10,000 Nm - substantially more than "matching" the current -200LR.

Seems more than reasonable indeed.

The A340-500E would be a plane unmatched by any product from Boeing: is this the plane QF needs for their SYD-LHR non-stop route?
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 4:40 am

An interesting upgrade to the aircraft, but you also still have 4 engines, which means more engine mx as compared to 2 engines.

If GE upgrades the 777's engines to Genx at that thrust level (90-115B), wow! that would effectively kill of the level playing field AND make room for the 787-10.
One Nation Under God
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 4:41 am

The first indication that the A346E will happen will be when RR announces they'll produce the engine.

Until then, it's all speculation.
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 4:53 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 35):

Don't some airlines (EK?) go 10 abreast already?

Yes, uncomfortably, which is an advantage of 2 seats abreast on A340. I guess you could cram more seats into an A340, but it's already a less roomy aircraft.

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 42):
I know the idea of a superior A340 is simply unacceptable for some persons, but with the A340E, there is a real prospect to see it materialize.

It's funny how airbus people can't stop talking about the 6" of cabin width A320 has on 737, but then when it comes to A340 vs. 777, they're silent. Maybe it's that 777 is 3 FEET wider than A340. So if it's 1 extra seet abreast (typically 9 on 777, 8 on A340), that's 3' extra for one seat. We all know a seat isn't 3' wide, which equates to there being over a foot of extra space on a 777. This is one weakness A340 will never overcome. It will never be as spacious, or have the cargo capacity of the wider 777.

I'm not sure there is a demand for aircraft with more range than A340-500 and 777-200LR. But just in case, if Boeing gave 777-200LR the same fuel capacity as A340-500 (even the theoretical A340-500E) it would fly as far, or further, and still have more cargo and seating area.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
WINGS
Posts: 2312
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 1:36 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 4:54 am

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 42):
So basically, this confirms what I'vernsaid a few days ago, and for which I got attacked by some A.netrnmembers...

Welcome to the club mate. I too got bashed for the very same assumptions.

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 42):
I know the idea of a superior A340 is simply unacceptable for some persons

How very true.

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 42):
but with the A340E, there is a real prospect to see it materialize.

Now more than ever.

It´s going to be interesting to see what comes out of all of this.

Regards,
Wings
Aviation Is A Passion.
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 4:59 am

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 42):
I'd just like to add the A340E would most likely go for much less as the 777-300ER or 777-200LR (as do the A340NGs), which would give it yet another killer advantage.

Have you taken into consideration the development cost of this new A340E?

If there is such a price disparity between the A340 and 777 how did the 777 outlsell the A340 10:1 last year?
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 5:00 am

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 43):
If GE upgrades the 777's engines to Genx at that thrust level (90-115B), wow! that would effectively kill of the level playing field AND make room for the 787-10.

Are you seriously suggesting a Genx (or trent 1000 for the record) of 90+Klbs????

A question: can you boost a CFM56 to produce 60Klbs for instance?

Of course not!

Reason being there are thermodynamic laws in physics which simply make it impossible to keep boosting an engine. The more you demand from it, the higher temperatures you'll be faced with and at some point you run out of materials which can resist them! 90Klbs for the Genx engine is simply out of reach as has been explained here several times already! Even the much lower T-requirement for the GEnx for the proposed 787-10 is on the edge of what the engine can do without major modification; let alone for a 773ER.

Boeing's only way to counter the A340E would be with a new GE90, based on the GEnx. However, GE has indicated their next project will be the new engine for the 737/A320 replacement, so I wouldn't hope for it, unless of course they decide to shelf that project, something B. won't particularly please either...

In short: if the trent 1500 materializes (highly likely) the 777 is screwed, ironically because it only has 2 (huge) engines for which there is no better alternative! Who would have thought...
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8545
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant

Sat Mar 18, 2006 5:02 am

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 42):
So basically, this confirms what I've said a few days ago, and for which I got attacked by some A.net members...

Well then, crank up the pity party...

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 42):
I'd just like to add the A340E would most likely go for much less as the 777-300ER or 777-200LR (as do the A340NGs), which would give it yet another killer advantage.

That's quite a forgone conclusion.

(1) Compare the initial cost of the A340NG program ($3.5 billion) and the 777LR program ($1.5 billion), then observe the respective sales (142 A340 vs. 224* 777LR). Boeing has done much better at amortizing their RD and generating profit than Airbus, a crucial factor in discounts/incentives.

(2) If Airbus proceeds with the A340-E, it will mark the second reinvestment to the initial A340NG program since commercial debut only four years ago. The HGW and Enhanced won't cost mere pennies. That money must be amortized or Airbus will only drain their resources from other fronts.

(3) Boeing has not sat on the 777 costs. Since 2004, Boeing has persued dramatic improvements in 777 production efficency. In 2006, Boeing will ramp-up production, implement the moving assembly line, and reduce aircraft unit costs. Boeing has price leverage.

(4) Airbus "killer price advantages" have not held up to Boeing's tremendous momentum in selling (155) B777 and (235) B787 last year. Even if Airbus gave away the aircraft, they wouldn't be available until 2011, which hardly appeals when the 777LR are available in 18-24 months.

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 42):
The A340-500E would be a plane unmatched by any product from Boeing:

The A345-E would likely match the current 766 klb variant of the 772LR with three auxillury tanks.

Boeing marketed a 775 klb, four-tank variant to QF which would give the 772LR adaquet performance for LHR-SYD all-year and SYD-LHR (with payloads) but a tech stop during 3-4 months of the year. Neeldess to say, QF has not placed an order and continue to "evaluate" the aircraft.

The A345E would not have sufficent range of performance to overcome the 772LR to the extent that all-season SYD-LHR would be possible, much less economical.

Finally, why do you assume Boeing can't modify the 777LR in response? If Airbus can make two product overhauls, Boeing can certainly upgrade the 777. It's a case of too little too late. If Airbus does something to give themselves an advantage, Boeing has a superior platform to begin with, which gives them a head-start in relatiating.

Time for A340 hospice care...

-----

Not including the 23 777F based on the 777LR platform.

Who is online