SA-JET
Topic Author
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 7:51 am

SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:25 pm

SAA's website has announced that from May 2007, all SAA inbound flights from JFK will be a non-stop service. This is reportedly due to the great popularity of their non-stop IAD to JNB service.

Furthermore, does anybody have some insights re SAA's wide-body purchase to be announced early next year? Both Boeing and Airbus are putting up a good fight to win the contract for 9 widebody jets. Any guesses? Could SAA sign up for the B747-800? I hope so! SAA has reported that it will not be a mixed order, but rather one company getting it all.
 
warren747sp
Posts: 981
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 7:51 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:37 pm

I am guessing that they will switch back to the 744 which they use to deploy instead of the underpowered A343?
747SP
 
AF022
Posts: 1638
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 10:41 pm

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:45 pm

I thought someone else said on a different thread that the flights couldn't operate nonstop year-round. Can anyone confirm this?

What happens to JFK-DKR nonstop? No more options? How many JFK-DKR passengers does SAA capture per week? Are they giving up too many of these passengers?
 
SA7700
Posts: 2936
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 9:38 pm

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:51 pm

Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 1):
I am guessing that they will switch back to the 744 which they use to deploy instead of the underpowered A343?

Nothing wrong with the A343E on that front - it is capable of reaching JNB non-stop from JFK.


Rgds

SA7700
When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
 
jfk777
Posts: 5866
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Mon Dec 04, 2006 10:08 pm

Never understood the stop going south, IT South African Air not African Air. SAA should buy the longest range airplanes possible. Be them A350, 787, 777LR or 748.
 
birdbrainz
Posts: 423
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 6:57 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:31 pm

Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 4):
Never understood the stop going south, IT South African Air not African Air. SAA should buy the longest range airplanes possible. Be them A350, 787, 777LR or 748.

Back in Jan 2004, I did JFK-DKR-JNB, and the JFK-DKR leg was packed. The continuing DKR-JNB leg was empty.

Having done this only once, I'm not sure if this is always true, but it looks like the loads to DKR certainly justify the stop.

That said, I hate the extra stop, but it seems to make business sense.
A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is if the aircraft can be flown again.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:34 pm

Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 4):
Never understood the stop going south

We've tried to explain it to you a hundred times.

Cargo and passenger capacity is the reason.

They now have a dedicated freighter service to JFK, hence the southbound stop is no longer necessary.

The longest range plane doesn't always yield the economics that you may need to make a route work. An A340-500 or 777-200LR could operate the route, but not at their max payload anyway, so why fly them? They get better revenue from larger planes with stops.

N
 
cactusTECH
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 12:11 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:14 am

The only problem with the A343E SAA is that it goes weight restricted out of JFK when it does the non-stop. This is not the first time they try non-stop with the 343
 
warren747sp
Posts: 981
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 7:51 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:32 am

But most passengers prefer to fly non-stop period. SAA had no problem doing the flight until they introduced the A340. Bear in mind they advertise the hell out of it claiming that it can do non-stop both ways to N. America but had to blame the advertising dept when it was found out that the equipment were unable to do so.
747SP
 
Fly2CHC
Posts: 443
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 10:35 pm

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:14 am

Really strange that SA didn't take some A345s in their A340 order. Could have done all their US stations non-stop.
 
birdbrainz
Posts: 423
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 6:57 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:02 am

Quoting Fly2CHC (Reply 9):
Really strange that SA didn't take some A345s in their A340 order. Could have done all their US stations non-stop.

They looked at it very closely. The A345 can't carry the payload necessary to make money while doing it non-stop. If they go non-stop both ways (even with a 772LR or A345), they basically wind up carrying fuel and little else.
A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is if the aircraft can be flown again.
 
TinkerBelle
Posts: 1436
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:46 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:08 am

Kinda like PAL's LAX-MNL leg with a stop in Guam. Very annoying but I guess with the 773ER's they'll be getting, non-stop won't be a problem.
If you are going through hell, keep going.
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5020
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:59 am

Don´t see any problem with 343E

The only downside, if we can call it that, is the sluggish t/o but while you´re in the air it´s the most quiet cabin there is today wich most pax prefere.

GO SAA!

Micke//  bigthumbsup 
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
SAA201
Posts: 479
Joined: Thu May 10, 2001 2:37 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:15 am

Browsing the online schedules at Amadeus.net, it seems that the JFK-JNB will revert to a one-stop flight (ie via DKR) during the months of July and August 2007.

Not sure if this is due to projected higher loads or hotter temps in New York at that time of the year or a combination of both.
 
SAA201
Posts: 479
Joined: Thu May 10, 2001 2:37 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:16 am

The JFK-JNB flights will continue to be operated by A343's.

[Edited 2006-12-04 20:30:52]
 
Leskova
Posts: 5547
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 3:39 pm

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:19 am

Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 8):
Bear in mind they advertise the hell out of it claiming that it can do non-stop both ways to N. America but had to blame the advertising dept when it was found out that the equipment were unable to do so.

Once again - repeating a myth does not make it true.

The equipment is quite capable of flying nonstop - it's the airline that decided not to. True, passengers prefer nonstop - but an airline prefers a higher yield. And at the time they made the decision, there was no competition on the route, so there was no reason not to go for the choice that maximizes yield.

There's competition now, so SAA is realigning their priorities.

... but, alas, I'm well aware that an A340 will never resemble anything even close to a 'capable aircraft' for you...  Yeah sure

Quoting Fly2CHC (Reply 9):
Really strange that SA didn't take some A345s in their A340 order. Could have done all their US stations non-stop.

No reason to order it - it would not have provided any benefit to SAA.
Smile - it confuses people!
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:19 am

Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 8):
SAA had no problem doing the flight until they introduced the A340.

The A340-600 hoists more payload on USA routes, stop or no stop, than the 744 ever did.

Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 8):
Bear in mind they advertise the hell out of it claiming that it can do non-stop both ways to N. America but had to blame the advertising dept when it was found out that the equipment were unable to do so.

That was their own fault. SAA Technical knew that the plane could not do it, but SAA sales ran to market with it ANYWAY.

N
 
AT502B
Posts: 329
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 11:17 pm

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:32 am

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 16):
The A340-600 hoists more payload on USA routes, stop or no stop, than the 744 ever did.

Interesting, Got any firm numbers or anything to back this claim?
I love the smell of jet fuel in the morning.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:34 am

Quoting AT502B (Reply 17):
Interesting, Got any firm numbers or anything to back this claim?

I do.

NS
 
AT502B
Posts: 329
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 11:17 pm

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:38 am

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 18):
I do.

I guess I'll be waiting patiently then!  scratchchin 
I love the smell of jet fuel in the morning.
 
AlitaliaMD11
Posts: 3704
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 5:19 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:51 am

Finally...

Hopefully this will mean the return of the A340-600's?
No Vueling No Party
 
AT502B
Posts: 329
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 11:17 pm

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:02 am

Quoting AlitaliaMD11 (Reply 20):
Finally...

Hopefully this will mean the return of the A340-600's?

Not sure where you mean, the A346 has been serving IAD-JNB for a while now. Is this what you are referring too?
The A343e' serve JFK and ORD (starting next year)
I love the smell of jet fuel in the morning.
 
AlitaliaMD11
Posts: 3704
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 5:19 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:08 am

Quoting AT502B (Reply 21):
Not sure where you mean, the A346 has been serving IAD-JNB for a while now. Is this what you are referring too?
The A343e' serve JFK and ORD (starting next year)

For the summer South African flew the A340-600 on the JNB-DKR-JFK. I was referring to that meaning hopefully the A340-600 might be flown on the JNB-JFK route sometime.
No Vueling No Party
 
mpdpilot
Posts: 695
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 6:44 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:14 am

someone should explain where all these statements about weight restriction is coming from. I am going to go all boeing on this one simply because airbus lacks the info. I will also Assume that JFK-JNB is 7900nm or so.

777-200LR
MTOW 766000
Actual TOW 766000

MZFW 461000
Actual ZFW 449000

747-400ER
MTOW 910000
Actual TOW 900000

MZFW 555000
Actual ZFW 480000

it would appear that the 777 operates the route much better only giving up 12000 pounds and the 747 giving up 75000. so I ask which one would be better. you are all talking about how the economics dictate the situation someone should explain how 12000 can make the difference between a non-stop and a one-stop.

one last thing here it would seem that some or all of you have funny numbers because everyones don't match. is it at all possible to go with straigh numbers and not what you think, unless ofcourse you say "I think" so we know it isn't necesarily fact.
One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:17 am

Your numbers are not specific to JNB.

NS
 
SR 103
Posts: 1618
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2000 6:19 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:24 am

Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 1):
I am guessing that they will switch back to the 744 which they use to deploy instead of the underpowered A343?



Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 8):
SAA had no problem doing the flight until they introduced the A340.



Quoting Leskova (Reply 15):
Once again - repeating a myth does not make it true.



Quoting Gigneil (Reply 16):
The A340-600 hoists more payload on USA routes, stop or no stop, than the 744 ever did.



Quoting Gigneil (Reply 16):
That was their own fault. SAA Technical knew that the plane could not do it, but SAA sales ran to market with it ANYWAY.

Guys, don't bother trying to educate Warren747sp about the 340. He has proven time and time again in numerous posts that he has his own set of ideas on what a horrible aircraft the 340 is. Just let him have his moment. Most of us know the truth anyway.

SR 103
 
AT502B
Posts: 329
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 11:17 pm

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:49 am

Quoting AlitaliaMD11 (Reply 22):
For the summer South African flew the A340-600 on the JNB-DKR-JFK. I was referring to that meaning hopefully the A340-600 might be flown on the JNB-JFK route sometime.

Gotcha. I suppose we will find out soon enough. With all the expansion SA is planning, it's going to be interesting to see how they manage the equipment they currently have. Khaya has said they are looking for 9 more wide bodies, probably A340's, he also said B748is are a small possibility -so we shall see  zzz 
I love the smell of jet fuel in the morning.
 
warren747sp
Posts: 981
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 7:51 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 10:38 am

Right SR 103
That's why the A340 is such a huge sales success!
W
747SP
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:03 pm

The A330/340 family is one of the most successful aircraft families ever.

NS
 
mpdpilot
Posts: 695
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 6:44 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:44 pm

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 24):
Your numbers are not specific to JNB.



Quoting Gigneil (Reply 28):
The A330/340 family is one of the most successful aircraft families ever.

could you explain who your are talk about when you say "your". also where are you getting these numbers that you speak of? Finally perhapps you could be more specific in you responses.
One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
 
Leskova
Posts: 5547
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 3:39 pm

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 3:59 pm

Quoting MPDPilot (Reply 29):
could you explain who your are talk about when you say "your". also where are you getting these numbers that you speak of? Finally perhapps you could be more specific in you responses.

Since you were the one supplying numbers for the flight as you were thinking it would look, I'd say it's a very safe bet that he meant you with "your"... as for the numbers themselves: JNB-JFK is not 7900nm, it's 6925nm; and the aircraft SAA was taking into consideration at the time they ordered the A340-300s or -600s was the B777-200ER, not the -200LR, so the numbers aren't representative in that regard; then, there's the problem of JNB's high altitude and high temperatures that affect the situation.

As for Gigneil's short responses, I'd guess that's in large part due to this discussion being somewhat of a déjà-vu... a rough estimate of mine is that it's at least the fourth or fifth thread on exactly the subject of SAA flying nonstop or not, and/or why they're not flying nonstop; each time, some where trying to put the blame squarely on Airbus, while the situation at the time simply was that, with the pax/payload planned, SAA ops was fully aware that there was no way the flights could be nonstop - marketing went ahead with announcing nonstops nonetheless... unfortunately, this is quite a bit of a view into how some of SAA's departments communicated with each other at the time, while they were going through CEOs at an almost higher rate than Airbus has this year...

Fact remains, one part of SAA knew, without a doubt, that the flights could not be done the way another part of SAA was saying they would be - but by the time they informed the others, the message was already out there, and SAA had egg on its face.

But the fact also remains that the A340s are doing just what Airbus had promised SAA they'd be doing, they're not underperforming, they're not (as some constantly like to claim) underpowered (though they aren't overpowered either), they're actually also very comfortable planes that, on most routes, reduced SAA's rate of customer complaints by quite an amount compared to the B747s used previously.
Smile - it confuses people!
 
SA744
Posts: 179
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 4:13 pm

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:09 pm

I know SAA claimed that they wanted to go all Airbus that might still be the call but what would be the most practical equipment to buy.
 
SAA346
Posts: 69
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 8:00 pm

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:06 pm

Damn - so will there be anything left doing JNB<>DKR with SAA?

That'll bugger up the airmiles a bit for me 

[Edited 2006-12-05 13:08:27]
 
SAA201
Posts: 479
Joined: Thu May 10, 2001 2:37 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:32 pm

Quoting SAA346 (Reply 32):
Damn - so will there be anything left doing JNB<>DKR with SAA?

On the JNB-DKR sector (from May 2007) there will be 2x daily flights (SA203 & SA207) and a 4x weekly (SA210).

On the return, ie DKR-JNB there will only be the 4x weekly flights that originate in ORD (SA211)
 
User avatar
United787
Posts: 2207
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Wed Dec 06, 2006 1:05 am

Quoting MPDPilot (Reply 29):
could you explain who your are talk about when you say "your". also where are you getting these numbers that you speak of? Finally perhapps you could be more specific in you responses.

I can. The A330/A340 program has 995 orders to date. (Note: I have excluded the A350 since I don't buy that it is part of the same program) The following aircraft programs have less:

A300/A310 - 821
L1011 - 250
DC-8 - 425
DC-10/MD-11 - 646
707 - 831
757 - 1049 (I assume the A330/A340 will surpass this number)
767 - 973 (Still in Production, Dying)

Aircraft Programs that are more successful than the A330/A340 Program:

A318/A319/A320/A321 - 4843 (Still in Production)
DC-9/MD-80/MD-90/717 - 2438
727 - 1831
737 - 6659 (Still in Production)
747 - 1469 (Still in Production)
777 - 852 (Still in Production and will likely surpass the A330/A340 Program)

Too Early to Tell:
A350
A380
B787

I would conclude that the A330/A340 program is one of the more successful aircraft programs, especially when you compare it to other widebodies.
 
mpdpilot
Posts: 695
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 6:44 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Wed Dec 06, 2006 5:24 am

Quoting Leskova (Reply 30):
Since you were the one supplying numbers for the flight as you were thinking it would look, I'd say it's a very safe bet that he meant you with "your"... as for the numbers themselves: JNB-JFK is not 7900nm, it's 6925nm; and the aircraft SAA was taking into consideration at the time they ordered the A340-300s or -600s was the B777-200ER, not the -200LR, so the numbers aren't representative in that regard; then, there's the problem of JNB's high altitude and high temperatures that affect the situation.

ok I understand that and I was just asking for clarification. also If i didn't mention it it was a hypothetical situation. 7900 was just a number I found off some website stating the distance between JFK and JNB distance measures vary considerably anyway from flight to flight based on routing so thanks for giving me a better number. I am still curious about this weight restriction talk and what it means for a flight like this. someone is this thread mentioned that the LR and 345 couldn't do the run, going by your number both aircraft could do it with a very full load so something is a miss here. one last thing regardless of how many times a thread has been talked about I still think that if your going to post you should still make an effort to be understood, I am not perfect as you can see but something being talked about a lot is not an excuse to be vague.
One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
 
User avatar
airzim
Posts: 1216
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2001 7:40 am

RE: SAA JFK To JNB Non-stop From May 2007

Wed Dec 06, 2006 6:19 am

Quoting United787 (Reply 34):
I would conclude that the A330/A340 program is one of the more successful aircraft programs, especially when you compare it to other widebodies.

Talk about lies, damn lies, and statistics. That is not a fair comparison by a long shot and you know it. You can't lump the A330/340 into one group. They are two different airplanes that are fulfilling two completely different missions. The fact that they share the same fuselage and similar cockpit doesn't make them the same airplane. In that case the 707/727/737/757 should all be in the same group.

Try breaking out the A340 from the A330 number which if memory serves is something like a 25/75 split. That will show you how 'successful' the A340 program has been. Not very.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, alski, Baidu [Spider], benjjk, Bing [Bot], BreninTW, GloomyDe, hoons90, imperialairways, jmmadrid, LamboAston, OO-VEG, planewasted, qf789, RIXrat, TC957, vhtje, wawaman, WIederling, Wingtips56, ZKLOU and 185 guests