UAEflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 1045
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:29 pm

Why No A346HGW For VS

Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:36 pm

While i was looking at the latest photo uploaded from TLS, i came across a Virgin Atlantic A340-600, i notice that it is not High Gross Weight (HGW).
Didn't Airbus stop producing the normal A340, arent they producing the HGW only?
if not why VS did not order the HGW, it is better than the original one.
Big Balloon, Bigger than the Sun & Moon, Flying High in the Sky.
 
scouseflyer
Posts: 2167
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:02 pm

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:48 pm

VSs deliveries started before the HGW was availble - their later planes being deliverd now are HGW but the early ones aren't

Don't know if you can "HGW" a pre-update plane - I suspect not
 
brendows
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:55 pm

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:33 pm

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 1):

Don't know if you can "HGW" a pre-update plane - I suspect not

Correct, that's not possible  checkmark 
 
UAEflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 1045
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:29 pm

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Fri Dec 15, 2006 11:13 pm

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 1):
Don't know if you can "HGW" a pre-update plane - I suspect not

Do you mean that a normal A346 cant be turned to HGW?
Big Balloon, Bigger than the Sun & Moon, Flying High in the Sky.
 
brendows
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:55 pm

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:51 am

Quoting UAEflyer (Reply 3):
Do you mean that a normal A346 cant be turned to HGW?

Yes, that's what Scouseflyer says. The A346HGW isn't just a simple MTOW increase on paper from the MTOW of the A346, there are structural differences between the two that prevents such a thing from being done.
 
sevenheavy
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:30 am

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:08 am

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 1):
VSs deliveries started before the HGW was availble

Correct.

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 1):
their later planes being deliverd now are HGW but the early ones aren't

None of the 17 currently delivered A346 are HGW versions. That includes the three delivered in the last couple of months, as well as G-VWEB which arrives next week.

I believe later options can be converted to HGW versions if required.

Regards
So long 701, it was nice knowing you.
 
scouseflyer
Posts: 2167
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:02 pm

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:14 am

Quoting SevenHeavy (Reply 5):
None of the 17 currently delivered A346 are HGW versions. That includes the three delivered in the last couple of months, as well as G-VWEB which arrives next week.

IIRC AB said when the HGW (or IGW as it's sometimes called) was certified that only the HGW of the A346 would be produced from then on?
 
gokmengs
Posts: 901
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 2:48 am

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:29 am

Does the HGW has considerable advantages over the stock Smile 346 if thats the case how come VS didn't choose the option even after it became available for the rest of the deliveries?
Gercekleri Tarih Yazar Tarihide Galatasaray
 
sevenheavy
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:30 am

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:34 am

As far as I remember airbus have been delivering HGW A346 for a few months but the VS aircraft are so far all identical.

I assume that airbus have been a little flexible on this.

Regards
So long 701, it was nice knowing you.
 
egnr
Posts: 408
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 8:31 am

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sat Dec 16, 2006 3:37 am

Quoting SevenHeavy (Reply 5):
I believe later options can be converted to HGW versions if required.

They will be HGW by default. The non-HGW variant is no longer offered or produced.
7late7, A3latey, Sukhoi Superlate... what's going on?
 
sevenheavy
Posts: 927
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:30 am

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sat Dec 16, 2006 3:49 am

Quoting EGNR (Reply 9):
They will be HGW by default. The non-HGW variant is no longer offered or produced.

Do you know when this came into effect?.

VS received G-VRED last month and that was non HGW. Also it seems that G-VWEB will be non HGW, and that aircraft has yet to be delivered.

Regards
So long 701, it was nice knowing you.
 
brendows
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:55 pm

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sat Dec 16, 2006 3:57 am

Quoting SevenHeavy (Reply 10):
Quoting EGNR (Reply 9):
They will be HGW by default. The non-HGW variant is no longer offered or produced.


Do you know when this came into effect?.

I believe all A340NGs produced and delivered since mid-summer have been of the HGW-version.

Quoting SevenHeavy (Reply 10):
VS received G-VRED last month and that was non HGW. Also it seems that G-VWEB will be non HGW, and that aircraft has yet to be delivered.

VS might have done the same thing with these birds as with their 744s, certifying and operating them at a lower MTOW...?
 
airbusA346
Posts: 7284
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:05 am

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sat Dec 16, 2006 6:46 am

Quoting Brendows (Reply 4):

What are the differances between the HGW and non-HGW.

Tom.
Tom Walker '086' First Officer of a A318/A319 for Air Lambert - Hours Flown: 17 hour 05 minutes (last updated 24/12/05).
 
brendows
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:55 pm

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:07 am

Quoting AirbusA346 (Reply 12):
What are the differances between the HGW and non-HGW.

A twelve ton increase in MTOW (which needs some structural reinforcements, and leads to a ~5ton higher OEW,) engines with a higher thrust rating, laser welded fuselage and a larger fuel capacity, that's some of the changes. It can carry more payload further (but burns more fuel when it's doing so) than the A340(non-HGW.)
 
UAEflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 1045
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:29 pm

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:01 pm

as i understood, that the non-HGW can be HGW, QR is the only airline that operates the A340-600HGW.

I was thinking about the 777-300ER, can a non-ER convert to ER version, i mean is there a major different between the two, i know the engine and fuel tanks but they have the same fuselage
Big Balloon, Bigger than the Sun & Moon, Flying High in the Sky.
 
airbusA346
Posts: 7284
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:05 am

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:08 pm

Quoting UAEflyer (Reply 14):

The 773ER has differant wingtips (raked) compare to the 773.

Tom.
Tom Walker '086' First Officer of a A318/A319 for Air Lambert - Hours Flown: 17 hour 05 minutes (last updated 24/12/05).
 
PADSpot
Posts: 1637
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:31 pm

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:53 am

Quoting UAEflyer (Reply 14):
QR is the only airline that operates the A340-600HGW.

Nope, LH also received HGW versions. In the end LH will have 10 non-HGW (10 delivered) and 14 HGW models (3-4 delivered, 10-11 yet to come))
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sun Dec 17, 2006 3:28 am

Quoting UAEflyer (Reply 14):
as i understood, that the non-HGW can be HGW, QR is the only airline that operates the A340-600HGW.

I was thinking about the 777-300ER, can a non-ER convert to ER version, i mean is there a major different between the two, i know the engine and fuel tanks but they have the same fuselage



Quoting AirbusA346 (Reply 15):
The 773ER has differant wingtips (raked) compare to the 773.

The 777-300ER is a massively different plane to the 777-300.

The A340-600X is different structurally to the A340-600. The structure of the A340-600X is actually lighter, there are control surface differences, and the MTOW of the plane is higher.

NS
 
airbusA346
Posts: 7284
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 7:05 am

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sun Dec 17, 2006 3:52 am

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 17):
The 777-300ER is a massively different plane to the 777-300.

Yeh, I know that I was just one thing that is differant as in looks.

Tom.
Tom Walker '086' First Officer of a A318/A319 for Air Lambert - Hours Flown: 17 hour 05 minutes (last updated 24/12/05).
 
PADSpot
Posts: 1637
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:31 pm

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sun Dec 17, 2006 4:59 am

Quoting Brendows (Reply 13):
A twelve ton increase in MTOW (which needs some structural reinforcements, and leads to a ~5ton higher OEW,)



Quoting Gigneil (Reply 17):
The structure of the A340-600X is actually lighter

How can these two statements function together?
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sun Dec 17, 2006 1:52 pm

They're not contradictory if you know the story.

The A340-600X uses a higher proportion of composites. It is lighter than if you had just bulked up the previous airframe to that MTOW linearly.

NS
 
PADSpot
Posts: 1637
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:31 pm

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Sun Dec 17, 2006 5:37 pm

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 20):

The A340-600X uses a higher proportion of composites. It is lighter than if you had just bulked up the previous airframe to that MTOW linearly.

Saying "light structure" is quite misleading here, because it IS 5 tons heavier. One could call it a more efficient structure, if you will

Standard version MTOW/OEW ratio: 368/177 = 2.08
HGW version MTOW/OEW ratio: 380/182 = 2.09

Hence the HGW is structure-wise exactly 0.49% more efficient. Not really impressing but ok ... still better than nothing.

Did you think of the mere 12t/5t ratio which is 2.4? Well, just the structural cannot fly ... you need to compare whole airplanes.

cheers,
Jan
 
jdevora
Posts: 225
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:41 am

RE: Why No A346HGW For VS

Mon Dec 18, 2006 9:49 am

Quoting UAEflyer (Thread starter):
if not why VS did not order the HGW, it is better than the original one.

From Airbus press release, looks like their latest 346 are HGW.

Quote:
Qatar Airways is the first customer to take delivery of this new higher gross weight A340-600 with first deliveries due to begin in summer 2006, followed by deliveries to Lufthansa, Virgin Atlantic and Etihad Airways.

They claim that the HGW is a 18% better than the normal 346. The problem is that they don't say better in what Sad

Quote:
Benefiting from A380 technology, reduced maintenance costs, and the latest development of Rolls-Royce Trent 500 engines, the new 380 tonne A340-600, with typical seating of 380 passengers in three-class comfort, provides up to 18% higher compared to earlier variants and travels 250 nm (463 km) further, up to 7,900 nm (14,600 km).

(enfasis added)

Quoting Brendows (Reply 13):
A twelve ton increase in MTOW (which needs some structural reinforcements, and leads to a ~5ton higher OEW,) engines with a higher thrust rating, laser welded fuselage and a larger fuel capacity, that's some of the changes. It can carry more payload further (but burns more fuel when it's doing so) than the A340(non-HGW.)

Both quotes are from Newly certified A340-600 brings 18% higher productivity

Cheers
JD

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

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

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

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

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

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

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

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos