N14AZ
Topic Author
Posts: 1963
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:19 pm

Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:46 am

I read this in BoeingVista’s contribution in the A 350 production thread (thanks for the information) and I thought it’s worth starting a separate thread.

EADS say in their latest press release published yesterday:

Quote:
Reported EBIT* includes a positive one-off due to the termination of the A340 programme of € 192 million.

Sad, but the order numbers (presented below in form of deliveries) speak a clear language.


So far I thought it’s still possible to order an Airbus A 340 but maybe they changed their minds at Airbus.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Rotate




So the last A 340 produced was actually an Airbus A 340-500 for the Government of Kuwait, correct me if I am wrong.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Yvan Panas

 
AustrianZRH
Posts: 844
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 5:55 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:50 am

Such a pity, such a beautiful aircraft  . But numbers are more important than beauty, unfortunately.
WARNING! The post above should be taken with a grain of salt! Furthermore, it may be slightly biased towards A.
 
Burkhard
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:34 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:52 am

At least finacally this is closed now. If an airline would come and want another dozen they still were free to deliver, but in all fairness this is unlikely now - the line is booked out with A330s, and the A350 EIS comes nearer.
 
scouseflyer
Posts: 2165
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:02 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:57 am

Quoting N14AZ (Thread starter):




So the last A 340 produced was actually an Airbus A 340-500 for the Government of Kuwait, correct me if I am wrong.

From the October Airbus O&D sheet:


A342 & A343 Ordered - 246 Delivered 246
A345 & A346 Ordered - 133 Delivered 129



and there's 2 still to be delivered to Private Customers and 2 of Kingfisher's A345 order still sitting on the tarmac. I wonder of the 2 private jets will still get finished or are they to be cancelled?
 
Extra300
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:04 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:19 am

This is sad, I did have a slight hope of some A346 top up orders. But that is to late now I believe. I just love the look of the 346. Long, sleek and just slightly out of proportion to keep it interesting to look at.

But let´s face it. The twin engine WB´s can do almost the same routes as a four holer these days. Airbus better focus in delivering A330s and get the A350 to the market.
 
Speedbird741
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 3:13 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:24 am

Very sad to see the end starting for my A340. Howbeit, there are still some very young 340s around that will continue to grace the skies for a few decades. A magnificent machine, the A340, and a widely underappreciated one too.

Quoting N14AZ (Thread starter):
So the last A 340 produced was actually an Airbus A 340-500 for the Government of Kuwait, correct me if I am wrong.

As far as I know, the last one to be produced was Iberia's LFS.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tomas Cologan
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alejandro Hdez Leon



Speedbird741
Boa noite Faro, Air Portugal 257 climbing flight level 340
 
alangirvan
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2000 2:13 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:30 am

How will A340s go on the second hand market? The efficiency of the A340 was quickly over taken by twin widebodies, but it is still quite a productive aircraft. A quieter interior than widebody twins. For some airlines the A340 could be acquired for a modest price. If Airbus do the Asset Management themselves, in the same way that ATR does, A340s could still have a good career ahead of them.
 
SCL767
Posts: 2812
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:25 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:12 am

Quoting alangirvan (Reply 6):
The efficiency of the A340 was quickly over taken by twin widebodies, but it is still quite a productive aircraft. A quieter interior than widebody twins.

LAN will replace its fleet of 5 A-340-313X aircraft with "quieter" B-787-9 aircraft in 2014.

CC-CQA at SYD:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui

 
qf340500
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 4:22 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:20 am

this is a VERY sad day, indeed. In my opinion the A340, in all versions but especially as the -500 and -600 is the nicest looking plane ever build so far. I love the quietness and the smooth take offs, and its sad to see them end the line... 

But nice enough, here in Asia we have a few flying around, SQ, LH, CX, chinese carriers...

SCL767, i am not sure if the 787 is quieter than the beauty A340  
 
AirbusA6
Posts: 1484
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 5:53 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:22 am

Some weird accounting, if terminating the A340 programme results in a one off GAIN of €192m! You'd have thought that they would have budgeted for higher sales of more A345/6s, and that the early termination would result in writing off some costs on the programme, and a loss?
it's the bus to stansted (now renamed National Express a6 to ruin my username)
 
shankly
Posts: 1194
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2000 10:42 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:32 am

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 9):
You'd have thought that they would have budgeted for higher sales of more A345/6s, and that the early termination would result in writing off some costs on the programme, and a loss?


The A330/A340 is in effect one programme....huge amounts of commonality between the two aircraft....in fact more than say the 742 and 747SP. Indeed it was the A330 that was the slow starter and now look at that thing....Airbus can't help but keep getting orders for it. Accordingly, in the round, no loss to show

Until the A380 showed up, it was the A346 that really pushed the game on in terms of cabin comfort and quietness, making the 777 (which I very much admire) sound like a bag of spanners in the cruise. Luckily have enjoyed some great and long rides on both QR's and SA's wonderful A346 fleets and still have hope of bagging an EK A345 ride before they finally go
L1011 - P F M
 
beakerltn
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 8:18 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:37 am

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 9):
Some weird accounting, if terminating the A340 programme results in a one off GAIN of €192m!

If you're no longer paying all the production support costs for plane you're no longer making, fairly easy to show a gain. Sad for everyone involved though.
300/319/320/321/330/732/733/734/73G/738/744/772/77W/146/EMB135/EMB145
 
Flyglobal
Posts: 336
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:25 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:39 am

I understand the decision from an economical standpoint, even since the A330 catch ed up so much in range and can replace the A340 on previously A340 needing routes.

For an airliner (not necessary seat arrangement) passenger experience the A340-600 is the most comfortable after the A380 and I will continue to enjoy flying it.

Yet of course I have to fly the new 787 and the 747-8i as most of us to make an assessment. I will tell you then of course.
My chance may be will be on LHs 747-8i first before the 787.
regards

Flyglobal
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1670
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:30 am

A340-500's & A340-600's are great pieces of hardware, the A340-600 still has the wow, that's flaming big factor for me, its an impressive piece of engineering, a great looking aircraft and quiet up in Y   huge amounts of take off power with a great RR sound woof! Much more impressive than a 77W close up but the bean counters win and its off into history for the big bus. Its really sad to see that the end of the line for 4 holers apart from the niche VLA segment.

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 7):
LAN will replace its fleet of 5 A-340-313X aircraft with "quieter" B-787-9 aircraft in 2014.

I can't see a twin being able to do routes from South America or South Africa to Australia.. Ever. VA tried it and ETOPS made it something like 3 hours longer. So this will be a problem for Qantas and SAA / LA in the future (assuming that QF international has a future but that's for a different thread).
BV
 
dennys
Posts: 656
Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 11:19 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:11 pm

The A340 is my fafourite looking bird since 1991 . I do love for holers . Should she have flown 2 years earlier 1990 , she would have been sold at least twice more than the quantity number produced. Therefore we have to "thank" ironically the delays taken for each A340 type first flight .

Then i should point the fact that some A340s were used on midium hauls on which they had no reasons to be flown ( CAI PAR - KWI ROM CDG - BRU NBO - etc ... Very surprising for an ULH aircraft . Not to mention the A345 use on sectors such as DXB ZRH instead of DXB LAX ( the reason why they were bought for) .
Even on a DXB OSA , I do not see why this aircraft is operating such sectors .

I cannot understand why the the A345 had neverbeen pushed up to fly non stop sectors such as EU - SYD or CDG PPT .....

I think from 2000 Airbus focused on the A388 kicking out the A345/A346 programm from their priority .
Airbus seems to have not considered the "danger" of the 773ER . Therefore it is quite understandable for Airbus to have delayed the A345 and A346 for more than one year !

Right on our days the end of the A340 is obvious , the twins (A333 772 773) C
can fly distances for 13 hours or more .... So why still using this "aging Four Holer"?

To conclude on a positive view, i say many thanks to RJA , SIA , DLH ,SAA AEROLINEAS. IBERIA ... ETHIAD And i forget some of them flying this beauty on sectors on which a Common twin would not cover the distances
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4921
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:30 pm

Airbus is still publicly offering the A340 in -300, -500, and -600 forms on their website. Seems to me they will have to pull those pages soon.

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 13):
I can't see a twin being able to do routes from South America or South Africa to Australia.. Ever. VA tried it and ETOPS made it something like 3 hours longer.

ETOPS 330 will take care of this. LAN is counting on it -- they are expecting the 787-9 to take over 343 missions.
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1670
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:38 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 15):
ETOPS 330 will take care of this. LAN is counting on it -- they are expecting the 787-9 to take over 343 missions.

ETOPS 330.. Would you be happy flying on a single engine for 5 1/2 hours over land let alone over an ocean, over the antarctic? I wouldn't if we keep pushing ETOPS up eventually someone is going to get their feet wet.
BV
 
kaitak
Posts: 8937
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:38 pm

Quoting dennys (Reply 14):
The A340 is my fafourite looking bird since 1991 . I do love for holers . Should she have flown 2 years earlier 1990 , she would have been sold at least twice more than the quantity number produced. Therefore we have to "thank" ironically the delays taken for each A340 type first flight .

Mine too! I've always thought ther TG A345s were the most perfect union of aircraft and livery!

She might have got a few more orders had she been in service earlier, but ultimately, the victim there would have been the MD11. The 777 would ultimately have still won.

Quoting dennys (Reply 14):
I cannot understand why the the A345 had neverbeen pushed up to fly non stop sectors such as EU - SYD or CDG PPT .....

It was considered by Air Tahiti, but there just wasn't the traffic to justify a nonstop. On the other hand, SQ still operates the world's longest sectors with the A345. EK flew a lot of long haul flights too, mostly DXB-Oz, but they've now been relegated to secondary routes.
 
na
Posts: 9129
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:43 pm

Very sad day, but the lack of orders in the last years made this expectable. Seems Airbus saw no chance to improve it further, enough to attract new orders. As a passenger and as an aesthete I still prefer the A340 over the 777 any day! But its the beancounter, not the passenger or the aesthete who decides what plane to buy.
 
corernagh14
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 9:14 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:47 pm

No surprise with this confirmation.

Iberia MSN1122 was last aircraft built and delivered in July 2010.

The accounting transaction recognises the kingfisher etc cancellations and commercial outcomes from deposits etc . Therefore positive income effect. All the substantive A340 NRC already recovered by airbus , in my view.

For those unfamiliar with the Airbus O&D spreadsheet and process if you look at the detail (say in October 2011) you will see 2 a/c still on order for Kingfisher - I expect this to drop away shortly. That leaves two private a/c on order etc. - they have being doing the rounds with the 2008 built MSN886 / MSN 894 for Sonair then Air Zimbabwe etc. the bottom line is that there are still two finished A340 500 in Toulouse (for 3.5 years) awaiting a customer / delivery.

Those of us within the industry expected this termination circa 135 a/c after the Farnborough airshow in July 2006 and the cancellation of the 18 A340 600 aircraft by emirates at that time...see www.fortfield.com

Hope this helps - by the way the accounting detail appears on pages 12 &14 of the EADS Q3.2011 results yesterday.
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3786
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:47 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 13):
A340-500's & A340-600's are great pieces of hardware, the A340-600 still has the wow, that's flaming big factor for me, its an impressive piece of engineering, a great looking aircraft and quiet up in Y huge amounts of take off power with a great RR sound woof!

To me the A340-500 is the best looking bird so far. All dimensions have the proportions, everything is so elegant and balanced to see.   Too bad no new ones will be build any time soon.  
 
Burkhard
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:34 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:55 pm

Quoting corernagh14 (Reply 19):
the bottom line is that there are still two finished A340 500 in Toulouse (for 3.5 years) awaiting a customer / delivery.

Too much of a pity Merkel Air just got the two A343 - these A345 would really do well and not be much more expensive.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13252
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:10 pm

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 9):
Some weird accounting, if terminating the A340 programme results in a one off GAIN of €192m! You'd have thought that they would have budgeted for higher sales of more A345/6s, and that the early termination would result in writing off some costs on the programme, and a loss?



Not really, because...

Quoting shankly (Reply 10):
The A330/A340 is in effect one programme....huge amounts of commonality between the two aircraft....



Not forgetting, of course, that the A340 is built on the same production line as the A330. So in this one instance, there are none of the normal costs associated with physically shutting down a production line, only the positive benefits of not supporting the A340 on that same line any longer. Obviously, when Airbus shuts down A330 production in (hopefully) many years' time, then you'll see the real cost of a production line shutdown.

Quoting BeakerLTN (Reply 11):
If you're no longer paying all the production support costs for plane you're no longer making, fairly easy to show a gain. Sad for everyone involved though.



Yes, but usually there's the cost of physically shutting sown the line, disposing of all the production equipment, cleaning the site, potentially knocking down the building, etc. Those things all normally result in a not insubstantial one-off cost. In this case, because the production line is continuing to pump out A330s, it's a small positive.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
AAplat4life
Posts: 254
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 11:14 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:11 pm

Obviously, most airlines think that the 777 is much better than the A340. The 777 is also a very comfortable plane. Both the 777 and the 340 have comparative advantages and disadvantages in terms of comfort. The market has been clear for years now that the A340 was not going to make the inroads necessary to survive. Also, the fact that Airbus is taking a €192 million ($260 million) charge for terminating the A340 program (or what it calls a "positive one-off") shows that from an accounting perspective it is not a single program with the highly successful A330. I'm sure that the few airlines that use the A346 instead of the 773ER will continue to fly them until they get replacement aircraft. However, it has been clear that any new material orders were not going to happen for some time now. Hence, the A350 program.
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1670
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:16 pm

Quoting AAplat4life (Reply 23):
The 777 is also a very comfortable plane

Haha, nope! Air is too dry and its noisy. 10 Across is just plain unpleasent. But it makes money.
BV
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9254
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:40 pm

I also love the A340-500 and agree that it is one of the best looking commercial airliners ever.

But what I love about all A340s (and 767s) is the seat config. 2-4-2 is best in my opinion. It's excellent when you're travelling as a couple or as a small family.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6670
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:42 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 16):
ETOPS 330.. Would you be happy flying on a single engine for 5 1/2 hours over land let alone over an ocean, over the antarctic? I wouldn't if we keep pushing ETOPS up eventually someone is going to get their feet wet.

What is the alternative, the A380 or the 747-8i, can we tell carriers presently using A340 / 747 capacity airlines for those routes that must either abandon the route, operate the route with multiple stops or greatly increase capacity to an A380 or 747-8i?
Neither OEM has announced lower capacity new 4 holers in their visions of the future, so whats happens to A340's and 747-400's?
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4921
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:56 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 16):
Would you be happy flying on a single engine for 5 1/2 hours over land let alone over an ocean, over the antarctic?

If the aircraft has been certified for it, absolutely.

My opinion might be different if there had ever, in the entire history of jet aircraft, been two independent engine failures at altitude on the same overwater flight.

We've had this debate many times before, and it's always statistics and experience on one side and nebulous, unsupported emotion on the other.
 
Extra300
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:04 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:59 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 26):
What is the alternative, the A380 or the 747-8i, can we tell carriers presently using A340 / 747 capacity airlines for those routes that must either abandon the route, operate the route with multiple stops or greatly increase capacity to an A380 or 747-8i?
Neither OEM has announced lower capacity new 4 holers in their visions of the future, so whats happens to A340's and 747-400's?

There is a lot of A340s and 744 out there and some of them will stay in commercial service for another decade, or even two decades. By then de 777NG and A350 are well established. The twins will in the future get even more reliable and get longer legs.

I hate to say it, but there´s really no market for ´twin aisle, singel decker´ 4 holers. Or better said, the market is to small for Airbus (or Boeing for that matter) to keep developing this type of aircraft.
 
airbazar
Posts: 6809
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:00 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 13):
I can't see a twin being able to do routes from South America or South Africa to Australia.. Ever. VA tried it and ETOPS made it something like 3 hours longer. So this will be a problem for Qantas and SAA / LA in the future (assuming that QF international has a future but that's for a different thread).

SCL-AKL/SYD is nothing like AUS-JNB.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 15):
ETOPS 330 will take care of this. LAN is counting on it -- they are expecting the 787-9 to take over 343 missions.

Even without ETOPS 330 it's not that big of a detour. Something like 6% longer IIRC, which will probably still be cheaper to operate than the current A340.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:10 pm

Quoting corernagh14 (Reply 19):
the way the accounting detail appears on pages 12 &14 of the EADS Q3.2011 results yesterday.

Hope the popcorn/peanuts expert "surfaces" with his fag packet handy to tell us what this actually means.
 
Burkhard
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:34 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:11 pm

Just a side remark, if the A340 program is really closed Airbus will have to pay back the outstanding RLI on the A340s. This will require some cash, that Airbus has, but lowers the debth too, so it may be that it is better to book this this years with a rather healthy profit to save taxes.
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:17 pm

Quoting AAplat4life (Reply 23):
Obviously, most airlines think that the 777 is much better than the A340. The 777 is also a very comfortable plane.

In terms of economics, yes. But the A340- 500/-600 are much more advanced and sophisticated then the 777.
The A340 has about 275km of wiring and is one of the most complex plane on earth.

And for me the A340 is and always will be in comfort, quitness and beauty miles ahead compared to the 777.

Really sad day.         
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13252
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:19 pm

Quoting AAplat4life (Reply 23):
Also, the fact that Airbus is taking a %u20AC192 million ($260 million) charge for terminating the A340 program (or what it calls a "positive one-off") shows that from an accounting perspective it is not a single program with the highly successful A330.

  

For a start, they're not taking a charge - they're making a positive contribution to profit. It's the money they're saving by not building A340s any more.

From an accounting perspective, they have to show that money in the books somehow. How else do you suggest they record it?
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:26 pm

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 9):
Some weird accounting, if terminating the A340 programme results in a one off GAIN of €192m!

In addition to the comments about the A330/340 being treated like one program, it also depends where the production end happens relative to the accounting period. If they'd already booked costs that they now won't incurr because production is ending that could show up as a gain (since they won't now incurr those costs) even if the A330 wasn't in the mix.

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 9):
You'd have thought that they would have budgeted for higher sales of more A345/6s, and that the early termination would result in writing off some costs on the programme, and a loss?

Program accounting uses an accounting quantity that is typically the amount that the company is reasonably assured will be sold...it typically lags actual orders by a little bit. As a result, if the actual orders are a little higher than the accounting quantity (the normal state) then they'll actually be spreading the costs across *more* airframes than they budgeted. This is why program accounting quantities are constantly being updated from year to year for airframes that are in production.

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 13):
I can't see a twin being able to do routes from South America or South Africa to Australia..

As several others have said, that's the whole reason for ETOPS 330. On this map the range rings are ETOPS180 and ETOPS330 (at 777 speeds). As you can see, 330 provides far more than adequate coverage for South Africa-Australia or South America-Australia:
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?DU=nm&EU=...V=410&P=SYD-JNB,+SCL-SYD&E=180,330

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 16):
ETOPS 330.. Would you be happy flying on a single engine for 5 1/2 hours over land let alone over an ocean, over the antarctic?

Me. I've done it several times.

Tom.
 
tom355uk
Posts: 168
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 11:34 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:31 pm

I'm just waiting for the first thread on a.net asking:

'Why don't Airbus re-open the A340 line, there would be lots of orders!'

:D

Seriously, a sad but inevitable day. At least with the death of the 340, the recent birth of the 350 opens up a new chapter.
on Twitter @tombeckett2285
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:50 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 16):
Would you be happy flying on a single engine for 5 1/2 hours over land let alone over an ocean, over the antarctic?
Quoting seabosdca (Reply 27):
If the aircraft has been certified for it, absolutely.
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 34):
Me. I've done it several times.

Thats maybe true for you, but nonsense as the majority of all passengers which don't know ETOPS or don't care about planes would be scared and worried to fly on a single engine for 5 1/2 hours over the antarctic.

People are scared even when the problem on the plane is nothing life-threatening.

[Edited 2011-11-10 06:52:12]
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13761
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:52 pm

Quoting N14AZ (Thread starter):
So far I thought it’s still possible to order an Airbus A 340 but maybe they changed their minds at Airbus.

CFO Ring confirms it:

Quote:

Airbus financial director Hans Peter Ring said the company had decided to abandon production of the A340, admitting: "We have accepted reality. We have not sold any A340s for nearly two years."

Ref: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...472cd6f1998e33ce774e5ad456d70f.431

Seems the "no sale for 2 years" metric is widely used. IIRC that's when the A300 and B757 were killed off too.
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:54 pm

Quoting Autothrust (Reply 36):
nonsense as the majority of all passengers which don't know ETOPS or don't care about planes would be scared and worried to fly on a single engine for 5 1/2 hours over the antarctic.

They're only going to know as much as the crew tells them. On a modern twin an engine-out is nearly invisible to the passengers. As a flight crew, wouldn't you just tell them you have to divert for mechanical reasons and leave it at that?

Tom.
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:02 pm

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 38):
On a modern twin an engine-out is nearly invisible to the

But its audible even more on the 777 with the powerful and noisy GE-90.
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
PC12Fan
Posts: 1973
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:50 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:09 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 16):
I wouldn't if we keep pushing ETOPS up eventually someone is going to get their feet wet.

It's a matter of time, yes. But I severely doubt a twin will go down on what ETOPS is based on. I.E. AF447 or even MS990. Those two factors would bring down a three and four holer.

But in regards to the A340 line, I had no idea that it had slowed down so much. Gotta say for a Boeing fan, the A340-500 is my favorite Airbus.

[Edited 2011-11-10 07:12:48]
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4921
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:13 pm

Quoting Autothrust (Reply 32):
But the A340- 500/-600 are much more advanced and sophisticated then the 777.
The A340 has about 275km of wiring and is one of the most complex plane on earth.

   The 777 was developed after the A340 and is every bit as "advanced and sophisticated." The -500 and -600 are not that different from other A340s: they just have new engines, a wing root extension, a stretch, and a lot of structural beefing up to handle all the extra weight.
 
A388
Posts: 7159
Joined: Mon May 21, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:15 pm

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 7):
LAN will replace its fleet of 5 A-340-313X aircraft with "quieter" B-787-9 aircraft in 2014.

I think alangirvan means that the A340 is the quietest aircraft among current twin engined aircraft. The 787-9 still needs to prove itself (even though we all know it will most likely be much quieter with the emphasis on "most likely"). In the same way the A330 is much quieter that the 767 but it is a newer aircraft.

I have flown the A343 of TP in the late '90s and at take-off I didn't even notice we were already in the air, that is how quiet the aircraft was. I flew the 77W back in August/September and it was fairly noisy to my surprise so the A343 to me is also much quieter compared to the 767 and 777 (which I have flown too) but this is just a personal opinion.

A388
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1670
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:32 pm

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 34):

As several others have said, that's the whole reason for ETOPS 330.

Several have said and I've heard them, but I'm still not doing southern oceans on a twin; won't have to consider it for many years anyway.

Just because we clever humans can do something doesn't mean we should, I'm probably clearly in a minority but I don't think that ETOPS 330 is a good idea. I work in security and risk and eventually with risk all the really small numbers add up to something not so small and when you go over the numbers again with a different set of assumptions (or real life statistics) you may get surprising results.

Quoting Autothrust (Reply 36):
Thats maybe true for you, but nonsense as the majority of all passengers which don't know ETOPS or don't care about planes would be scared and worried to fly on a single engine for 5 1/2 hours over the antarctic.

Its not a case of being scared of it, just risk adverse. Having said that I did once ride a Motorcycle across Cambodia.

[Edited 2011-11-10 08:21:09]
BV
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:41 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 41):
The 777 was developed after the A340 and is every bit as "advanced and sophisticated."

Wrong, The A340(500/600) has a higher percentage of CFRP then the 777, has more integrated avionics, A340 were made using laserwelding, are more complex, feature a sophisticated turbulence damping system, a centre of gravity management system, Cabin Intercommunication Data System, higher humidity, electric rudder vs mechanically on 777,

Advanced composites have been used for the empennage (complete tail unit) structure, moving surfaces, empennage and wing trailing edges, all fairings and floor panels. Superplastic foaming and diffusion bonding have been used on the inspection hatches, the tailcone cap, the slat mechanism cams and parts of the canopy.

Maybe you want take a look here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/36507600/Airbus-A340-Technical-Differences
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4921
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:56 pm

Quoting Autothrust (Reply 44):
Wrong, The A340(500/600) has a higher percentage of CFRP then the 777, has more integrated avionics, A340 were made using laserwelding, are more complex, feature a sophisticated turbulence damping system, a centre of gravity management system, Cabin Intercommunication Data System, higher humidity, electric rudder vs mechanically on 777

The non-structural differences listed between -300 and -500/-600 in that presentation are still relatively minor, and amount to changes necessary to make the aircraft operate safely and comfortably at its larger size.

The 777 also has most of the features you listed, save the electric rudder. The two aircraft are in the same generation, developed only a few years apart (777 later, both for the original and the update), and feature roughly the same level of technical sophistication. Without that level of sophistication, Boeing would not have been able to make the 777 carry more payload than an A340 with lighter empty weight, a difference that is particularly striking with respect to the A340-500/-600.
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:17 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 45):
The 777 also has most of the features you listed,

" Most" Nice try, tell me which features the 777 has listed above.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 45):
and feature roughly the same level of technical sophistication

Again Wrong, the 777 has about 170km of wiring, while the A340 has about 275km of wiring. The huge amount of wiring isn't for fun there.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 45):
Boeing would not have been able to make the 777 carry more payload than an A340 with lighter empty weight, a difference that is particularly striking with respect to the A340-500/-600.

Nonsense, the sophistication has less to do with the lighter empty weight from the 777. But 4 engine design vs 2 might contribute to that.  Yeah sure

[Edited 2011-11-10 08:24:26]
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
mountain
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2004 5:44 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:18 pm

Call me old school. I just like the perceived security of 4 engine planes. I know the statistics prove otherwise. Those large wide body twins just look out of proportion to me. (777,330, etc.)
 
modesto2
Posts: 2669
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2000 3:44 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:31 pm

As an aviation enthusiast, it's sad to see the demise of any aircraft. However, the orders book speaks volumes about the viability (or lack thereof) of the A340. The A330, 777, and 787 will carry commercial aviation into the near future.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4921
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Termination Of The A 340 Programme

Thu Nov 10, 2011 5:08 pm

Quoting Autothrust (Reply 46):
" Most" Nice try, tell me which features the 777 has listed above.

The 777 has an automatic gust suppression system, its FMC performs similar functions to the A340's with respect to CoG, controls that are functionally equivalent to the Airbus CIDS, the same humidity as the A340, a composite rudder, and a composite cabin floor (that has been causing Boeing grief on the 777 BCF concept).

Quoting Autothrust (Reply 46):
the 777 has about 170km of wiring, while the A340 has about 275km of wiring

In other words (taking your numbers as correct), the A340 has substantial excess weight due to unnecessary wiring.

Quoting Autothrust (Reply 46):
the sophistication has less to do with the lighter empty weight from the 777.

If technical sophistication doesn't help airlines fly passengers more economically, then it's not much use. The 777 has proven a more economical and capable aircraft for most missions, hot and high excepted, than the A340. The lighter empty weight is the single biggest reason for that -- if the A340-600 were as light as a 777, it would compare very favorably, four engines notwithstanding.

[Edited 2011-11-10 09:11:11]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, aflyingkiwi, Baidu [Spider], Channex757, CHCalfonzo, ettyus, kaitak, kaitak744, LA704, Mumrik, PanzerPowner, sandromederle, shamrock350 and 187 guests