User avatar
American 767
Topic Author
Posts: 3923
Joined: Wed May 19, 1999 7:27 am

Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:43 am

What do you think? I think the A340-500 would suit South African Airways in the long haul sector. They are going in the long run towards an all Airbus fleet and they already have the A340-600 which is their new flagship. The A340-500 has a slight less capacity but has a greater range.

The advantages of the A340-500 are the following:
1. No ETOPS restrictions (That is the reason why they decided not to buy Boeing 777's).
2. Commonality with the 600, that would save costs in flight crew and MX crew training. Exact same flightdeck and a lot of common spare parts. Of course all amenities found in the PAX Business and Coach cabins of the 600 would also be found in the 500.
3. As stated, it has a very long range. Range isn't the only factor to consider when choosing a new aircraft but SAA would need it if they want to expand on long intercontinental routes. The A380 is also considered but it would suit only the LHR-JNB and LHR-CPT routes because those are the ones that are the most profitable for SAA. The A340-500 would be good for SAA on other routes where load factor isn't as high as it is on the LHR-JNB and LHR-CPT routes but distance to cover nonstop is very long.
4. Good climb performance. That's quite an important factor to consider for aircraft flying out of JNB. SAA's home base, JNB, has a high elevation above ground level, over 5000ft MSL I would say.
5. Considering all aircraft SAA purchased from Airbus already, SAA could negociate a good deal with Airbus.

I'm convinced the A340-500 suits South African Airways. It would look terrific in SAA's current livery.

Ben Soriano
Brussels Belgium

Ben Soriano
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:49 am

No ETOPS restrictions

...yet



That is the reason why they decided not to buy Boeing 777's

Actually, it wasnt... as expressed by the airline when they ordered their 777s.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 1:55 am

The A380 fans have argued in numerous threads that the LHR-JNB/CPT routes are perfect candidates for the Big Birds. Seems your suggestion runs against the current trends in conventional wisdom. My thought is that SA should holds its powder for now, fully assimilate and work with what its already got and see what's going to develop.
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
ZSSNC
Posts: 413
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 6:33 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 2:09 am

The A380 is also considered but it would suit only the LHR-JNB and LHR-CPT routes because those are the ones that are the most profitable for SAA.

Sorry, but this statement is wrong. I am just mentioning this, because on airliners.net a lot of people make claims about airline route statistics without having ever seen them (same applies, btw, to aircraft performance statistics!). I find this a bit sad as first of all airline performance statistics don't belong in public forums and if something wrong is posted it is misleading the public.

ZSSNC
Airbus A340-600 - the longest temptation in the sky
 
andz
Posts: 7624
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 2:13 am

As expressed by the airline when they ordered which 777s????
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
 
JoFMO
Posts: 1840
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 1:55 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 2:17 am

I agree with you American767,

SAA should buy the A380 for all their London routes and maybe also FRA and the A345 for all their American routes to make them permanent non-stop.

But as Leelaw pointed out, it could be a little bit of overkill for SAA with so many new planes, maybe they should at first keep what they have and consolidate a little bit.

But it would be awesome to see the bigbus in SAA`s livery.

Btw. Does anybody know how old their 747 are?
 
swissgabe
Posts: 5147
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2000 4:57 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 2:19 am

Good point Andz. Maybe he tried to say "... when they ordered their 343 or 346" ...
Smooth as silk - Royal Orchid Service /// Suid-Afrikaanse Lugdiens - Springbok
 
andz
Posts: 7624
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 2:23 am

First 744 was delivered on 20 January 1991, there was a good party in hangar 8!

After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
 
BCAInfoSys
Posts: 2617
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 11:09 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 2:26 am

JoFMO - Here's the delivery (hand-over) dates for SAA's 744s:

ZS-SAV: 01/19/91
ZS-SAZ: 11/30/98
ZS-SAK: 06/30/98
ZS-SAY: 10/05/93
ZS-SAX: 10/27/92
ZS-SAW: 06/28/91
*ZS-SBS: 12/30/98
*ZS-SBK: 12/30/98

* = ZS-SBS & ZS-SBK were originally for PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, but were cancelled in Sept '98. SAA eventually took these two.

Note: some of these had their engines modified/upgraded circa 2000.

EDIT: All of their 743s have been parked. There are also 2 747

[Edited 2004-08-17 19:31:25]
Militant Agnostic - I don't know and you don't either.
 
JoFMO
Posts: 1840
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 1:55 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 2:30 am

So SAA is in a similar situation as NZ was with their 744. Replacing them or refurbishing them.
I am not familiar with the premium seats in their 744, but eco is not in the same league the new 346 is in.

So SAA should look if its cheaper to bring their 744 standard-wise to their 346 or if its cheaper in the long run to replace them now with brandnew 380 and also take advantage of their additional seats especially on their LHR-routes.
 
SafetyDude
Posts: 3654
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2001 10:02 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 2:35 am

No ETOPS restrictions
Check out the ETOPS restrictions on 777s. The 777 can practically fly anywhere.

(That is the reason why they decided not to buy Boeing 777's)
SAA was never looking at the 777. Swissair had orders the 346, and following their bankruptcy, the orders were dropped and SAA picked them up. This was described as a "management SNAFU" because they made their decision too quickly and the 346 - or any plane available at that time - would not have been able to perform fully on the key South Africa-ATL/JFK route, which is why the management at SAA is getting turned out.

The A380 is also considered but it would suit only the LHR-JNB and LHR-CPT routes because those are the ones that are the most profitable for SAA.
I do not know what the profitability is, but I do know that the LHR-South Africa flights are full to capacity and they want to get more slots, but cannot. The 380 would greatly help SAA on that route, but I am not sure about other routes.

The advantages of the 345 (over what?  Big grin) were listed, but that does not mean that an airline will have a need for the 345. Unless SAA wants to compete on the DXB routes, or even Australia or South America, I do not see the 345 joining SAA's fleet - and if SAA did want to compete on those routes, the 345 would be too small in capacity.

 Smile
-Will
"She Flew For What We Stand For"
 
SA7700
Posts: 2940
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 9:38 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:02 am

JoFMO

So SAA is in a similar situation as NZ was with their 744. Replacing them or refurbishing them. I am not familiar with the premium seats in their 744, but eco is not in the same league the new 346 is in.

I'm sorry but I could not disagree with you more. SAA's A346 economy seating is not comfortable at all, in fact it can be sheer torture. I've flown on the 744's to the States and back and did not experience any of the discomfort I experienced from JNB-CPT on the A346.

Just my opinion.

Rgds

SA7700


When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
 
andz
Posts: 7624
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:10 am

SA7700 you're dead right, the 346 is awful in economy, the only plane I've been on where the exit row and bulkhead seats are actually less comfortable than the main seating!
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:32 am

SAA was never looking at the 777. Swissair had orders the 346, and following their bankruptcy, the orders were dropped and SAA picked them up. This was described as a "management SNAFU" because they made their decision too quickly and the 346 - or any plane available at that time - would not have been able to perform fully on the key South Africa-ATL/JFK route, which is why the management at SAA is getting turned out.

None of these statements are true.

SAA was looking at the 777 intently.

The A340-600 was never, ever intended to fly nonstop year round on any of the routes, and everyone there knew that except certain sales executives, who are being turned out.

The A340-600 is exceeding SA's requirements on these routes in terms of uplift and fuel burn. They couldn't be happier with the planes if they had been free.

N
 
SafetyDude
Posts: 3654
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2001 10:02 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:40 am

SAA was looking at the 777 intently.
Barely, but my point remains that they jumped when they heard that the Swissair 346 order was dropped.

The A340-600 was never, ever intended to fly nonstop year round on any of the routes, and everyone there knew that except certain sales executives, who are being turned out.
Management knew that, but what they ended up getting was less than what they thought they would (at no fault to Airbus).

The A340-600 is exceeding SA's requirements on these routes in terms of uplift and fuel burn. They couldn't be happier with the planes if they had been free.
Actually, SAA is not happy that they have limited service to JFK and ATL and that they still have to make a fuel stop.

 Smile
-Will
"She Flew For What We Stand For"
 
Scorpio
Posts: 4766
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:43 am

SafetyDude,

Barely, but my point remains that they jumped when they heard that the Swissair 346 order was dropped.

Actually, I seem to remember SAA having at some time signed an MoU for the 777, which didn't materlialize (for financial reasons at the time, I think?). This was a few years before the A340 order was placed.

Actually, SAA is not happy that they have limited service to JFK and ATL and that they still have to make a fuel stop.

Source?
 
andz
Posts: 7624
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:46 am

This goes back to the time when Coleman Andrews was in charge and he got shot of all the A300s and A320s and replaced them with 738s, the 777 was definitely on the cards then, but after he bled the airline dry and left, the pendulum swung back Airbus' way.
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
 
SafetyDude
Posts: 3654
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2001 10:02 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:49 am

Actually, I seem to remember SAA having at some time signed an MoU for the 777, which didn't materlialize (for financial reasons at the time, I think?). This was a few years before the A340 order was placed.
I never heard about this. If you have information, I would be interested in reading it. (I am serious, and am not being a smart-alec.)

Actually, SAA is not happy that they have limited service to JFK and ATL and that they still have to make a fuel stop.

Source?

Numerous topics here, media reports, and information from SAA workers.

 Smile
-Will
"She Flew For What We Stand For"
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 3:55 am

Management knew that, but what they ended up getting was less than what they thought they would (at no fault to Airbus).

That's not true. What they got is actually better than they projected.

Actually, SAA is not happy that they have limited service to JFK and ATL and that they still have to make a fuel stop.

Also not true. SAA is enjoying the fact that the plane goes out with its maximum structural payload and the dollar revenue associated with that, and prefer that to a nonstop service. Even if the plane had 500nm more range, they'd still stop so they could take max payload.


Source?
Numerous topics here, media reports, and information from SAA workers.


Numerous topics here is not a valid source, since most of them are at best misinformed and at worst blatant lies.

I don't know what SAA workers you may know, but unless they're management in SA Technical or Operations, they're probably mistaken.

N
 
SafetyDude
Posts: 3654
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2001 10:02 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:00 am

That's not true. What they got is actually better than they projected.
Also not true. SAA is enjoying the fact that the plane goes out with its maximum structural payload and the dollar revenue associated with that, and prefer that to a nonstop service. Even if the plane had 500nm more range, they'd still stop so they could take max payload.

Sure, whatever you say.  Insane

Numerous topics here is not a valid source, since most of them are at best misinformed and at worst blatant lies.
There were numerous topics that consisted of SAA workers, and those aside, there were quite a few articles from respected media establishments.

-Will
"She Flew For What We Stand For"
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:05 am

Sure, whatever you say.

Glad you agree.


There were numerous topics that consisted of SAA workers, and those aside, there were quite a few articles from respected media establishments.


I read a good number of those too, and found none of them to cite credible information.

N
 
whitehatter
Posts: 5180
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 6:52 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:06 am

This has been done to death.

SAA is loading on extra cargo, which makes them money. That is why the fuel stop is being made.

Repeating the same old tired story about underperformance doesn't make it true. The 'problem' here is with SAA Cargo who are selling space in the hold at a nice premium, which offsets any stop costs.

Arguably a 777 solution might have worked out better, but the A346 is doing its job and more in that it is hauling heavier loads than anticipated. And making SAA money.

Rumours and scuttlebut are worth precisely nothing. It's dollars and rands in the bank that matter, and the 346 is performing on that front.
Lead me not into temptation, I can find my own way there...
 
andz
Posts: 7624
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:07 am

I think criticising the SAA employees who venture an opinion is a bit rich considering the wild speculation that goes on in this forum every day.
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
 
RT514
Posts: 399
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 2:11 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:13 am

I read a good number of those too, and found none of them to cite credible information.

I second that.

The "SAA despises their A346's" threads have become legendary in these parts. Come to think of it, if a.net chatter were always true, there wouldn't be a single satisfied operator of the A346.

 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:13 am

I think criticising the SAA employees who venture an opinion is a bit rich considering the wild speculation that goes on in this forum every day.

I was referring to the media articles.

Every SA employee I have spoken with, even here, has agreed with my statements.

I have further opinions from management in SA Operations, so no matter what is said here, I believe those first.

N
 
Scorpio
Posts: 4766
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:18 am

I never heard about this. If you have information, I would be interested in reading it.

Did a little search, and came up with this:

http://www.highbeam.com/library/doc0.asp?docid=1G1:17555268&refid=ink_looksmt_news&skeyword=south+african+airways&teaser=...SEATTLE+Nov.+3+/PRNewswire/

Announcement dates back to 1995, for 4 777s and 3 options.
 
SafetyDude
Posts: 3654
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2001 10:02 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:29 am

The "SAA despises their A346's" threads have become legendary in these parts. Come to think of it, if a.net chatter were always true, there wouldn't be a single satisfied operator of the A346.
The threads that I read were nothing to that extent.

You can believe what you want to believe and I will believe what I want to. Please stop arguing with me.

Scorpio: Thanks for the article.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

-Will
"She Flew For What We Stand For"
 
warren747sp
Posts: 979
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 7:51 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:37 am

I feel sorry for the sales executives who got fired at SAA for believing in other Sales Executives from Airbus on range and weight., etc.
It is so convenient to get rid of your problem or explaining underperformance by defining it using the firing method.
747SP
 
SA7700
Posts: 2940
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 9:38 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 4:54 am

Andz

I know this is totally of-topic and I do apologise to the other users as well. I'm booking my JNB/JFK/JNB tickets within the next few days. Towards JFK, I can get the "infamous" 76D.

However back to JNB, 76D has already been booked. As I understand from some previous postings by yourself, the bulkhead and emergency exit seats can be extremely uncomfortable, due to the airbag.

Any suggestions please? Seats 46D or G does not seem that bad?? Would seat 75D's armrest be movable, that would ensure some leg leverage to the left...

Rgds

SA7700
When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:01 am

I feel sorry for the sales executives who got fired at SAA for believing in other Sales Executives from Airbus on range and weight., etc.
It is so convenient to get rid of your problem or explaining underperformance by defining it using the firing method.


Stop posting this crap. Its baseless, and as I've said before, you're intentionally trying to mislead the conversation.

Sales execs at SAA got fired for offering a product that SA Technics said would never happen.

It happens at every company, sales offers more than engineering can deliver, but usually engineering is the one that gets in trouble. In this case, the sales management got fired, which is as it should be.

Nobody in SA Operations ever believed operating the route nonstop year round was feasible or desirable, and Airbus never told them it was. Any contrary post on your part is a fabrication.

N
 
Scorpio
Posts: 4766
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:07 am

Stop posting this crap. Its baseless, and as I've said before, you're intentionally trying to mislead the conversation.

Who? Warren747sp? Nah! He'd never dare to do such a thing  Laugh out loud
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:10 am

As expressed by the airline when they ordered which 777s????

Maybe he tried to say "... when they ordered their 343 or 346"

SAA was never looking at the 777.

Never ceases to amuse me how quick some are to contradict that which they know so little thereof...




Announcement dates back to 1995, for 4 777s and 3 options.

...or, could just take Sean's approach and just see how long (if ever) it takes for someone to employ corroborative fact  Big grin
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
andz
Posts: 7624
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:21 am

An "order" that doesn't result in a delivery means nothing so I stand by what I said....which 777s? "their 777s" implies they own them, which they don't.
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
 
Leskova
Posts: 5547
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 3:39 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:32 am

SAA did look at the 777 - even at the time that the A340-600s were ordered, the B777 was a serious contender... it was fully evaluated by SAA, but SAA decided that the overall package being offered by Airbus was better.

The fact that the ex-Swissair-ordered A340-600s were, in part (if I recall correctly) already sitting idle at Toulouse obviously helped Airbus offer a good deal, because they had planes built but no customer for them: the fact that SAA wanted more or less the same configuration as SR had ordered didn't hurt either - according to SAA, only minor modifications were necessary.

And yes, SAA is happy with the A340-600, and yes, they knew full well that they weren't going to get year-round nonstops to the US, and yes, Gigneil is absolutely right in saying that SAA prefers to be able to pack the plane with cargo to being able to fly it nonstop between South Africa and the US: which, just to get back to the actual topic of this thread, is the main reason I see for them not opting for the A340-500, or at least not for the US routes... it would get them there nonstop, but it wouldn't be able to carry as much freight (at least by volume) and thus is not really a preferrable option.

Regards,
Frank
Smile - it confuses people!
 
warren747sp
Posts: 979
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 7:51 am

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 10:30 am

@Scorpio
All the materials I read while flying SAA are all crap dreamed up by their sales!
I think we should only read materials approved by tech next time.
747SP
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:40 pm

And... back to the topic.

I think SA could make a go of the A345, to offer more point to point services in Europe - they served 22 cities in Europe at one point IIRC, and now its down to 6 or 7. There are definitely markets there for a smaller aircraft point to point eg ATH, LIS, AMS, MAN, FCO, bypassing hubs. Same with Asia/Australasia - I'm sure there are markets like KUL, BKK, NRT/KIX, AKL, BNE that could be served nicely with an A345 nonstop.

In North America, could an A345 operate nonstop unrestricted JNB-ORD or JNB-LAX ? JNB-YYZ ? These would seem to me to be routes worth exploring.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
andz
Posts: 7624
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 9:06 pm

SA7700

Sorry I missed your post! As I recall the bulkhead and AC/HK emergency exit row seats have the airbag, however I have heard that DEFG on the exit row do not (can't say I noticed myself). The exit row is not that wide, probably equivalent to one row of seats missing but it does give much more legroom than the normal rows, although you'll probably find people using it as a passage and tripping over your legs all night.
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
 
SA7700
Posts: 2940
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 9:38 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Wed Aug 18, 2004 10:55 pm

Andz

Thanks for the feedback. I think it's time to get moving to my agent.

Rgds

SA7700
When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
 
Hirnie
Posts: 465
Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 7:13 pm

RE: Should SAA Order The A340-500?

Thu Aug 19, 2004 8:24 am

JGPH1A,
as for the routes to Europe the 340-200/300 have enough range and capacity to open such new routes.

For some long and thin routes to North America or Australia the 340-500 might be a good choice. But as some people already posted SAA should not order to many new planes.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: KentB27 and 10 guests