SAA Leasing A350

evanb · Thu Oct 31, 2019 7:34 pm

jfk777 wrote:
Whatever problems SAA has some of their ultra long haul routes have to be dogs, is flying nonstop with either an A350 or A340-600 to JFK profitable ? Highly doubtful. Many SAA routes are flown for political reasons for the South African Government.

Which ones are those? While it's a nice soundbite that SAA fly routes for political reasons, and certainly has been the case with a handful of routes in the past (e.g. PEK), it's hard to accept that many of their current routes are flown for political purposes. I think it's necessary to distinguish between political interference in the business strategy versus the use of SAA as a mechanism for corruption. The latter is what's killed SAA.

chiki · Thu Oct 31, 2019 8:05 pm

https://twitter.com/NgwenyasHouse/statu ... 52197?s=19

Sent from my SM-J415F using Tapatalk

9MMPD · Thu Oct 31, 2019 9:14 pm

There’s now many photos of the livery online and by the looks of it it seems the titles on the right (which starts after Door 1L) are more forward than the left (which start after the 4th window). Is that some sort of mistake?

trees · Thu Oct 31, 2019 9:18 pm

9MMPD wrote:
There’s now many photos of the livery online and by the looks of it it seems the titles on the left (which starts after Door 1L) are more forward than the right (which start after the 4th window). Is that some sort of mistake?

They are decals (not paint). Suspect they did not want to go over doors 2L/R so they positioned the space between the words “South” and “African” there which causes the misalignment

9MMPD · Thu Oct 31, 2019 9:22 pm

trees wrote:
9MMPD wrote:
There’s now many photos of the livery online and by the looks of it it seems the titles on the left (which starts after Door 1L) are more forward than the right (which start after the 4th window). Is that some sort of mistake?

They are decals (not paint). Suspect they did not want to go over doors 2L/R so they positioned the space between the words “South” and “African” there which causes the misalignment

Makes perfect sense. Well spotted

jfk777 · Thu Oct 31, 2019 9:28 pm

juliuswong wrote:
If using these A350 still can't help to improve SAA's financial standing, only God can help them....

Its time to call Bishop Desmond Toto and start praying because SAA needs all the divine intervention God can deliver.

KingOrGod · Fri Nov 01, 2019 7:34 am

B777LRF wrote:
juliuswong wrote:
If using these A350 still can't help to improve SAA's financial standing, only God can help them....

They could operate aircraft given to them for free, burning fuel given to them for free, and they'd still be just as incompetent today as they were yesterday.

PS
"God" doesn't exist. The only thing that might help SAA is complete decoupling from the SA government and a foreign investor who would replace every single executive, manager, supervisor and team leader. Whether they fly this, that or the other aircraft is utterly irrelevant. Heck, a decent management team offering a decent product at decent prices, could spin money operating a fleet of Il-96s!

Seems a reply to your post has been deleted, defending SAA some more.

However, I agree with you. They would make a loss with all the handouts in the world. Just read this article:

https://m.fin24.com/Budget/mboweni-a-wh ... l-20191031

The entire ship is rotten. Time to sink it.

rbavfan · Fri Nov 01, 2019 8:36 am

x1234 wrote:
If they want to save more fuel they should get more A350's or A332's. Their A332 can actually make JNB-HKG as DL used to operate the A332 to the limit with DTW-PEK (similar distance).

DTW is 646 ft. above sea level.
HKG is 53 ft. sea level.
JNB is 5558 ft altitude and also hotter.
So similar distance is not similar fuel, PL & range and can't be flown the same.

UA947 · Fri Nov 01, 2019 11:58 am

jfk777 wrote:
Its time to call Bishop Desmond Toto and start praying because SAA needs all the divine intervention God can deliver.

It's Bishop Desmond Tutu.

SR380 · Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:02 pm

So SAA is getting 4 A350s:

MSN 226 Hainan B 304z. Currently in Singapore in full SAA colours now ZS-SDC.
MSN 345 Hainan B 305a. Currently in Singapore being painted in SAA colours. Will be ZS-SDD
MSN 354 Air Mauritius ntu. Awaiting paint and delivery TLS. Will be ZS-SDE
MSN 365 Air Mauritius ntu. Final Assembly TLS. Will be ZS-SDF.

What will be the cabin configuration? Are MSN 226 & 345 fitted with Hainan cabin product, while MSN 354 & 365 are fitted with Air Mauritius'ones?

A388 · Fri Nov 01, 2019 3:47 pm

SR380 wrote:
What will be the cabin configuration? Are MSN 226 & 345 fitted with Hainan cabin product, while MSN 354 & 365 are fitted with Air Mauritius'ones?

It would indeed not surprise me if SA takes those A350's cabins as is. I don't think they have the money to change the interiors. Someone with more knowledge of this, please correct me on this.

A388

Flying Belgian · Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:01 pm

How long will those leasing be ?

Is it the same seats they use on their newer A330-300E ?

So will it be two ex-Hainan and two "not taken" Air Mauritius birds ?

Thx ;-)

Williamsb747 · Fri Nov 01, 2019 5:03 pm

https://onemileatatime.com/saa-airbus-a350/

Regarding seating configuration.
Also lease will be for 3 years.

Williams

aemoreira1981 · Fri Nov 01, 2019 11:22 pm

Williamsb747 wrote:
https://onemileatatime.com/saa-airbus-a350/

Regarding seating configuration.
Also lease will be for 3 years.

Williams

Unclear is if the lease is now with LATAM or Delta Air Lines. Were those two frames part of the 4-aircraft sale of A359s when DL bought the LATAM stake? I presume that ALC owns the other two.

Williamsb747 · Sat Nov 02, 2019 8:00 am

aemoreira1981 wrote:
Williamsb747 wrote:
https://onemileatatime.com/saa-airbus-a350/

Regarding seating configuration.
Also lease will be for 3 years.

Williams

Unclear is if the lease is now with LATAM or Delta Air Lines. Were those two frames part of the 4-aircraft sale of A359s when DL bought the LATAM stake? I presume that ALC owns the other two.

Unrelated, LATAM never took those leases. It was passed on to Hainan and now SAA. Therefore not leased or owned by delta nor Latam.

Williams.

Opaque · Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:23 am

chunhimlai wrote:
Should JNB build a new terminal for SA expansion?

No, they should build a new terminal for Emirates, Qatar, Turkish, Ethiopian, etc expansion. SAA is not expanding. It is a shrinking airline.

jfk777 · Sat Nov 02, 2019 12:04 pm

evanb wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
Whatever problems SAA has some of their ultra long haul routes have to be dogs, is flying nonstop with either an A350 or A340-600 to JFK profitable ? Highly doubtful. Many SAA routes are flown for political reasons for the South African Government.

Which ones are those? While it's a nice soundbite that SAA fly routes for political reasons, and certainly has been the case with a handful of routes in the past (e.g. PEK), it's hard to accept that many of their current routes are flown for political purposes. I think it's necessary to distinguish between political interference in the business strategy versus the use of SAA as a mechanism for corruption. The latter is what's killed SAA.

SAA has been politically interfered with its entire existence, if JFK is so important to SAA fly it with an A330-200 one-stop. SAA doesn't have enough Business Class seats to make the route profitable. SAA should park all their A340's and fly only A330 on their intercontinental routes. Long before the A340 were ordered SAA had 777 ordered in the mid 1990's, how thing could have been different if they had gone the Boeing route. Hopefully these first 4 A350 will be the first of 15 to 20 modernizing the SAA fleet.

DominoxX · Sat Nov 02, 2019 12:09 pm

jfk777 wrote:
evanb wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
Whatever problems SAA has some of their ultra long haul routes have to be dogs, is flying nonstop with either an A350 or A340-600 to JFK profitable ? Highly doubtful. Many SAA routes are flown for political reasons for the South African Government.

Which ones are those? While it's a nice soundbite that SAA fly routes for political reasons, and certainly has been the case with a handful of routes in the past (e.g. PEK), it's hard to accept that many of their current routes are flown for political purposes. I think it's necessary to distinguish between political interference in the business strategy versus the use of SAA as a mechanism for corruption. The latter is what's killed SAA.

SAA has been politically interfered with its entire existence, if JFK is so important to SAA fly it with an A330-200 one-stop. SAA doesn't have enough Business Class seats to make the route profitable. SAA should park all their A340's and fly only A330 on their intercontinental routes. Long before the A340 were ordered SAA had 777 ordered in the mid 1990's, how thing could have been different if they had gone the Boeing route. Hopefully these first 4 A350 will be the first of 15 to 20 modernizing the SAA fleet.

B777 fanboy ...

trees · Sat Nov 02, 2019 4:15 pm

jfk777 wrote:
evanb wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
Whatever problems SAA has some of their ultra long haul routes have to be dogs, is flying nonstop with either an A350 or A340-600 to JFK profitable ? Highly doubtful. Many SAA routes are flown for political reasons for the South African Government.

Which ones are those? While it's a nice soundbite that SAA fly routes for political reasons, and certainly has been the case with a handful of routes in the past (e.g. PEK), it's hard to accept that many of their current routes are flown for political purposes. I think it's necessary to distinguish between political interference in the business strategy versus the use of SAA as a mechanism for corruption. The latter is what's killed SAA.

SAA has been politically interfered with its entire existence, if JFK is so important to SAA fly it with an A330-200 one-stop. SAA doesn't have enough Business Class seats to make the route profitable. SAA should park all their A340's and fly only A330 on their intercontinental routes. Long before the A340 were ordered SAA had 777 ordered in the mid 1990's, how thing could have been different if they had gone the Boeing route. Hopefully these first 4 A350 will be the first of 15 to 20 modernizing the SAA fleet.

SAA’s route network is no longer politically driven.
JFK makes money direct. Not one-stop.

Breathe · Sat Nov 02, 2019 4:26 pm

SR380 wrote:
So SAA is getting 4 A350s:

MSN 226 Hainan B 304z. Currently in Singapore in full SAA colours now ZS-SDC.
MSN 345 Hainan B 305a. Currently in Singapore being painted in SAA colours. Will be ZS-SDD
MSN 354 Air Mauritius ntu. Awaiting paint and delivery TLS. Will be ZS-SDE
MSN 365 Air Mauritius ntu. Final Assembly TLS. Will be ZS-SDF.

What will be the cabin configuration? Are MSN 226 & 345 fitted with Hainan cabin product, while MSN 354 & 365 are fitted with Air Mauritius'ones?

I thought Air Mauritius were leasing the planes for 3 years rather than ntu the planes or are they "technically" ntu?

A388 · Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:10 pm

So when will SA start scheduled flights with these A350's and on which routes will they be used? I remember reading New York being one of their A350 routes? Which other routes will they use them on initially?

A388

peterinlisbon · Sat Nov 02, 2019 10:17 pm

Etihad has been flying its new A350s straight to Bordeux for storage. It could be that they decided to lease them out until they are ready to use them.

ikolkyo · Sat Nov 02, 2019 10:24 pm

peterinlisbon wrote:
Etihad has been flying its new A350s straight to Bordeux for storage. It could be that they decided to lease them out until they are ready to use them.

The Etihad aircraft are A350-1000s, not -900s. Also the Etihad aircraft don’t have interiors and are currently stored as empty shells. They aren’t going anywhere.

zkojq · Sat Nov 02, 2019 10:27 pm

KingOrGod wrote:
. Just read this article:

https://m.fin24.com/Budget/mboweni-a-wh ... l-20191031

The entire ship is rotten. Time to sink it.

Yikes!

jfk777 wrote:
evanb wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
Whatever problems SAA has some of their ultra long haul routes have to be dogs, is flying nonstop with either an A350 or A340-600 to JFK profitable ? Highly doubtful. Many SAA routes are flown for political reasons for the South African Government.

Which ones are those? While it's a nice soundbite that SAA fly routes for political reasons, and certainly has been the case with a handful of routes in the past (e.g. PEK), it's hard to accept that many of their current routes are flown for political purposes. I think it's necessary to distinguish between political interference in the business strategy versus the use of SAA as a mechanism for corruption. The latter is what's killed SAA.

SAA has been politically interfered with its entire existence, if JFK is so important to SAA fly it with an A330-200 one-stop. SAA doesn't have enough Business Class seats to make the route profitable. SAA should park all their A340's and fly only A330 on their intercontinental routes. Long before the A340 were ordered SAA had 777 ordered in the mid 1990's, how thing could have been different if they had gone the Boeing route. Hopefully these first 4 A350 will be the first of 15 to 20 modernizing the SAA fleet.

SAA could never make money due to all the political interference, but everything would be fine and rosy if only they had bought my favourite plane 20 years ago! :roll:

Mate, you should probably pick one argument and stick with it.

jfk777 · Sat Nov 02, 2019 10:40 pm

zkojq wrote:
KingOrGod wrote:
. Just read this article:

https://m.fin24.com/Budget/mboweni-a-wh ... l-20191031

The entire ship is rotten. Time to sink it.

Yikes!

jfk777 wrote:
evanb wrote:

Which ones are those? While it's a nice soundbite that SAA fly routes for political reasons, and certainly has been the case with a handful of routes in the past (e.g. PEK), it's hard to accept that many of their current routes are flown for political purposes. I think it's necessary to distinguish between political interference in the business strategy versus the use of SAA as a mechanism for corruption. The latter is what's killed SAA.

SAA has been politically interfered with its entire existence, if JFK is so important to SAA fly it with an A330-200 one-stop. SAA doesn't have enough Business Class seats to make the route profitable. SAA should park all their A340's and fly only A330 on their intercontinental routes. Long before the A340 were ordered SAA had 777 ordered in the mid 1990's, how thing could have been different if they had gone the Boeing route. Hopefully these first 4 A350 will be the first of 15 to 20 modernizing the SAA fleet.

SAA could never make money due to all the political interference, but everything would be fine and rosy if only they had bought my favourite plane 20 years ago!

Mate, you should probably pick one argument and stick with it.

Things at SAA probably would still be very red financially if they ordered 777 instead of A340's, but would they be as red ? Look at how many airline ordered A340 and then went to the 777, Air Canada and Singapore Airlines oh and Cathay Pacific too.

N14AZ · Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:56 am

zkojq wrote:
KingOrGod wrote:
. Just read this article:

https://m.fin24.com/Budget/mboweni-a-wh ... l-20191031

The entire ship is rotten. Time to sink it.

Yikes!

Wow! An entire engine has been stolen?!?!? And the thefts even affected a BA-plane?!? Just wow...

Let’s hope they will stop this as soon possible so that their new A350s will not be affected (... and yes, I just added this last sentence to avoid the impression that this is o/t :blush:

...)

enzo011 · Sun Nov 03, 2019 5:57 am

jfk777 wrote:
SAA has been politically interfered with its entire existence, if JFK is so important to SAA fly it with an A330-200 one-stop. SAA doesn't have enough Business Class seats to make the route profitable. SAA should park all their A340's and fly only A330 on their intercontinental routes. Long before the A340 were ordered SAA had 777 ordered in the mid 1990's, how thing could have been different if they had gone the Boeing route. Hopefully these first 4 A350 will be the first of 15 to 20 modernizing the SAA fleet.

Can you expand on this thinking? Why would ordering the 777 in the mid-90's have been better for SAA when interference and not facing up to the challenges they faced during that time would not have changed? Why would having the 777-200 or 777-300 in the fleet have made the decisions around the airline different? Would having the 777 in the fleet have made the decision to appoint Dudu Myeni any less disastrous at the airline?

Also, can you say why having the 777 in the fleet would have been better for the airline than the A330/A340 for performance out of JNB? What payload advantages would the 777 offer SAA in the early 2000's that it didn't have with the Airbus fleet?

enzo011 · Sun Nov 03, 2019 6:00 am

N14AZ wrote:
Wow! An entire engine has been stolen?!?!? And the thefts even affected a BA-plane?!? Just wow...

Let’s hope they will stop this as soon possible so that their new A350s will not be affected (... and yes, I just added this last sentence to avoid the impression that this is o/t ...)

The saying a fish rots from the head seems apt here.

seat64k · Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:05 pm

jfk777 wrote:
Things at SAA probably would still be very red financially if they ordered 777 instead of A340's, but would they be as red ? Look at how many airline ordered A340 and then went to the 777, Air Canada and Singapore Airlines oh and Cathay Pacific too.

Which of those airlines are based at 5,558ft? Because that really changes the game.

KingOrGod · Sun Nov 03, 2019 10:27 pm

seat64k wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
Things at SAA probably would still be very red financially if they ordered 777 instead of A340's, but would they be as red ? Look at how many airline ordered A340 and then went to the 777, Air Canada and Singapore Airlines oh and Cathay Pacific too.

Which of those airlines are based at 5,558ft? Because that really changes the game.

The 777 couldn't even do a demo flight :old:

SAA execs got a free taxi round JNB in a 777 that day. It did not inspire confidence.

Superboi · Sun Nov 03, 2019 10:45 pm

KingOrGod wrote:
seat64k wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
Things at SAA probably would still be very red financially if they ordered 777 instead of A340's, but would they be as red ? Look at how many airline ordered A340 and then went to the 777, Air Canada and Singapore Airlines oh and Cathay Pacific too.

Which of those airlines are based at 5,558ft? Because that really changes the game.

The 777 couldn't even do a demo flight SAA execs got a free taxi round JNB in a 777 that day. It did not inspire confidence.

People seem to forget the B777 of when SAA got the A340s are not the as same machine of today

KingOrGod · Sun Nov 03, 2019 10:57 pm

Superboi wrote:
KingOrGod wrote:
seat64k wrote:

Which of those airlines are based at 5,558ft? Because that really changes the game.

The 777 couldn't even do a demo flight SAA execs got a free taxi round JNB in a 777 that day. It did not inspire confidence.

People seem to forget the B777 of when SAA got the A340s are not the as same machine of today

I am aware that 90's ERA 772 isn't a modern day 777, just as I am aware that the DL 77L has been known to hit tyre limitation speed out of JNB...

I don't believe that a 77W or 77L would suit SAA currently. It simply isn't the plane for SAA.

Superboi · Sun Nov 03, 2019 11:02 pm

KingOrGod wrote:
Superboi wrote:
KingOrGod wrote:

The 777 couldn't even do a demo flight SAA execs got a free taxi round JNB in a 777 that day. It did not inspire confidence.

People seem to forget the B777 of when SAA got the A340s are not the as same machine of today

I am aware that 90's ERA 772 isn't a modern day 777, just as I am aware that the DL 77L has been known to hit tyre limitation speed out of JNB...

I don't believe that a 77W or 77L would suit SAA currently. It simply isn't the plane for SAA.

I Agree too

CRJ900 · Sun Nov 03, 2019 11:12 pm

Kudos to SAA for trying out the A359 for three years - either it works or it doesn't.

339 seats is pretty decent - if SAA can fly 339 passengers JNB-JFK non-stop using the A359, then the A359 is a very capable bird!

zkojq · Mon Nov 04, 2019 1:22 am

jfk777 wrote:
zkojq wrote:
KingOrGod wrote:
. Just read this article:

https://m.fin24.com/Budget/mboweni-a-wh ... l-20191031

The entire ship is rotten. Time to sink it.

Yikes!

jfk777 wrote:

SAA has been politically interfered with its entire existence, if JFK is so important to SAA fly it with an A330-200 one-stop. SAA doesn't have enough Business Class seats to make the route profitable. SAA should park all their A340's and fly only A330 on their intercontinental routes. Long before the A340 were ordered SAA had 777 ordered in the mid 1990's, how thing could have been different if they had gone the Boeing route. Hopefully these first 4 A350 will be the first of 15 to 20 modernizing the SAA fleet.

SAA could never make money due to all the political interference, but everything would be fine and rosy if only they had bought my favourite plane 20 years ago!

Mate, you should probably pick one argument and stick with it.

Things at SAA probably would still be very red financially if they ordered 777 instead of A340's, but would they be as red ? Look at how many airline ordered A340 and then went to the 777, Air Canada and Singapore Airlines oh and Cathay Pacific too.

As has been discussed numerous times, including in this thread, SAA is one of the carriers that need the Hot & High performance that the A340 offers. To that end, one could probably argue that they are also one of the few airlines that could benefit from the 777x's massive wing. But a 77E or 773 for routes to JFK/HKG? :lol:

DylanHarvey · Mon Nov 04, 2019 2:00 am

Superboi wrote:
KingOrGod wrote:
seat64k wrote:

Which of those airlines are based at 5,558ft? Because that really changes the game.

The 777 couldn't even do a demo flight SAA execs got a free taxi round JNB in a 777 that day. It did not inspire confidence.

People seem to forget the B777 of when SAA got the A340s are not the as same machine of today

SAA need a 15+ hour aircraft, that can also do stuff like lift MTOW from JNB like the A346 can at 30 degrees and 5500ft AMSL. DL have specially equipped tires on the 77L so the tire speed limits aren't as harsh.

juliuswong · Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:45 am

KingOrGod wrote:
seat64k wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
Things at SAA probably would still be very red financially if they ordered 777 instead of A340's, but would they be as red ? Look at how many airline ordered A340 and then went to the 777, Air Canada and Singapore Airlines oh and Cathay Pacific too.

Which of those airlines are based at 5,558ft? Because that really changes the game.

The 777 couldn't even do a demo flight SAA execs got a free taxi round JNB in a 777 that day. It did not inspire confidence.

I believe Boeing sent one of DL B772ER down for demo. One of its engines failed during demo flight, not really convincing when one is to do product demo to potential customers. This is of course pre-dated B77W and B77L era. The issue was rectified later DL and CX are sending their B77L and B77W nowadays, but the ship sailed long ago for SA.

Superboi · Mon Nov 04, 2019 8:45 am

DylanHarvey wrote:
Superboi wrote:
KingOrGod wrote:

The 777 couldn't even do a demo flight SAA execs got a free taxi round JNB in a 777 that day. It did not inspire confidence.

People seem to forget the B777 of when SAA got the A340s are not the as same machine of today

SAA need a 15+ hour aircraft, that can also do stuff like lift MTOW from JNB like the A346 can at 30 degrees and 5500ft AMSL. DL have specially equipped tires on the 77L so the tire speed limits aren't as harsh.

You are just affirming what my statement is pointing to.

seat64k · Mon Nov 04, 2019 4:58 pm

zkojq wrote:
But a 77E or 773 for routes to JFK/HKG?

For interest, Cathay sends a 777W (not sure of weight limitations) to JNB. It's 2-class with the old business (recliner). CPT gets the A359 in a 3-class layout.

VRHNM · Mon Nov 04, 2019 5:57 pm

seat64k wrote:
zkojq wrote:
But a 77E or 773 for routes to JFK/HKG?

For interest, Cathay sends a 777W (not sure of weight limitations) to JNB. It's 2-class with the old business (recliner). CPT gets the A359 in a 3-class layout.

Just for clarification:

CX sends their 3 class 777-300ER to JNB, which seats 340 or 368 passengers (9 across vs 10 across). All 777-300ERs have lie flat beds.
Only the 777-300A (Non-ER) are in 2 class configurations. They are used in the regional network within Asia only and have the regional business class (recliners).

seat64k · Mon Nov 04, 2019 7:08 pm

VRHNM wrote:
Just for clarification:

CX sends their 3 class 777-300ER to JNB, which seats 340 or 368 passengers (9 across vs 10 across). All 777-300ERs have lie flat beds.

I guess you're right. When I search for a flight it does offer Premium Economy. I didn't notice that, but the 777-300ER link goes to this page, which shows a 2-class layout. I guess it defaults to the first option in the drop menu, since the rest are 3- and 4-class layouts

https://www.cathaypacific.com/cx/en_HK/ ... l?brand=CX

KingOrGod · Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:05 am

VRHNM wrote:
seat64k wrote:
zkojq wrote:
But a 77E or 773 for routes to JFK/HKG?

For interest, Cathay sends a 777W (not sure of weight limitations) to JNB. It's 2-class with the old business (recliner). CPT gets the A359 in a 3-class layout.

Just for clarification:

CX sends their 3 class 777-300ER to JNB, which seats 340 or 368 passengers (9 across vs 10 across). All 777-300ERs have lie flat beds.
Only the 777-300A (Non-ER) are in 2 class configurations. They are used in the regional network within Asia only and have the regional business class (recliners).

If I am not mistaken, the 73Z on CX website is a 77W. And it's a 2 class machine.

Williamsb747 · Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:19 am

KingOrGod wrote:
VRHNM wrote:
seat64k wrote:

For interest, Cathay sends a 777W (not sure of weight limitations) to JNB. It's 2-class with the old business (recliner). CPT gets the A359 in a 3-class layout.

Just for clarification:

CX sends their 3 class 777-300ER to JNB, which seats 340 or 368 passengers (9 across vs 10 across). All 777-300ERs have lie flat beds.
Only the 777-300A (Non-ER) are in 2 class configurations. They are used in the regional network within Asia only and have the regional business class (recliners).

If I am not mistaken, the 73Z on CX website is a 77W. And it's a 2 class machine.

3 class high density, 368 seater, 10 across economy is sent to JNB with reverse herringbone seats. CPT gets 3 weekly NW A359.

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/ai ... hannesburg

Williams

Williamsb747 · Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:24 am

MSN 245 is heading to JNB flight number HU3050 Reg B-305A. On FR24 right now. SAA second a359.

Williams

Stickpusher · Tue Nov 05, 2019 9:23 am

UA947 wrote:
jfk777 wrote:
Its time to call Bishop Desmond Toto and start praying because SAA needs all the divine intervention God can deliver.

It's Bishop Desmond Tutu.

It's all so confusing.

PM · Sun Nov 10, 2019 11:45 am

Breathe wrote:
SR380 wrote:
So SAA is getting 4 A350s:

MSN 226 Hainan B 304z. Currently in Singapore in full SAA colours now ZS-SDC.
MSN 345 Hainan B 305a. Currently in Singapore being painted in SAA colours. Will be ZS-SDD
MSN 354 Air Mauritius ntu. Awaiting paint and delivery TLS. Will be ZS-SDE
MSN 365 Air Mauritius ntu. Final Assembly TLS. Will be ZS-SDF.

What will be the cabin configuration? Are MSN 226 & 345 fitted with Hainan cabin product, while MSN 354 & 365 are fitted with Air Mauritius'ones?

I thought Air Mauritius were leasing the planes for 3 years rather than ntu the planes or are they "technically" ntu?

MSN 354 was delivered on 30th October ... to Air Mauritius but apparently registered ZS-SDE. See the October Airbus O&D spreadsheet.

flymad · Sun Nov 10, 2019 12:25 pm

(Apologies - my quote function will not work!)

Things at SAA probably would still be very red financially if they ordered 777 instead of A340's, but would they be as red ? Look at how many airline ordered A340 and then went to the 777, Air Canada and Singapore Airlines oh and Cathay Pacific too.

Things would be exactly the same, there just would have been more to line their pockets with.

PM · Sun Nov 10, 2019 2:50 pm

flymad wrote:
(Apologies - my quote function will not work!)

Things at SAA probably would still be very red financially if they ordered 777 instead of A340's, but would they be as red ? Look at how many airline ordered A340 and then went to the 777, Air Canada and Singapore Airlines oh and Cathay Pacific too.

Things would be exactly the same, there just would have been more to line their pockets with.

(My quote function does work!)

As has been noted above (and countless times elsewhere), Singapore and Hong Kong are at sea level and most major Canadian airports are at no great altitude but JNB is 1.7Km (that's 5,700 ft., or well over a mile, above sea level). Madrid is the highest capital in Europe. There's a reason Iberia went for the A340-600 too.

seat64k · Sun Nov 10, 2019 5:23 pm

PM wrote:
Madrid is the highest capital in Europe. There's a reason Iberia went for the A340-600 too.

And MAD is only 610m. JNB is 1680m - a full km higher.

RainerBoeing777 · Sun Nov 10, 2019 11:01 pm

seat64k wrote:
PM wrote:
Madrid is the highest capital in Europe. There's a reason Iberia went for the A340-600 too.

And MAD is only 610m. JNB is 1680m - a full km higher.

Iberia bought the A346 for its hot and high missions in Latin America such as MEX, BOG, UIO, SCL, SJO, among others.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net