jbs2886
Posts: 2181
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 1:16 am

tommy1808 wrote:
Boeing over-delivered on the 77W


So Boeing should have not sold aircraft that were in high demand in order to maximize the long-term value of used aircraft...that Boeing wouldn't sell except in a few circumstances?
 
User avatar
SCFlyer
Posts: 328
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 11:14 pm

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 4:20 am

"4 Engines 4 Long Haul" morphing into "2 Engines To Long Haul" considering the A345/A346 has largely been a commercial failure for the most part, imo.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 11258
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 4:56 am

jbs2886 wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
Boeing over-delivered on the 77W


So Boeing should have not sold aircraft that were in high demand in order to maximize the long-term value of used aircraft...that Boeing wouldn't sell except in a few circumstances?


? The 77W was in high jemand because Boeing overdelivered on spec. Airbus at the same time missed its mark. Badly.

The specs lunch decisions where made on have been fairly competitive.

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
JohnAudiR18
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2018 5:37 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 5:29 am

Would the A340's do any good with cargo carriers? or does the same issue regarding fuel costs hamper the aircraft?
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4047
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 5:42 am

KFTG wrote:
What is the "correct" age for an A340 prior to it being scrapped?

If an airline can still afford the Maintenance checks due to keep it airworthy? Then at 20 years it might be tine to think of retirement, at 25 years? retirement should be again revisited,
 
User avatar
Spacepope
Posts: 4412
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 1999 11:10 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 6:01 am

JohnAudiR18 wrote:
Would the A340's do any good with cargo carriers? or does the same issue regarding fuel costs hamper the aircraft?

You gotta get someone to bite on the STC, and with the engine issues, nobody is ever going to pull the trigger.
The last of the famous international playboys
 
juliuswong
Moderator
Posts: 1861
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 3:22 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 6:19 am

The B77F is selling well as freighter. Don't think anyone would want to spend a bomb converting ex-pax A340 to carry cargo. Unless the value proposition is good enough. Four engines to maintain vs two engines. Money talks.
- Life is a journey, travel it well -
 
APYu
Posts: 487
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:23 pm

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 12:17 pm

readytotaxi wrote:
I don''t understand how this works so if someone can explain pls.
Does not the airline control which staff members go on which courses, why need volunteers?


It’s common practice to ask for volounteers first before assigning people, as the types of aircraft you are certified on affects where you fly to, which in turn affects lifestyles and how much money you earn.

If they don’t get enough volunteers then the airline will assign crews, but it’s good people management to ask ‘who wants to’ first.

Like when VS operated an Air Atlanta Icelandic aircraft to and from Lagos. Volounteers were requested to be licensed for that aircraft, and solely that aircraft for a period. Those who wanted relatively short flights and zero jet lag volunteered, avoiding the need to upset several who didn’t want that repetitive route pattern.
We'd like to welcome in particular our Executive Club members and those joining us from our Oneworld alliance partners.
 
SpaceshipDC10
Posts: 6489
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 12:35 pm

readytotaxi wrote:
Withdrawn Virgin Atlantic A340-600 G-VWEB, which has been under decomissioning at London Gatwick since 22nd October, positioned London Gatwick – Lourdes Tarbes for storage this morning as VS834P.

Only 13yrs :confused:


If you look at the situtation from the number of years the airframe has been deliveried, it might seem confusing. However, don't forget the A346 is a version designed during the '90s of an aircraft that was conceived in the '80s. At both times, four engines seemed a good option but it didn't prove to be. Twinjets have become the norm. Thus you have aircraft that are retired rather sooner than later in the name of efficiency.
 
hinckley
Posts: 543
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:53 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 1:50 pm

PhilMcCrackin wrote:
jetwet1 wrote:
hinckley wrote:
I'm a big fan of VS and SRB, but I'll always equate the 346 with their shameful "4 engines 4 long haul" fear-mongering campaign. It was incredibly short-sighted and detrimental to commercial aviation as a whole.


Except that it was an Airbus slogan, not VS or SRB.


Yet VS was still painting it on their airplanes for a time.....


^This. VS was trying to differentiate itself, but it was a campaign of fear. Not smart imo.
 
hinckley
Posts: 543
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:53 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 1:53 pm

edealinfo wrote:
hinckley wrote:
I'm a big fan of VS and SRB, but I'll always equate the 346 with their shameful "4 engines 4 long haul" fear-mongering campaign. It was incredibly short-sighted and detrimental to commercial aviation as a whole.


You do understand that for some years now it is Delta (which owns 49% of Virgin) that's running the show and not Richard Branson.


Yes. Do you understand that DL took its 49% stake in VS in 2012 and that VS removed the 4 engines 4 long-haul slogan from its planes in 2007? Facts get in the way sometimes, huh?
 
Iloveboeing
Posts: 419
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:02 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 5:53 pm

452QX wrote:
The age of quad jets is coming to an end for many airlines, with the newest generation twins doing the same job more efficiently. It simply was time for VS to start retiring their A340 fleet as they became more expensive to operate in comparison.

Of course there are still some important roles for aircraft like the 747 and A380 to fill for airlines, but admittedly the A340’s job can be better performed by the 777/787 and the A359/K, save for a few niche routes

I would love to try and fly on one while I still can, I do think they’re very neat


I think it's amusing how VS used to almost incessantly preach "4 Engines 4 Longhaul" with such fervor and conviction. Now they've had to eat those words!
 
User avatar
Slash787
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 9:37 pm

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 9:24 pm

xwb777 wrote:
It seems Mahan Air isn’t interested in purchasing it.


Iran Air could have used these birds.
 
Kato79
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2016 11:44 pm

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 9:38 pm

Iloveboeing wrote:
452QX wrote:
The age of quad jets is coming to an end for many airlines, with the newest generation twins doing the same job more efficiently. It simply was time for VS to start retiring their A340 fleet as they became more expensive to operate in comparison.

Of course there are still some important roles for aircraft like the 747 and A380 to fill for airlines, but admittedly the A340’s job can be better performed by the 777/787 and the A359/K, save for a few niche routes

I would love to try and fly on one while I still can, I do think they’re very neat


I think it's amusing how VS used to almost incessantly preach "4 Engines 4 Longhaul" with such fervor and conviction. Now they've had to eat those words!


Yes I’m sure they’re really embarrassed about it & are completely regretting ever saying it :roll:

I can assure you that no one outside of Anet cares or even remembers....including Virgin Atlantic.
 
ptcflyer
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2001 12:03 pm

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 10:39 pm

readytotaxi wrote:
Withdrawn Virgin Atlantic A340-600 G-VWEB, which has been under decomissioning at London Gatwick since 22nd October, positioned London Gatwick – Lourdes Tarbes for storage this morning as VS834P.

Only 13yrs :confused:


I guess that the slogan: "Four for the Long Haul" didn't really age very well.
Last edited by ptcflyer on Sun Nov 10, 2019 11:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
wave46
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2018 12:02 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Sun Nov 10, 2019 11:00 pm

The efficiency aside, I wonder if the Trent 500's relative uniqueness factors into retirements. AFAIK, the A340-500/600 were the only airliners powered with that engine.

Whereas the A340-300 was powered by the much more ubiquitous CFM56, so teardowns and rehabs would be cheaper, no?

Anyway, I'm of two minds with the retirements:
1. As an avgeek, I'll miss the A346. They're lovely planes but I doubt that I'll get to ride in one before they're all gone - they just don't fly where I want to go and I can't justify making a trip somewhere just to ride on a specific type of aircraft.
2. As a person who understands the economics of airlines, I get why this is happening. It's the same reason we've lost many unique aircraft. Fuel-inefficient and low-production airplanes do not make economic sense in the era where profit margins are very slim.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4047
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:42 am

aemoreira1981 wrote:
A340s have really hit scrap value, especially with the A359/A35K, B77W and B789/B78X being way more efficient. The A345/A346 was a mistake if you ask me, given that it was in development after Boeing had already announced the B77W. It was promised to be able to do LHR-PER (requiring a tech stop westbound), a route that the B789 now does in reality (on a premium-heavy frame). The A343 made sense for when it was developed, as it entered service 2 years before the B772 did, selling over 200 frames. A346s have no real value as high-density frames since their exit door capacity is 475, while you have Cebu Pacific desiring 460 on an A339 (which has the fuselage length of the A333/A343), while the A343 theoretically could become one.

Also, consider that there is no A340 freighter conversion owing to the lack of feedstock (the only A340 variant which saw more than 100 built was the A343, but many carriers, especially LH and IB, have flown them to end of usable life), whereas a B77W freighter conversion will ensure longer lifespans of those frames. When A340s hit their next heavy check date, expect them to be ferried to the breakers.

There is really nothing wrong with the A340 nor derivatives except for the fact that the USA passed the ETOPS rules which made 3 and 4 engine airplanes clearly obsolete from a cost and operational standpoint and crashed their resale. I would bet they might still be useful in charter work or even freight were there conversion opportunities,
 
lat41
Posts: 618
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 12:23 pm

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:20 am

strfyr51 wrote:
There is really nothing wrong with the A340 nor derivatives except for the fact that the USA passed the ETOPS rules which made 3 and 4 engine airplanes clearly obsolete from a cost and operational standpoint and crashed their resale. I would bet they might still be useful in charter work or even freight were there conversion opportunities,

Of course, there was nothing wrong with them. It was appropriate marketing for the day, no different than automobile marketing of yore where anything other than a V8 was inferior. Some of these posts are absurd.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2991
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:57 am

strfyr51 wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
A340s have really hit scrap value, especially with the A359/A35K, B77W and B789/B78X being way more efficient. The A345/A346 was a mistake if you ask me, given that it was in development after Boeing had already announced the B77W. It was promised to be able to do LHR-PER (requiring a tech stop westbound), a route that the B789 now does in reality (on a premium-heavy frame). The A343 made sense for when it was developed, as it entered service 2 years before the B772 did, selling over 200 frames. A346s have no real value as high-density frames since their exit door capacity is 475, while you have Cebu Pacific desiring 460 on an A339 (which has the fuselage length of the A333/A343), while the A343 theoretically could become one.

Also, consider that there is no A340 freighter conversion owing to the lack of feedstock (the only A340 variant which saw more than 100 built was the A343, but many carriers, especially LH and IB, have flown them to end of usable life), whereas a B77W freighter conversion will ensure longer lifespans of those frames. When A340s hit their next heavy check date, expect them to be ferried to the breakers.

There is really nothing wrong with the A340 nor derivatives except for the fact that the USA passed the ETOPS rules which made 3 and 4 engine airplanes clearly obsolete from a cost and operational standpoint and crashed their resale. I would bet they might still be useful in charter work or even freight were there conversion opportunities,


The A345 is way too heavy (97t heavier than a higher MTOW A343, and the Kingfisher NTUs are 105t heavier) despite being only about 14 feet longer than an A343, and the A346 still has a 440 passenger limit, same as the A343/A333. Also, in a premium-heavy configuration, a 254t B789 can do the missions of the A345 except routes like SIN-EWR, or one can use the B77L...but that was imagined as a freighter as well, and its freighter version has been very popular. The A345 could not do planned or current routes like PER-LHR or AKL-EWR profitably, and the overweight meant that even a route with good load factors such as JFK-BKK could not be operated profitably once fuel spiked. The model that has a chance in charter work still is the A343, especially examples from airlines like China Airlines or Air Mauritius.
 
sf260
Posts: 280
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 9:59 pm

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Mon Nov 11, 2019 7:46 am

lightsaber wrote:
The A340 has a long interval, 12 years on corrosion to HMV I would bet that with storage (stop clocking) this is retired to avoid heavy maintenance.
Lightsaber

I know the A320/330/A340 maintenance program inside out, storage doesn't stop your calendar timed maintenance tasks, only FH/FC based tasks. An aircraft sitting in storage doesn't suddenly stop corroding. Depending on the area, most structural inspections tasks are either 6Y or 12Y.
 
oldannyboy
Posts: 2434
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:28 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:38 am

FBGTX wrote:
Yes Oldannyboy, you're right ! We don't care about the economics. What we want is nice birds to fly. The 346 was the loveliest bird to fly (and to see flying) since the DC-7, the Superstarliner and the DC-8-63/73. And like you I'd fly a 346 (or a 345) any time better than any 77W or 780 or even 359.
I know I need to hurry now to fly one again before they totally disappear from the skies and I wonder which ones are left now: LH ? IB ? For how long ?
What a sadness...


LH are still a relatively big user of this splendid machine.... IB too for the time being. Such a quiet, smooth, comfortable spaceship.
 
oldannyboy
Posts: 2434
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:28 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:54 am

https://samchui.com/2019/11/05/thai-air ... ck9EbpFy74

Sam apparently is reporting that TG management is looking into flying the long-stored A346s again....
As wonderful for us enthusiasts it would be, I really don't see this happening.
What do you guys think?
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8032
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:59 am

oldannyboy wrote:
https://samchui.com/2019/11/05/thai-airways-could-fly-their-airbus-a340-600s-again/#.Xck9EbpFy74

Sam apparently is reporting that TG management is looking into flying the long-stored A346s again....
As wonderful for us enthusiasts it would be, I really don't see this happening.
What do you guys think?


I was just thinking the other day that TG's fleet didn't have enough diversity and that they needed to add another type. That will fix their profit issues.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
oldannyboy
Posts: 2434
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:28 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Mon Nov 11, 2019 11:02 am

RyanairGuru wrote:
oldannyboy wrote:
https://samchui.com/2019/11/05/thai-airways-could-fly-their-airbus-a340-600s-again/#.Xck9EbpFy74

Sam apparently is reporting that TG management is looking into flying the long-stored A346s again....
As wonderful for us enthusiasts it would be, I really don't see this happening.
What do you guys think?


I was just thinking the other day that TG's fleet didn't have enough diversity and that they needed to add another type. That will fix their profit issues.


Indeed. I'd be the happies man on earth if they could also bring back the MD-11. I LOVED that bird.

Oh, and the A300-600!
 
BrianDromey
Posts: 2502
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:23 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Mon Nov 11, 2019 11:10 am

oldannyboy wrote:
https://samchui.com/2019/11/05/thai-airways-could-fly-their-airbus-a340-600s-again/#.Xck9EbpFy74

Sam apparently is reporting that TG management is looking into flying the long-stored A346s again....
As wonderful for us enthusiasts it would be, I really don't see this happening.
What do you guys think?


I think his commentary is a bit extreme. The A340, from a customer point of view has a quiet cabin and a very nice 2-4-2 layout in economy. "Small Windows", "Aluminium Fuselage" and "Dated Lighting" are reasons not to introduce the aircraft back to service. He seems to think that paying for an aircraft and leaving it idle, while sill performing some maintenance on it is a better plan. The A346 isn't going to make or break TG's finances. The question should be wither TG need the capacity in addition to the current A330/350/777/380 fleet, my feeling is that they don't, so they need to consider if scrapping the A340s makes more sense. There isn't going to be much demand for the engines, which will be much of the value.
 
oldannyboy
Posts: 2434
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:28 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Mon Nov 11, 2019 11:23 am

BrianDromey wrote:
oldannyboy wrote:
https://samchui.com/2019/11/05/thai-airways-could-fly-their-airbus-a340-600s-again/#.Xck9EbpFy74

Sam apparently is reporting that TG management is looking into flying the long-stored A346s again....
As wonderful for us enthusiasts it would be, I really don't see this happening.
What do you guys think?


I think his commentary is a bit extreme. The A340, from a customer point of view has a quiet cabin and a very nice 2-4-2 layout in economy. "Small Windows", "Aluminium Fuselage" and "Dated Lighting" are reasons not to introduce the aircraft back to service. .


Agree. The cabin is still wayyyy more comfortable that say that of a 9-across 787, not to mention the noisy T7 cabin. And who cares about the metal fuselage, 'small windows' and dated lighting! It's so quiet and smooth!
 
AirbusA6
Posts: 1627
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 5:53 am

Re: Only 13yrs service now decomissioned VS A346

Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:46 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
A340s have really hit scrap value, especially with the A359/A35K, B77W and B789/B78X being way more efficient. The A345/A346 was a mistake if you ask me, given that it was in development after Boeing had already announced the B77W. It was promised to be able to do LHR-PER (requiring a tech stop westbound), a route that the B789 now does in reality (on a premium-heavy frame). The A343 made sense for when it was developed, as it entered service 2 years before the B772 did, selling over 200 frames. A346s have no real value as high-density frames since their exit door capacity is 475, while you have Cebu Pacific desiring 460 on an A339 (which has the fuselage length of the A333/A343), while the A343 theoretically could become one.

Also, consider that there is no A340 freighter conversion owing to the lack of feedstock (the only A340 variant which saw more than 100 built was the A343, but many carriers, especially LH and IB, have flown them to end of usable life), whereas a B77W freighter conversion will ensure longer lifespans of those frames. When A340s hit their next heavy check date, expect them to be ferried to the breakers.

There is really nothing wrong with the A340 nor derivatives except for the fact that the USA passed the ETOPS rules which made 3 and 4 engine airplanes clearly obsolete from a cost and operational standpoint and crashed their resale. I would bet they might still be useful in charter work or even freight were there conversion opportunities,


The A345 is way too heavy (97t heavier than a higher MTOW A343, and the Kingfisher NTUs are 105t heavier) despite being only about 14 feet longer than an A343, and the A346 still has a 440 passenger limit, same as the A343/A333. Also, in a premium-heavy configuration, a 254t B789 can do the missions of the A345 except routes like SIN-EWR, or one can use the B77L...but that was imagined as a freighter as well, and its freighter version has been very popular. The A345 could not do planned or current routes like PER-LHR or AKL-EWR profitably, and the overweight meant that even a route with good load factors such as JFK-BKK could not be operated profitably once fuel spiked. The model that has a chance in charter work still is the A343, especially examples from airlines like China Airlines or Air Mauritius.


Yes the issues with the A345/6 are as much to do with the fuselage as they are with the number of engines

Indeed doesn't the A343 compare quite well with the 77E?
it's the bus to stansted (now renamed National Express a6 to ruin my username)

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