Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Trimeresurus
Topic Author
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 6:06 pm

Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:09 am

The 77W looks like a closer equivalent to the 747 than the A330.
 
mozart
Posts: 2168
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 12:21 am

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:20 am

Travel demand to St Maarten collapsed after the big destructions in the 2018 hurricane season. It never came back to previous levels, so less capacity was needed
 
Trimeresurus
Topic Author
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 6:06 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:22 am

[twoid][/twoid]
mozart wrote:
Travel demand to St Maarten collapsed after the big destructions in the 2018 hurricane season. It never came back to previous levels, so less capacity was needed


But the replacement came in 2016?
 
tomaheath
Posts: 631
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 11:58 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:45 am

Wasn’t it a flight with two stops? Then the demand increase so each destination got it own flight?
 
User avatar
leleko747
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:16 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:54 am

The 747 had a tech stop in Curaçao. The A330 can fly nonstop to Amsterdam.
I wonder when people will understand:
Embraer 190 or simply E190, not ERJ-190. E-Jets are NOT ERJs!
Boeing 747-8, not Boeing 747-800. Same goes for 787.
Airbus A320, not Airbus 320.
Airbii does not exist.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:56 am

Winter season 2016/2017 KLM started with non stop flights AMS-SXM-AMS (3 times/week) with the A332. (KL729/30)

Before that SXM was integrated in the AMS-CUR-AMS 744 schedule. Three times a week the triangular route AMS-SXM-CUR-AMS was operated with the 744.
Also starting winterschedule 2016/2017 AMS-CUR was flown daily nonstop with the 744. (KL735/36)
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
FlyingHonu001
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2020 2:33 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:36 pm

747classic wrote:
Winter season 2016/2017 KLM started with non stop flights AMS-SXM-AMS (3 times/week) with the A332. (KL729/30)

Before that SXM was integrated in the AMS-CUR-AMS 744 schedule. Three times a week the triangular route AMS-SXM-CUR-AMS was operated with the 744.
Also starting winterschedule 2016/2017 AMS-CUR was flown daily nonstop with the 744. (KL735/36)


An A330 is also I think a lighter aircraft. Wasnt the runway length at SXM also a restriction for the grand lady? Correct me if im wrong: The reason for stopping over at CUR was to fuel her up for the transatlantic crossing, which could not be done at SXM.
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1874
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:52 pm

FlyingHonu001 wrote:
747classic wrote:
Winter season 2016/2017 KLM started with non stop flights AMS-SXM-AMS (3 times/week) with the A332. (KL729/30)

Before that SXM was integrated in the AMS-CUR-AMS 744 schedule. Three times a week the triangular route AMS-SXM-CUR-AMS was operated with the 744.
Also starting winterschedule 2016/2017 AMS-CUR was flown daily nonstop with the 744. (KL735/36)


An A330 is also I think a lighter aircraft. Wasnt the runway length at SXM also a restriction for the grand lady? Correct me if im wrong: The reason for stopping over at CUR was to fuel her up for the transatlantic crossing, which could not be done at SXM.

Reason for CUR hop was 2,100m runway plus the mountain at the end of the runway means SXM can't support a fully-loaded 747 to do Trans-Atlantic. At least A332 with weight restrictions can make the trip.

SXM can definitely fuel the trip with KLM and TUI flying non-stop to Europe.

Michael
 
workhorse
Posts: 827
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 2:59 pm

As already mentioned, the 77W can not clear the mountain in front of SXM's sole runway with enough fuel to get to AMS and a meaningful payload.

Besides, I am not even sure it can make the U-turn at the end of the runway which is required in SXM since there's no taxiway.

Has anyone ever flown a 77W into SXM? I don't think so.
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 3:02 pm

The traffic demand AMS-SXM-AMS never justified the use of a 747 or a 777-300ER.
For that reason SXM was integrated into the CUR schedule,
Part of the passengers from AMS disembarked at SXM and the SXM passengers with destination AMS embarked at SXM.
KLM had no passenger traffic rights at the stretch SXM-CUR.
At CUR the passenger from AMS with desination CUR disembarked. The SXM-AMS passengers stayed on board (or went to the transit lounge) and the CUR passengers , also with destination AMS filled up the remaining seats.
Neither the SXM or the CUR stop were technical stops.
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2141
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 3:08 pm

The 77W can't climb out safely from SXM and clear the mountain in front of the runway, travel to SXM dropped significantly since it was struck by a hurricane a few years ago, and the 77W is likely to premium heavy for a leisure route.The A330 has no problem with the runway limitations, cargo hold needs, etc..
 
User avatar
747classic
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:13 am

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 3:18 pm

Due unfavourable windpatterns at the SXM-AMS route the A332 had to make a few times an intermediate stop.
Also the A330 is operating at it's limits at SXM and is not able to take the full payload (MZFW) out of SXM due T/O performance limitations.
Operating a twin over the ocean, you're always one engine failure from a total emergency.
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 418
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 3:29 pm

Does anyone know what the 332 is actually limited to out of SXM? I think it is somewhere between 200-220t because of the mountain.
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4323
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 4:08 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:
The 77W can't climb out safely from SXM and clear the mountain in front of the runway, travel to SXM dropped significantly since it was struck by a hurricane a few years ago, and the 77W is likely to premium heavy for a leisure route.The A330 has no problem with the runway limitations, cargo hold needs, etc..


Neither does the 787-8 which TUI puts on the Amsterdam - St. Maarten route. There's two reasons KLM chose the A330 instead of the 787.

First of all, at the time the 747 was being replaced on this route KLM didn't have any 787s yet. The A330 was the closest thing they had.

Second, KLM doesn't fly the 787-8, they only have the 787-9 and 787-10. Those are too big for St. Maarten and make it across the pond to Amsterdam, it required a smaller aircraft to do that. Again they ended up at the A330-200. An A330-300 would have had the same problem as a 787-9 or 10.

It's a pretty thin route, not a lot of demand. That asks for a small aircraft. Both KLM and TUI put the smallest aircraft they have that is able to make the trip on this route. For KLM that's the A330-200, for TUI it's the 787-8. And even those aircraft are mostly too big.
 
opticalilyushin
Posts: 800
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 6:35 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 6:36 pm

It always amused me that for many years most widebodies would stop at CUR, BON or AUA on the way home, while the underpowered A340 would slowly make it direct to CDG
 
trent768
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 5:32 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 6:36 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
The 77W can't climb out safely from SXM and clear the mountain in front of the runway, travel to SXM dropped significantly since it was struck by a hurricane a few years ago, and the 77W is likely to premium heavy for a leisure route.The A330 has no problem with the runway limitations, cargo hold needs, etc..


Neither does the 787-8 which TUI puts on the Amsterdam - St. Maarten route. There's two reasons KLM chose the A330 instead of the 787.

First of all, at the time the 747 was being replaced on this route KLM didn't have any 787s yet. The A330 was the closest thing they had.

Second, KLM doesn't fly the 787-8, they only have the 787-9 and 787-10. Those are too big for St. Maarten and make it across the pond to Amsterdam, it required a smaller aircraft to do that. Again they ended up at the A330-200. An A330-300 would have had the same problem as a 787-9 or 10.

It's a pretty thin route, not a lot of demand. That asks for a small aircraft. Both KLM and TUI put the smallest aircraft they have that is able to make the trip on this route. For KLM that's the A330-200, for TUI it's the 787-8. And even those aircraft are mostly too big.

A very interesting insight! I always thought that the route have a high demand due to its popularity with the tourist and the ties between the two regions. Maybe a bit off topic, but does the AMS-SXM route considered as a domestic/Schengen or an international one?
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2141
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 24, 2020 10:15 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
The 77W can't climb out safely from SXM and clear the mountain in front of the runway, travel to SXM dropped significantly since it was struck by a hurricane a few years ago, and the 77W is likely to premium heavy for a leisure route.The A330 has no problem with the runway limitations, cargo hold needs, etc..


Neither does the 787-8 which TUI puts on the Amsterdam - St. Maarten route. There's two reasons KLM chose the A330 instead of the 787.

First of all, at the time the 747 was being replaced on this route KLM didn't have any 787s yet. The A330 was the closest thing they had.

Second, KLM doesn't fly the 787-8, they only have the 787-9 and 787-10. Those are too big for St. Maarten and make it across the pond to Amsterdam, it required a smaller aircraft to do that. Again they ended up at the A330-200. An A330-300 would have had the same problem as a 787-9 or 10.

It's a pretty thin route, not a lot of demand. That asks for a small aircraft. Both KLM and TUI put the smallest aircraft they have that is able to make the trip on this route. For KLM that's the A330-200, for TUI it's the 787-8. And even those aircraft are mostly too big.


Range wise, the 787-9/10 would have no problem performing AMS-SXM or SXM-AMS. It's too much plane for this route.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4682
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sun Oct 25, 2020 4:13 am

Cointrin330 wrote:
PatrickZ80 wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
The 77W can't climb out safely from SXM and clear the mountain in front of the runway, travel to SXM dropped significantly since it was struck by a hurricane a few years ago, and the 77W is likely to premium heavy for a leisure route.The A330 has no problem with the runway limitations, cargo hold needs, etc..


Neither does the 787-8 which TUI puts on the Amsterdam - St. Maarten route. There's two reasons KLM chose the A330 instead of the 787.

First of all, at the time the 747 was being replaced on this route KLM didn't have any 787s yet. The A330 was the closest thing they had.

Second, KLM doesn't fly the 787-8, they only have the 787-9 and 787-10. Those are too big for St. Maarten and make it across the pond to Amsterdam, it required a smaller aircraft to do that. Again they ended up at the A330-200. An A330-300 would have had the same problem as a 787-9 or 10.

It's a pretty thin route, not a lot of demand. That asks for a small aircraft. Both KLM and TUI put the smallest aircraft they have that is able to make the trip on this route. For KLM that's the A330-200, for TUI it's the 787-8. And even those aircraft are mostly too big.


Range wise, the 787-9/10 would have no problem performing AMS-SXM or SXM-AMS. It's too much plane for this route.


It's the single engine performance that's the limiting factor. A 787-9/10 with enough fuel to reach Amsterdam would not make it over the mountain if it suffers an engine failure.
 
LH707330
Posts: 2369
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sun Oct 25, 2020 4:28 pm

opticalilyushin wrote:
It always amused me that for many years most widebodies would stop at CUR, BON or AUA on the way home, while the underpowered A340 would slowly make it direct to CDG

The irony is that the best widebody OEI hot and high performer has the slowest AEO normal climb rate. Gotta lose the 340 for things like this, pity there are too few other unique circumstances to spur more demand.
 
zoek34
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 2:45 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sun Oct 25, 2020 8:55 pm

I noticed with the AF flight from SXM to CDG that is almost always does a runway 27 departure (even with tail wind).
Not sure what is the crossover point is for the tail wind so that a runway 9 departure should be done (as is when there is too much tailwind so that a runway 27 departure can't be done anymore)


I'm quite interested in what aircraft of the current KLM fleet (A332, A333, B772, B77W, B789, B78X) will be able to cover the SXM - AMS flight and how much payload they can carry in comparision to the MTOW?
 
Trimeresurus
Topic Author
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 6:06 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Tue Oct 27, 2020 10:44 pm

Why can't these heavies depart from RWY28 instead?
 
zoek34
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 2:45 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Fri Oct 30, 2020 6:48 pm

The heavies certainly can do a runway 28 departure, but since it's not the longest runway out there and most of the times the winds come from the east, it's suprising

For example currently the wind at SXM is 080/16, if I'm not mistaken that is the limit for an A332 (which KL and AF currently use)
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6480
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Fri Oct 30, 2020 9:48 pm

SXM lies in the SE Trades, 90% of times winds favor 10, often exceeding the 10 knot tailwind. And with the short runway, the tailwind hurts—a lot.
 
Flanker7
Posts: 490
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:38 pm

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:16 am

trent768 wrote:
PatrickZ80 wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
The 77W can't climb out safely from SXM and clear the mountain in front of the runway, travel to SXM dropped significantly since it was struck by a hurricane a few years ago, and the 77W is likely to premium heavy for a leisure route.The A330 has no problem with the runway limitations, cargo hold needs, etc..


Neither does the 787-8 which TUI puts on the Amsterdam - St. Maarten route. There's two reasons KLM chose the A330 instead of the 787.

First of all, at the time the 747 was being replaced on this route KLM didn't have any 787s yet. The A330 was the closest thing they had.

Second, KLM doesn't fly the 787-8, they only have the 787-9 and 787-10. Those are too big for St. Maarten and make it across the pond to Amsterdam, it required a smaller aircraft to do that. Again they ended up at the A330-200. An A330-300 would have had the same problem as a 787-9 or 10.

It's a pretty thin route, not a lot of demand. That asks for a small aircraft. Both KLM and TUI put the smallest aircraft they have that is able to make the trip on this route. For KLM that's the A330-200, for TUI it's the 787-8. And even those aircraft are mostly too big.

A very interesting insight! I always thought that the route have a high demand due to its popularity with the tourist and the ties between the two regions. Maybe a bit off topic, but does the AMS-SXM route considered as a domestic/Schengen or an international one?

Its considered a International flight
Flying blue only if possible
 
mozart
Posts: 2168
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 12:21 am

Re: Why did KLM replace the Boeing 747-400 on AMS-SXM route with an Airbus A330-300 and not a Boeing 777-300ER?

Sat Oct 31, 2020 11:11 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
An A330-300 would have had the same problem as a 787-9 or 10.


I think Air Caraibes flies A330-300s out of SXM non-stop to Paris.

Also, what about the A359? Air France has some of them. Might be too big for the demand on that route. But it wouldn't have any performance issues would it?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests

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