Revelation wrote:

777luver wrote:

A lot of speculation out there by simpleflying and others that LX will retire its A343s. They think that the 5 Airbus longhaul a/c referred to in today's memo must automatically mean the 5 A343s because there's 5 of them

Yet the tweet linked above from Andreas Spaeth says 'announced by @FlySWISS' and he's a professional journalist for decades now and I doubt he would use these words if it was just speculation. Of course he could have made a mistake or been given bad information, but I doubt he's speculating, he would have said so if he was.

ZK-NBT wrote:

thmeo wrote:

Is it possible that the first 3 could be the QANTAS birds not delivered that are in storage? These would have the aisle access business class (Vantage XL seat) and could be re-painted and delivered in a relatively short time.

The only problem is the GE engines and everyone’s expecting them to have Rolls.

I think QF would have something to say about that, QF will take delivery when the time is right.

Kind of ironic, given how the 787 delays caused QF so many problems a decade or so ago.

DUSZRH wrote:

You have to distinguish the medium. His Twitter is a lot about speculation/opinion. Basically, not too different from this thread.

777luver wrote:

But he is speculating........he said the following on his own post regarding Swiss' announcement "True, it's not confirmed it'll all be A340s that are exiting. But looking at their fleet mix I find this is very likely the one type exiting, consisting of exactly 5 a/c" it's completely speculative, there's the link to said post:

https://mobile.twitter.com/SpaethFlies/ ... 8196429825

Big cuts announced by @FlySWISS: 20% of staff or 1,700 jobs will be lost, 10 #A320 family aircraft and all five #A340-300 will exit the fleet #avgeek

Revelation wrote:

777luver wrote:

But he is speculating........he said the following on his own post regarding Swiss' announcement "True, it's not confirmed it'll all be A340s that are exiting. But looking at their fleet mix I find this is very likely the one type exiting, consisting of exactly 5 a/c" it's completely speculative, there's the link to said post:

https://mobile.twitter.com/SpaethFlies/ ... 8196429825

Not doubting you, but when I click on that link I get the original post:

Big cuts announced by @FlySWISS: 20% of staff or 1,700 jobs will be lost, 10 #A320 family aircraft and all five #A340-300 will exit the fleet #avgeek

If it is him just speculating, IMO it's really bad for him to not clearly stay that he is just speculating.

Revelation wrote:

777luver wrote:

But he is speculating........he said the following on his own post regarding Swiss' announcement "True, it's not confirmed it'll all be A340s that are exiting. But looking at their fleet mix I find this is very likely the one type exiting, consisting of exactly 5 a/c" it's completely speculative, there's the link to said post:

https://mobile.twitter.com/SpaethFlies/ ... 8196429825

Not doubting you, but when I click on that link I get the original post:

Big cuts announced by @FlySWISS: 20% of staff or 1,700 jobs will be lost, 10 #A320 family aircraft and all five #A340-300 will exit the fleet #avgeek

If it is him just speculating, IMO it's really bad for him to not clearly stay that, it drags down his overall credibility when he is actually reporting.

If he wants to shit-post, he can make up a burner account like the rest of us do.

Opus99 wrote:

Revelation wrote:

777luver wrote:

But he is speculating........he said the following on his own post regarding Swiss' announcement "True, it's not confirmed it'll all be A340s that are exiting. But looking at their fleet mix I find this is very likely the one type exiting, consisting of exactly 5 a/c" it's completely speculative, there's the link to said post:

https://mobile.twitter.com/SpaethFlies/ ... 8196429825

Not doubting you, but when I click on that link I get the original post:

Big cuts announced by @FlySWISS: 20% of staff or 1,700 jobs will be lost, 10 #A320 family aircraft and all five #A340-300 will exit the fleet #avgeek

If it is him just speculating, IMO it's really bad for him to not clearly stay that, it drags down his overall credibility when he is actually reporting.

If he wants to shit-post, he can make up a burner account like the rest of us do.

https://twitter.com/spaethflies/status/ ... 03780?s=21

Seems like he’s using the count of the 340s to determine

777luver wrote:

Opus99 wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Not doubting you, but when I click on that link I get the original post:


If it is him just speculating, IMO it's really bad for him to not clearly stay that, it drags down his overall credibility when he is actually reporting.

If he wants to shit-post, he can make up a burner account like the rest of us do.

https://twitter.com/spaethflies/status/ ... 03780?s=21

Seems like he’s using the count of the 340s to determine

A count that doesn't mean anything really. He's not the only one. Simpleflying has done the same thing. (They aren't credible. Period.) They even speculated that because Azerbaijan Airlines' A345 isn't flying in the next few months that it must be getting parked permanently after a recent period of flying. When in fact there is no such information that states that to be true.....

Opus99 wrote:

777luver wrote:

Opus99 wrote:

https://twitter.com/spaethflies/status/ ... 03780?s=21

Seems like he’s using the count of the 340s to determine

A count that doesn't mean anything really. He's not the only one. Simpleflying has done the same thing. (They aren't credible. Period.) They even speculated that because Azerbaijan Airlines' A345 isn't flying in the next few months that it must be getting parked permanently after a recent period of flying. When in fact there is no such information that states that to be true.....

I’m not arguing with you

777luver wrote:

Oops, if you go into the comments thread, his comment admitting it's not fact but just his opinion based on his take of Swiss' fleet will be there. But as others have pointed to, people can't take what's said on Twitter from an unofficial source as fact just because they are journalists. Just a general comment, not directed towards you. Journalists speculate all the time and it does hurt their credibility, you're absolutely right

Opus99 wrote:

https://twitter.com/spaethflies/status/ ... 03780?s=21

Seems like he’s using the count of the 340s to determine

777luver wrote:

A count that doesn't mean anything really. He's not the only one. Simpleflying has done the same thing. (They aren't credible. Period.) They even speculated that because Azerbaijan Airlines' A345 isn't flying in the next few months that it must be getting parked permanently after a recent period of flying. When in fact there is no such information that states that to be true.....

Revelation wrote:

777luver wrote:

Oops, if you go into the comments thread, his comment admitting it's not fact but just his opinion based on his take of Swiss' fleet will be there. But as others have pointed to, people can't take what's said on Twitter from an unofficial source as fact just because they are journalists. Just a general comment, not directed towards you. Journalists speculate all the time and it does hurt their credibility, you're absolutely right

I guess I haven't seen the "journalists speculate all the time" part on my social media feed, at least without them making it clear that they are speculating.

This case was especially bad, him saying airline X is announcing Y and Z without any clue that Z is pure speculation.

Most public figures absolutely understand that anything they say on social media can damage their credibility so they need to watch what they post.

Most journalists defend their credibility to an amazing extent, even more so than the girls at my school defended their virtue. Of course in both cases, their words may not have matched their deeds...

Opus99 wrote:

https://twitter.com/spaethflies/status/ ... 03780?s=21

Seems like he’s using the count of the 340s to determine

Thanks!

I didn't see it because it was a reply to a reply.

777luver wrote:

A count that doesn't mean anything really. He's not the only one. Simpleflying has done the same thing. (They aren't credible. Period.) They even speculated that because Azerbaijan Airlines' A345 isn't flying in the next few months that it must be getting parked permanently after a recent period of flying. When in fact there is no such information that states that to be true.....

IMO Spaeth is mainline journalist who is trying to get us to buy his expensive books, he needs to do better than Simply Flying.

thmeo wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

thmeo wrote:

[photoid][/photoid]

It could be 2 to 3 years before they require more capacity than the 11 they already have in service. At which point these birds will be 3 to 4 years old and never flown.

I’m sure for the right deal, Boeing and QANTAS would both allow these to be sold to another operator.

The reality is who other than the odd carrier like LH here is actually looking for new aircraft? I’ll say QF could use them by late 2022 early 2023.

I think it’s going to be a long time before they can fill all 28 A330’s and 11 789’s and require the 3 stored 789’s.

I think it’s very unlikely that they could be going to LH, however anything’s possible.

Revelation wrote:

777luver wrote:

Regarding the A340s, there's a lot of armchair fleet planners who cannot understand why LH kept their A343s longer than most airlines, they cannot fathom an airline doing that :p

Our longest running meme here on a.net was when/if DL would ever get rid of their DC-9s.

There's a lot to be said for an aircraft that is already paid for and is still somewhat efficient with regard to fuel burn.

As above, it must have been some interesting calculations at LH on whether or not to take more 789s or stick with A340s.

Blerg wrote:

So will LH have only A350s in MUC?

DL717 wrote:

Blerg wrote:

So will LH have only A350s in MUC?

There has been some COVID shuffling to FRA, but the plan was MUC gets the first 25 IIRC then Frankfurt if they went with the options. 787-s were intended for Frankfurt and the partners. Early A346 retirement probably changed that thinking a bit, but generally, Frankfurt was second fiddle on the 350. Seems backward and I always thought it was, but that's what their plan was. Its possible the 787s will replace the 343's and the 350's the 346's given the COVID environment impacts that will be felt over their delivery schedule. Its interesting they picked up the 5 new 787s early. I'm all for it. 340 is a gas guzzler.

DALCE wrote:

Aren't that the same GEnx engines as the 748's? If so, then there is engine commonality in the fleet anyway.

na wrote:

LH must have gotten a fantastic deal to accept these GEnx powered white tails as the future fleet beyond this quintet will be Rolls-Royce.

DL717 wrote:

Firm Orders:
A350 for Munich
789 for Frankfurt

Options and extra frames:
Leftovers to their partners

343's are done for as soon as they get enough planes in house.

na wrote:

DL717 wrote:

Firm Orders:
A350 for Munich
789 for Frankfurt

Options and extra frames:
Leftovers to their partners

343's are done for as soon as they get enough planes in house.

Yes, but that will take a few years. Which means, all A343s be be retired on schedule after a full service life of around 23 - 25 years.

Blerg wrote:

DL717 wrote:

Blerg wrote:

So will LH have only A350s in MUC?

There has been some COVID shuffling to FRA, but the plan was MUC gets the first 25 IIRC then Frankfurt if they went with the options. 787-s were intended for Frankfurt and the partners. Early A346 retirement probably changed that thinking a bit, but generally, Frankfurt was second fiddle on the 350. Seems backward and I always thought it was, but that's what their plan was. Its possible the 787s will replace the 343's and the 350's the 346's given the COVID environment impacts that will be felt over their delivery schedule. Its interesting they picked up the 5 new 787s early. I'm all for it. 340 is a gas guzzler.

Is the A350 the smallest new generation aircraft in their fleet? Maybe that's why they were destined for MUC? They still lack the passenger volume FRA has.

viennafly wrote:

It's going to be definitely LN 887,893,898,905&913. (https://sites.google.com/site/lhgroupfleet/lufthansa)

All with GENX-engines.

DL717 wrote:

viennafly wrote:

It's going to be definitely LN 887,893,898,905&913. (https://sites.google.com/site/lhgroupfleet/lufthansa)

All with GENX-engines.

Where do you get the GENX engines. Fleets shows Trent.

Lets not forget this:

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... challenges

Had a 24 hour target, but if you don't need it done in 24 hours...

Lufthansa 2021-06-01 DLH-B787-128199 Trent 1000-74 TEN (J3)
Lufthansa 2022-05-15 DLH-B787-120433 Trent 1000-74 TEN (J3)
Lufthansa 2022-06-01 DLH-B787-128200 Trent 1000-74 TEN (J3)
Lufthansa 2022-06-01 DLH-B787-128201 Trent 1000-74 TEN (J3)
Lufthansa 2022-06-01 DLH-B787-128202 Trent 1000-74 TEN (J3)

A320B737NGCapt wrote:

Does anyone have a definitive answer to which LN Lufthansa are actually taking?

viennafly wrote:

A320B737NGCapt wrote:

Does anyone have a definitive answer to which LN Lufthansa are actually taking?

Thats the 5 they will be taking

A320B737NGCapt wrote:

viennafly wrote:

A320B737NGCapt wrote:

Does anyone have a definitive answer to which LN Lufthansa are actually taking?

Thats the 5 they will be taking

Do you have a credible source? Not an enthusiast tracking site? Any press releases from Lufthansa or Boeing?

A320B737NGCapt wrote:

viennafly wrote:

A320B737NGCapt wrote:

Does anyone have a definitive answer to which LN Lufthansa are actually taking?

Thats the 5 they will be taking

Do you have a credible source? Not an enthusiast tracking site? Any press releases from Lufthansa or Boeing?

A320B737NGCapt wrote:

viennafly wrote:

A320B737NGCapt wrote:

Does anyone have a definitive answer to which LN Lufthansa are actually taking?

Thats the 5 they will be taking

Do you have a credible source? Not an enthusiast tracking site? Any press releases from Lufthansa or Boeing?

LAX772LR wrote:

airbazar wrote:

The A380's biggest problem at LH was their massive number of premium seats and finding markets to fill them consistently. With corporate travel slow to rebound post pandemic, that puts the 779 in the same type of conundrum, IMO.

At the risk of stating the obvious: you realize that airlines can modify the outfitting/ratio of their cabins at any time, do you not?

Okcflyer wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

airbazar wrote:

The A380's biggest problem at LH was their massive number of premium seats and finding markets to fill them consistently. With corporate travel slow to rebound post pandemic, that puts the 779 in the same type of conundrum, IMO.

At the risk of stating the obvious: you realize that airlines can modify the outfitting/ratio of their cabins at any time, do you not?

You do realize that 600+ seat aircraft, which is what the A380 with a more normal J/Y ratio, is also nearly impossible to fill consistently? Same issue remains.

LAX772LR wrote:

Okcflyer wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

At the risk of stating the obvious: you realize that airlines can modify the outfitting/ratio of their cabins at any time, do you not?

You do realize that 600+ seat aircraft, which is what the A380 with a more normal J/Y ratio, is also nearly impossible to fill consistently? Same issue remains.

But the 779, which if you were actually paying attention, is what the statement speaks to moving forward-- is not.

And since the quoted poster laments the issue of filling a massive number of business seats; a reconfigured 779, which is certified to hold less passengers than a smaller 77W (which a larger number of airlines CAN fill), would in practical application be less affected by such.

LAX772LR wrote:

Okcflyer wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

At the risk of stating the obvious: you realize that airlines can modify the outfitting/ratio of their cabins at any time, do you not?

You do realize that 600+ seat aircraft, which is what the A380 with a more normal J/Y ratio, is also nearly impossible to fill consistently? Same issue remains.

But the 779, which if you were actually paying attention, is what the statement speaks to moving forward-- is not.

And since the quoted poster laments the issue of filling a massive number of business seats; a reconfigured 779, which is certified to hold less passengers than a smaller 77W (which a larger number of airlines CAN fill), would in practical application be less affected by such.

airbazar wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Okcflyer wrote:

You do realize that 600+ seat aircraft, which is what the A380 with a more normal J/Y ratio, is also nearly impossible to fill consistently? Same issue remains.

But the 779, which if you were actually paying attention, is what the statement speaks to moving forward-- is not.

And since the quoted poster laments the issue of filling a massive number of business seats; a reconfigured 779, which is certified to hold less passengers than a smaller 77W (which a larger number of airlines CAN fill), would in practical application be less affected by such.

The question then becomes: Can it be operated profitably with a smaller premium cabin?
All I'm saying is this: Whatever math LH used to justify buying the 779 pre-Pandemic has now gone out the window. And although I'm probably wrong, I have my doubts that they can make the math work any time soon. LH is not exactly known for being a backpacker airline. They are often the most expensive TATL option so filling a huge number of Y seats would require a serious change in their business strategy.

Noshow wrote:

Before year's end.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Heavierthanair wrote:

G'day

Ziyulu wrote:

Do you think economy on the 787 will be 3-3-3?

Further on the way to the bottom I would not be surprised if they will configure the A350 ten abreast in economy. All recent developments at LH have not really been to enhance customer experience, but rather the opposite. I used to like them, having been a Senator member, these days I prefer alternatives however. Will be interesting to see how they are positioned post Corona.

Cheers

Peter

Totally agree. LH is a meh airline at best, with a very average business class product and though it likes to brand itself as a premium offering, it doesn't really live up to the hype it likes to give itself. LX and OS have a far superior product in the group.

speedbird52 wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Heavierthanair wrote:

G'day



Further on the way to the bottom I would not be surprised if they will configure the A350 ten abreast in economy. All recent developments at LH have not really been to enhance customer experience, but rather the opposite. I used to like them, having been a Senator member, these days I prefer alternatives however. Will be interesting to see how they are positioned post Corona.

Cheers

Peter

Totally agree. LH is a meh airline at best, with a very average business class product and though it likes to brand itself as a premium offering, it doesn't really live up to the hype it likes to give itself. LX and OS have a far superior product in the group.

Lufthansa's strength is its route network. LX and OS just don't have anything comparable.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

but they have better service, a more premium feel to their experience when traveling in those cabins and leveraging their ground services for them, and better operations in most cases than LH.

LAX772LR wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

but they have better service, a more premium feel to their experience when traveling in those cabins and leveraging their ground services for them, and better operations in most cases than LH.

Which, during market troughs, really doesn't mean much of anything, if it can't be translated into a revenue premium.

LAX772LR wrote:

Which, during market troughs, really doesn't mean much of anything, if it can't be translated into a revenue premium.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

...leveraging their ground services for them, and better operations in most cases than LH.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

speedbird52 wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Totally agree. LH is a meh airline at best, with a very average business class product and though it likes to brand itself as a premium offering, it doesn't really live up to the hype it likes to give itself. LX and OS have a far superior product in the group.

Lufthansa's strength is its route network. LX and OS just don't have anything comparable.

LH does have a strong and well developed route network, yes. LX and OS, even pre-pandemic, were much smaller, but they have better service, a more premium feel to their experience when traveling in those cabins and leveraging their ground services for them, and better operations in most cases than LH.