Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
trex8
Posts: 5677
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:53 pm

Quoting ScottB (Reply 46):
Yes, we do all know about Lufthansa's profit in comparison to others. In 2005, the operating profit of the passenger segment was 135 million euros on 12 million euros in revenue -- or an operating margin of 1.1% on the passenger transportation business. Lufthansa spent 2.2 billion euros in 2005 on fuel; if they had spent just 5% less on fuel, their operating profit would have been nearly double what they reported.

but you have to factor in how much they would have to pay to train a whole new fleet of aircrew and have a different roster etc also., plus the cost of financing what may be a cheaper product vs a 777, thats probably why some smaller operators will stick with A340s even if they burn gas like crazy, the other operating costs esp if they have A330s in the fleet or even A320s negate any benefit from the lower fuel burn in a small fleet. or when some operators with no etops experience need those planes right away for certain routes.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 52):
Boeing was given an award (don't know the name of it thou) for its signature range cabin in the B777s and is still the only airliner family to be given an award for its passenger comfort. The B777 signature cabin is now also used on the B737NGs. An award like that speaks a thousand words on how comfy the B777 is over the A340 for its passengers. I can see the B787 also being given an award for its passenger comfort

the award was not because the design was necessarily more comfortable etc, it was just innovative.
 
jfk777
Posts: 7486
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Sat Nov 25, 2006 11:12 pm

Lauda are had ordered 4 777 but only had 3 delivered. Early in 2006 Ausrian finalized the deal for the 4th 777. Given SWISS's need for extra A340 or A330 Austrian perhaps saw the right economic solution in selling some planes to them. 777 will make the flights to Japan more confortable for Austrian's passengers. I would love to see the 777 at JFK though, the 767 is a little dissapointing after the A330 for so many years.
 
Leskova
Posts: 5547
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 3:39 pm

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:40 am

Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 57):
777 will make the flights to Japan more confortable for Austrian's passengers.

You're probably right in the case of Business Class passengers, because OS is installing, or has already installed, the new seats on the B777; for Economy Class passengers, it's definitely a step backwards.
Smile - it confuses people!
 
sstsomeday
Posts: 821
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:32 pm

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 2:33 am

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 48):
I did not know there was any huge debate on which one burned less fuel....

I think the debate, although I don't understand it, is to whether it MATTERS because of other expense considerations.

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 56):
but you have to factor in how much they would have to pay to train a whole new fleet of aircrew and have a different roster etc also., plus the cost of financing what may be a cheaper product vs a 777, thats probably why some smaller operators will stick with A340s even if they burn gas like crazy, the other operating costs esp if they have A330s in the fleet or even A320s negate any benefit from the lower fuel burn in a small fleet. or when some operators with no etops experience need those planes right away for certain routes.

These are good points. I think we are speaking of two different issues;

1) ...whether it's prudent for an airline already flying a fleet of 340s to change to the 777. (debatable, and involves a lot of variables, but some airlines are choosing to do it.)

2) ...or whether an airline, presently not flying either, should begin a 777 fleet or 340 fleet (which I would suggest is an easier decision to make, and current sales figures show the airlines are answering that question.)
I come in peace
 
mk777
Posts: 888
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:48 am

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 3:04 am

I enjoyed the OS A332s from IAD-VIE-DEL. I shall miss them.

They will replace the A332s with B763ERs soon on the IAD-VIE leg and they already have been operating the 767 on the VIE-DEL route. The 767 is too crammed, hardly any leg space, wish they would go bigger.

I think B777 will operate in summer 07 from IAD-VIE, lets see how the aircraft is.

Consideriing their flights on this legs are going full especially during winter months, why would they want to cram people in the 767 even though the seating is simialr to the A332s.

Is OS doing so bad in making money??
come fly with me
 
swissy
Posts: 1481
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:12 pm

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 7:02 am

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 56):
thats probably why some smaller operators will stick with A340s even if they burn gas like crazy,

Define your claim of crazy fuel burn?????

Sorry but maybe have a look at OS fleet and maybe some people understand that the 33/34 is not the problem to begin with..... OS seams to be lost in space right now..........

And yes Niki knows, he used to have T7 & 37 and now he uses 320 metal..... on Niki......  scratchchin 
It does not mean that aircraft X will work for airline Y, Z, A .... that is a fact based on numbers and studies I have.....  Wink

Cheers,
 
trex8
Posts: 5677
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:11 am

Quoting Swissy (Reply 61):
Define your claim of crazy fuel burn?????

I'm not trying to put down the A340, I was trying to rationalize why some operators will still prefer the A340 even if there are other suitable alternatives , like a A333 which burns about 10% less fuel than a A343 over comparable length sectors - see the SAS emissions site. As for what a 777 might do compared to an A340, I have seen numbers anywhere from 5% (at least for a A346 vs 77W comparison per wbp's posts here) to claims of over 20% (which I seriously doubt).
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 4:18 am

@ Trex8

The difference in fuel consumption between B777-300ER and A346 based on the same payload and city-pair is 7 percent if you are interested in the real number.

On ETOPS-Critical Sectors which result in longer routings for the B777 this figure changes to 4-5 percent.

I hope that helps a bit.


Johnny
 
sstsomeday
Posts: 821
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:32 pm

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 8:46 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 63):
The difference in fuel consumption between B777-300ER and A346 based on the same payload and city-pair is 7 percent if you are interested in the real number.

Is that per passenger?
I come in peace
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15147
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 9:37 am

777 has lower fuel burn, higher dispatch reliability, better payload and lower maintenance costs. It's not just 5-10% fuel burn, and it's why the sales of 340s declined as the sales of 777s increased, and then after the blip of the 345/346 being the only planes in the market of that size, the 777LR program again sent the 340 into retirement. It's not rumor, it's not wishful thinking, it's the reality.

Just as the A330 helped send the 767 into decline, so did the 777 help topple the 340. If Airbus didn't believe it was so, they wouldn't be working on the A350...

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 6):
LOL its called a touch of British Humour.

Or a touched in the head British humourist.

The reason it didn't come across as that funny is that it was kind of nonsensical. OS HAS decided to dump the A330/340 for the 777/767, so your post is more ironic than humorous.

Quoting HiJazzey (Reply 11):
I recommend you look up this word: Sarcasm

You might want to as well. Because sarcasm is not "all in fun" but in fact means you intend to mock and ridicule. So if he was being sarcastic, it was right for people to be confused as it seemed directed at nobody in the thread and somewhat angry. And people did read it as angry, or a rant.

I knew he was trying to be funny. I just don't think he succeeded...  Wink
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
AirbusDriver
Posts: 228
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2001 8:01 am

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 9:38 am

To put this myth to rest forever, here is the fuel burn according to Boeing and Airbus. ( Data available on A and B Web site )

A340-300 Seat 295 Max range 7400NM with 39060 GAL or 4.18 Gal per N/M
B772-ER Seat 301 Max range 7730NM with 45220 Gal or 5.84 Gal per N/M

A340-500 Seat 313 Max Range 9000NM with 56750 Gal or 6.30 Gal per N/M
B772-LR Seat 301 Max Range 9420NM with 53440 Gal or 5.67 Gal per N/M

A340-600 Seat 380 Max Range 7900NM with 51746 Gal or 6.55 Gal per N/M
B773-ER Seat 365 Max range 7880NM with 47890 Gal or 6.07 Gal per N/M

Also you all seem to forget the main factor, Price How much cheaper is the A340, 20, 30 Millions??? factor that with a 5% financing over 20 years...

Fuel Burn The A343 Beat the 772ER and the 772LR/N773ER beat the A345/346.
Because people keep repeating the same thing over and over on A.net doesn't make it true, Here are the Facts, discuss.
 
swissy
Posts: 1481
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:12 pm

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 9:58 am

The magic word is ETOPS which virtually killed the 3-4 pot aircraft (up to a certain size)

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 65):
Just as the A330 helped send the 767 into decline,

Agree 100%

Quoting Johnny (Reply 63):
On ETOPS-Critical Sectors which result in longer routings for the B777 this figure changes to 4-5 percent.

Agree Johnny, the data I have studied shows a 3-5% better fuel burn

Quoting AirbusDriver (Reply 66):
To put this myth to rest forever, here is the fuel burn according to Boeing and Airbus. ( Data available on A and B Web site )

Thank you for taking the time to post it, but sometimes reality looks different for some airlines... (based on what I have seen)

Bottom line is ETOPS is basically a non issue anymore and yes twins are the future as of today and as an EDAS "owner" I am happy to see AB is working on a "new" WB twin..........

Cheers,
 
sstsomeday
Posts: 821
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:32 pm

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 11:26 am

Quoting AirbusDriver (Reply 66):

A340-300 Seat 295 Max range 7400NM with 39060 GAL or 4.18 Gal per N/M
B772-ER Seat 301 Max range 7730NM with 45220 Gal or 5.84 Gal per N/M

This is difficult to believe, as the figures stand, because they defy logic. Can anybody explain this? Are there hidden variables here, such as the ability to carry significant freight in these hypothetical examples?
I come in peace
 
AirbusDriver
Posts: 228
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2001 8:01 am

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 11:41 am

B772-ER

Pratt & Whitney 4090
90,000 lb

Rolls-Royce Trent 895
93,400 lb

General Electric 90-94B
93,700 lb



A340-300

Engines four CFM56-5C4/P four CFM56-5C4/P

Engine thrust range 139-151 kN 31,200-34,000 lb. slst


They don't defy logic, less thrust less fuel furn.
 
CHRISBA777ER
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 6:58 pm

Quoting AvFan4ever (Reply 38):
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 3):
I think basically they changed it because their managers and directors are known to browse this site from time to time, and when, after several years of trouble free operations, they found out from the forums here that their A340s, which they had paid all their hard-earned Austrian marks for, were actually not worth anything at all, and that even the scrapman wouldnt take them on.

These forums provide entertainment value to those who either work in the aviation industry at a medium capacity or less, and to those who do not work in the aviation industry but have an interest in aviation-related topics. For those "in the know", these forums provide a modest (and somewhat irritating) window into the world of general public opinion, rumours, and misinformation. In my daily contact with airline and OEM senior management, I have never run across a single person who indicated that airliners.net was a source of useable or trustworthy information. For topics in my area of expertise, I can confidently say that 99% of the material I read in these forums related to my area of expertise is incorrrect.

To think that the opinions of this forum contributed to the fleet planning decisions of a competently managed airline is ridiculous

Yes.

I know.

Hence the sarcasm.
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
CHRISBA777ER
Posts: 3715
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 12:12 pm

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Mon Nov 27, 2006 7:01 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 59):
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 6):
LOL its called a touch of British Humour.

Or a touched in the head British humourist.

The reason it didn't come across as that funny is that it was kind of nonsensical. OS HAS decided to dump the A330/340 for the 777/767, so your post is more ironic than humorous

Jeez Ikra - why the need to take everything so seriously?

Lighten Up - you sound like an android.
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
 
widebodyphotog
Posts: 885
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 1999 9:23 am

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 6:53 am

Quoting AirbusDriver (Reply 60):
To put this myth to rest forever, here is the fuel burn according to Boeing and Airbus. ( Data available on A and B Web site )

A340-300 Seat 295 Max range 7400NM with 39060 GAL or 4.18 Gal per N/M
B772-ER Seat 301 Max range 7730NM with 45220 Gal or 5.84 Gal per N/M

A340-500 Seat 313 Max Range 9000NM with 56750 Gal or 6.30 Gal per N/M
B772-LR Seat 301 Max Range 9420NM with 53440 Gal or 5.67 Gal per N/M

A340-600 Seat 380 Max Range 7900NM with 51746 Gal or 6.55 Gal per N/M
B773-ER Seat 365 Max range 7880NM with 47890 Gal or 6.07 Gal per N/M

This is absolutely not fuel burn data...

You simply used maximum fuel tankage divided by design range...this is meaningless as with the exception 777-300ER and -200LR none of these aircraft can carry maximum fuel with design payload...and even then the loaded fuel is not indicative of fuel burned. As a pilot I would have thought this would be immediately evident to you...

The information I've posted in this regard is quite extensive. Here is some data relevant to this post:

300-400 Seat Design Range/Payload Comparison

Some calculated data:

300-400 Seat Specific Fuel Burn Comparison

The burn per seat data puts things in a better perspective relative to the head to head performance comparison especially when comparing a340-500 to the 777-200LR. If you bring the range down to match the A345 takeoff weight reduces dramatically and that reduction is all fuel. For the 777-200LR vs A340-500 highest gross weight at design payload and 9,000nm range the burn difference is >20%...

Equal Mission Distance With Design Payload 777-200LR/A340-500

Fuel specifics come out like this:

Equal Mission Distance Specific Fuel Burn 777-200LR/A340-500

*Burn figures are to +/- 1,000lbs for calculated sector lengths.
*Standard day
*Standard cruise profiles according to brake release weight

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 59):
777 has lower fuel burn, higher dispatch reliability, better payload and lower maintenance costs. It's not just 5-10% fuel burn, and it's why the sales of 340s declined as the sales of 777s increased, and then after the blip of the 345/346 being the only planes in the market of that size, the 777LR program again sent the 340 into retirement. It's not rumor, it's not wishful thinking, it's the reality.



Quoting Trex8 (Reply 56):
I'm not trying to put down the A340, I was trying to rationalize why some operators will still prefer the A340 even if there are other suitable alternatives , like a A333 which burns about 10% less fuel than a A343 over comparable length sectors - see the SAS emissions site. As for what a 777 might do compared to an A340, I have seen numbers anywhere from 5% (at least for a A346 vs 77W comparison per wbp's posts here) to claims of over 20% (which I seriously doubt).

You are both right and also missing something...

The payload specific advantage over the A340-600 is about 12% in terms of fuel burn per unit payload. However when factoring in more effective aircraft payload utilization that figure can rise an additional 3-5% on sector lengths of 6,000-7,000nm. The 777-300ER can carry heavier payloads a bit farther while burning less fuel...I would not be surprised at all if the 777-300ER gets close to 20% better fuel burn per sector if you factor in increased useable volume in the lower hold as an offset to fuel burn...

Quoting Johnny (Reply 57):
On ETOPS-Critical Sectors which result in longer routings for the B777 this figure changes to 4-5 percent.

What specific sectors are you referring to that are being operated today by 777's and any other four engined aircraft where ETOPS routing changes the 777's sector distance, time or fuel burn by 5%??? Maybe that was the case some years ago, Kamchatka overflight comes to mind, but it's not so today. Even flights in the vicinity of the Himalayas to Europe with 777-300ER's only take nominally 10-15min longer than 747's. But that's not due to routing but to the slower flight speed of the 777...

Newly approved routes and more highly capable ETOPS aircraft have all but eliminated any significant detriment to ETOPS sector planning in the Northern Hemisphere. Operators who have invested in ETOPS infrastructure have benefited greatly and will continue to do so. The only big problem for ETOPS operation arises if you don't do what you need to do to maintain the maintenance standard...some carriers have learned that the hard way...



-widebodyphotog
If you know what's really going on then you'll know what to do
 
AirplaneFan
Posts: 196
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 5:56 am

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 7:09 am

I know that OS ordered an additional Boeing 777 from Boeing last year IIRC, but was that additional ordered airplane a -200ER or a -300ER? I'll love to see a Boeing 777-300ER in OS colors.
I GOT YOUR SIX
 
brendows
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:55 pm

RE: Austrian:why Switch From A340 To B777?

Tue Nov 28, 2006 7:17 am

Quoting AirplaneFan (Reply 67):
I know that OS ordered an additional Boeing 777 from Boeing last year IIRC, but was that additional ordered airplane a -200ER or a -300ER?

They ordered a GE powered -200ER in September last year.

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