|Quoting columba (Thread starter):|
Swiss is looking to replace with their A340-300 with a larger jets. They need them especially for their route to Sao Paolo.
Despite all speculation, the article you refer too doesn't necessarily mention that LX
is actively sourcing larger aircraft to operate before
the arrival of A350s or B787s. It only states that the route to GRU
could support a bigger aircraft, but they kill the argument right away that additional capacity could rather be sent through LHs hubs.
|Quoting mandala499 (Reply 48):|
I find that rather odd. The 346's fuel burn per seat is worse than the 343.
Maintenance for those 4 Trents on a per seat basis makes the CFMs on the 343 look like a bargain.
Do you have any numbers to support that the 346 has a higher fuel burn per seat, and higher mthan the 343?
|Quoting vegas005 (Reply 118):|
Unless LX gets them for free or at a fantastic lease rate the 346 will be a waste of money. Little to no resale value for a stop gap procedure is not a good business practice.
When you lease them, the resale value is not of that much interest. Especially as a stop-gap measure, a short-term lease can be interesting. Considering the lack of interest (in general) for the 346, owners of these aircraft (including Boeing for the MU
frames and Airbus for the VS
-frames) might be very willing to offer the aircraft on short-term leases - especially
when the replacing aircraft are acquired from either manufacturer.
For short-term leases, commonality saves lots of money when it comes to crew training & scheduling.
carries a huge amount of cargo throughout the network. Longhaul loadfactors are very good. 346's or 748's will both be very very welcome from a cargo perspective