DL rumored to acquire used A340-600s
- Thread starter WorldTraveler
- Start date
- Status
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #32
VS is operating or HAS operated them. They very well could be leased.
Also, if you read above, Airbus has offered a program to A340 operators to compensate them for loss of value if the value of A340s fell below certain levels. It is known if these aircraft are part of that program but if they are, VS could have been able to force Airbus to take them back.
I believe CX also operated A340-600s and dumped them fairly quickly. Even the 77L which was built in similar numbers was not removed from fleets as aggressively as the A340-500/600s have been.
Airbus has a lot of reasons to keep its planes flying rather than have two complete models disappear halfway into their life.
Also, if you read above, Airbus has offered a program to A340 operators to compensate them for loss of value if the value of A340s fell below certain levels. It is known if these aircraft are part of that program but if they are, VS could have been able to force Airbus to take them back.
I believe CX also operated A340-600s and dumped them fairly quickly. Even the 77L which was built in similar numbers was not removed from fleets as aggressively as the A340-500/600s have been.
Airbus has a lot of reasons to keep its planes flying rather than have two complete models disappear halfway into their life.
seems to me a lot of "Ifs" in this rumour. Again, I find it hard to believe. Acquisition cost "might" be low but
operating cost would seem to be too high. Fuel, mtc, training etc. and again, the "whole international growth discipline" thing lol.
what route exactly does Delta need a huge capacity increase to justify this additional cost. I'm no expert nor do I claim to be but
wouldn't Delta trash fairs say on the LAX-SYD flight with the increase in capacity? Also Delta just spend a lot of $$ on refurbishing the
744's just to have them exit early? Again, I think there are many con's vers pro's for this rumour.
operating cost would seem to be too high. Fuel, mtc, training etc. and again, the "whole international growth discipline" thing lol.
what route exactly does Delta need a huge capacity increase to justify this additional cost. I'm no expert nor do I claim to be but
wouldn't Delta trash fairs say on the LAX-SYD flight with the increase in capacity? Also Delta just spend a lot of $$ on refurbishing the
744's just to have them exit early? Again, I think there are many con's vers pro's for this rumour.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,940
- 9,371
IIRC, aircraft ownership is somewhere between 5-7% of the equation for calculating CASM, and fuel is around 26-29%.
If (and this is very unlikely...) DL got the airplanes for free, the lack of an ownership expense might offset the 20% higher fuel burn.
It's not going to offset the higher costs associated with keeping four engines maintained, or the price of having rotables on the shelf for yet another aircraft and unique engine type.
If (and this is very unlikely...) DL got the airplanes for free, the lack of an ownership expense might offset the 20% higher fuel burn.
It's not going to offset the higher costs associated with keeping four engines maintained, or the price of having rotables on the shelf for yet another aircraft and unique engine type.
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #35
part of the deal supposedly involves Rolls-Royce maintaining the engines at well below market rates.
Since they are Rolls-Royce engines and are similar but scaled to the Trent 890s that power DL's 777s, the engines could well end up being maintained by TAESL.
The 340 has high commonality - including for pilots - with the 330s which DL already flies.
even using your numbers, increasing fuel by 20% but taking it out of ownership easily makes the numbers work.
I used actual fuel burn and the purported ownership offers vs. market rates for the 773 and the numbers do appear to be very close.
It isn't a complete "never going to work" case but rather one of whether Airbus and RR have enough of an incentive to place the planes with DL.
Since they are Rolls-Royce engines and are similar but scaled to the Trent 890s that power DL's 777s, the engines could well end up being maintained by TAESL.
The 340 has high commonality - including for pilots - with the 330s which DL already flies.
even using your numbers, increasing fuel by 20% but taking it out of ownership easily makes the numbers work.
I used actual fuel burn and the purported ownership offers vs. market rates for the 773 and the numbers do appear to be very close.
It isn't a complete "never going to work" case but rather one of whether Airbus and RR have enough of an incentive to place the planes with DL.
- Banned
- #36
If it is such a great airplane why are and did most airlines get rid of them?
And why did Airbus stop making them?
And if they have to give airlines money or almost give them away, then the plane isnt worth it.
Four engine planes are going away except for some 747-8i and the A380.
A340-200: 28
A340-300: 218
A340-500: 34
A340-600: 97
A total of 377 airframes delivered from 1993 till 2012
And why did Airbus stop making them?
And if they have to give airlines money or almost give them away, then the plane isnt worth it.
Four engine planes are going away except for some 747-8i and the A380.
A340-200: 28
A340-300: 218
A340-500: 34
A340-600: 97
A total of 377 airframes delivered from 1993 till 2012
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #37
.... have you really missed the first 66 times in this thread that it was said that the reason why this deal would work - if it happens at all - is because Airbus and Rolls Royce are both apparently willing to offer prices well below what they would ever offer including to an original order customer?
No one has any problem understanding that the 773 handedly beat the 346 when customers actually had to pay for both.
The whole basis of this deal is that Airbus and Rolls are apparently desperate enough to find a home that they are willing to offer far below what they otherwise would charge.
The concept isn't any different from why DL has scoured the world looking for M90s and why it kept the DC9s as long as it did and why it has no plans to get rid of the M80s. When ownership costs fall enough, other factors including fuel burn become much less important.
Right now, DL pilots are seeing significant growth after years of slow to little growth, due in part to DL ramping up hiring and the effects of 117. Either way, DL is giving its pilots what they want which is career growth esp. to larger, higher paying aircraft including the 744 and 777.
Throw in some 340s and DL could go along ways toward making the pilot group happy just as they both enter negotiations for a new contract years before AA and UA pilots will get a chance to look for higher wages - and right at the time that WN is still trying to meet the wage demands from its employees.
No one has any problem understanding that the 773 handedly beat the 346 when customers actually had to pay for both.
The whole basis of this deal is that Airbus and Rolls are apparently desperate enough to find a home that they are willing to offer far below what they otherwise would charge.
The concept isn't any different from why DL has scoured the world looking for M90s and why it kept the DC9s as long as it did and why it has no plans to get rid of the M80s. When ownership costs fall enough, other factors including fuel burn become much less important.
Right now, DL pilots are seeing significant growth after years of slow to little growth, due in part to DL ramping up hiring and the effects of 117. Either way, DL is giving its pilots what they want which is career growth esp. to larger, higher paying aircraft including the 744 and 777.
Throw in some 340s and DL could go along ways toward making the pilot group happy just as they both enter negotiations for a new contract years before AA and UA pilots will get a chance to look for higher wages - and right at the time that WN is still trying to meet the wage demands from its employees.
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #39
oh there is... it just is unnamed.
If it becomes true, then we'll know it was valid. If not, nothing lost since I can't verify the accuracy or not of the rumor.
If it becomes true, then we'll know it was valid. If not, nothing lost since I can't verify the accuracy or not of the rumor.
AdAstraPerAspera
Veteran
Then why are you bloviating if it is nothing but mere speculation?
I could start a thread that I'm sure would be very compelling wondering out loud if NK is looking to place an order for 853-seat all-economy A380s and it would have the same veracity that this thread currently has
I could start a thread that I'm sure would be very compelling wondering out loud if NK is looking to place an order for 853-seat all-economy A380s and it would have the same veracity that this thread currently has
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #41
there are 39 replies to a thread that includes the title rumor.
Ask the people who replied. It is an intriguing possibility.
Ask the people who replied. It is an intriguing possibility.
eolesen
Veteran
- Jul 23, 2003
- 15,940
- 9,371
As the idea has been stated so far, it is an illogical possibility.
I'd think that Rolls and Airbus might be better off parting out the aircraft than letting them operated at a loss.
Since the A340 program is already shuttered, what redeeming commercial value is there in paying someone to fly them? It's not like having a bunch of them available on the used market will hurt future A340 sales... It's certainly inconsequential to future A350 sales.
If anything, it would be deterring DL from placing new orders.
The only way I can see a deal like this is if it were tied to new purchases, i.e. take these slightly used A346's until your A350's are certified...
I'd think that Rolls and Airbus might be better off parting out the aircraft than letting them operated at a loss.
Since the A340 program is already shuttered, what redeeming commercial value is there in paying someone to fly them? It's not like having a bunch of them available on the used market will hurt future A340 sales... It's certainly inconsequential to future A350 sales.
If anything, it would be deterring DL from placing new orders.
The only way I can see a deal like this is if it were tied to new purchases, i.e. take these slightly used A346's until your A350's are certified...
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #43
it is illogical to YOU.
We have yet to hear from Airbus, Rolls, and DL whether the deal makes sense for them or not. If it happens, and I am making no promises that it will, they don't agree it is illogical.
The 346 has fuel burn that is about 20% worse than the 777-300ER. That is not a great disadvantage but there are larger fuel burn differences between older generation and newer generation aircraft, including early 737s vs the NG, and WN will operates a large fleet of older generation 737s, or DL's M80s vs M90s etc.
It is precisely because there is no market for used A340s that DL can set the price. Airbus can choose to reject an offer but why would they park usable planes which can be sold for any amount?
Rolls is not giving their services away. They are offering them at a reduced rate. DL already is a Rolls customer via the 890s.
And then there is the RFP for new aircraft which DL has out there... and DL execs have said they very much would like Airbus to move ahead with the 330neo as a replacement for the 767.
It is very possible that DL will use the 346s to push back a 747 replacement but go ahead with the 330neo if it is offered. DL has said their timeframe for replacing the first 747s and 767s comes in several years anyway and then only a few copies of both fleets will leave each year.
Not only does Airbus deny DL the possibility of acquiring new or used aircraft from Boeing (DL has supposedly been interested in used 773ERs as well) but they keep an Airbus model flying that would otherwise be parked.
I expect if this is true, we will hear within a couple months. DL has no pilot pay rates for the 346 so the likely reason nothing has been announced is because DALPA executives are aware of the order pending resolution of issues with DL including a pay rate for the 346.
With up to 19 Virgin 346s available in the next couple years, that is a lot of pilot growth that could take place if DL has the aircraft to grow its int'l system.
We have yet to hear from Airbus, Rolls, and DL whether the deal makes sense for them or not. If it happens, and I am making no promises that it will, they don't agree it is illogical.
The 346 has fuel burn that is about 20% worse than the 777-300ER. That is not a great disadvantage but there are larger fuel burn differences between older generation and newer generation aircraft, including early 737s vs the NG, and WN will operates a large fleet of older generation 737s, or DL's M80s vs M90s etc.
It is precisely because there is no market for used A340s that DL can set the price. Airbus can choose to reject an offer but why would they park usable planes which can be sold for any amount?
Rolls is not giving their services away. They are offering them at a reduced rate. DL already is a Rolls customer via the 890s.
And then there is the RFP for new aircraft which DL has out there... and DL execs have said they very much would like Airbus to move ahead with the 330neo as a replacement for the 767.
It is very possible that DL will use the 346s to push back a 747 replacement but go ahead with the 330neo if it is offered. DL has said their timeframe for replacing the first 747s and 767s comes in several years anyway and then only a few copies of both fleets will leave each year.
Not only does Airbus deny DL the possibility of acquiring new or used aircraft from Boeing (DL has supposedly been interested in used 773ERs as well) but they keep an Airbus model flying that would otherwise be parked.
I expect if this is true, we will hear within a couple months. DL has no pilot pay rates for the 346 so the likely reason nothing has been announced is because DALPA executives are aware of the order pending resolution of issues with DL including a pay rate for the 346.
With up to 19 Virgin 346s available in the next couple years, that is a lot of pilot growth that could take place if DL has the aircraft to grow its int'l system.
AdAstraPerAspera
Veteran
Just as you said it would be unlikely AA would find any used 77Ls, I doubt DL will stumble upon any used 77Ws
OP
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #45
there are EK 773ERs coming off lease in the next couple years.
- Status
