China Airlines first 747-8 Passenger customer

[Buzz]

Yes, that is logical if these A340 are already in service 8 yaers, and will be in service another 4-6 years, that is long, but not as long as AA or UA drive their birds.

SQ replaces their birds (777's and 747's) after 7-10 years, it's their policy... That doesn't mean they are lousy aircraft and they don't go straight to the scrapman. They will have a happy second life with another carrier and will be retired when they reach the end of their useful life (20-25 years old most likely).

The reason SQ and CA can do this and AA and UA can't is simple: money and thus profitability, wich SQ and CA have, and AA and UA don't...

I consider it sport to pick on airsub, and admit it freely.

You've just lost the respect of 95% of the people on this forum...
Just don't complain when moderators throw out most of your posts for this reason (hopefully).
Quality on the forum is important, not quantity (and definitely not the talk you're talking)

But to lose 10 passenger jumbos to a 40 year old 747 (I know re-designed etc) when the A380 has not sold a passenger airframe for a year is a body blow.

If life were that simple...

No announcement has been made by either CA or Boeing, and there have been statements in the press stating they haven't decided yet.

Also, as stated in other treads: most, if not all, new programs (including 777) don't get any orders in the year before their EIS. New customers wait until they get opinions of operators etc. before placing their orders...

Since it clearly has no use, I'll stop arguing with you now.

[fleabyte]

1. AA and UA have too much overhead in salaries and pensions maybe, SQ and CAL have something that I can not figure out, profitability, new aircraft and high prices, even though usually SQ flights within Asia are 50-70% load factor.

2. 95% percent of Luchzak lost their respect for my comments, (I think it more around 50%, and that respect was lost by my 10th post, not on this one)

3. It is the perogative of the moderators to pull what they deem necessary, but to date none of my posts have been pulled. Thankfully they are less self righteous than some others for which I will not mention names.

flea

[Buzz]

1. AA and UA have too much overhead in salaries and pensions maybe, SQ and CAL have something that I can not figure out, profitability, new aircraft and high prices, even though usually SQ flights within Asia are 50-70% load factor.

Good yield management and a not so competitive envirement I suppose...

2. 95% percent of Luchzak lost their respect for my comments, (I think it more around 50%, and that respect was lost by my 10th post, not on this one)

3. It is the perogative of the moderators to pull what they deem necessary, but to date none of my posts have been pulled. Thankfully they are less self righteous than some others for which I will not mention names.

flea

I've got to give you credit for being so honnest.
Maybe I can learn to respect your opinion if you don't 'pick on airsub' in too obvious ways

First step is admitting you have a problem, you know
(before anyone takes that the wrong way, it's a joke...)

[KLM671]

probably the order will come out at the next airshow!

[fleabyte]

Thanks,

Yes, you know I am starting to bore myself with my anti-airbus diadrabs.

I am sort of new to the site and needed to blow out the steam

Funny thing is the 787 with RR engines has less US content than the A380 with engine alliance engines has US content.

Let there be new planes and good planes and give me somewhere to sleep in coach, if Airbus does this, then I am forever theirs.

[smokejumper]

Well a life of about 8 years is reasonable for an airliners to be in an airline.. They are ordering to replace it, meaning there will still be years until they will be replaced.

Actually 8 years is a very young age for airliners to be replaced; only a few airlines (e.g., SIA) are in a position to do so. Most major airlines will keep any profitable plane in service for perhaps 20 years or more. This is because new airplanes are expensive, and become fully depreciated after a (projected) write-down over 12-15 years and, unless something drastic occurs (like a major increase in the cost of fuel), they won’t be replaced for many years.

Some airlines’ decision to ground the A-340 is such an example. It is a good plane (at lower fuel costs), but at higher costs, it will eat your lunch.

Generally, once a plane is sold, the airline will retain it for many years, thus effectively blocking a competitor aircraft manufacturer from selling his product to that airline.