SNBA is taking over the lease of the 3 Birdy Airlines A330-300 at the end of October. There is no discussion about that. The lease for these aircraft runs for another year after the takeover, after that SNBA can decide what it wants to do as far as the long haul is concerned.
The A330-300 has an exceptional cargo capacity compared to the -200 and definitely compared to the Boeings, especially the 767 which takes a meagre 4 pallets compared to the 11 for the A330 -300.
SNBA uses basically LD3 containers for baggage and 64, 88 or 96 x 125 pallets for cargo. Average cargo load per flight is approx 8500 kgs, some flights as high as 20 000kgs. Try that in a B767... Also remember the belly width of the 767 is a non-standard 100 inch compared to the Airbus' 125 inch. Pain for all ULD's. This is why the 767 uses dedicated LD2 and LD4 containers.
Drawback fo the Airbus is that the -300 has a poor range compared to the 767 and definitely to the 330-200.
Rwy25r
SNBA to change A333 for 767 or 777?
Moderator: Latest news team
This is realy interesting information Rwy25. I think that for the time being the drawback of the A333 is not a drawback for SNBA since they focus on West-Africa, East-Africa en Central Africa. In addition the extra pax is as compared to the A332 is an extra advantage because of the SNBA routes serve mostly 2 destinations at the same time.rwy25r wrote:SNBA is taking over the lease of the 3 Birdy Airlines A330-300 at the end of October. There is no discussion about that. The lease for these aircraft runs for another year after the takeover, after that SNBA can decide what it wants to do as far as the long haul is concerned.
The A330-300 has an exceptional cargo capacity compared to the -200 and definitely compared to the Boeings, especially the 767 which takes a meagre 4 pallets compared to the 11 for the A330 -300.
SNBA uses basically LD3 containers for baggage and 64, 88 or 96 x 125 pallets for cargo. Average cargo load per flight is approx 8500 kgs, some flights as high as 20 000kgs. Try that in a B767... Also remember the belly width of the 767 is a non-standard 100 inch compared to the Airbus' 125 inch. Pain for all ULD's. This is why the 767 uses dedicated LD2 and LD4 containers.
Drawback fo the Airbus is that the -300 has a poor range compared to the 767 and definitely to the 330-200.
Rwy25r
Danny
Just a precision....
Those specifific A333 have a poor range. The payload is limited for direct flights to FIH and the flights to/from NBO. The take off from Nairobi is almost always at the max performance. FIH is usually combined with Douala or Yaoundé, therefore eliminating the problem.
A brief historic shows that initially those aircrafts - amongst the firsts to come out from the line - were previously dedicated for Air Inter. There are others A330-300 with a max TO weight around 230T (versus 215T for OO-SFM, N, O) with a range comparable to an A330-200.
Is it economically viable to pay a lot of extra bucks to increase the range at max payload? That analyse has surely been done at the management level.
Happy landings.
Those specifific A333 have a poor range. The payload is limited for direct flights to FIH and the flights to/from NBO. The take off from Nairobi is almost always at the max performance. FIH is usually combined with Douala or Yaoundé, therefore eliminating the problem.
A brief historic shows that initially those aircrafts - amongst the firsts to come out from the line - were previously dedicated for Air Inter. There are others A330-300 with a max TO weight around 230T (versus 215T for OO-SFM, N, O) with a range comparable to an A330-200.
Is it economically viable to pay a lot of extra bucks to increase the range at max payload? That analyse has surely been done at the management level.
Happy landings.
who seas they go to sn technics for maintenance? if there is a new contract there is the posibility to choose another MRO like eg LH technics nextdoor.I never said that SNBA would buy the planes, they will for sure lease them. But even if they lease the planes Boeing will be happy, since they will have to support SN Technics with parts that'll have to be replaced during maintenance.
I hope they take the wise decesion to get rid of those maintenance absurbing A333. When I see how many times this type has been delayed or cancelled due to technical problems I think SNBA should make a wise decision to switch to Boeing 767 or (but I don't think so) the 777.
On a lease contract maintenance is not important for the price, and imagine the price difference in leasing a B767 or a A333. Only on that difference they would save lots of €€€!!!!
Besides that they will see a major drop in delays and cancellations due to technical problems, my advice, go for the Boeing 767's.
Greetz,
Erwin
On a lease contract maintenance is not important for the price, and imagine the price difference in leasing a B767 or a A333. Only on that difference they would save lots of €€€!!!!
Besides that they will see a major drop in delays and cancellations due to technical problems, my advice, go for the Boeing 767's.
Greetz,
Erwin
A Whole Different Animal
-
Sabena_690
- Posts: 3378
- Joined: 20 Sep 2002, 00:00
Erwin:
x B767 is most probably no option, for the same reason why KLM switched from B763 to A332. As you know, cargo is very important for KLM. They were in need of an aircraft with an excellent operational reliability (the A332 has proven to be extremely reliable). Do you know, besides the A332, an aircraft that can hold LD3 containers in combination with the same number of pax as the B763? To make the link with SN: also SN has important cargo-traffic to Africa. For this reason, I would be very surprised to see the B767 entering service for SN.
x do not generalize the problems with the SN A333's to all A330's flying around. The operational reliability of the A330's is VERY high. The problem with those of SN is 1) the difficult conditions those aircrafts are flying in (landing in Africa etc is not as landing in BRU or JFK, the difference in airport infrastructure is big), the high humidity inclusive hot temperatures etc etc; 2) the number of cycles: those aircrafts make 4 cycles a day (in difficult circumstances); 3) they were among the first A333's built, used for shorthaul-flights in the beginning with Air Inter
x Switching from Airbus to Boeing for 'reliability' makes no sense. Both are very good manufacturers.
x Till now, I haven't heard that ALL THREE A333's would go. I would actually be very surprised when all 3 A333's leave the fleet. Is this an indication that the A330's will be replaced by A330's? It makes no sense to operate both the B767 and A330
Frederic
x B767 is most probably no option, for the same reason why KLM switched from B763 to A332. As you know, cargo is very important for KLM. They were in need of an aircraft with an excellent operational reliability (the A332 has proven to be extremely reliable). Do you know, besides the A332, an aircraft that can hold LD3 containers in combination with the same number of pax as the B763? To make the link with SN: also SN has important cargo-traffic to Africa. For this reason, I would be very surprised to see the B767 entering service for SN.
x do not generalize the problems with the SN A333's to all A330's flying around. The operational reliability of the A330's is VERY high. The problem with those of SN is 1) the difficult conditions those aircrafts are flying in (landing in Africa etc is not as landing in BRU or JFK, the difference in airport infrastructure is big), the high humidity inclusive hot temperatures etc etc; 2) the number of cycles: those aircrafts make 4 cycles a day (in difficult circumstances); 3) they were among the first A333's built, used for shorthaul-flights in the beginning with Air Inter
x Switching from Airbus to Boeing for 'reliability' makes no sense. Both are very good manufacturers.
x Till now, I haven't heard that ALL THREE A333's would go. I would actually be very surprised when all 3 A333's leave the fleet. Is this an indication that the A330's will be replaced by A330's? It makes no sense to operate both the B767 and A330
Frederic
Thanks to rnwy25r's explanation, it's quite obvious that the A330 is better in term of Cargo. This means that a replacement of the A333's with other A333's could be the cheapest solution, becasque todays A333's have had qute some problems 
You definately have a point there
But I still hope they choose SN Technics 
Chris
Voyager wrote:who seas they go to sn technics for maintenance? if there is a new contract there is the posibility to choose another MRO like eg LH technics nextdoor
You definately have a point there
But I still hope they choose SN Technics Chris
@Frederic, the reason KLM choose for the A333 had nothing to do with operational reasons but was a political choice. Some years ago KLM used to fly with a couple off A310-203 Airbusses. During this period the decision came to get rid off the airbusses due to the fact KLM was not satisfied with those planes. Also they took a decision to go for a All Boeing fleet. The reason KLM is now chosing for again Airbus, in this case the A330-200, has to do with the fact that their partner NWA choose this airplane. Since the contract for line maintenance off NWA in EHAM is with KLM this was the 1st reason to choose also for a A330-200 to get the licences and experience on line maintenance off this aircraft.
2nd reason was the real political choice, how can THE European partner from Air France fly around in a fleet without any Airbus???
This should be not done since Air France including the French governement is having 81% from the new KLM/Air France company in their hands. Check the dates off the first signs KLM was going to be eaten by Air France and the decision they were going to buy the A330-200. This is by the way not the first time KLM has to choose for a airplane they didn't want to have. In the time Fokker was building their F100 and the F70's KLM was totally not interested in those types, too bad for them since the dutch governement had a very big finger in both companies and they forced KLM to buy Fokker 100 and Fokker 70 aircraft. It should be not done that the dutch international carrier was not flying around with a dutch aircraft. A lot of decisions in aviation have nothing to do with the quality of a chosen product but has all to do with politics, so don't be fooled about the fact KLM is buying some A330-200's, it is not their will, it's a must!
Greetz,
Erwin
2nd reason was the real political choice, how can THE European partner from Air France fly around in a fleet without any Airbus???
This should be not done since Air France including the French governement is having 81% from the new KLM/Air France company in their hands. Check the dates off the first signs KLM was going to be eaten by Air France and the decision they were going to buy the A330-200. This is by the way not the first time KLM has to choose for a airplane they didn't want to have. In the time Fokker was building their F100 and the F70's KLM was totally not interested in those types, too bad for them since the dutch governement had a very big finger in both companies and they forced KLM to buy Fokker 100 and Fokker 70 aircraft. It should be not done that the dutch international carrier was not flying around with a dutch aircraft. A lot of decisions in aviation have nothing to do with the quality of a chosen product but has all to do with politics, so don't be fooled about the fact KLM is buying some A330-200's, it is not their will, it's a must!
Greetz,
Erwin
A Whole Different Animal
-
Sabena_690
- Posts: 3378
- Joined: 20 Sep 2002, 00:00
Sorry Erwin, but this is totally untrue.
You are ignoring all facts summed up above.
I ask you once again the question you did not answer in your posting: can you name, besides the A332, one aircraft with a simillar seating capacity as the B763 that can hold LD3 containers, has an excellent operational reliability, and has excellent economics?
The A332 is currently seen as a very efficient aircraft worldwide.
Your interpretation of the story about the A310-200 in the KLM fleet also isn't correct.
You have to see this decision in the new strategy of KLM back in that time: they were increasing frequencies in Europe with smaller planes (instead of offering less frequencies with bigger planes). Because the A310's of KLM were A310-200's, they lacked the range to be redeployed on long haul flights.
This is the reason why KLM got rid of their A310-200's, replaced by B737's on the European network, and B763's on the long haul network.
A lot of airlines have proven that operating a mix of B777 and A332 is very good: you can put both aircrafts on their specific markets. The B777 is too big for a lot of KLM destinations, that's why they got the A332 (offering the necessary cargo, and the same nr of seats as the B763).
As you say, fleet commonality certainly is an argument due to the A330's of AF/NW/...
Before I forget: as far as I remember, KLM's main interest was still BA and not AF when the A332's were ordered.
And one last thing, some economics: with the big competition between Airbus and Boeing these days, don't you find it a very smart decision to rely on both manufacturers? And who, besides Boeing, can deliver long haul aircrafts?
Sorry for this off topic discussion, but I found it too important to correct Erwin his statements.
Frederic
You are ignoring all facts summed up above.
I ask you once again the question you did not answer in your posting: can you name, besides the A332, one aircraft with a simillar seating capacity as the B763 that can hold LD3 containers, has an excellent operational reliability, and has excellent economics?
The A332 is currently seen as a very efficient aircraft worldwide.
Your interpretation of the story about the A310-200 in the KLM fleet also isn't correct.
You have to see this decision in the new strategy of KLM back in that time: they were increasing frequencies in Europe with smaller planes (instead of offering less frequencies with bigger planes). Because the A310's of KLM were A310-200's, they lacked the range to be redeployed on long haul flights.
This is the reason why KLM got rid of their A310-200's, replaced by B737's on the European network, and B763's on the long haul network.
A lot of airlines have proven that operating a mix of B777 and A332 is very good: you can put both aircrafts on their specific markets. The B777 is too big for a lot of KLM destinations, that's why they got the A332 (offering the necessary cargo, and the same nr of seats as the B763).
As you say, fleet commonality certainly is an argument due to the A330's of AF/NW/...
Before I forget: as far as I remember, KLM's main interest was still BA and not AF when the A332's were ordered.
And one last thing, some economics: with the big competition between Airbus and Boeing these days, don't you find it a very smart decision to rely on both manufacturers? And who, besides Boeing, can deliver long haul aircrafts?
Sorry for this off topic discussion, but I found it too important to correct Erwin his statements.
Frederic
rre
I heard that when the lease contract is over with birdy, the would change the 3 "old sn " a330-300 for 4 new ( or 2nd handed but not older then 2 years ) a330-200er.
Note from me: i think that the 777 is not an option for snba.
Kind Regards,
Note from me: i think that the 777 is not an option for snba.
Kind Regards,
Nice an empty quote, it should be nicer when you explain why you agree with Frederic.sab319 wrote:I totally agree with you Sabena 690!!!
Now @ Frederic, KLM doesn't care so much about the cargo space in PAX planes, that's why they use the 747-400's from the cargo department, besides that they use a lot of cargo space from MP since they own 50% of it.
2nd, the information I just told you about the A310 they used too had was totally correct, this was inside information my friend from E&M, maybe somebody who is currently still working with KLAF can confirm this also. I don't know why you always respond too me to deny my posts but you don't have all the wisdom in your house, even you think you do!
Better check your sources before you say mine were not correct!
Erwin
A Whole Different Animal
-
Sabena_690
- Posts: 3378
- Joined: 20 Sep 2002, 00:00
Erwin: where did I say that I have all 'wisdom in the house'?
KLM B744's cannot fly to every destination where the B763's fly to, so yes, cargo is important on those flights.
A310: the only problems I heard about was something with the stability of the plane, but then again, they did not fit in the new strategy of the KLM management anyway.
And for the third time you ignored my question about the A332...
The A332 was the right choice for KLM, point. And your argument about politics doesn't make a lot of sense. I thought that KLM managament was very independent? (only look at the time where they 'had' to buy Fokker)
Frederic
KLM B744's cannot fly to every destination where the B763's fly to, so yes, cargo is important on those flights.
A310: the only problems I heard about was something with the stability of the plane, but then again, they did not fit in the new strategy of the KLM management anyway.
And for the third time you ignored my question about the A332...
The A332 was the right choice for KLM, point. And your argument about politics doesn't make a lot of sense. I thought that KLM managament was very independent? (only look at the time where they 'had' to buy Fokker)
Frederic
Brussels Airlines - Flying Your Way
te
To sn690
However, the 767 and the md-11 would be changed in 6 a332 and 6 772. at the moment klm has bought and leased ( the first 3 planes are bought )8 b772 and 6 a332 and the md-11 stays in service, so i think the a332 is not a big issue for the klm management, i heard that the 772 - md-11 combination fit`s well in the KLM strategy, and the 772 can carry more cargo then the a332!
Please sn690, it is not personal against you!
To denimair: KLm owns 49% of martinair, KLM has not the operational rights of martinair, because they most have ( in the netherlands, it`s the law ) 50% if you want to have the operational rights.
to denimair, also not personal against you!
Kind regards
However, the 767 and the md-11 would be changed in 6 a332 and 6 772. at the moment klm has bought and leased ( the first 3 planes are bought )8 b772 and 6 a332 and the md-11 stays in service, so i think the a332 is not a big issue for the klm management, i heard that the 772 - md-11 combination fit`s well in the KLM strategy, and the 772 can carry more cargo then the a332!
Please sn690, it is not personal against you!
To denimair: KLm owns 49% of martinair, KLM has not the operational rights of martinair, because they most have ( in the netherlands, it`s the law ) 50% if you want to have the operational rights.
to denimair, also not personal against you!
Kind regards
sorry just forgot:
It is true that klm ( and martinair ) had several probs with the a310, my dad told me, and he was ( at the time ) in maintance of the a310 of kl. there where a lot off probs with the a310 also economic, they where in a to little amount, ( i mean a little group of airbussen a310, and a big group of boeing / mc douglass ) so they got also probs with storage of parts (economic probs )
But : like sn690 told you, when they had the a310-300 er, there where no probs with this plane. but its true that the planes didn`t fit in the "only Boeing " strategy of the former KLM-management.
So both ( sn690 and denimair ) are right
It is true that klm ( and martinair ) had several probs with the a310, my dad told me, and he was ( at the time ) in maintance of the a310 of kl. there where a lot off probs with the a310 also economic, they where in a to little amount, ( i mean a little group of airbussen a310, and a big group of boeing / mc douglass ) so they got also probs with storage of parts (economic probs )
But : like sn690 told you, when they had the a310-300 er, there where no probs with this plane. but its true that the planes didn`t fit in the "only Boeing " strategy of the former KLM-management.
So both ( sn690 and denimair ) are right
-
Sabena_690
- Posts: 3378
- Joined: 20 Sep 2002, 00:00
@V-Bird: I agree with your posting except one thing:
The A332 is currently the only aircraft on the market with those specifications.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the A332 already ordered before Boeing released the specific details of the B7E7?
Not that the B7E7 was an option for KLM, because the first B763's are on the way out next year, while it will still take several years before the B7E7 enters commercial service.
About the KLM A310: who was doing the maintenance of those planes? If I remember well, CO had a lot of problems with their A300 fleet, not because it was a bad plane, but because it was the only Airbus fleet in their plane. Maintenance was from what I heard a big problem for these aircrafts, because the technicians lacked the experience to work on those planes (CO was already an all-Boeing operator at that time, with the exception of their MD80 fleet).
Frederic
Well, that is exactly the problem: the B772 is too heavy for the B763 destinations of KLM! KLM can impossibly put B772's on all current B763 markets (look at BA, identical situation over there, and look at SQ when their A310's were phased out in favour of the B772!). KLM needs an aircraft able to carry the same number of pax as the B763, but with more space for cargo for LD3 containers.However, the 767 and the md-11 would be changed in 6 a332 and 6 772. at the moment klm has bought and leased ( the first 3 planes are bought )8 b772 and 6 a332 and the md-11 stays in service, so i think the a332 is not a big issue for the klm management, i heard that the 772 - md-11 combination fit`s well in the KLM strategy, and the 772 can carry more cargo then the a332!
The A332 is currently the only aircraft on the market with those specifications.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the A332 already ordered before Boeing released the specific details of the B7E7?
Not that the B7E7 was an option for KLM, because the first B763's are on the way out next year, while it will still take several years before the B7E7 enters commercial service.
About the KLM A310: who was doing the maintenance of those planes? If I remember well, CO had a lot of problems with their A300 fleet, not because it was a bad plane, but because it was the only Airbus fleet in their plane. Maintenance was from what I heard a big problem for these aircrafts, because the technicians lacked the experience to work on those planes (CO was already an all-Boeing operator at that time, with the exception of their MD80 fleet).
Frederic
Brussels Airlines - Flying Your Way
re
well i dont know, but i do know that the 763 africa routes are changing in the md-11. what is also a bigger plane then the 763 and 332. also the flights to londen heathrow in the rushhour ( "spitsuur ") normaly operated with the 763, are changing in 2X 739.
the a310 from Martinair and KLM where maintanced in Holland, by the maintanmce departments from the both airliners. I know my dad told me that he joined a special a310 course in toulouse with airbus in the early 1980`s. I think the biggest problem is indeed as you told us that it was a little airbus fleet, in a big Boeing/MC Douglass fleet. Also to biggest problem for Martinair was that they had a310 combi`s, what means that they can roll out / roll-inn the interior, so they can use the aircraft in de holiday periods as a passenger plane, and in the winter period as a cargo plane. Airbus build only 6 a310-200 combi`s, en they has several problems like to install the pressure systems ( like the gassmasks ) to install the airco each time when the aircraft would be used as an passenger aircraft.
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/464039/L/
You can clearly see the "cargo "door next to the front pessenger door!
so thats the Dutch a310 story
the a310 from Martinair and KLM where maintanced in Holland, by the maintanmce departments from the both airliners. I know my dad told me that he joined a special a310 course in toulouse with airbus in the early 1980`s. I think the biggest problem is indeed as you told us that it was a little airbus fleet, in a big Boeing/MC Douglass fleet. Also to biggest problem for Martinair was that they had a310 combi`s, what means that they can roll out / roll-inn the interior, so they can use the aircraft in de holiday periods as a passenger plane, and in the winter period as a cargo plane. Airbus build only 6 a310-200 combi`s, en they has several problems like to install the pressure systems ( like the gassmasks ) to install the airco each time when the aircraft would be used as an passenger aircraft.
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/464039/L/
You can clearly see the "cargo "door next to the front pessenger door!
so thats the Dutch a310 story
fftopic: here.