4x A346's to go by the end of the year

It should give Virgin a more versatile fleet for seasonal demand on routes. Its not the first time they have introduced smaller planes i.e. a 747 fleet to a mixed 747/A343.

It seems to me that a number of airlines are flying smaller planes these days inc BA: 747-400 to 777

Not sure where you get that from - BA has brought back its 747s from the desert, is having A380s delivered from next year, and is ordering 77Ws over 772s. BA has a strategy and a plan for growth that VS doesn't seem able to emulate in any shape or form. I'm just seeing managed decline.

Don't forget the new A330's do not have ANY proper crew rest facilities... so that means there is extra space in the hold that can be used for Cargo (as the 346 has the lower deck mobile crew rest).

Oh lovely, so crew unhappy, that bleeds into no use of the front loo for UC pax all wanting to change at the same time, etc. crew congregating around doors L1 and L2, crew reserving UC seats for their use (not blaming the crew here).

A333 payload with c. 200 passengers = 46 T
A346 payload with c. 380 passengers = 56 T

Of course VS will have fewer passengers to compare, say 265 and 330 which will make the cargo difference greater between them.

Then there's range, the A333 with 290 pax has a range of c. 6,000 NM whereas the A346 has range of 7,900 NM. So HKG will be hard if not doable with an A333 for example so the fleet could become a little inflexible.

The 333 is a "smaller' aircraft in every regard.

The whole point of the A333 is for 6-7-8 hour trips with a decent passenger and cargo load. It's absolutely ideal for routes to NYC IAD BOS ACC NBO DXB and ORD.

While the A346 is ideally suited for the longer routes like NRT HKG LAX and CPT.

And also I'm always lead to believe that VS does well with cargo, but the A333 has significantly less cargo capacity and payload than a A346 ... weird downsizing! I am getting worried by VS.

Not accoring to this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A340-600#A340-600 - 152.3 cubic metres (5380 cubic ft)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A330 - 162.8 cubic metres (5750 cubic ft)

OK, weight is an entirely separate measure.

Wikipedia is NOT your friend!

Having read that (somewhat implausible) claim that aircrafts of different lengths would have Identical cargo volumes, I went to the source:


http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/ ... fications/


http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/ ... fications/

However you measure it, the 333 is smaller than the 346.

and maybe, just maybe, they know how to run an airline better than us

But wheres the fun in that?! ):

and maybe, just maybe, they know how to run an airline better than us

^) ^) ^) Well said.

Interesting indeed...

Some thoughts:
- are there not routes/departures currently using A346 that are rarely full? Substitute A333
- If more slots available, perhaps more frequency of routes thus maintaiing/increasing overall capacity?
- I'm pretty sure the A333 has a lower cost per passenger ile than does the A346.

And, pure economics - perhaps letting the A346 leases expire and procuring A333s just makes sense in terms of fleet cost.

Whilst I'm a huge fan of the 747s (with their 4 engines!), there is nothing to be concerned about, for anyone, about twin engined operations - really, there isn't. perhaps we could start a whole new topic on that particular point...

As Macmaddog says, may they know what they are doing! Let's hope so anyway...

Personally, if they increase frequency of flights with slightly smaller planes, I'm all for that.

And great news on the UCS...

and maybe, just maybe, they know how to run an airline better than us

^) ^) ^) Well said.

But more often that not make it look like they don't.

Perception can be more powerful than reality.

It should give Virgin a more versatile fleet for seasonal demand on routes. Its not the first time they have introduced smaller planes i.e. a 747 fleet to a mixed 747/A343.

It seems to me that a number of airlines are flying smaller planes these days inc BA: 747-400 to 777

====================================================

Slinky09 'Not sure where you get that from - BA has brought back its 747s from the desert, is having A380s delivered from next year, and is ordering 77Ws over 772s. BA has a strategy and a plan for growth that VS doesn't seem able to emulate in any shape or form. I'm just seeing managed decline'

=====================================================

According to airliners.net the 77W's are to replace some of the 747's. I believe some BA 747's have been scrapped in Cardiff. In terms of routes at times SYD can be flown by a 777 instead of a 747. Likewise HK used to be 3 747's it now has 1 777 (plus 2 x 747's). I have flown the BA 77W and a 747 it is not. BA carry upto 345 on a 747 v's 299 on a 77W.

I expect BA will see how the 380 works for them before deciding how to replace the rest of the 747's.

Air NZ is another one replacing 747's with 77W.

Pesonally I prefer a bigger plane

Air NZ is another one replacing 747's with 77W.

Incorrect unless you are on the board of NZ that are currently undertaking a long haul review. NZ was originally going to replace the 744 with 77W however at least two are being retained in the fleet to operate AKL-SFO. There is considerable "chatter" that the 772 will be deployed back into LHR as NZ are struggling big time to compete with VS/CX/BA on LHR-HKG. However the "chatter" has been, for years, that they will start MAN but nothing has come of it. Anyway back OT.


IIRC the first two 346 are very early off the line (number two and three possibly) and therefore one would presume they are not as effective as the others. I know that sounds crazy but aircraft makers do refine and make their aircraft more effective once the first couple are off the production line. I also think they may have the heavier wing and so therefore are a lot less efficient. And lets not forget that VS, along with QR and AC, got caught up in ordering what they believed would be the airliner for the next twenty years. Sadly the 77W soon arrived and proved them wrong. The 346 is a great plane but is regarded as the idiots choice over the 77W and hence will be hard to sell second hand (unless you are IB, SA, LAN, AR who operate at high altitudes). Bearing in mind the resale market I think its a good move to return them back to the leasing company asap.

They are also all leased so no need to keep them on if the 10 year plan at VS is for the airline to reduce the 346s and to increase 330's use, have the 787 into the fleet and keep the 744s as a work horse.

In my mind its a smart move by VS.

The 346 is a great plane but is regarded as the idiots choice over the 77W

Out of interest, could you expand on that a bit? (Who regards it as the idiot's choice? Why?)

The 346 is a great plane but is regarded as the idiots choice over the 77W

Out of interest, could you expand on that a bit? (Who regards it as the idiot's choice? Why?)

At the time when the 346 was launched it was regarded as a great choice however shortly after Boeing launched the 77W.

The 77W is a much more efficient aircraft, it is two engined rather than four, uses less fuel, holds more cargo and is cheaper to operate. Had VS not so pubically declared '4 engines 4 long haul' or been the launch customer they may have cut their losses earlier.

As a result of the greater 77W performance, with the exception of IB and SA, who had selected the 346 because it performs excellent at high altitude airports (where they predominately fly to/from) and LH, who were never going to get rid of it given its essentially a German aircraft, most airlines decided to go for the 77W. Indeed AC, long considered a huge Airbus supporter, got rid of theirs 346s in rather swift fashion for the Boeing. The chair of QR (who often comes out with quite outrageous statements) publicly declared his dislike of the 346 and QR promptly went out and got the 77W.

The 346 sister, the 345, has not faired much better either with the 77L being considered much better. EY being the latest carrier to dump theirs and EK have made the model a bit part player.

Nearly every carrier which was faced with the choice of the 346 or 77W has gone with the later because it is just a much more efficient airliner. Of course, when VS decided to become launch customer of the 346, the 77W was not an option and then when Boeing announced it, VS was so far down the line and loyal to Airbus they couldn't pull out.

Air NZ is another one replacing 747's with 77W.

Incorrect unless you are on the board of NZ that are currently undertaking a long haul review.
===============================================

Why do you need to reply with such a sentence? I have followed this forum for over 6 years. I don't post often, but enjoy reading many items as I fly alot inc Virgin. I thought it was a fairly friendly and helpful place. Of course I am not on the board. NZ is one of my markets that I visit a few times a year. Someone I work with was invited on the inaugural 77W to London last year. He told me they were replacing the 747. If its not right - fair enough. There are other ways of saying I am not right.

Just watched departure on Plane Finder of the flight I'll take next week VS201 A346 and the slightly earlier CX101 A333 - both SYD-HKG - one thing I noticed (and this may be a question for the Aviation Geeks forum) is that the 346 climbed to a higher cruising altitude 33,000' than the 333 - 28,000 -quite a difference. I guess CX may be carrying a heavier load - but I wondered if there were any other factors that might contribute to this?

According to airliners.net the 77W's are to replace some of the 747's. I believe some BA 747's have been scrapped in Cardiff. In terms of routes at times SYD can be flown by a 777 instead of a 747. Likewise HK used to be 3 747's it now has 1 777 (plus 2 x 747's). I have flown the BA 77W and a 747 it is not. BA carry upto 345 on a 747 v's 299 on a 77W.

I expect BA will see how the 380 works for them before deciding how to replace the rest of the 747's.

Air NZ is another one replacing 747's with 77W.

Pesonally I prefer a bigger plane

Well we sort of agree, BA had 57 747s and parked I think eight in the desert, six have been brought back into service and two scrapped at Cardiff. BA also had 42 772s and have added six 77W and ordered some more of these. So overall some growth. To this BA has added an order for 12 A380s with seven options, and 24 787s. So the 787s replace the ageing 767s and it's likely that the A380s and 77Ws will replace older 747s - both upsizing and downsizing.

I note that BA tends to take the aircraft it orders, unlike VS whose fleet planning appears schizophrenic at best.

Note also that BA and CX have the OneWorld alliance to provide options on LHR-HKG. I agree also about NZ - they have replaced 747s with a 772 in the LHR via HKG route and a 773 on the route via LAX. All to do with economics ...

It mustn't be ignored that the B777-300er (77W) has a significantly higher purchase price than the A346, so whilst it's more efficient it might be even-steven on overall costs on a 10 year life span.

Just watched departure on Plane Finder of the flight I'll take next week VS201 A346 and the slightly earlier CX101 A333 - both SYD-HKG - one thing I noticed (and this may be a question for the Aviation Geeks forum) is that the 346 climbed to a higher cruising altitude 33,000' than the 333 - 28,000 -quite a difference. I guess CX may be carrying a heavier load - but I wondered if there were any other factors that might contribute to this?

It would depend what altitude the flight was allocated on the flight path. It could very well move up higher later in its journey - depends how busy the sky is.

Does anyone have sufficient knowledge to summarise the current fleet and the fleet at, say the end of the year?

4x A346 leaving 8?x A330 arriving? etc, etc,

It would be interesting to see the net gain/reduction in airframes, and an estimate of passenger capacity...

The A380s will not enter this equation, and the 787s won't until next year?

Oh boy, this is confusing!!!

Hey Concorde,

Here is a summary for you!

Current Fleet
19x A346
4x A343
2x A333
12x B744

http://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/Virg ... lantic.htm

Total of 37 in fleet currently.

To leave by 2012

2x A343
4x A346
1x B744 (VTOP)

Total of 7 to leave fleet

To Arrive by 2012

5x A333 New from Airbus
3x A333 Returned from Leases (2x leased to China Airways, 1x Ryan International)
1x B744 (VROM)

Total of 9 to enter fleet

So with a net gain of two aircraft but a whole load of fleet refurbishment going on with the LGW 12, it should be an exciting year to travel with VS!

By the way, I'm ignoring the A388 and the 788 planes which are on order but not like to be seen before 2013-2015 at the earliest!

3x A333 Returned from Leases (2x leased to China Airways, 1x Ryan International

Are you sure these are, I thought the China Air leases were 2+ years?

Does anyone know why VWIN has been out so long, now in Zurich? I guess she will return before long, and before all this fun and games goes on?

3x A333 Returned from Leases (2x leased to China Airways, 1x Ryan International

Are you sure these are, I thought the China Air leases were 2+ years?

I would agree that the leases are probably as long as 2 years, possibly longer but that's why I wanted to line them out separately, incase they don't come back!

RyanJW - that's a brilliant summary - and dumbed down just right for my tiny brain!!!

Interesting though, isn't it, even counting the leased A330s, we've got a net drop in capacity I'd suggest.

A level number of airframes (which blows out my theory of more smaller planes to increase frequency), possibly even redution in airframes for a period...

So - unless VS have fleet plans we know nothing about, they are predicting a drop in capacity requirement (assuming fleet planning and revenue forecasting are joined up!)?

It's not as simple as all that, of course, refurbs, seasonality etc - but at the bear bones, it doesn't look expansionist.

Get BMI slots and planes? Now, maybe that's where the increased capacity and number of airframes is coming from!!!

It's not as simple as all that, of course, refurbs, seasonality etc - but at the bear bones, it doesn't look expansionist.

Get BMI slots and planes? Now, maybe that's where the increased capacity and number of airframes is coming from!!!

See my earlier comments about managed decline, now you have the numbers you can see the result, smaller planes, no increased frequency beyond what has been announced - and don't expect VS to get anything from BMI either. The competition commission isn't even investigating BA's acquisition of BMI so VS's public bleating is for nothing.

I much prefer flying VS, I'd like to see it strong and growing, it remains strongly my preferred airline, and I'd like to see it in a proper alliance so that frequent fliers have more options. I'd like to see a stop to chit chat and a return to action (e.g. SRB "We will join an alliance within three months" back in June 2011)!

It's great to have new planes, but less capacity and no strategy for growth continues to worry me.

Slinky - you're clearly better informed (have a better memory than me) - but the big question in my mind is this...

Are VS management being realistic and smart, or are they overly cautious and likely to get left behind?

With the apparent (yet to be truly and consistently delivered) upping of the stakes by BA (and others), is this a management team paralised by indecision?

Worrying times for VS or not....your thrust appears to be yes, but I don't know, I really don't...

There is no final officially announced plan just yet.

Reading between the lines....
G-VROM is apparently coming back and G-VTOP may be staying, indeed the new paint scheme is probably still wet.

There are five new A330-300s due this year, with three from last year not taken up and still out on lease.

So four A346s leaving and 5 A330s and 1 B744 returning seems to be the plan. Perhaps G-VSUN and G-VFAR may be going as well, these are the two that didn't get the new colours recently.

The A340-600 is *WAY* too much aircraft for short routes like Boston, New York, Chicago and Miami. It's OK for Los Angeles and San Francisco with Vancouver coming on line too, but the competition are doing the same routes with two engines in every case.