View Full Version : Kingfisher Airlines Delays Flights to the USA
mannymux
6th Aug 2008, 16:44
Have anyone received info on why KF has delayed flights to the states? I heard that they were not thrilled with the A340?
concordino
6th Aug 2008, 19:35
Funny you said that. It seems that only after getting two airframes ready for delivery, (A345s), they changed their mind.
With current Oil prices, signs of slowdown in India and the US and the losses suffered so far... There surely isn't anything impressive about them 345s:D
News about a more conservative expansion based on the 332s...
condorbaaz
11th Aug 2008, 11:10
Apparently in may there was a possibility mooted to make a refuelling halt , in an atempt to beat the high ATF prices inflamed by the high taxes. the Board asked why the 340-500 if now a refuelling halt is envisaged.
Hence the reaction.
expected routes: 332
BLR-LHR, BLR-HKG, BOM-Shanghai-west coast
Possibly Amsterdam with KLM....
Bad choice of aircraft. The B772LR 'kills' the A345 in terms of fuel burn and payload and obviously trip costs and potential trip profit.
guiones
11th Aug 2008, 18:30
Hey B772 proove it.
In your experience with the economics of the two A/C give us some numbers. I would love to see what you base your assumptions on.
Your inside information on trip costs for all B772 and A340-500 operators must have taken a long time to get.
Eagerly waiting for your numbers!!!
G
Guiones, Sorry to disappoint you but the A340-500 and A340-600 are flops. Air Canada and Thai International both lost interest in the A340-500 within weeks of their introduction to service and have withdrawn the type/model from service. The Singapore Airlines (SQ) fleet of 5 x A340-500 is effectively subsidised by Airbus due to various operational guarantees not being met.
SQ have considered replacing the A340-500's on a number of occassions with the B772-LR but the A340-500 has little resale value. I understand Airbus are offering discounts of approx. $75 Mil on the A340-500 and A340-600 for any new sales.
You may be aware SQ placed an order for 30 A340-300's but soon after the initial aircraft went in to service they realised the aircraft was a dud. As SQ could not cancel the order Boeing agreed to accept the entire A340-300 order as a trade-in on a B777 order. It took Boeing some time to dispose of the A340-300's even at give away prices.
At the limit of the A340-500's payload/range the B777-200LR will have burnt 15 tonnes less fuel whilst carrying 25 more passengers and 12 more tonnes of freight.
In an effort to improve the aircrafts performance and financials SQ are changing the configuration of the A340-500 fleet to just 100 Biz class from
64 Biz class and 117 Executive Economy. A reduction of 81 seats.
The B777-200LR also outclimbs the A340-500 by a considerable margin.
fatbus
12th Aug 2008, 17:20
45 Tons less burn dont think so, and climb better?
guiones
12th Aug 2008, 18:01
B772:
Again, you are talking without any specific knowledge. Your 45 ton statements shows your complete ignorance on the A345.
Also your numbers on Airbus discounts, what is your souce?
Do you know the specific reason for airlines to remove them from the fleet, what are your sources?
What is Airbus subsidising at SQ, what guarantees were not met, what are your sources again?
All heresay, no concrete info; when you mention concrete info (45 tons) you show your complete ignorance.
Stick to the airplane you know.
G
vikram_nz
15th Aug 2008, 06:13
Cant see anywhere 45 tonnes being mentioned by B772.:confused:
guiones
15th Aug 2008, 19:53
He changed it to 15 after it was challenged; which it still exagerated.
G
Finger trouble it was. Most airline people know about the short comings of the A340-500 especially. The Thai annual report said they paid $130M each for the A340-500's. Airbus quote a list price of $237M for new A340-500's. A recent edition of Aircraft Value suggested the Thai A345-500's are worth less than $100M each.
Details of payments, compensation and/or other benefits to carriers by Airbus are confidential between the parties.
Sorry folks, B772 is right in nearly every respect.
Thai was really disappointed with the Airboos.
condorbaaz
27th Aug 2008, 12:12
The 345 are out.
As per a press release this is their ac strength...
domain-b.com : Kingfisher Airlines defers A320 deliveries (http://www.domain-b.com/aero/airlines/20080826_airlines_a320.html)
Don't get me started about the 3 x 346's in our fleet.:mad:
We have got rid of 1 and the other 2 go soon.
Biggest piece of trash CX ever bought.
Those 3 Aircraft in our fleet consumed something like 30% of our maint budget.
The 777-200LR and 300ER ****s all over the 345 and 346, no exceptions.
I think even Airbus have acknowledged this fact in the press as well.
Sky Dancer
31st Aug 2008, 03:52
yeah but Dr.Vijay Mallya still thinks it's a great airplane..which speaks volumes about KFs fleet evaluation programme..right now no one in the company are sure as to what the plans are for the A 340s..they've sold off 2 of them and trying to find buyers for a few more..meanwhile they've deffered deliveries of 32 A 320s and from rumours they may go ahead and cancel some of them....looks like the red on his balance sheet is getting a bit to hot for him to handle...:ok:
concordino
2nd Sep 2008, 17:45
Here is the latest on the 340 situation at KFA straight from the horse's mouth as it appeared on Flight International today:
India's Kingfisher looks to sell some of its A340-500s
By Leithen Francis
Kingfisher Airlines aims to sell some of the five Airbus A340-500s it has on order, but wants to keep at least two so it can launch ultra-long-haul services from Bangalore to San Francisco.
The carrier's executive vice-president, Hitesh Patel, says all five A340-500s are to be delivered in October and it is working to sell two or three.
Patel says Kingfisher experienced difficulties raising financing for the A340-500s, but that issue has been resolved. "With the price of fuel... we felt it was in our best interests to hold onto [just] a couple of the A340s," rather than five, he says.
Kingfisher was due by the end of August to have taken delivery of four of the five A330s it has on order.
teghjeet
9th Sep 2008, 03:45
Kingfisher to reduce planned US flights - Corporate News - livemint.com (http://www.livemint.com/2008/09/08000633/Kingfisher-to-reduce-planned-U.html)
ACMS. The CEO of Qatar has just announced he would throw away the A340-600 fleet as he is unhappy with their performance. He went on to say the aircraft are not efficient at all.
jetjockey696
13th Mar 2009, 10:50
After all you have said and argued.. Someone should tell Air Asia X about the excitment of A330 and a340.. fuel burn.. people just dont listen.
Left Wing
13th Mar 2009, 14:13
these airbus "believers" ...dont want to sell cargo on 777's so claim the 330 /340 is the best for for them....while dedicated cargo guys make a killing ...
jamestaylor
14th Mar 2009, 00:03
Gentlemen,
The key problem is management. These billionares (soon to be millionares) buy airilines as they are sexy - no? The real issue is they do not hire smart people of any colour or race who an actually do a proper aircraft purchase and route analysis.
A little lesson do not take this wrong - but A/C are simply tools! Airbus versus Boeing does not matter. Who makes the best equipment for the route and economic analysis - I will say again economic analysis. Do you really think any of these super brains had a smart team doing the route analysis, marketing analysis, competive analysis, and the proper aircraft analysis to make the proper well thought out decision. I do not think Kingfisher and the majority of new airlines do this.
I do now that Lufthansa, SQ, Cathay, Southwest, etc do have good teams doing this on a full time basis. This business is crazy - low yields, too many government linked companies, high fuel, high regulatory hell, why would any sane business man go into ti - Warren Buffet does not invest in airlines.
Lastly, the 777 versus the 345 is no comparison sorry but even Airbus will admit it. The bottom line is super long haul has it disadvantages due to high cost and low seats due to weight limitations and no proper A/C yet (maybe the dreamed of 350-1000).
Thai has parked their 345 no? SQ only business and this model has never worked - never!
So in closing (sorry if there are typos here) I think best short haul plane is a320 AND THE BEST LONG HUAL IS 777-300ER.