SAA's A340's
Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hilton, Sheraton or Marriott
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAA's A340's
Was wondering what the word from the rockface was re. SAA's A340's. Late delivery, still outstanding on the -600's; 330's leased in from BMI (what's the crew mix and is this by-pass pay rumour true?) and today I heard that some ex-Lufthansa -200's are arriving early in the New Year.
GunsssR4ever
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Out there somewhere ...
Posts: 3,816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A problem ?
KCW, I pressume you know more about the subject ??
So what is the buzzz, fuzz ... ??? Do you speculate it can not take off at H, H, H conditions - even at Smut's runway lenght ? Tell us more ... we are waiting in constipation ...
So what is the buzzz, fuzz ... ??? Do you speculate it can not take off at H, H, H conditions - even at Smut's runway lenght ? Tell us more ... we are waiting in constipation ...
Join Date: May 2002
Location: up here, everyone looks like ants!
Posts: 966
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having recently experienced a 28 degree departure from FAJS ( a mild, early Summers day) in the A340-300 (CX) I would have to say that SAA have bought themselves (in the -300) a whole lot of problems.
The MTOW (structural) of the 340-300 is 275 000 kg.
We left at 251 000 (performance limited) using every trick in the book.
Full pax, their bags (I presume), no gas for Mummy and about 20 000 kg of "high priority" cargo on the ramp (seafood).
The take-off performance was marginal, we never made the 8000' restriction (not even close) and to say I saw the whites of some pedestrians eyes as we crossed the fence is not an exaggeration.
We have been told the -600 is a different airplane completely, nowhere near as limited. After an LAX next month, I hope to be able to corroborate that statement.
The MTOW (structural) of the 340-300 is 275 000 kg.
We left at 251 000 (performance limited) using every trick in the book.
Full pax, their bags (I presume), no gas for Mummy and about 20 000 kg of "high priority" cargo on the ramp (seafood).
The take-off performance was marginal, we never made the 8000' restriction (not even close) and to say I saw the whites of some pedestrians eyes as we crossed the fence is not an exaggeration.
We have been told the -600 is a different airplane completely, nowhere near as limited. After an LAX next month, I hope to be able to corroborate that statement.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: South Africa
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They wouldn't be the first aircraft to have limitations at FAJS in mid-summer. Hope that SAA did their homework properly, could be a bit embarrassing to have to fly with reduced payload
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: "HARD" TO TELL.....
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SA taxpayers having to cough up YET AGAIN for the clowns in the government...The only reason why scareways alias SA Government bought BUSSES and not Boeing,is because of the handsome AIDS contributions from countries in Europe-in return Mbeki and the 40 thieves are obliged to buy European goods!!
Pathetic,to say the least...
Nothing wrong with the Bus though,I have the pleasure of flying one myself....
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think SAA is getting themselves into a lot of trouble with the A340-300. It cannot get out of JNB on hot days with full payload. The engines will overtemp everytime and maintenance will have a great time doing boroscopes everyday. The end result is that the engine has to get replaced after so many overtemp's. So I hope SAA are getting a lot of spare engines.
I have had the pleasure/displeasure to be onboard a A340-300 out of JNB on a hot afternoon. Were taking off towards Kempton and saw the fire station appear on the left before they rotated!
I have had the pleasure/displeasure to be onboard a A340-300 out of JNB on a hot afternoon. Were taking off towards Kempton and saw the fire station appear on the left before they rotated!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Africa
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A340-300? I thought they were getting the -600.
Anyone care to comment?
If it is indeed the -300 I reckon the monkey cage at Spoories' HQ needs to be refurbished to stop the little sods getting out and wasting more taxpayers' hard earned bucks.
Anyone care to comment?
If it is indeed the -300 I reckon the monkey cage at Spoories' HQ needs to be refurbished to stop the little sods getting out and wasting more taxpayers' hard earned bucks.
Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hilton, Sheraton or Marriott
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The order includes -600's & -300's. Can't agree on the overtemps on every takeoff, but old engines will get hot. Joburg on some days looks like a 340 reunion; Virgin, Sabena, Austrian, Turkish, Cathay, Olympic, Mauritius, Air France, Iberia, TAP have all operated at various times through JNB. Can't be that bad.
SAA's -300's are also the latest version with the latest version of the CFM56, post the C4. That'll no doubt help the performance.
Still interested in the late deliveries & the Lufthansa connection.
SAA's -300's are also the latest version with the latest version of the CFM56, post the C4. That'll no doubt help the performance.
Still interested in the late deliveries & the Lufthansa connection.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't have the figures in front of me, so must await Pontius' contribution with the exact numbers, but the A340-300 needs less than 20C or thereabouts to get out of JNB at anything approaching MTOW. However, departing at night to Europe (and I assume most of SAA's departures will fall into this category?), we can always depart with full pax, and a fair whack of freight. We often have to chuck some freight off if the wx at the other end is grotty, but I've never departed JNB for LHR with less than about 10 tons of freight, even on the hottest night and with the grottiest wx in LHR. And we've never ever left pax or bags behind (not for weight considerations anyway
). So unless Spoories are planning on daytime departures, they shouldn't have too many problems.
Deliveries. As far as I know the 300s are only scheduled for soemtime next year anyway - don't know what their status is. The -600s are late - we get the first 4, then I think CX gets 2 before SAA gets their 1st one, though I might be wrong. Anyway, no.4 was supposed to have been delivered about now, but we've only just taken delivery of no.3, which should have arrived in august!! So I suspect Spoories have a month or 2 to wait.
4HP - how you doing, bro'? Long time no hear - you heading this way at all?
). So unless Spoories are planning on daytime departures, they shouldn't have too many problems.Deliveries. As far as I know the 300s are only scheduled for soemtime next year anyway - don't know what their status is. The -600s are late - we get the first 4, then I think CX gets 2 before SAA gets their 1st one, though I might be wrong. Anyway, no.4 was supposed to have been delivered about now, but we've only just taken delivery of no.3, which should have arrived in august!! So I suspect Spoories have a month or 2 to wait.
4HP - how you doing, bro'? Long time no hear - you heading this way at all?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Contract
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The following figures from the performance manual:
A/C model A340-313
Manufacturer's Serial Number 0194
Engines C4's
MTOW (Structural) 271 000 kgs
Takeoff conditions:
Runway 03L full length Johannesburg International
Config 2
Packs off
Anti ice off
No wind
Dry runway
At 20 degrees C:
Max takeoff weight 262 400 kgs
Limited by obstacles and brake energy
V1=136
Vr=158
V2=165
At 30 degrees C:
Max takeoff weight 244 200 kgs
Limited by runway length and brake energy
V1=140
Vr=157
V2-163
As can be seen from Cpt Underpants' posting, their A340-300's in CX have differences in the structural limits. We also have some with a Max structural take off weight of 257 000 kgs and with C3 engines (less thrust).
With this in mind one would have to know the exact details of the SAA aircraft to see what their limitations will be, and more importantly what their effective payload would be on the various sectors.
A/C model A340-313
Manufacturer's Serial Number 0194
Engines C4's
MTOW (Structural) 271 000 kgs
Takeoff conditions:
Runway 03L full length Johannesburg International
Config 2
Packs off
Anti ice off
No wind
Dry runway
At 20 degrees C:
Max takeoff weight 262 400 kgs
Limited by obstacles and brake energy
V1=136
Vr=158
V2=165
At 30 degrees C:
Max takeoff weight 244 200 kgs
Limited by runway length and brake energy
V1=140
Vr=157
V2-163
As can be seen from Cpt Underpants' posting, their A340-300's in CX have differences in the structural limits. We also have some with a Max structural take off weight of 257 000 kgs and with C3 engines (less thrust).
With this in mind one would have to know the exact details of the SAA aircraft to see what their limitations will be, and more importantly what their effective payload would be on the various sectors.
Registered User *
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Not here anymore
Age: 63
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe I'm just on the slow side (it is the season ain't it!!!), but following the posts here it looks as if A340 deliveries are being delayed due to production status/problems at Airbus.
How come we have (for some time now) a full blown add on TV in SA with an A340 flying in SAA colours? Is the aircraft shown in the add possibly in the acceptamce phase and if so, how long does this take? Or is it computer generated magic they're selling us? Just wondering - what with the rumours about SAA not being able to pay and all the rest!!
How come we have (for some time now) a full blown add on TV in SA with an A340 flying in SAA colours? Is the aircraft shown in the add possibly in the acceptamce phase and if so, how long does this take? Or is it computer generated magic they're selling us? Just wondering - what with the rumours about SAA not being able to pay and all the rest!!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Wales, UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AIRBUS FOR SAA
SAA will be the launch customer for the A340-300 advanced
The A340-600 arrives late January
The Govt is not paying for the Aircraft - thanks to Bin Ladin, they came at good prices and SAA through some financial wizardry will pay for the aircraft.
The Airline through its strategy of perfecting the basics is doing OK right now and is certainly profitable.
No, its not perfect but lets give credit where credit is due !!!
The A340-600 arrives late January
The Govt is not paying for the Aircraft - thanks to Bin Ladin, they came at good prices and SAA through some financial wizardry will pay for the aircraft.
The Airline through its strategy of perfecting the basics is doing OK right now and is certainly profitable.
No, its not perfect but lets give credit where credit is due !!!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Kinshasa DRC
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A340 vs B747 ?????
Maybe we should ask some of the ex-Sabena pilots to 'inform' the masses of the different performances of these two aircraft using J'Berg as they changed in the late 90's from Bee's to Busses - funny I just did - the ex-chief pilot informed me that for the first time in their 80 year history they could NOT use the MTOW given in the flight manual for this airport - in fact usually 40t under. Their profitability went to hell and we all know the end result. I really do hope that SAA have done their sums correctly this time and not simply calculated on the purchase price!!!
Coincidence - you be the judge???
Coincidence - you be the judge???
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Munich
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hi guys.
just thought that in comparison it would be interesting to see the B777 performance figures. here they are for a B777-200ER with GE90-90.
JNB 03L, 20°C, 1013, no wind:
MTOM 269.290 kgs (Brake Energy limit) V1 162, Vr 172, V2 176;
at 30°C:
MTOM 255.250 kgs (Field limit), 163, 170, 174
hope that was good info. that is packs off and optimum v1.
i myself have never operated into jnb, so its just off the computer. keep in mind that approximate ZFM of the 777 is around 145 to 147 t. would be interesting to see how that figure compares with the 340, to find out the payload capability.
just thought that in comparison it would be interesting to see the B777 performance figures. here they are for a B777-200ER with GE90-90.
JNB 03L, 20°C, 1013, no wind:
MTOM 269.290 kgs (Brake Energy limit) V1 162, Vr 172, V2 176;
at 30°C:
MTOM 255.250 kgs (Field limit), 163, 170, 174
hope that was good info. that is packs off and optimum v1.
i myself have never operated into jnb, so its just off the computer. keep in mind that approximate ZFM of the 777 is around 145 to 147 t. would be interesting to see how that figure compares with the 340, to find out the payload capability.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4HolerPoler:
I think nobody has answered your remark concerning ex DLH A340s yet... you are right: AFAIK, at least four of the six A342 (yes, -200s!) will be leased/sold to SAA after DLH handed them back to AI. Each transfer is scheduled after D1-check (commencing on the first a/c sometime around Jan./Feb. 03).
Having read all your performance thoughts I must say I am worried about the A342s with the C2 engines having to climb out of JNB (I was pax on a rather new DLH A343 recently doing exactly that - and it was a frightening long take-off run...!)
Nevertheless: A340s are great aircraft (except for some "troublesome" areas like ATA 32, 28, 21/36... *g*).
J.V.
I think nobody has answered your remark concerning ex DLH A340s yet... you are right: AFAIK, at least four of the six A342 (yes, -200s!) will be leased/sold to SAA after DLH handed them back to AI. Each transfer is scheduled after D1-check (commencing on the first a/c sometime around Jan./Feb. 03).
Having read all your performance thoughts I must say I am worried about the A342s with the C2 engines having to climb out of JNB (I was pax on a rather new DLH A343 recently doing exactly that - and it was a frightening long take-off run...!)
Nevertheless: A340s are great aircraft (except for some "troublesome" areas like ATA 32, 28, 21/36... *g*).
J.V.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4HolerPoler:
D-AIBA has left revenue service today after last rotations to DEN, PHX, and the middle east (KWI?!) on a ferry flight to HAM where it has gone to D1 check.
BTW: BA was the DLH star alliance bird!
cheers,
J. V.
D-AIBA has left revenue service today after last rotations to DEN, PHX, and the middle east (KWI?!) on a ferry flight to HAM where it has gone to D1 check.
BTW: BA was the DLH star alliance bird!
cheers,
J. V.