A340-600
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: South
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought as much.
So I did a quick search on google thinking it would be a leading news title in an aviation magazine but nada.
Anyone know why they were returned? how many etc..
So I did a quick search on google thinking it would be a leading news title in an aviation magazine but nada.
Anyone know why they were returned? how many etc..
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE Asia
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
was not a big deal at all ... cx had 3, I think, and the lease has not been renewed by cx so they went back to the leasing company (ILFC?) who actually owns them. It seems they have been sitting around CLK in Hainan Airlines colours for a long time, coz Hainan didn't want to take delivery amidst the downturn and so, once a month on each scheduled delivery day they found one or two new technical item that needs to be fixed before they can take them.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 3.5 from TD
Age: 47
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They are now flying, I did see one of them in Pudong a while back.
CH-Aviation - Airline News, Fleet Lists & More
CH-Aviation - Airline News, Fleet Lists & More
I forget the actual figures but 3 600's used up something like 30% of the whole fleet maintenance budget. They were early build 600's and basically a pain in the ass. CX had huge problems maintaining them. Not to mention the lack of payload v the ER.
I turned out that only 3 600's in the fleet wasn't financially viable long term.
Bye bye 600's.................................thank goodness
I turned out that only 3 600's in the fleet wasn't financially viable long term.
Bye bye 600's.................................thank goodness
Not sacked, she was transfered to cargo, something about leaising with other carriers over pricing, then onto the fuel hedging team. I hear she's going to replace Nic running flight ops soon.
Last edited by pill; 3rd Aug 2009 at 00:04.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 'round here
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was a nice machine to fly and had a bunk you could stand up in, no standing in the stairwell to put your shirt on. Plus it had 4 engines for going over the pole. Very much doubt it sucked up 30% of the airbus fleet operating budget as they were proven reliable in the latter stages of us having them.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: The Fragrant Harbour
Age: 49
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have to give it some respect, it was the nicest of the buses to fly, it landed just as nicely as the -300er, in fact my stike rate was far higher on the -600, it was the first aircraft to be able to do NYC direct year round, yes it burnt more fuel than the ER on the trip but it didnt have to off load baggage and pax come a hot day in NYC or YYZ. The worst loss is that it was the best aircraft out of them all for JNB, year round it could lift more than a 744 not mater what the OAT. Having done Joburgs in both -600 and the ER i have to say the ER takes less ground to get airborn albiet with significantly reduced payload but if i were to lose one at V1 i would want to be in the -600 any day.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Infinity and Beyond
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Says the man from the UAE who happen to be sitting on a vast oil reserve!! The rest of the world is a little more concerned about the cost of fuel and conserving it's usage to try and maximise operating profits......oh and to protect the environment of course!
If you are 4 ft tall.....................
the 777 is the best a/c in the air by far...................including the crew rest facilities.............