Thai Airways confirms A340-600 fleet retirement in March 2015

[george]

Thai Airways accelerates A340-600 retirement to 28 March 2015

BANGKOK: -- Thai Airways accelerated planned retirement of its A340-600 fleet to 28 March 2015 with the aircraft no longer appearing in the schedule from the following day, as per a 16-Feb-2015 GDS inventory and timetable display .

The following services are affected:

Bangkok Suvarnabhumi-Frankfurt: Three class 376-seat Boeing 747-400 to replace three class 267-seat A340-600 equipment on six of 13 weekly frequencies, resulting in 654 additional one-way seats each week;

Bangkok Suvarnabhumi-Zurich: Two class 364-seat 777-300 to replace three class 267-seat A340-600 equipment on seven weekly frequencies, resulting in 679 additional one-way seats each week.

Thai also operates A340 equipment on some regional services from Bangkok Suvarnabhumi to Singapore, Hong Kong and Delhi. According to the CAPA Fleet Database, Thai Airways currently operates six A340-600 aircraft with an average age of 9.0 years.

The Airbus A340 is a long-range four-engine wide-body commercial passenger jet airliner. It was developed and produced by Airbus. The A340 was assembled at Toulouse, France.

It seats up to 375 passengers in the standard variants and 440 in the stretched -600 series. Depending on the model, it has a range of between 6,700 to 9,000 nautical miles (12,400 to 16,700 km).

It is similar in design to the twin-engined A330 with which it was concurrently designed. Its distinguishing features are four high-bypass turbofan engines and three-bogie main landing gear.

-- Agencies

-- 2015-02-17

[Xircal]

You see now? This is a typical example of why Thai fails to make a profit. If they've configured their A340-600s in a 267 seating layout, then something is seriously pear-shaped there because the standard seating capacity in a two class configuration is 359 passengers according to Airbus.

But as we're all aware, Thai provides 15 free first class tickets to their directors, their families and accompanying passengers and so they have to configure the seating capacity to reflect that.

What's more, the 747-400 drinks fuel like a fish and unless they're going to re-engine all of them, switching to that model will cost them even more the A340-600s do even though the larger aircraft can carry more passengers.

[ginjag]

You see now? This is a typical example of why Thai fails to make a profit. If they've configured their A340-600s in a 267 seating layout, then something is seriously pear-shaped there because the standard seating capacity in a two class configuration is 359 passengers according to Airbus.

But as we're all aware, Thai provides 15 free first class tickets to their directors, their families and accompanying passengers and so they have to configure the seating capacity to reflect that.

What's more, the 747-400 drinks fuel like a fish and unless they're going to re-engine all of them, switching to that model will cost them even more the A340-600s do even though the larger aircraft can carry more passengers.

9 Year life is peanuts for this classy aircraft, with a good safety record. retired ??? Middle east man wanted to buy 1 at least but Thais price was too high.

They couldn't run a raffle.

I flew out to LHR October and back with Lufthansa. the out non stop was good, the aircraft I like. They say it's a gas guzzler, but if the price is right and it is full-and non stop, it is far better than a 20 year old Jumbo half full.

Are they still for sale ?? lower your price same your air tickets...you may find you will sell the aircraft and fill the flights..

[IsaanUSA]

You see now? This is a typical example of why Thai fails to make a profit. If they've configured their A340-600s in a 267 seating layout, then something is seriously pear-shaped there because the standard seating capacity in a two class configuration is 359 passengers according to Airbus.

That's why people loved to fly on THAI's A340-600. Tons of space!

I've never looked into this topic before, but I wonder why they don't reconfigure the planes? I guess it's cheaper to just get rid of them.

[worgeordie]

Are these the same ones they have been trying to sell for quite a while,I thought

they were already out of service,or is that some other access stock they have?

regards Worgeordie

[dddave]

You see now? This is a typical example of why Thai fails to make a profit. If they've configured their A340-600s in a 267 seating layout, then something is seriously pear-shaped there because the standard seating capacity in a two class configuration is 359 passengers according to Airbus.

But as we're all aware, Thai provides 15 free first class tickets to their directors, their families and accompanying passengers and so they have to configure the seating capacity to reflect that.

What's more, the 747-400 drinks fuel like a fish and unless they're going to re-engine all of them, switching to that model will cost them even more the A340-600s do even though the larger aircraft can carry more passengers.

Not really the reason.

The A340-600's in 267 seat layout were specifically set-up for the very long haul BKK-JFK, BKK-SFO and BKK-LAX non-stop routes. Weight/fuel reserve considerations limited seating to 267. When I flew this route: JFK to BKK non-stop in 2006, it was a 16.5 hour flight over the North Pole.

Seating in coach was great; 2-4-2 with extra wide seats and lots of leg room...what would be premium economy now.

When fuel prices skyrocketed around 2008, they started loosing money on these flights even when they were full. BKK-JFK was the first to be cancelled, then SFO and finally LAX. By that time, they had switched those routes to B777's. There might have been other US cities serviced non-stop but I'm not aware of them

Edited February 17, 2015 by dddave

[KamnanT]

Are these the same ones they have been trying to sell for quite a while,I thought

they were already out of service,or is that some other access stock they have?

regards Worgeordie

I believe you're thinking of the four A340-500 series aircraft that TG used on the ultra-long haul BKK-JFK and BKK-LAX services. Those were mothballed in April 2012 and are sitting on the ground at Don Meuang the last I heard. Thai has been trying to sell them but no takers - a difficult aircraft to sell these days.

[Tomtomtom69]

You see now? This is a typical example of why Thai fails to make a profit. If they've configured their A340-600s in a 267 seating layout, then something is seriously pear-shaped there because the standard seating capacity in a two class configuration is 359 passengers according to Airbus.

But as we're all aware, Thai provides 15 free first class tickets to their directors, their families and accompanying passengers and so they have to configure the seating capacity to reflect that.

What's more, the 747-400 drinks fuel like a fish and unless they're going to re-engine all of them, switching to that model will cost them even more the A340-600s do even though the larger aircraft can carry more passengers.

Not really the reason.

The A340-600's in 267 seat layout were specifically set-up for the very long haul BKK-JFK, BKK-SFO and BKK-LAX non-stop routes. Weight/fuel reserve considerations limited seating to 267. When I flew this route: JFK to BKK non-stop in 2006, it was a 16.5 hour flight over the North Pole.

Seating in coach was great; 2-4-2 with extra wide seats and lots of leg room...what would be premium economy now.

When fuel prices skyrocketed around 2008, they started loosing money on these flights even when they were full. BKK-JFK was the first to be cancelled, then SFO and finally LAX. By that time, they had switched those routes to B777's. There might have been other US cities serviced non-stop but I'm not aware of them

It was the A340-500s that were used on those routes but only BKK-JFK and BKK-LAX. THAI has never flown to SFO, at least not in the last 20 years or so and never non-stop.

[Tomtomtom69]

Are these the same ones they have been trying to sell for quite a while,I thought

they were already out of service,or is that some other access stock they have?

regards Worgeordie

I believe you're thinking of the four A340-500 series aircraft that TG used on the ultra-long haul BKK-JFK and BKK-LAX services. Those were mothballed in April 2012 and are sitting on the ground at Don Meuang the last I heard. Thai has been trying to sell them but no takers - a difficult aircraft to sell these days.

They are indeed. I've spotted them on recent drive-bys of Don Muang airport.

[bangrak]

The average Thai being about 1.60m. 'tall', the legspace will be enough for them on the cramped Boeings' configurations they chose for, so who cares a dime at THAI, or did you imagine it was of any concern in the fantastic plan that the average 'Caucasian' is getting close to 1.80m., and that the shoulderwidth might be a tad different? Nah, we are proud Thais, we know better, we don't need the Farangs... Do these airheads atthe top of THAI really want to fly only Thais? They're doing their best at it anyways... Their excess of attitude will make the airline lose more... altitude, more and once more... Speaking of the quality of 'Thai management', the more so with all the police, airforce and army top-brass, plus all the political creatures, having a golden armchair in that board, oh my!

[rubl]

Are these the same ones they have been trying to sell for quite a while,I thought

they were already out of service,or is that some other access stock they have?

regards Worgeordie

I believe you're thinking of the four A340-500 series aircraft that TG used on the ultra-long haul BKK-JFK and BKK-LAX services. Those were mothballed in April 2012 and are sitting on the ground at Don Meuang the last I heard. Thai has been trying to sell them but no takers - a difficult aircraft to sell these days.

Six or so years ago it became an increasingly expensive aeroplane because of it's four engines and the high costs of fuel. All in all not a real successful plane. 377 were sold and delivered, no new orders open.

http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamilies/passengeraircraft/a340family/

The airbus website even shows 23 various A340 models available, second hand that is. Not sure the THAI A340-600 are amongst the three listed, those are configured with 308 seats.

http://www.airbus.com/company/market/asset/aircraft-available/?tx_aircraftavailablefe_pi1[tab]=A340-600

[Xircal]

Are these the same ones they have been trying to sell for quite a while,I thought

they were already out of service,or is that some other access stock they have?

regards Worgeordie

That's the A300-600 which is a twin engine aircraft. But they're no longer in use with seven of them sold to other operators and the other five in storage.

[Xircal]

Here's a seating map of the layout in the A340-600: http://www.thaiairways.co.uk/static/common/pdf/exp_thai/cabin_class/economy/In-flight_Entertainment/2A340-600.pdf

Not a huge difference when compared to the Singapore Airlines 777-300ER: http://www.singaporeair.com/pdf/seatmaps/boeing777-300er.pdf

But in spite of the fact that 1 in 15 Singaporeans is a millionaire, their flights are a whole lot cheaper than Thai.

[Ricardo]

I wonder whether, given the recent crash in the price of oil, these aircraft might now be useable again on extra-long-haul routes ?

Or are passengers simply not willing to pay higher-fares necessary for a non-stop flight on these routes ?

The problems remaining however that you've got to carry extra flight-crew, and the fuel for the last few hours' flight (plus diversion-reserves) has to be carried all the way on non-stop flights, which burns even more fuel.

[Prbkk]

Fuel guzzling aside, it's a pity to see them go. Really great planes and deserved more success.

[shenanigans997]

You see now? This is a typical example of why Thai fails to make a profit. If they've configured their A340-600s in a 267 seating layout, then something is seriously pear-shaped there because the standard seating capacity in a two class configuration is 359 passengers according to Airbus.

But as we're all aware, Thai provides 15 free first class tickets to their directors, their families and accompanying passengers and so they have to configure the seating capacity to reflect that.

What's more, the 747-400 drinks fuel like a fish and unless they're going to re-engine all of them, switching to that model will cost them even more the A340-600s do even though the larger aircraft can carry more passengers.

Not really the reason.

The A340-600's in 267 seat layout were specifically set-up for the very long haul BKK-JFK, BKK-SFO and BKK-LAX non-stop routes. Weight/fuel reserve considerations limited seating to 267. When I flew this route: JFK to BKK non-stop in 2006, it was a 16.5 hour flight over the North Pole.

Seating in coach was great; 2-4-2 with extra wide seats and lots of leg room...what would be premium economy now.

When fuel prices skyrocketed around 2008, they started loosing money on these flights even when they were full. BKK-JFK was the first to be cancelled, then SFO and finally LAX. By that time, they had switched those routes to B777's. There might have been other US cities serviced non-stop but I'm not aware of them

Dave, I think you will find these were the A340-500's on these long hauls, same Aircraft SQ flew in an 80 seat all business class configuration on those routes, they were set up for extreme long hauls.

[trawler]

Flew Bkk-Zrh-Bkk in Dec on these aircraft in Business class.Seats uncomfortable and not flat bed.A340;s take longer flight time than Boeing equipment as slower speed.Return leg the inflight entertainment system was completely failed and advised by crew during boarding.However no compensation or apologies offered.Cathay and Singapore both offer vouchers if this happens.All in all poor seating and service so so only.Luckily my company paying..........

[F4UCorsair]

You see now? This is a typical example of why Thai fails to make a profit. If they've configured their A340-600s in a 267 seating layout, then something is seriously pear-shaped there because the standard seating capacity in a two class configuration is 359 passengers according to Airbus.

But as we're all aware, Thai provides 15 free first class tickets to their directors, their families and accompanying passengers and so they have to configure the seating capacity to reflect that.

What's more, the 747-400 drinks fuel like a fish and unless they're going to re-engine all of them, switching to that model will cost them even more the A340-600s do even though the larger aircraft can carry more passengers.

Not really the reason.

The A340-600's in 267 seat layout were specifically set-up for the very long haul BKK-JFK, BKK-SFO and BKK-LAX non-stop routes. Weight/fuel reserve considerations limited seating to 267. When I flew this route: JFK to BKK non-stop in 2006, it was a 16.5 hour flight over the North Pole.

Seating in coach was great; 2-4-2 with extra wide seats and lots of leg room...what would be premium economy now.

When fuel prices skyrocketed around 2008, they started loosing money on these flights even when they were full. BKK-JFK was the first to be cancelled, then SFO and finally LAX. By that time, they had switched those routes to B777's. There might have been other US cities serviced non-stop but I'm not aware of them

Well done ddave.....somebody who knows what he's talking about.

[realenglish1]

Those planes should have been retired a long time ago. I too the Frankfurt leg ( not due to my bookings) as a foul up with another airline missing the flight. They put me on another flight that was Thai airways

The touch screen did not work properly and my seat would not recline properly as well It sucked

It should have been put out to pasture a few years ago

This is one of many reasons Thai aways is having problems The top one is management of course

[bkkjames]

This fleet is a real mix of aircraft types and manufacturers. I remember when they also had MD 11's or DC 10s as well. Only thing missing was a tristar - one of my old favorites.

[ginjag]

You see now? This is a typical example of why Thai fails to make a profit. If they've configured their A340-600s in a 267 seating layout, then something is seriously pear-shaped there because the standard seating capacity in a two class configuration is 359 passengers according to Airbus.

That's why people loved to fly on THAI's A340-600. Tons of space!

I've never looked into this topic before, but I wonder why they don't reconfigure the planes? I guess it's cheaper to just get rid of them.

They have been for sale for 2 years at least, They want top book. same thinking for the flight ticket price. They have to get into the mindset of EVA--Etihad--Emirates. if not they will FOLD.

[KarenBravo]

They have to get into the mindset of EVA--Etihad--Emirates. if not they will FOLD.

Nah.....they will continue to run at a loss rather than close.

Can't admit they were wrong and lose face, now can they?

[ginjag]

Are these the same ones they have been trying to sell for quite a while,I thought

they were already out of service,or is that some other access stock they have?

regards Worgeordie

I flew A340 Thai on the LHR route October and they did not fill the 300 seats because they are over priced---here is their main problem.

These planes are super--but you have to fill the 300 seats if not they are not economical. the Jumbo's they have are far older than 9 years and they do not fill them. Pricing they have no clue. They think to increase the price you get more money. Thai logic (parks) hotels) etc

[ginjag]

You see now? This is a typical example of why Thai fails to make a profit. If they've configured their A340-600s in a 267 seating layout, then something is seriously pear-shaped there because the standard seating capacity in a two class configuration is 359 passengers according to Airbus.

But as we're all aware, Thai provides 15 free first class tickets to their directors, their families and accompanying passengers and so they have to configure the seating capacity to reflect that.

What's more, the 747-400 drinks fuel like a fish and unless they're going to re-engine all of them, switching to that model will cost them even more the A340-600s do even though the larger aircraft can carry more passengers.

Not really the reason.

The A340-600's in 267 seat layout were specifically set-up for the very long haul BKK-JFK, BKK-SFO and BKK-LAX non-stop routes. Weight/fuel reserve considerations limited seating to 267. When I flew this route: JFK to BKK non-stop in 2006, it was a 16.5 hour flight over the North Pole.

Seating in coach was great; 2-4-2 with extra wide seats and lots of leg room...what would be premium economy now.

When fuel prices skyrocketed around 2008, they started loosing money on these flights even when they were full. BKK-JFK was the first to be cancelled, then SFO and finally LAX. By that time, they had switched those routes to B777's. There might have been other US cities serviced non-stop but I'm not aware of them

How often are they full, with fare paying passengers ??? now fuel prices are low any excuses Thai ?? They could use them now fill them LHR---not use Thai 747 half full. stupid-----overpriced tickets.

[geriatrickid]

TG has made the right decision to get rid of the AB 340. They would have done it sooner but;

1. There is no market for them unless they are given away and.

2. TG was unable to fund the purchase of the B777 series as other airlines have done.

Most major airlines such as SQ, AC, CX, AF and Emirates dumped theirs into the market, so TG wasn't going to get much for its planes. It was less of a loss to continue to operate the clunkers than to try and replace them.

Airbus made a lot of promises with its AB340 and there was once a market for a 4 engine plane. However, as the reliability of the B777 was proven, and it was a more profitable aircraft to operate, the switch was on in the market.

The loss of First class on some routes is going to upset a few hi so's. I won't be surprised if TG follows its *A partners like AC and BR and gets rid of F class on more routes as it is not making money on the cabin.

[ginjag]

Are these the same ones they have been trying to sell for quite a while,I thought

they were already out of service,or is that some other access stock they have?

regards Worgeordie

I believe you're thinking of the four A340-500 series aircraft that TG used on the ultra-long haul BKK-JFK and BKK-LAX services. Those were mothballed in April 2012 and are sitting on the ground at Don Meuang the last I heard. Thai has been trying to sell them but no takers - a difficult aircraft to sell these days.

Costs money to maintain STOOD. They had chance to sell but want too much------there are buyers out there, at the right price. lose a little on book price Thai and get them off your hands

[hhinhh]

You see now? This is a typical example of why Thai fails to make a profit. If they've configured their A340-600s in a 267 seating layout, then something is seriously pear-shaped there because the standard seating capacity in a two class configuration is 359 passengers according to Airbus.

That's why people loved to fly on THAI's A340-600. Tons of space!

I've never looked into this topic before, but I wonder why they don't reconfigure the planes? I guess it's cheaper to just get rid of them.

The relatively nice pitch in Eco caused many people to book Thai. This may change if they reconfigure the planes. And if they would be more genrous with offering miles on cheaper flight booking classes the reults would even be better.

What they must definitively stop immediately is loud cabin-wide advertisments. That is what nobody needs and would chase away customers.

[shaurene]

You see now? This is a typical example of why Thai fails to make a profit. If they've configured their A340-600s in a 267 seating layout, then something is seriously pear-shaped there because the standard seating capacity in a two class configuration is 359 passengers according to Airbus.

But as we're all aware, Thai provides 15 free first class tickets to their directors, their families and accompanying passengers and so they have to configure the seating capacity to reflect that.

What's more, the 747-400 drinks fuel like a fish and unless they're going to re-engine all of them, switching to that model will cost them even more the A340-600s do even though the larger aircraft can carry more passengers.

What a planning committee they have do not know what they are really trying to archive. The are replacing the A340 with those old 777's they have seats that feel like sitting on hard wooden floors they are old and falling apart. The 747s should be the very first to go followed by the 777's.

They will get nowhere until they source a CEO internationally. I stopped using them 4 yrs back after I held a gold ca d for around 8 yrs and will still not use then any time in the future.

[marcusd]

The average Thai being about 1.60m. 'tall', the legspace will be enough for them on the cramped Boeings' configurations they chose for, so who cares a dime at THAI, or did you imagine it was of any concern in the fantastic plan that the average 'Caucasian' is getting close to 1.80m., and that the shoulderwidth might be a tad different? Nah, we are proud Thais, we know better, we don't need the Farangs... Do these airheads atthe top of THAI really want to fly only Thais? They're doing their best at it anyways... Their excess of attitude will make the airline lose more... altitude, more and once more... Speaking of the quality of 'Thai management', the more so with all the police, airforce and army top-brass, plus all the political creatures, having a golden armchair in that board, oh my!

1 Million percent agree. I have 16 people I this week tried to book through THAI head office on a Group Tour to Vietnam. Cnx -Bkk-Han -Bkk-Cnx.

Did they want to know? Ring these agents please - 2 of the numbers DISCONNECTED and the 3rd hanged up not interested. Then I stopped in a few agents and got a price HIGHER than I could have booked online DIRECT.

So I went to another website and booked Bangkok Air who were great on the phone and Qatar and the price total? HALF of what the on line price was for thai and that was THAI DISCOUNTED fares.

They are going down as Airlines are very tight

Bangkok Suvarnabhumi-Frankfurt: Three class 376-seat Boeing 747-400 to replace three class 267-seat A340-600 equipment on six of 13 weekly frequencies, resulting in 654 additional one-way seats each week;

Bangkok Suvarnabhumi-Zurich: Two class 364-seat 777-300 to replace three class 267-seat A340-600 equipment on seven weekly frequencies, resulting in 679 additional one-way seats each week.

Now this is a JOKE. These planes already fly one third full and two thirds EMPTY .

They want to destroy this airline!