johan rebel

"Next month South African Airways will invite Airbus and Boeing to submit Requests for Proposals for SAA’s total fleet review"

Full story

Johan

Wiirachay

Great!!! The newer aircraft have a higher cruising speed compared to the A340s. I hope they're aiming for long-range aircraft so that they can do my JNB-USA flights non-stop!

SAWorldVoyager

Although I have no issue with twin engine aircraft. What about ETOPS requirements as a fair number of our routes go over the ocean, being that we are on the butt end of the planet?

I see both 787 and A350 are planning to have ratings of 350mins.

Does anyone know of a visualiser online that can show areas that would be "no mans land" ?

I haven't flown 787 yet, but did sit in the mock up of the A350 in Toulouse during a collection of an A330 last year. As a passenger the A350 cabin is very impressive.

jsnydcsa

Seems like only yesterday we were talking about Coleman Andrews.

Wiirachay

www.gcmap.com The routes affected are GRU, EZE, PER, and SYD.

SAWorldVoyager

+1

B747-437B

^

My first reaction on meeting Khaya Ngqula after he took over as CEO was that SAA had finally found someone to make Coleman Andrews look good. Khaya did not disappoint.

johan rebel

It is worth bearing in mind that there is often a world of difference between manufacturer mockups and the airline cabins you end up flying in.



Johan

Cheetah_SA

Ah, the tried and tested way of the New ZA: mega tenders! So Airbus and Boeing have been told they have until December to present "proposals" - written on the backs of cheques no doubt.

jsnydcsa

Too traceable. Cash on barrel head, please. Offshore.

Friends, family, etc. form consulting companies related to tender. Yebo!

And, don't forget the need to travel on government and company dimes to various factories and facilities (by way of Paris, Chicago, etc. which are great hubs to other destinations) as part of the evaluation process.

thijsseh

Gosh, what a load of drivel by this Potgieter guy about the CPT/LHR route.
They cant handle the competition...
Well, SAA is a state supported airline, I admit, so is EK. But VS, BA (twice daily during the summer season), LH, KL, AF, TK all are responsible to REAL shareholders and still manage to continue these routes between Europe and CPT.
SAA evidently only are able to make money on routes where there is no competition, like a zillion obscure African destinations, India, South America where they can rape the customers. Or 'politically correct' ones, like PEK!
And then partly blame the UK visa story for the problem. OK, its a big pain in the butt as well as a ripoff, but hey, South African passport holders have to get these visas no matter what airline they use....
And with CPT being a major tourist destination, a substantial number of South Africans having personal links to the UK and London still being the major European financial hub, there must be a good reason to serve this route.

Personally, I like SA. I love the J product. But not enough to add 36% to my travel time. And having to fly via JNB in the process, with all risks thereof (baggage-wise). As I have mentioned in another thread, but I'm still not over my indignation....

SAWorldVoyager

You are partly right IMHO.

Yes the PEK is political its loosing a fortune and yup shouldn't be flying from an airline profitability point of view.

However South Africa (PTY) Ltd, and its shareholders (the citizens) need to decide on what SAA's role should be.

Personally, I dont believe SAA should be run as a profitable business, importantly at the onset let me clearly state I do think it should be run soundly to good financial principles, but not driven by profit.

So over inflated salaries, stupid fleet renewals, etc etc should not be allowed. Accountability is key.

I think SAA is a tool, to serve South Africans and a South African agenda. Yes in my perfect world CPT should be better served. Further to this perfect world SAA should serve the African destinations that it does, but should also serve a ton more other foreign destinations ex JNB.

I think at least 3, but probably 4 US cities (add ATL, and ORD), add Shanghai, a few more EU destinations, Sydney, Auckland, and Rio.

SA is at the arse end of the continent and we need to make doing business in SA attractive, one of the ways we do this is with efficient and where possible direct air links.

Its kind of like building a Las Vegas somewhere between Upington and Port Nolloth, and then refusing to build a road or an airport to the resort town. If you want people to come you need to make it easy. That road in itself will never be profitable, but the value of the people it carries in terms of the towns overall success, easily covers its cost.

Whether we like it or not South Africa is between no where and no where, we will never be a major hub and thus we need to dig into our pockets to fund this road, ie SAA.

When Cape Town was 'canned' we immediately heard from various bodies that by dropping this one route it would cost South Africa over 600 million in lost opportunity.

Now if one route brings SA that much value, imagine what value all the routes combined bring? Surely then 6 billion or whatever is not that much ??

Further if SAA takes 6 billion or 10 billion or whatever, what goes back to government in direct taxation?

There must be at least 1000 pilots, each earning close on a bar (at least), that in itself brings half a billion back to the coffers. Now factor in management, admin staff, air hostesses errr.... I mean safety officers and the money given comes back directly just in direct taxes. That is before taxes generated from companies and staff who provide services to SAA, fuel levies etc etc.

So it looks like the road can effectively be had free of charge, albeit that it doesn't generate its own profit.

We must assume all the Cape Town evangelists are in fact telling the truth and that the value brought, as per the estimates on the their route being axed are indeed pure profit towards South Africa (Pty)Ltd.

How much then are we loosing as a country by not flying the routes we should?

Under the current status quo though.

Everytime there is any talk of a bailout, the media jump on the bandwagon, uninformed oxygen thieves cry foul without grasping some of the basics.

Point is South Africa (Pty)Ltd is the only shareholder in SAA, and its asset is heavily under capitalised. SAA needs a bigger fleet, and within the constraints of a small fleet, you cannot serve some routes which would be profitable, so you have to choose the most profitable, and operate those routes. Yes even giving up on some profitable routes.

This however is the theory,

enter government who dictates PEK.... and says its in the best interest of SA.... Now what happens to the more than R1million lost per return flight who knows, SAA must ma make a plan..... Just dont dare come ask for money.... You must operate profitably

Are you confused? I am! So what chance does SAA management have?



I dont know on the exact numbers for Cape Town LHR, and whether it was profitable or not.... but I do agree if you look at the entire value proposition, and not the flight in isolation, the CPT - LHR should be flying.

With the mixed signals by SA PTY and its citizens i think SAA has taken the approach we can use the plane elsewhere and make more money and thats what SA wants... They have not been holistic.

I disagree on that basis.

But I do think government and public have being driving the wrong agenda. And based purely on the agenda of SAA must be profitable, ya, axe Cape Town LHR, but then be fair please and axe JNB - PEK too.

Lastly re BA, AND VS (LH, KL, AF, TK) it is a completely different equation. I do not doubt the routes profitability at all (I honestly dont know).

BUT I will say base those airlines in SA and fly ex SA only to wherever they want, and they WOULD NOT be able to operate as they do. Being based in the EU and close to other major hubs and not a million miles from everything has many advantages (not only in crew and aircraft rotations and movements), which if we are being fair we need to equate for.

Like you I agree SAA J is a great product, and I love nothing more than having our tail plane at airports around the world. I may be weird, but it makes me feel warm and fuzzy.

Likewise, after being overseas, simply boarding a ZS plane I immediately feel at home.

Personally, I would rather have SA (PTY) dump money into our airline (which actually brings value), than painting the flag on London cabs, or putting up a row of flags on the Champs Elysees, which is a dead loss venture.

Money inputted IMO should be spent on fleet EXPANSION and not RENEWAL.

johan rebel

Upington's runway is so long, that any aircraft landing on it will be halfway to Port Nolloth by the time it gets to the far end, or would be if they realigned the runway.

Johan

Cheetah_SA

You almost got that right.

SAWorldVoyager

further, if we can spend 2BILLLION (yes BILLION) to transport 2 individuals, how much should we spend for the rest of the countries air travel needs?

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Ne...eport-20120629