The Sunjets of Scanair

Wonderfull Sandy.

Wonderfull Sandy.

ahhh

ahhh

I think if SAS had kept their 767s along side the A340s, there route network would be in better shape.

Much would be in better shape if SAS ‘had only’… but this airline is not known for taking logical decisions! 😉

The A321 was not a replacement for non-existing 757s though. The A321 was purchased to fill the void between the MD-80 and 767/A340. I e heavier European routes such as CPH-LHR, CPH-CDG etc.

The 777 was said to be “too big” and the engines couldn’t be transported on lorries under Swedish road bridges. That’s one of the reasons… now the A340 is always full on certain Asian routes. If a 777-100 existed, it would have been perfect back then. There were also talks about buying second-hand 747-400 Combis off Cathay Pacific IIRC.

Back in 1987-88 when a replacement for the DC-10 was due, McDonnell Douglas even issued a press release that an order for the MD-11 had been placed, but this wasn’t the case. As we know, 767-200 and -300s were ordered instead.

I think if SAS had kept their 767s along side the A340s, there route network would be in better shape.

Much would be in better shape if SAS ‘had only’… but this airline is not known for taking logical decisions! 😉

The A321 was not a replacement for non-existing 757s though. The A321 was purchased to fill the void between the MD-80 and 767/A340. I e heavier European routes such as CPH-LHR, CPH-CDG etc.

The 777 was said to be “too big” and the engines couldn’t be transported on lorries under Swedish road bridges. That’s one of the reasons… now the A340 is always full on certain Asian routes. If a 777-100 existed, it would have been perfect back then. There were also talks about buying second-hand 747-400 Combis off Cathay Pacific IIRC.

Back in 1987-88 when a replacement for the DC-10 was due, McDonnell Douglas even issued a press release that an order for the MD-11 had been placed, but this wasn’t the case. As we know, 767-200 and -300s were ordered instead.

…and now there are talks about leasing in a number of 767s to reopen certain routes and open new ones from Stockholm. Let’s see what happens…

I think if SAS had kept their 767s along side the A340s, there route network would be in better shape.

…and now there are talks about leasing in a number of 767s to reopen certain routes and open new ones from Stockholm. Let’s see what happens…

I think if SAS had kept their 767s along side the A340s, there route network would be in better shape.

…and now there are talks about leasing in a number of 767s to reopen certain routes and open new ones from Stockholm. Let’s see what happens…

…and now there are talks about leasing in a number of 767s to reopen certain routes and open new ones from Stockholm. Let’s see what happens…

I think I’ll start another thread with more illustrations of older vintage liveries.
for now, here’s what I was working on earlier:

SAS were going to purchase 757s for a possible Arlanda-US route. But decided against it and bought their A321’s. Something they now regret as CO has proven that exact route to be a money maker and SAS do not have an aircraft suitable for it. Their A321’s do not have the range and their A340s are too big. Also, the decision to dump the 767’s they now see as a little short sighted.
At least, thats what I remember in my discussions with a certain SAS expert.

Also, when the time came for a longhaul fleet update, the 767s we’re dumped rapidly and A340’s were bought.

According to the information a few SAS afficionados have, the 777 may have proven a better airframe.
SAS’s A340s often have to leave with a restricted payload from airports in the far east. A practice that has often left Cargo and Stand-by pax behind.

Maybe my info on that isn’t correct, I’m not 100% sure. Hans?

I think I’ll start another thread with more illustrations of older vintage liveries.
for now, here’s what I was working on earlier:

SAS were going to purchase 757s for a possible Arlanda-US route. But decided against it and bought their A321’s. Something they now regret as CO has proven that exact route to be a money maker and SAS do not have an aircraft suitable for it. Their A321’s do not have the range and their A340s are too big. Also, the decision to dump the 767’s they now see as a little short sighted.
At least, thats what I remember in my discussions with a certain SAS expert.

Also, when the time came for a longhaul fleet update, the 767s we’re dumped rapidly and A340’s were bought.

According to the information a few SAS afficionados have, the 777 may have proven a better airframe.
SAS’s A340s often have to leave with a restricted payload from airports in the far east. A practice that has often left Cargo and Stand-by pax behind.

Maybe my info on that isn’t correct, I’m not 100% sure. Hans?

Excellent Illustrations as usual Bemused55.

Perhaps you could do a small collection of retro schemes on modern airframes?

Working on something now.

An aircraft SAS were close to getting, but chose Airbus instead, something I gather SAS now realise was a mistake.

Excellent Illustrations as usual Bemused55.

Perhaps you could do a small collection of retro schemes on modern airframes?

Working on something now.

An aircraft SAS were close to getting, but chose Airbus instead, something I gather SAS now realise was a mistake.

Very good, let’s talk later! 😉

And for all you others, the site where these profiles are going to is http://scanair.sonnenflieger.se (in Swedish only, sorry), my site about Scanair which I made in 2001 and now is set for refurbishment.

see ya on msn 🙂

Very good, let’s talk later! 😉

And for all you others, the site where these profiles are going to is http://scanair.sonnenflieger.se (in Swedish only, sorry), my site about Scanair which I made in 2001 and now is set for refurbishment.

see ya on msn 🙂

Very good, let’s talk later! 😉

And for all you others, the site where these profiles are going to is http://scanair.sonnenflieger.se (in Swedish only, sorry), my site about Scanair which I made in 2001 and now is set for refurbishment.

Very good, let’s talk later! 😉

And for all you others, the site where these profiles are going to is http://scanair.sonnenflieger.se (in Swedish only, sorry), my site about Scanair which I made in 2001 and now is set for refurbishment.