Is the dream for the 787 lovers and A350 lovers to see one of these types (or both of them) in Emirates livery reaching an end ?
Air&Cosmos has written this week , Emirates is not enthousiastic for both these planes as both are too small , and perhaps they will purchase 50 777s instead placing a new generation twin wide body order.
Perhaps this weekly publication knows something we don't , since in their website www.aerospacemedia.com they said EK will place a 6 milliards $ order for 777s , no later that tomorrow (Nov 20th).
In this case where Airbus will find the 50 A350 frames they need to reach the promised 200 units before year end ? Great question............

Well, considering one isn't going to be available in numbers in the size they want until 2011 (789) and the other isn't even EIS until 2010, they don't have to decide by this week, despite what some are dreaming.

But if they want 777s, they need to buy them ASAP.

I've never quite seen the urgency for a carrier with such clout who doesn't want the 788, the only one they need to sign up for right away or risk losing out.

I thought it's been mentioned time and again that they think the 787 is too small, and they want a bigger variant. That's probably why they feel no urgency and don't feel they're "losing out".

The way that Emirates is ordering planes, I wouldn't be too surprised to eventually see them order both the 787 and A350. I know that one of the a.netters suggested (not sure if it was a guess or something heard) that Emirates could become a leasing agency in the future. At the rate this rate, it kind of makes sense, using my limited knowledge of Emirates and leasing agencies.

KhenleyDIA

Back in 2003, Emirates Management was telling their pilots that eventually they would ike to fly "2" aircraft, the A380 & the 777. If Emriates ignores both the 787 & the A350, wondering if Emirates will follow through with that plan,, hmmmm?  

Quoting KhenleyDIA (Reply 3): I know that one of the a.netters suggested (not sure if it was a guess or something heard) that Emirates could become a leasing agency in the future

That was me. Comes from no inside knowledge. Just based on their capital abilities, their enthusiasm for ordering the hottest planes in large numbers, and that they already lease some jets and could easily lease more at a profit.

But again, with no model of the size they want (359, 789/10) available until later 2010 at the earliest, there is not urgency to order these planes 5 years in advance, considering that both companies are talking about increasing production rates to meet demand.

Spend the down payment money on 773ERs and A389s right now, do the other orders in a year or 2.

It would be a surprise if there were no order from EK for either the A350 or B787. I suspect that at some point the A359 has got to be favored, although, as Ikramerica, they can take their time. If the rumored 777 order goes through, they will have committed a considerable amount of capital (along with the massive pending A380 order) to new purchases.

Speaking of the A380, way back this summer there was a long thread about a rumored A380 follow-on order by EK to be announced at Paris. That didn't happen, but does anyone have any inisights if they will go for the A389? Isn't that the plane they really want?

Separate, but related issue, is QR going to confirm all 60 A350's? They have a news conference on Tuesday. We may finally find out what "up to 60" A350's and "more than 20" 777's mean!

According to the Wall Street Journal

Quote: Emirates is expected to announce an order for as many as 42 Boeing 777s. The purchase would be divided among three of the newest models of the plane, all of which are designed to travel long distances. Two people familiar with the airline's planning say that Emirates plans to order about 24 777-300ER jetliners, eight 777 freighters and another 10 777-200LR "Worldliners." In addition, the airline also has been widely expected to announce an order for as many as 50 Airbus A350s.

Quoting FCKC (Thread starter): Emirates is not enthousiastic for both these planes as both are too small

If the 787 and the A350 are too small and they seem to like the 777, could the 747-800 be a possibility? The 747-800 and 777 will have similar cockpits so if they got 747-800s the pilot transition might not be too difficult between the two.

If they don't order I would suggest the problem is that A359 range is not sufficient and the 787-9 doesn't have enough capacity in an eight abreast format. What they probably want to see is the A359 HGW variant some have referred to as the A359-1000 and the 787-10X.

Quoting JAM747 (Reply 9): If the 787 and the A350 are too small and they seem to like the 777, could the 747-800 be a possibility? The 747-800 and 777 will have similar cockpits so if they got 747-800s the pilot transition might not be too difficult between the two.

I don`t see any 748s in their fleet in the future. When they concentrate on two airplanes these will definitely be the A380 and 773ER. Maybe they will also add some A350s which fly smaller routes.

I just can`t see them flying DXB-HAM daily with a 773ER when they also fly to TXL, FRA, MUC and DUS. They need a smaller plane for this.

Question is what will happen to their mass of relatively new A330s and 772s?

Regards

If all these order predictions are true, Emirates will be a MASSIVE X 20 airline in a couple of years (meaning a lot of aircraft in their fleet). It will no doubt be the biggest airline in the world....just a thought.

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 7): We may finally find out what "up to 60" A350's and "more than 20" 777's mean!

Sorry to nit-pick, but I believe the actual quote was "at least 20", not "more than 20" 777's.

Quoting FCKC (Thread starter): Perhaps this weekly publication knows something we don't , since in their website www.aerospacemedia.com they said EK will place a 6 milliards $ order for 777s , no later that tomorrow (Nov 20th). In this case where Airbus will find the 50 A350 frames they need to reach the promised 200 units before year end ? Great question............

The 777 order seems to be getting the airplay though EK are quite equitable when placing their orders. They have a media conference also on Monday 21st and as the WSJ reports it is expected that EK will order the A350. IMO we'll see both Airbus and Boeing get substantial orders and we've not long to wait

Regards, PanAm_DC10

For what it's worth... from the press...

http://www.thebusinessonline.com/Sto...B76EF0-7991-4389-B72E-D07EB5AA1CEE

"Airbus has been chasing a bumper order from the same Middle Eastern airline for its proposed mid-sized jet, the A350, but sources say this is unlikely to be announced at the show. The airline is instead considering a 290 to 300-seater version of the new Boeing Dreamliner, or 787."

Huge blow to Airbus if this is lost...

I think EK is right about these aircraft.

With high - and expected higher - fuel price, you need to carry a lot of business travellers on your long haul network (to pay all the extra fuel you need to carry all along- even considering these aircraft are more fuel efficient). Most of Business travellers are mostly between big markets where you can use higher capacity aircraft to carry the economy class as well.

Quoting Aither (Reply 16): With high - and expected higher - fuel price, you need to carry a lot of business travellers on your long haul network (to pay all the extra fuel you need to carry all along- even considering these aircraft are more fuel efficient).

With higher fuel prices you need to attract a higher mix of business passengers, but you can also expect a smaller number of passengers overall if ticket prices rise.

Yes a bit but not that much on the long haul market. Pax prefer the lowest price but even if the lowest price is 15% higher most would go on with their travel plan. You don't have alternative transports.

Quoting NZPM (Reply 13): ut I believe the actual quote was "at least 20", not "more than 20" 777's.

You are not nitpicking, you are correct.    I, for one, can't wait to see what "at least 20" 777s means.   

The Wall Street Journal said the order is for 24×777-300ER, 10×777-200LR, and 8×777 Freighter.

Quoting N328KF (Reply 20): The Wall Street Journal said the order is for 24×777-300ER, 10×777-200LR, and 8×777 Freighter

For QR?

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 21): For QR?

The article title is in reference to EK, so I am referring to EK.

I would LOVE to see the look on Leahy's face if EK orders a crap load of 777s and NO A350s at Dubai...

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 6): Speaking of the A380, way back this summer there was a long thread about a rumored A380 follow-on order by EK to be announced at Paris. That didn't happen, but does anyone have any inisights if they will go for the A389? Isn't that the plane they really want?

I am wondering that too. Seems that the urgency is in the 777s, as they are selling like hotcakes and available pre-2010, and the 389, since the A380 output will remain limited and EK wants them ASAP. Since FEDEX also wants them ASAP, would make more sense to put money down on 389s than on 350s or 787s this year.

just my uninformed outsider 2 cents.

Interesting question Lumberton. Is the A389 already on offer to airlines? If not, when is the A389 expected to be launched?

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 24): I am wondering that too. Seems that the urgency is in the 777s, as they are selling like hotcakes and available pre-2010, and the 389, since the A380 output will remain limited and EK wants them ASAP. Since FEDEX also wants them ASAP, would make more sense to put money down on 389s than on 350s or 787s this year.

Thats a good point you raised there

Quoting Manni (Reply 25): Interesting question Lumberton. Is the A389 already on offer to airlines? If not, when is the A389 expected to be launched?

I don't think it is officially launched, but if EK were to order 20, I think it would be launched. I believe there is an authority to offer, however, not like that matters.

The 789 has no authority to offer, yet AC ordered some. According to the Boeing website, only 2 models have authority to offer: 788 and 783.

Cargolux also placed an order for the 748 before it was launched. Not sure if there was an authority to offer in place...

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 27): ccording to the Boeing website, only 2 models have authority to offer: 788 and 783.

Link please... Please, with all respect, I think you are wrong.

Thanks Ikramerica. So, Emirates does not have to wait for that and can order them at any time? Perhaps they're waiting to see how their 388's perform and fill up, if proven succesfull they might well have the option to convert some of their orders to the bigger 900.

Go to the Boeing website.

Look at the technical specs for each 787 model.

The 788 has a milestone calendar re: launch, authority to offer, first flight, certification, etc.

The 783 has only the authority to offer date and the EIS date.

The 789 has ONLY an EIS date. Why would boeing list the 783 milestone but not the 789 milestone?

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/facts_stretch.html

My guess is that because the 789 was still flexible, as we have seen by the range upgrade and seating reconfiguration.

It may be updated now that AC has booked some, but before the AC order, no 789s were sold to any carrier, only 783 and 788. Before the update to 233 frames, there were 43 783s for 2 customers and 153 788s for 14 customers, 14 total unique customers.

Again, all speculation, which in my opinion is way off. The 789 was and continues to be offered, it is just going to be in service in 2010... we may not think there were orders for this variant as some airlines have not decided which variant they want... Also, look at AC where they have signed their order and there was no press release launching the program.

Just recently there was a press release on the updated ranges and seating. The 789 is launched.

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/q4/nr_051117g.html

Please show me a link to any article or press release that says that there was an authority to offer the 787-9. Not that the family was launched and the 787-9 is one future variant, but one that specifically says the 787-9 has an ATO.

You are asking me to prove a negative, a very difficult thing to do, but it should be quite simple for you to prove a positive. I am not saying authority has not been given, just that Boeing has given no public statement that authority has been given, so I don't think it is official.

The earlier 747 stillborn projects also went through various changes and some were made public. Even the 747Adv went through various public configuration press releases and meetings with carriers, yet it wasn't launched at that time. The A350 did as well before it was launched or there was an authority to offer, and even before it was an A350 and still an A330-800, it was being shopped.

You can shop a plane without and official authority to offer it or a launch. That was done with the 747-8.

And again, those pages have NOT been updated with the latest information from the last week re: the AC booked order and the 789 upward revisions in range and capacity. But those specs pages are updated rather regularly, so they are not months out of date. For example the 747-8 page went up within hours of launch, and the 773ER range information was updated pretty quickly each time they would improve the range.

The priority for updating the website seems to be:

1. Press Releases - right away
2. Main Order Page - within a week, though daily during airshows
3. Customized Order Pages - within 2 weeks to a month
4. Technical Specs - not months out of date, but might be weeks out of date

here you go... 789 is a milestone...

Major program milestones
Firm configuration completed – September 2005
Major assembly begins – 2006
First flight – 2007
First delivery – 2008
787-3 Mid-2010
787-9 Late 2010

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/programfacts.html

It doesn't really matter but I just thought I was wrong... but there is NOTHING that I have ever read that this plane couldnt be offered or bought.

Amazing, how major assembly will start next year... wow...

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 32): You are asking me to prove a negative, a very difficult thing to do, but it should be quite simple for you to prove a positive. I am not saying authority has not been given, just that Boeing has given no public statement that authority has been given, so I don't think it is official.

I don't know if there was a separate authority to offer for each 787 family member. I assumed that in late 2003 when Boeing was authorized by its board to offer the 7E7, it was authorized to offer an entire family of aircraft. That family was defined by the time of launch to include three family members. But looking back it is clear that the 787-9 figures weren't set in stone just two months ago when Boeing released an updated 787 Airport Compatibility Brochure. The -9 was represented by an amorphous blob on the Boeing aircraft family range capacity diagram. Since Boeing typically doesn't offer aircraft that aren't going to be available until maybe 8 years later (2012), maybe they were authorized to offer the 787-8 and -3 (which had EIS date requirements determined by ANA's needs) specifically, but at the same time they wanted to make clear the future directions of the aircraft family, which would include the -9.

[Edited 2005-11-20 06:08:11]

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 33): here you go... 789 is a milestone... Major program milestones Firm configuration completed – September 2005 Major assembly begins – 2006 First flight – 2007 First delivery – 2008 787-3 Mid-2010 787-9 Late 2010

sorry, but that is the main program page, not the individual model page. that is exactly what I am saying. it doesn't list the authority to offer any models, does it? no, that's on the individual model page.

they are NOT building the 789 in 2006. making that statement is just silly. they are assembling the first 788 in 2006.

you are intentionally obfuscating the issue.

my link shows the 789 page. it has 1 milestone.

the 783 page as 2.

the 788 has 5.

Your quote is no different than Airbus's claim that 680 A330/340/350 family planes are currently flying.

Please provide any boeing press release or other document specifically showing an authority to offer the 787-9. The 787-3 and 787-8 are not hard to find.

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 33): [...]

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 35): [...]

Why are you two bickering over this? You are trying to argue over data from the least up-to-date portion of Boeing's website.

Quoting N328KF (Reply 36): Why are you two bickering over this? You are trying to argue over data from the least up-to-date portion of Boeing's website.

Because the purpose of boards like A.net is to bicker over minutiae so that one may claim the I Was Right Trophy, do a little victory dance, and rub it in opposition's face. 

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 37): Because the purpose of boards like A.net is to bicker over minutiae so that one may claim the I Was Right Trophy, do a little victory dance, and rub it in opposition's face.

Exactly! Plus, I was bored and wanted to see if he could produce any information to back up his argument. So far he hasn't. So fun was had by me...

For the record, AC have not ordered the 789 as some have claimed, and they won't be the launch customer for the type. Looking at Boeing's press release for the AC order, there is no breakdown in type for the 787 they ordered, and the Air Canada website only offers pics of the 787-800 (sic).

I had heard they ordered both from other people on these boards, but that isn't true. The 14 787s for delivery beginning in 2010 are for 787-8s, and according to "Randy" they became "the first airline to announce plans for the 787-9."

Thus, the 787-9 has NO ORDERS and there is no confirmation it is available for order at this time from any source I have found.

I have stated in the past that this is because the final configuration for the 787-9 is not solid, and it might grow (my belief), as they are still 'working with customers to define the plane' since interest hasn't been that high. They've already redefined it this week with a higher MTOW, greater range and greater payload. I personally think it might grow 8-10 feet before they finalize anything. But that's just me. No basis for it other than lack of sales and complaints by customers about capacity being too low.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 38): I have stated in the past that this is because the final configuration for the 787-9 is not solid, and it might grow (my belief), as they are still 'working with customers to define the plane' since interest hasn't been that high. They've already redefined it this week with a higher MTOW, greater range and greater payload. I personally think it might grow 8-10 feet before they finalize anything. But that's just me. No basis for it other than lack of sales and complaints by customers about capacity being too low.

I don't think you can say if the interest is high or not if Boeing doesn't put down an EIS date for it, and one that is close. Moreover, the time between a firm order and EIS or predicted first delivery for a model/variant has traditionally been well under 5 years. Exceptions have been the 772ER, 772LR (due to 9/11), and the 787-3 (ANA/JAL requiring this as part of launch order) which have had first order to first delivery periods of over 5 years. The longest time differences have mostly been for the first model of a family. Variants (except for the 777LR models which had 9/11 in the intervening period) typically have shorter delays between first order and first delivery. Given that Boeing was considering a 2012 EIS for the 787-9, it is no surprise that Boeing hasn't taken orders yet. Even late 2010 is far off in historical terms for a variant.

Model	Order	Deliv	years	  
772LR	6/2000		~5.7	   
787-3	7/2004		~5.7	   
772ER	8/1991	2/1997	5.5	   
772A	10/1990	5/1995	4.6	   
757-200	8/1978	12/1982	4.3	   
767-200	7/1978	8/1982	4.1	   
737-700	11/1993	12/1997	4.1	   
773ER	3/2000	4/2004	4.1	   
744F	11/1989	11/1993	4.0	   
707-220	12/1955	12/1959	4.0

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 39): Given that Boeing was considering a 2012 EIS for the 787-9, it is no surprise that Boeing hasn't taken orders yet. Even late 2010 is far off in historical terms for a variant.

Boeing has always stated late 2010 for the 787-9. Not sure where you got the 2012 date from.

Considering there are some carriers taking first delivery of the 788 in 2010, and production is pretty well sold out through 2010, one would assume that carriers would be booking 789s now should they want them in 2010, so either nobody wants them as configured, or Boeing isn't selling them yet.

Though the 787-3 has an EIS of 2010 as well, it is the same fuselage as the 787-8, so you firm the configuration of the 787-8, you pretty much have the 787-3 set aside from the wing and some structural/fuel tank issues. But the 789 is still in the design stage and could change more than it has this week before Boeing signs commitments (promised figures and capacities) with any carriers.

I think part of the problem was that Airbus countered with the 359 which is more appealing in some respects than the 789 and the 772ER, and now Boeing is stuck having to basically replace the 772ER earlier than expected. Smart move by Airbus? But a revised 789 would beat the pants off the 359, sending Airbus scurrying for a 359HGW prelaunch. I think Boeing is looking to do this. Just my hunch...

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 40): Boeing has always stated late 2010 for the 787-9. Not sure where you got the 2012 date from

No, they were considering a later EIS, and they only firmed plans for 2010 around the time of the Paris Air show when they were trying to win the QR order.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 40): Though the 787-3 has an EIS of 2010 as well, it is the same fuselage as the 787-8, so you firm the configuration of the 787-8, you pretty much have the 787-3 set aside from the wing and some structural/fuel tank issues.

The -3 was a prerequisite for the ANA's order which launched the 787. They want it so they can start retiring older jets, but they don't need it right away.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 5): Quoting KhenleyDIA (Reply 3): I know that one of the a.netters suggested (not sure if it was a guess or something heard) that Emirates could become a leasing agency in the future That was me. Comes from no inside knowledge. Just based on their capital abilities, their enthusiasm for ordering the hottest planes in large numbers, and that they already lease some jets and could easily lease more at a profit.

Emirates Leasing was being discussed here before you even joined the site.

Do not attribute yourself with the ideas or information of other people. Your understanding of the EK business is on a par with your knowledge of the Heathrow slot system

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 27): Cargolux also placed an order for the 748 before it was launched. Not sure if there was an authority to offer in place...

There was an ATO the B747Adv before Cargolux ordered.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 30): Go to the Boeing website. Look at the technical specs for each 787 model. The 788 has a milestone calendar re: launch, authority to offer, first flight, certification, etc. The 783 has only the authority to offer date and the EIS date. The 789 has ONLY an EIS date. Why would boeing list the 783 milestone but not the 789 milestone?

The last time Boeing updated the B787 techical specs webpages, the Wright brothers hadn't flown yet. I think the wheel had already been invented, but wasn't in production yet.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 40): Boeing has always stated late 2010 for the 787-9. Not sure where you got the 2012 date from.

No, it was earlier this year that Boeing changed the EIS for the B787-9 from 2012 to 2010, largely due to pressure from EK.

I don't know whether or not Boeing's board has ATOed the B787-9 yet, so I'm not implying anything one way or another on that question.

Whoa!!! 42 Triple 7s... I hope I'll see some of them at least, flying over my house in Long Island, New York on their way to JFK.

Anyone venturing a guess where they'll be used? I'm thinking they may eventually replace the A340 to New York with a 773??

[Edited 2005-11-20 18:11:14]

Forbes reports that they will order 50 A350´s..

http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/afx/2005/11/20/afx2347112.html

The press seems to be all over the place on this. Keesje, the article you cite, which was very recently released I admit, speaks of the announcement for the 777's in the future tense, which points to the fact that this is old info:

Quote: The paper said Emirates is also set to place orders for more than 40 of US aerospace giant Boeing's wide-bodied 777s

One could infer from this that the information was "leaked" before EK management (cited in other articles) said they were in no hurry to choose between the 787 or the A350. We'll just have to wait and see.

from WSJ 11/20/05:

"...Emirates also said it hasn't yet chosen between competing smaller models from Boeing and rival Airbus. Emirates has been looking closely at the planned Airbus A350 for many months, but Boeing has recently been making a big push with its new 787. "We're looking at both of them," said Tim Clark, president of Emirates Airlines."

Perhaps Mr. Clark intends to decide overnight, based on the conflicting media reports?

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 47): Perhaps Mr. Clark intends to decide overnight, based on the conflicting media reports?

Is it actually Mr Clarks decision to make?

Regarding the 787 and A350, we haven't decided yet which way we'll go" Emirates Chairman Sheik Ahmed bin Saeed al Maktoum told reporters.

This one look's like the decision is going to be as tight as the IB A346 / B777 decision.

Regards, PanAm_DC10

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Reply 48): Regarding the 787 and A350, we haven't decided yet which way we'll go" Emirates Chairman Sheik Ahmed bin Saeed al Maktoum told reporters

Maybe they'll go both, with a 359/789HGW combo and use the 359s on denser routes and the significantly longer-legged 789-HGW on longer-thinner routes. Just a possibility, but EK don't seem too perturbed about operating similar types from Airbus/Boeing.
Anyway, they may very well order nothing. If they hadn't made their mind up as of yesterday, will they by today???

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 49): Anyway, they may very well order nothing. If they hadn't made their mind up as of yesterday, will they by today???

That well maybe the case Dale but they've usually been rather even handed when ordering from both OEM's. Given their comments it does seem to validate Boeing's claim that the A350 was not a given and whatever Boeing have put to them is serious enough for EK to re-consider their needs in the A350/B787 Category. That said, I still have a feeling they'll announce something good for Airbus this week.

Regards, PanAm_DC10

I agree with PanAmDC10 largely. If Boeing somehow manages to sell them 787 on top of all the 777, it would be a huge coup. Even if that does not occur, I think Boeing will have achieved a small victory by making Airbus sweat an order that though they had bagged. Emirates should get a good price whatever they buy.

Here's another thought.

EK talked of an LCC config on some of the A380s. Might they then do the QF+Jetstar idea that has been floated around, getting 359s and 789s for the different fleets? Maybe the 789s in the denser 9 across for the LCC routes in second tier low yield markets in Asia, Eastern Europe and Africa to complement 389s LCC planes on the bigger routes, and then the 359 fit out similar to the 345 for medium haul routes with high yields like they are wasting the 345 on ZRH for?

Anyone see that happening as a long term strategy?

I would think if the A359 can carry more folks then a B789/780, then EK would want to use it for the LCC fleet instead, to pack more folks in.

And evidently (noted in another thread), EK will be putting the high-end A345 cabin in their B772LRs and their new B773ERs, so that might mean the A345s are going away and being replaced with B773ERs to increase capacity (since I can't see EK using a 772LR for DXB-ZRH).

Read the following comment and you will understand why. The competition for this order is a knock down, drag out fight.

Sheikh Ahmed said his fast-growing airline had yet to decide on whether it will buy the Airbus A350 or the Boeing (BA) 787.

"We will decide when we are ready," said Sheikh Ahmed.