Aviationfreak From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 1166 posts, RR: 46 Posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5009 times:
KLM announced this a while ago at their website:
"KLM is currently renewing its intercontinental fleet. The current Boeing 747-300, MD-11 and Boeing 767 aircraft will be replaced as of 2003 by Boeing 777-200 ER aircraft and Airbus 330-200. The current Boeing 747-300 freighters will be replaced by Boeing 747-400 freighters.
The first 747 400ER Freighter was delivered in March 2003. When the fleet renewal is completed, KLM`s intercontinental fleet will consist of three types: Boeing 747-400, Boeing 777-200ER and Airbus 330-200."
So they will get Airbus a/c. I find this a bit strange. Believe me I have nothing against Airbus or Boeing. Correct me if I`m wrong but I always thought that KLM replaced their A310`s for 767`s in the past because KLM was not very font of Airbus a/c. Besides they were not that old that they needed to be replaced.
And I also think Airbus a/c will not be good for fleet commonality.
So why does the Royal Dutch Airline want Airbus a/c now?
BTW I personally would like another KLM plane with winglets.
I love both Airbus and Boeing as much as I love aviation!
Ka From Switzerland, joined Apr 2000, 643 posts, RR: 11 Reply 1, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4908 times:
First, why not? The A332 is a very modern and economic a/c. And regarding commonality: Do we know if they aren´t planning behind the scenes for an A380 Combi if launched??
Scorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4934 posts, RR: 47 Reply 2, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4876 times:
First, the A310s were not replaced because KLM 'didn't like them'. They were replaced because of a change in KLM's route structure, i.e. more flights with higher frequency but with smaller planes within Europe, as well as on the long haul. Some A310s were thus replaced by 737s in Europe, and could not be redeployed on the long haul, because they lacked the range (they were -200s). So, KLM decided to replace them with the 767.
The 767 is less than ideal for KLM, because, while it has the range, it lacks the cargo capacity KLM needs. Enter the A330-200, which has both the range and the cargo capacity. So the plane was ordered (firm order for 6, options for 18). It seems several airlines have opted for a mix of 777 and A330-200 (e.g. AF, EK) and it seems to work fine for them.
Lj From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4140 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4826 times:
So why does the Royal Dutch Airline want Airbus a/c now?
The leases on the B767 will expire, the B777 is too big for the intended A330 routes, KLM doesn't want to rely on 1 supplier for its aircraft and although KLM wasn't happy with the A310, the A330 has proved itself over the past few years.
And I also think Airbus a/c will not be good for fleet commonality.
ehhhh Northwest has them, Air France has them thus commonality enough I say (not to mention other Skyteam airlines)
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15989 posts, RR: 59 Reply 4, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 4700 times:
I also think the 332 is an odd change. I wonder if there is a political element involved in that as a Euro carrier it feels political pressure to have some AI aircraft in its fleet?
Anyway, the 332 order was placed prior to the 7E7 prospect. Given that the 7E7 will be more efficient than the the 332, hopefully Boeing is pushing hard for KLM to drop the 332 order in favour of a 7E7 order.
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
Bobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5974 posts, RR: 9 Reply 6, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 4628 times:
Yyz717,
"given that the 7E7 will be more efficient than the 332"
The 7E7 hasn't even been given it's final design yet or have the engines been chosen. How is it a given that it will be more fuel efficient?
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 8, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 4566 times:
I also think the 332 is an odd change. I wonder if there is a political element involved in that as a Euro carrier it feels political pressure to have some AI aircraft in its fleet?
That's ridiculous and I certainly hope it was a joke. They want planes soon to replace the 767s and the 330 is the best tool for the job, for reasons already detailed.
Given that the 7E7 will be more efficient than the the 332, hopefully Boeing is pushing hard for KLM to drop the 332 order in favour of a 7E7 order.
They want planes before 2008/2009 I'd assume is most of it, and there are lots of things that are more efficient than other things but people still choose to buy them for a host of nonpolitical reasons.
Rjpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 4539 times:
The 7E7 Stretch is being aimed to be more efficient than the A332, due to its new bleedless engines and light airframe.
My guess as to why KLM ordered the A332---And I'm surprised nobody has said this but the A332 is an amazing aircraft, the best in its class and probably one of the best overall commercial aircrafts available today. For that reason they are selling like crazy and that is why Boeing is developing the 7E7 stretch with the sole intention of beating the A332.
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15989 posts, RR: 59 Reply 10, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 4468 times:
They want planes soon to replace the 767s
It raises the issue of why does KLM need to replace their 763's? They are relatively young.
As for the political consideration of ordering the 332, I was being serious. When the 772/332 order was announced, a senior KLM exec was quoted as saying that the joint order was a balance betw Boeing & Airbus. This comment "implies" a number of things: that KLM does not want to rely just on Boeing, and that in a highly politically charged EU airline environment, KLM was conspicuous as the only "flag carrier" without AI equipment until the 332 order. Of course KLM could have chosen the 332 strictly on its operational/financial metrics without political pressure at all.
Nonetheless, with the 7E7 offering since the KLM 332 order, it's only natural that KLM would reconsider the 332 order in light of the new 7E7 option.
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
Lj From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4140 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 4438 times:
I feel our usual Airbus vs Boeing war coming again......
Anyway, anyone who is amazed that KLM didn't order from Boeing was sleeping as the management indicated many times (in public) that it didn't want to rely on one supplier. And which comapny besides Boeing can deliver widebodies to KLM?? Not many.
Lj From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4140 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4386 times:
It raises the issue of why does KLM need to replace their 763's? They are relatively young.
Yyz717, the lease on the 767s expire between 2005 and 2009. The lease contract stipulates three options. The first option is to extend the lease for another x years. The second option is to buy the B767. The third option is to continue the lease but with another type. KLM has opted for option 3 probably beacuse buying would be too expensive and the cargo capabilities aren't great.
This comment "implies" a number of things: that KLM does not want to rely just on Boeing, and that in a highly politically charged EU airline environment
I can assure you that the first thing you amply is correct. Dureing a guest lecture at my university (back in 1999) the senior person of the procurement department told about the benefits of using dual sources for procurement (including aircraft). And guess what happened four years later?
Aviationfreak From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 1166 posts, RR: 46 Reply 13, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4176 times:
It was not my intention to start a new battle in the so called Boeing/Airbus war! I really, really hate that!!
This whole Boeing vs Airbus thing is ridiculous. When I started this topic I said that I have nothing against any of them. The reason I did that was to prevent the B vs A thing. Actually I like almost all planes of both manufactures. Like somebody already said before, no one would like to see a/c mainly from one manufacturer. So I hope they both last long. Everyone who replies something B vs A related and being negative about one of them is acting very childish. So if you intend to, don't!
Everyone else, thank you very much for the interesting reply`s. I know something now I always was curious about.
BTW keep on replying if you want as long it is not A vs B related.
I love both Airbus and Boeing as much as I love aviation!
DaV From Italy, joined Jun 2001, 669 posts, RR: 12 Reply 14, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4179 times:
I also think the 332 is an odd change. I wonder if there is a political element involved in that as a Euro carrier it feels political pressure to have some AI aircraft in its fleet?
No, it's not. They needed an aircraft with similar pax payload of the 767, better (far better) cargo payload than the 767, and better economics than the M11. KLM is well known to do it's own interest, not others... drop the political theme, it won't work here :rolleyes
Anyway, the 332 order was placed prior to the 7E7 prospect. Given that the 7E7 will be more efficient than the the 332, hopefully Boeing is pushing hard for KLM to drop the 332 order in favour of a 7E7 order.
If that happens, KL will
a) have to pay a penalty (of which we don't know the amount, but I doubt it will be fair)
b) they'll have to wait until the end of the decade, leaving them with no suitable aircraft for their intended operation.
I hope for Boeing that they'll come out with something more efficient in so many years, otherwise they'll have hard times.
Aviationfreak From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 1166 posts, RR: 46 Reply 15, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4150 times:
Dav,
KLM is well known to do it's own interest, not others... drop the political theme, it won't work here.
You are so right. The Dutch government always was a big shareholder in both Fokker and KLM. When they tried to press KLM to buy the F100 The Royal Dutch Airline wasn't very coöperitive.
BTW that I find the choice for the A332 a bit odd doesn't mean I'm not happy about it. I like a/c with winglets.
[Edited 2003-12-24 20:03:49]
I love both Airbus and Boeing as much as I love aviation!
Celticmanx From Netherlands, joined Mar 2001, 99 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4111 times:
The KLM decision to take A330 has been smart enough, as well as most airlines worldwide. If you see those airlines that has been for a long time a B767 operators and have been looking to replace them, they have opted to acquire the A330 and that's why this airplane is leading on medium to long high density routes, whereas its current competitor B767-400 has been unsuccessful. On the other hand, The B777 is for Long haul routes and play a much different role than the A330. In fact the A340 is the direct competitor of the B777, but in this case Boeing has proved to be more efficient. Airlines will always go for the best option available and the airplanes orders speak by themselves.
Now the 7E7 is a plan, not even a proyect. A long study is under way to decide whether or not the 7E7 is feasible to build. Meanwhile the 7E7 is not even offered, because the engineers are not sure yet if they'll get the numbers they want in order to build it, whereas the A330 is already airborne and being delivered like hot cakes.
We can even think that when the 7E7 is ready and if KLM would be interested, it will possibly be the option to replace the old A330 by then.
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 21 Reply 17, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4003 times:
The 310s were taken out of service because they were dangerously unstable when used in the role KLM had envisioned for them.
They were completely unsuited to KLMs mode of operation which includes mixing cargo and passengers on the same flight.
At the time KLM vowed to never buy Airbus again and go for an all-Boeing fleet, something they almost accomplished.
The 330s were most likely purchased on orders from Paris, being a political decision more than anything.
Scorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4934 posts, RR: 47 Reply 19, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3911 times:
Jwenting,
Please at least TRY to be a bit honest in your responses. We all know of your almost insane obsession with the KLM-AF thing (some of the statements you've made about that here are irrational to say the least), and you most obviously let it cloud your judgment, but you're going a wee bit far this time, don't you think?
They were completely unsuited to KLMs mode of operation which includes mixing cargo and passengers on the same flight.
Pretty much every airline does this. It's what the plane was designed for. KLM got rid of the A310s because they lacked the range KLM needed when they changed their strategy, as explained above. Your theory makes little to no sense, and it's the very first time I've ever heard anyone bring this 'problem' forward.
At the time KLM vowed to never buy Airbus again and go for an all-Boeing fleet, something they almost accomplished.
You know, that's repeated here at infinitum by some members of this forum, and yet I've never seen it confirmed by anyone official at KLM.
The 330s were most likely purchased on orders from Paris, being a political decision more than anything.
This one takes the cake. The planes were ordered at a time when KLM was still widely rumoured to merge with BA. Of course you'll just say that the 'evil French' were already lurking behind a corner, and BA was used as a smokescreen, right? It also doesn't mix in with your theory that AF will dissolve KLM in the next few years, which you've repeated here at infinitum over the last few months, because in that case AF would have allowed KLM to order... NOTHING. Oh yeah, that's right, the planes will be delivered in AF colors, right...
Sorry about the rant, but this guy has been getting on my nerves for some time now, with his assinine comments.
Rjpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3603 times:
I agree totally....KLM needed a new plane in that category and what choice did they have? The A332 far beats the 764.....and the 7E7 is still 6 or 7 years away.
Keesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3528 times:
KLM long haul fleet will be :
- 400 seat 744´s
- 320 seat 772´s
- 280 seat 774 combi´s
- 250 seat 332´s
Great mix with excellent cargo capasity and all with the range to do almost all destinations in the long haul network from AMS. This gives great flexibility to vary capasity as demand changes.
The fact that the M11´s will continue to fly for KLM is due to their good lease rates and their excellent cargo capability.
The differences in efficiency, range and cargo capasity between the 767 and 330 are so big that the 767 orders are coming to a halt and Boeing is forced to respond with the 7e7. However KLM and many others Boeing loyals don´t want to wait 9-10 yrs for it.
DaV From Italy, joined Jun 2001, 669 posts, RR: 12 Reply 23, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3435 times:
There is strong suggestive evidence from significant political involvement in other Airbus orders throughout the world
And the same about Boeing. What proves that?
As Lj said, perhaps KLM wanted a dual supplier which would have meant an Airbus order in due course anyway.
Again, what does it have to do with politics? It's a double smart move by KL: they got the airplane that fitted at best their need, and now they don't have to rely on one supplier but they have the possibility to switch from one to another and back again; they gained the maximum beneficts, that is heavy discounts on new airplanes purchase
Aviationfreak From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 1166 posts, RR: 46 Reply 24, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3414 times:
Can't believe this. I successfully ended a B vs A battle and a new war is started.
Don't be too hard for Jwenting. I can understand his point of view. We al know that the merge (don't know if you can still speak of a merge, it looks like a takeover to me) is a very sensitive subject here in the Netherlands. After the bankrupt of Fokker the merge with AF teared up my proud and Dutch aviation hart. So I can understand that my aviation loving country fellowmen would feel the same way.
Sometimes I even start thinking that someone in the Netherlands gave KLM away and that probable made that guy filthy rich.
But I also agree that continue nagging about it isn't an option and BTW this discussion isn't related to this topic. Sorry but I had to say it. Please forgive me!
I love both Airbus and Boeing as much as I love aviation!
25 Yyz717: Odd considering Yyz717 is actually from Europe!Perhaps bashing and criticism are 2 things in your eyes? Thanks for your support Donder! I was not Euro
26 Sv11: Some of Boeing's traditional customers like Qantas, KLM and EVA Air have ordered the A330-200. I think it is an outstanding aircraft in terms of cargo
27 Anxebla: Aviationfreak:Don't be angry ANYWAY... I agree with you,always is the same with Boeing-Airbus.Both manufacturers make good planes. KL need the A-330.R
28 Lj: Although it has been discussed before here goes the entire reasoning behind KLMs A310, B767 and now A330 purchase. Initially KLM wanted to buy the B76
29 Scorpio: Lj, Thank you for that explanation. however, there's one major flaw in your reasoning: Initially KLM wanted to buy the B767-300ER. However at the time
30 Flpuck6: The 330s should not be compared to the 777. As already mentioned, another company like AF has a fleet of 330s and 777s, each aircraft used on DIFFEREN
31 Lj: KLM ordered the A310 in 1978. At that time, there was no such thing as a 767-300ER. It wasn't even launched yet. the first 767-300ER only entered serv
32 L-188: Short Answer. Their preferred aircraft supplier went out of business. Remember KLM is the only airline that I know of that flew every aircraft type th
33 Killerbabe: I think KLM ordered the A330-200 as a result from pressure from NWA, their partner in the US, who placed a big A330 order as we all know. Who knows, K
34 Solnabo: Rechtop in de wind, Airbus332. Michael/SE
35 UN_B732: They might be "young" but has anyone read SR 103's trip report? -UN
36 Jwenting: so now being opposed to the AF takeover of KLM means you're a fascist? I'd have expected such a response from a far left communist unionmember as they
37 Scorpio: so now being opposed to the AF takeover of KLM means you're a fascist? No, but bitching about it in EVERY DAMN POST in an irrational manner makes you
38 Gigneil: The most logical replacement would have been another 767, not an A330. I don't understand how you can advocate the replacement of a 20 year old plane
39 DaV: The most logical replacement would have been another 767, not an A330> No, it's not logic I hope that you KNOW that YOUR flag carrier makes a lot of m
40 Sabena 690: DaV and Scorpio: thanks for your replies, but I'm afraid it doesn't make any sense... he doesn't believe it anyway! (I think he lives in some kind of
41 Anxebla: If the most logical replacement would have been another 767...the most logical replacemente for 727's is...other B-727.The same for the DC-10's even f
Sponsor Message: 
From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 1166 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Apr 2000, 643 posts, 
From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4934 posts, 
From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15989 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5974 posts, 
From Italy, joined Jun 2001, 669 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
