MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32177 posts, RR: 72
Reply 5, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4154 times:
Quoting Orion737 (Reply 4): New long-haul destinations for RAM other than Rio, might include a service to another French speaking long-haul destination, perhaps a joint service to Guadeloupe/Martinique.
DAL767400ER From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 5721 posts, RR: 46
Reply 7, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 4068 times:
Quoting YULMRS (Reply 6): Do we know which versions ? 783 788 ???????
Whose says it can't be both ? Ok, with only 4, it wouldn't make too much sense to split the order. Expect the 788, as the 787 will likely be used to replace/supplement the 763s on the transatlantic routes.
FoxBravo From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2948 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3775 times:
Here's a somewhat amusing excerpt from the Boeing press release, a not-too-subtle dig at the recent comments by Airbus:
"Royal Air Maroc's Board of Directors agreed to purchase the Boeing 787s on July 29, following a long and well-defined competition that had been extended on two occasions. After declaring the tender to be clear and transparent, RAM's Board of Directors instructed the airline to directly engage Boeing in negotiations for the purchase of the 787 as the best solution for its long- haul fleet." (emphasis added)
This is great news for Boeing, and I am happy to see yet another early success for the 787, but frankly I think it would have been even classier if they had risen above the childish back-and-forth and just ignored the Airbus PR. I'm sure they wanted to preempt any possible criticism, but instead this just makes them look a bit defensive. Oh well, c'est la vie.
Swisswings From Switzerland, joined Feb 2005, 60 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3608 times:
RAM may increase flights to its present North American destinations (New York and Montreal) with the 787 Dreamliner. I do not think that they will increase the number of destinations served in North America, though.
As mentioned before, RAM could use them too on their key routes to France (high volume) as well as to Jeddah or reopen its South American link to Rio de Janeiro.
FCKC From France, joined Nov 2004, 2348 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3164 times:
As already mentionned in another topic , Airbus didn't make any tender to win this order , SIMPLY because RAM want to have the new plane in fleet in 2008.
Of course Airbus is absolutly unable to deliver the A350 at this date , the sooner would be 2010-2012.
To win this order , Boeing made slots for RAM for 2008 delivery , as they absolutly want this order , as they consider RAM as a prestigious African airline.
I guess they will NOT reopen the RIO route , as this route has been opened with a 747 , only as a caprice of the previous King (HassanII) to carry members of the Royal family , but it was a vaste of money.
Think the new King is quite more reasonable.
Atlanta is a surprise , but why not.
Fort de France or Pointe a Pitre is a joke.No Morrocans go there.
Meafly From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 30 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2980 times:
Perhaps Airbus should of stated [that] themselves. Instead, from what I've read, they instead claimed that they wouldn't compete due to RAM being unspecific in their tender. That claim has been fully rejected by the airline. It seems they just were trying to muddy the waters so this wasn't perceived for what it, in fact, is.....another clear win for the 787 over the A350. And, they pursued this track after it was clear Boeing had already won the deal. This has been one of the stranger stories I read about an airplane deal. Didn't Airbus also rub India the wrong way not too long ago?