Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus And Boeing To Renew Qantas Talks Early 06  
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 10855 times:

Flight International thinks the requirement for long haul larger aircraft will start early 2006.

FI says the ULH requirements are still on the table. I believe Dixon said he saw them as not economical viable..

http://www.flightinternational.com/A...tas+deal+sees+launch+of+787-9.html



Other intersting info: the Qantas 787 slots appeared to have been reserved for Qatar.

The 787-9 will enter service in 2011. Smart planning by Boeing IMO. The A350 won´t be available earlier & it gives the 772 some extra selling time.

47 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4445 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 10796 times:

I would assume that the 777-200LR is in the lead slightly.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29662 posts, RR: 84
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 10758 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

So the rumor Boeing held QR's slots for QF are true, then.

As for the ULR order, I would imagine it depends on how quickly QF wants these birds. An A345E program would probably have an EIS towards the end of the decade, in which time the 772LR will have almost five years of in-flight service under her belt and one can expect Boeing will continue to refine and improve her performance as they have with the 773ER since it entered service.

However, end of decade could also give Boeing a shot at trying to make a 787-9ULR, but I'm kinda (if not pretty) doubtful they could launch it in that timeframe, since they'll still be pushing to get the baseline 787-9 out the door.

If QF is serious about launching the service, Boeing may win it with the 772LR just because it is the only option available this decade.


User currently offlinePlaneDane From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 10674 times:

Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
Other intersting info: the Qantas 787 slots appeared to have been reserved for Qatar.

Well, this is good news for Airbus too. We can now see that Qatar is definitely committed to the A350 and not to the B787 anymore. Of course, the airline will still need to firm up this order at some point.

[Edited 2005-12-19 23:19:07]

User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 10644 times:

Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
I believe Dixon said he saw them as not economical viable..

No, he said there wasn't a case with the aircraft presented.

If someone presents the 'Holy Grail' of a SYD-LHR machine -- without having to resort to a lower density layout such as SQ uses on its A340-500's -- he'd gobble it up.

Without it, QF is simply playing in what will become EK's turf, only without a hub that's more central to leverage.

Steve


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 10643 times:



"Neither the Boeing 777 or A340 provide an economical solution to our desire to have some of our services overfly midpoint hubs

As well, our commercial people did not feel the savings in elapsed time between the non-stop and one-stop journey was great enough to appeal to a wide enough passenger base"

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/251993_qantas14.html

Boeing has said the 777-200LR, which recently set a world non-stop distance record on a direct flight from Hong Kong to London, can do the Qantas mission. With three additional fuel tanks in its belly, the 777-200LR will be the world's longest-range jetliner when it enters service next year.

But Dixon disagreed, even though Boeing was offering Qantas a 777-200LR with six additional fuel tanks.


User currently offlineBoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1596 posts, RR: 18
Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 10613 times:

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 3):
We can now see that Qatar is definitely committed to the A350 and not to the B787 anymre.

I would agree with you that there is good chance but to say its definitely... hmm I dont know.... We all have seen a lot of crazy stuff happen through the years when it comes to LOI... They really dont mean much some of the time...

You still have slots for 2008 for Primaris... so those slots could potentially be released to some other airliner??



Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
User currently offlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4091 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 10599 times:

Here's my question...why doesn't Boeing just put the tanks in, fill the airplane with volunteers, and prove that the LR can do it?

User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 10549 times:

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 3):
Well, this is good news for Airbus too. We can now see that Qatar is definitely committed to the A350 and not to the B787 anymre. Of course, the airline will still need to firm up this order at some point.

Well, I suppose Boeing would have refunded the deposits holding the slots as soon as QR made their order public, since they were prime slots. Boeing wouldn't want QR to be sitting on slots that they could be offering to other prospective customers.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 10541 times:

Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
Other intersting info: the Qantas 787 slots appeared to have been reserved for Qatar.

Then I would think we know where Qatar stands on the A-350 v 787 battle.

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 7):
Here's my question...why doesn't Boeing just put the tanks in, fill the airplane with volunteers, and prove that the LR can do it?

Put the Qantas execs on it and let them do it themselves along with the volunteers. That way they know and can see and feel what it would be like to be holed up for 23 hours. Max her out on weight and give it a shot with those 6 tanks.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineTrolley Dolley From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 10489 times:

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 7):
Here's my question...why doesn't Boeing just put the tanks in, fill the airplane with volunteers, and prove that the LR can do it?

Because it is not an issue of capability, as there is no doubt that the 777LR can fly between SYD & LON, but economics. One has to weigh up the cost of slots at LHR, the limited number of services allowed by the UK/Australia bilateral, the overall market demand, the limited number of viable departure times ex LON that result in a market friendly departure/arrival time when flying to Sydney and the passenger and cargo loads of the flight. I read in the very interesting book, "Flightpaths" that something like only 5% of the world's air routes would be profitable by only carrying passengers. If Boeing and Airbus have to compromise on either revenue earning area- by reducing pax configuration or taking up hold space with fuel tanks- this is of key interest to operators. The capabilities of the A & B ULR offerings are too economically marginal for such an extreme route at the moment.


User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4252 posts, RR: 29
Reply 11, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 10417 times:

Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
Other intersting info: the Qantas 787 slots appeared to have been reserved for Qatar.

Interesting development or, rather, revelation. Boeing appears to have pulled the trigger on QR, forcing them to deal with Airbus. Not a good position to be in from a buyer's perspective since your supplier knows you have no alternatives; certainly not a better (read quicker to market) alternative. Of course, that's assuming QR was still sitting on the fence; hence, the reason no firming up of their 350 order.



I'm not a racist...I hate Biden, too.
User currently offlineConfuscius From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 3825 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 10344 times:

Interesting quote...hmmm...

“Whereas Boeing is viewed as an engineering-led company, Airbus is seen as being sales-led,” one chief executive of a 787 customer airline told Flight International recently. “The 787 is superior...Airbus can compete by being cheaper.”



http://www.flightinternational.com/A...ng+triumphs+in+twinjet+tussle.html



Ain't I a stinker?
User currently offlineAJRfromSYR From United States of America, joined May 2005, 454 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 10331 times:

Maybe QR wants 789's and not the 788?


-AJR-
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8044 posts, RR: 8
Reply 14, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 10301 times:

QR is in an interesting situation now, having lost the 787 production slots.

I think Airbus would be in error if they think they now have leverage over QR on the 350. They are still going to need to sell the planes and get the contract and the longer QR drags out the negotiations the better chance Boeing has of delivering an interesting proposal - especially if Boeing opens a second 787 production line.


User currently offlineNirvarma From New Zealand, joined May 2005, 108 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 10298 times:

Quoting Confuscius (Reply 12):
Interesting quote...hmmm...

Have to agree with you on than one and perhaps it's true considering the issues A has had with the A345/6 and the delays on the A380.

NV


User currently onlineStuckInCA From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1922 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 10229 times:

Quoting Confuscius (Reply 12):
Interesting quote...hmmm...

“Whereas Boeing is viewed as an engineering-led company, Airbus is seen as being sales-led,” one chief executive of a 787 customer airline told Flight International recently. “The 787 is superior...Airbus can compete by being cheaper.”

Note that the quote is from a 787 customer airline. It is in his interests to pronounce the 787 superior and better engineered. Without opining on whether or not this is true, I think everyone should agree that he'd be a tool to say anything otherwise. If his airline had selected the A350 he'd be saying positive things about it and about Airbus.


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 17, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 10164 times:

Quoting Trolley Dolley (Reply 10):
it is not an issue of capability, as there is no doubt that the 777LR can fly between SYD & LON, but economics.

A B787-8ER would offer much better economics flying SYD-LHR than would the B777-200LR. Seating could be 6 abreast in Business and 8 abreast in Economy. 200 seats total with generous pitch. 2 belly tanks would be needed for extra fuel -- unless the raked winglets could be fitted with tanks.


User currently offlineGARPD From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2579 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 10072 times:

Quoting StuckInCA (Reply 16):
Note that the quote is from a 787 customer airline. It is in his interests to pronounce the 787 superior and better engineered. Without opining on whether or not this is true, I think everyone should agree that he'd be a tool to say anything otherwise. If his airline had selected the A350 he'd be saying positive things about it and about Airbus.

It can also be stressed that the CEO was not named, nor was his/her airline. So its still possible the statement is largley true.

From what I've seen and heard in my little circle of friends, it fits.

[Edited 2005-12-20 00:39:11]


arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineHanginOut From Austria, joined May 2005, 550 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 10003 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 17):
A B787-8ER would offer much better economics flying SYD-LHR than would the B777-200LR. Seating could be 6 abreast in Business and 8 abreast in Economy. 200 seats total with generous pitch. 2 belly tanks would be needed for extra fuel -- unless the raked winglets could be fitted with tanks.

Since the revision to the 789's range and capacity, I've wondered why Boeing didn't the same for the 788 (as an HGW version) as well? As Zvezda has suggested, perhaps Boeing may be contemplating/be convinced to develop a 788LR.

HanginOut



Dreaming of the day I can work for an airline
User currently offlineAeroPiggot From United States of America, joined May 2005, 283 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 9978 times:

Quote:
Quoting Confuscius (Reply 12):
Interesting quote...hmmm...

“Whereas Boeing is viewed as an engineering-led company, Airbus is seen as being sales-led,” one chief executive of a 787 customer airline told Flight International recently. “The 787 is superior...Airbus can compete by being cheaper.”

Don't worry guys, Neeleman have said the say thing about his decision to buy the A320 over the 737NG for Jet Blue.  yawn 



A scientist discovers that which exists, an engineer creates that which never was.
User currently offlineDalecary From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 9971 times:

Quoting PlaneDane (Reply 3):
Well, this is good news for Airbus too. We can now see that Qatar is definitely committed to the A350 and not to the B787 anymore. Of course, the airline will still need to firm up this order at some point.

Well not committed to the 788 anyway. They could be still looking at the 789 with 2011 EIS and the possible 787-10X with EIS of 2012+.
FWIW, I think QR will stay with the 350.


User currently offlinePHXinterrupted From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 474 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 9942 times:

Quoting StuckInCA (Reply 16):
Quoting Confuscius (Reply 12):
Interesting quote...hmmm...

“Whereas Boeing is viewed as an engineering-led company, Airbus is seen as being sales-led,” one chief executive of a 787 customer airline told Flight International recently. “The 787 is superior...Airbus can compete by being cheaper.”

Note that the quote is from a 787 customer airline. It is in his interests to pronounce the 787 superior and better engineered. Without opining on whether or not this is true, I think everyone should agree that he'd be a tool to say anything otherwise. If his airline had selected the A350 he'd be saying positive things about it and about Airbus.

The executive in question could have been from an airline that operates both Boeing and Airbus. And regardless of the 787 statement, the general statement about Boeing and Airbus speaks volumes about Boeing's products in my opinion.



Keepin' it real.
User currently onlineStuckInCA From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1922 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 9901 times:

Quoting PHXinterrupted (Reply 22):
The executive in question could have been from an airline that operates both Boeing and Airbus. And regardless of the 787 statement, the general statement about Boeing and Airbus speaks volumes about Boeing's products in my opinion.

Indeed it COULD have been...

I'm only saying that if you are a chief executive of a company that buys a product, you are going to say good things about that product versus it's competition. It's him saying good things about his airline's product against some of his competition. We don't know who said it. I don't care. I don't have enough information to agree or disagree with the assertion, I just would be wary of accepting it as truth just because an executive of an airline who purchased the 787 says Boeing is engineering led while Airbus is sales led.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29662 posts, RR: 84
Reply 24, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 9862 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 17):
A B787-8ER would offer much better economics flying SYD-LHR than would the B777-200LR. Seating could be 6 abreast in Business and 8 abreast in Economy. 200 seats total with generous pitch. 2 belly tanks would be needed for extra fuel -- unless the raked winglets could be fitted with tanks.

As I understand it, Boeing offered the 772LR with 200 seats and Airbus the A345 with 120 for QF's ULR RFP, so a 787-8LR would offer identical passenger payload to the 772LR (and I am guessing close to that in cargo) with more efficiency.

But will 2010ish be too late to meet QF's needs? By then most everyone will have A388s plying LHR-xxx-SYD. Or will all that capacity be the trigger that convinces QF to launch non-stop service?


25 NAV20 : I feel that Qantas may have made a mistake here; under-estimated the demand for a nonstop all-business service. Worth remembering that Singapore Airli
26 Post contains images Stitch : Can SQ launch SYD-LHR without the approval of the Australian Government? They put the kebosh on SQ's bid for non-stop SYD-LAX service, for example. A
27 Post contains images NAV20 : Don't know off-hand, Stitch. But even if they do need permission, Qantas could hardly object on grounds of 'unfair competition' in respect of a route
28 AJRfromSYR : I'll disagree, if it wasn't for Boeing selling them 10 planes at a time in the past with minimal discount, they wouldn't have changed the plan and hu
29 Gemuser : No SQ cannot operate Oz-UK non stop without renegotiating BOTH the Oz/SIn & UK/SIN bi-lateral treaties, not something I would think would be really e
30 WhiteHatter : I've posted many times here on just this subject, in depth, and been flamed by cheerleaders who just can't see exactly what Geoff Dixon has confirmed
31 Post contains images NAV20 : No need for us to disagree, AJR - you're right, we'll never know how much of the 'bulk purchase' idea came from Boeing. In any event, like most succes
32 AJRfromSYR : I'll agree on the win-win, just sounded like you were saying QF has a long history of bargain hunting. QF did a great job negotiating on this deal th
33 Glennstewart : I'm sure that with 6 fuel tanks and a full load of PAX, the 777-200LR could do SYD-LHR. But that's not the point... Qantas hasn't earned it's close t
34 Post contains images Lightsaber : Hmmm... I'm not sure there are that many more 772 orders left. Not when rumors of a 787-8ER are going about. But with LHR slots being worth so much..
35 Post contains images NAV20 : As far as I know it's definitely going to happen, Lightsaber, but not for five years or so. God help the West London people; I lived there myself for
36 SLUAviator : You took the words right out of my mouth!
37 Post contains images Stitch : Boeing, like Airbus, just put in the seats that the airlines deliver in the places the airlines tell them to put them in. So it was SQ that decided o
38 Gemuser : No they would not! Thats called dumping, which most governments and their Tresuary departments frown on strongly!! The anti dumping arguments are ver
39 Post contains images Windshear : Ha that is what I posted in an earlier discussion about the B787 order, people were quick to say that the A340/777 orders were scrapped Feels good to
40 Post contains images Keesje : I think this is good news for the A330.
41 NA : Everyone is talking about 787 vs.A50 here. The topic as I understand is about the bigger jets to be ordered in 2006 or a little later. So it´ll main
42 Slarty : From your link, I thought this was also a notable quote: "... The 787 had a number of factors in its favour, including price, groundbreaking technolog
43 Astuteman : If the assumptions about the A345E are correct, it could be quite an aircraft. The Airbus website lists the range of the A345HGW as 9000 nm (up from
44 AirFrnt : If the choice is between a 345E and ceeding dominance of the most profitable (per frame) market to Boeing, can they afford not too?
45 Kaitak : I saw a quote on PPRUNE (D&G Reporting Points - the Aussie section!) about the new QF orders and it suggested a price of less than $70m for each of QF
46 Astuteman : Do you mean most profitable per frame for QF orders? How many will QF order? Or do you mean most profitable per frame in the whole marketplace? I sus
47 Atmx2000 : That is dependent on how much development costs are factored into the price of an aircraft. I suspect the 777LR family profitability is fairly high,
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Airbus & Boeing To Resume Subsidies Talks posted Sun Jul 29 2007 00:56:20 by Breiz
Airbus And Boeing On Their Way To Iran? posted Tue Jun 6 2006 17:14:25 by PM
Updated Orders For Airbus And Boeing Up To Now posted Wed Jun 27 2001 06:13:09 by United Airline
Aeroflot: Tendencies Towards Airbus And Boeing posted Tue Jan 15 2008 11:01:25 by 797
KLM Orders Extra Airbus And Boeing posted Wed Nov 21 2007 23:13:55 by KL577
Airbus And Boeing Deliveries Through Aug posted Wed Sep 12 2007 02:24:34 by Buckeye
Oman Air Buys Airbus And Boeing Planes posted Fri Jul 6 2007 17:08:06 by Manni
How Far Is Airbus And Boeing Production Sold Out? posted Wed Feb 7 2007 16:52:48 by NoWorries
What’s Ahead In 2007 For Airbus And Boeing? posted Wed Jan 10 2007 00:29:29 by BoomBoom
Airbus And Boeing Product Strategy posted Wed Oct 25 2006 20:52:57 by Katekebo