PanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 3987 posts, RR: 93 Posted (7 years 2 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 8114 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW COMMUNITY MANAGER
China Airlines Chairman Mr Philip Wei has stated during an interview that they wish to modernise and simplify their fleet on 3 types only. Initially they wish to dispose of their A300s and standardise on the A333, B738 & B744. By modernising their fleet and initiating a process of simplification they wish to reduce maintenance and crew costs.
After this, He has also stated thet they need a larger capacity aircraft for U.S. and European routes, seating greater than 400 PAX.
Fair use excerpt;
The airline needs aircraft that can carry more than 400 passengers each, the so-called jumbo aircraft, to fly on long- haul routes to the U.S. and Europe, Wei said.
``Now it's the time for us to consider a modern jumbo fleet for the next generation,'' he said. China Airlines will choose between the 555-seat Airbus A380 and a passenger version of Boeing's 747-8 design, he said, declining to say when a decision will be made.
They will not dispose of their 744s, instead they will convert all existing PAX versions inot 744BCF's Mr Wei states that they will then have one of the largest 744 Freighter fleets in the world by the time they have simplified their fleet.
Report leads me to ask the following. If they wish to simplify on 3 types as mentioned above, it would be 4 if they chose the A380.
Also, they own Mandarin don't they? Is this an indication they'll go for the 73G or 738 for the RFP that Mandarin Airlines currently have?
Finally, this is not a case of another carrier considering the A380 or 748-I as an RFP has been issued. Unfortunately I cannot link to the source for the RFP requirement or when it was issued.
Boeing767-300 From Australia, joined Sep 2001, 659 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (7 years 2 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 8080 times:
Time will tell but they have clearly stated that they are clearly interested in both. Although I don't believe that as the decision will have been made this release was made for the benefit of price negotiations with the manufacturers.
Boeing need a passenger customer for 748 and Airbus need some momentum back after stalling in A380 sales: Benefactor=CI at the negotiating table.
If its a big order then both will be desperate to land this one. This could go either way thats for sure
Trex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 3970 posts, RR: 14 Reply 3, posted (7 years 2 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 7991 times:
Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Thread starter): They will not dispose of their 744s, instead they will convert all existing PAX versions inot 744BCF's Mr Wei states that they will then have one of the largest 744 Freighter fleets in the world by the time they have simplified their fleet.
interesting, this will really mess up their average fleet age which they are keen to keep very low since the 742 crash in 2002,, though they could fudge it by not including the freighters
Quoting KL808 (Reply 1): Will politics be involved? If so, I would conclude that the B748 will be the winner.
if you think the Taiwan government will put pressure on CI to buy Boeing as it has previously, it won't happen this time, not with the present administration anyway. Boeing in various ways in the last few years ,which has been previously discussed in other threads, has bent over backwards to appease Beijing and in the process insult the Taiwanese government. Boeing has decided that its commercial airplanes dealings with mainland China take precedence over any with Taiwan or integrated defence systems sales to Taiwan.
UALMMFlyer From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 135 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (7 years 2 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 7796 times:
Interesting news. Doesn't CI has a relatively new fleet of A340-300? Are they going to be phased out so soon?
IIRC, CI signed a MOU for a substantial order of 777s, then chose the A340 when politics got in the way.
It is hard to tell which way CI is going to go, but I am surprised that they are not considering the 787/A350 and 777/A346?
Zeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 7725 posts, RR: 73 Reply 5, posted (7 years 2 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 7691 times:
Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Thread starter): Also, they own Mandarin don't they? Is this an indication they'll go for the 73G or 738 for the RFP that Mandarin Airlines currently have?
AFAIK AE has two leased aircraft from ILFC. Not sure about CI, they also had 2x320s at one stage. The CI 738 fleet age is above the fleet average, oldest 11-98.
Quoting KL808 (Reply 1): It seems to me that the B748 would fit better since it would have a lot of commonality with the rest of the 747 fleet.
This will be a tough contest and I don't believe this will be a clear cut order. Though I believe the B748 will fit better, don't discount the A380.
Very true, depends on how they want to split it up. They may like to keep the long haul pilot pool across just the 747 fleet (be 45+ frames), or do what they can do at the moment with MFF between the 330/340 with the 330/340/380 (30+ frames) and 744 (30+ frames), or possibly a 320/330 group 340/380 group, and 744 group.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
FCKC From France, joined Nov 2004, 2347 posts, RR: 4 Reply 6, posted (7 years 2 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 7549 times:
I have exactly the same questions that UALMMflyer.
If they wish to standardise their fleet with only 3 types (738 , 744 , 330) , so they will sell their A340-300s , and will go 747-8.
In this case , are we sure 747-8 can do the job for ALL long haul routes they have ? I do not think so.Probably it is too big for some of them , thus i think they need a 787/A350 category plane.
If they wish to get a 3 types fleet as they said , why not in the future a fleet like this.
- 738 (then new next generation narrow body to be launched , and enter service around 2012)
- A350 (replacing A330s and for thin long haul routes)
- 747-8/744BCF (Are they sure they will not need a bigger plane in the future that 747-8 for huge density routes).
Scbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 11358 posts, RR: 50 Reply 8, posted (7 years 2 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 7355 times:
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 7): The US "protects" the Taiwanese from any perceived threat from the PRC
While this has certainly been true in the past, the US seems to be less "interested" in Taiwan these days. A cynic might suggest that the PRC represents a vastly larger market for US goods and services than does Taiwan. Sadly for the Taiwanese, the mighty $ rules.
Trex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 3970 posts, RR: 14 Reply 9, posted (7 years 2 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 7308 times:
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 7): but it seems there is scope for political pressure to be applied if Boeing are in danger of losing the order.
there is scope in any commerical transaction for political pressure
Quoting Scbriml (Reply 8): A cynic might suggest that the PRC represents a vastly larger market for US goods and services than does Taiwan
this is exactly what has happened and Boeing are in the doghouse both in the Presidential residence and Ministry of National Defense in Taipei.
I can see the A343s gone by the time A350/787s are readily available and given they will still be taking A330s in the next 2 years, the A350 must have the upper hand.
CI has been rumored at various times to be a potential A380F customer.
ER757 From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2222 posts, RR: 8 Reply 11, posted (7 years 2 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 6874 times:
Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Thread starter): The airline needs aircraft that can carry more than 400 passengers each, the so-called jumbo aircraft, to fly on long- haul routes to the U.S. and Europe, Wei said.
This would seem to bode well for the A380. I'd love to see the 748i with CI, but if they need planes larger than 400 pax, that would give the nod to the A380 IMO.
Alexchao From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 686 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (7 years 2 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 6845 times:
Interestingly, there have been several articles in the Taiwanese press.
Airbus Director of Product Marketing for the A380, Richard Carcaillet, came to Taiwan recommending the A380 for EVA Air and China Airlines on the TPE-LAX route.
Both airlines said that they currently have no plans to purchase the aircraft, however, they are continuing to evalute the aircraft.
Elvis777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 360 posts, RR: 3 Reply 13, posted (7 years 2 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 6790 times:
Hello SCBRIML,
I do not agree with your statement. Although it is clear that PRC has more economic clout thanTaiwan I have not detected a shift in the policy of the US towards Taiwan. In other words afaik any military intervation towards Taiwan would call for direct intervention by our military. Unless I have missed something. do you have a reference where I can look this up?
Peace
Elvis777
Leper,Unevolved, Misplaced and Unrepentant SportsFanatic and a ZOMBIE as well
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7694 posts, RR: 5 Reply 14, posted (7 years 2 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 6710 times:
I think CI will be leery of buying the A380-800 unless Airbus can prove the plane at 560T MTOW can actually fly 8,000 nautical miles still-air range. If Airbus achieves that goal expect a lot of new orders for the plane to come.
At 8,000 nm still-air range, the A388 would allow airlines like SQ to fly from SFO to HKG on a full pax/cargo load almost year-round and CI to fly LAX-TPE on a full pax/cargo load essentially year-round with this plane.
SJCRRPAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (7 years 2 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 6591 times:
If there is not a clear winner on merits between the 748 and the A380, politics will decide the winner. The U.S. 7th fleet has prevented PRC from taking Taiwan for 50 years. If the PRC attacks Taiwan, no chance Europe would stop them. IMHO, all things being equal the 748 will be the choice. Same logic with El Al.
Slz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (7 years 2 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 6519 times:
Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 15): The U.S. 7th fleet has prevented PRC from taking Taiwan for 50 years. If the PRC attacks Taiwan, no chance Europe would stop them.
So you still think the US would stop them, do you?
15 years ago, I would have agreed with you,
5 years ago, I would have said it is likely
today, I say you're wrong.
China has become an economic superpower nobody can be out of though with, and has built itself a military too strong to risk a fight with.
Sure, the US military would still be able to throw the Chinese back to the mainland if they were to take the island, but then what? For a subsequent invasion and occupation of the PRC the US army just isn't strong nor big enough and stopping after Taiwan is liberated would mean the US faces a cold war with the largest economic market in the world for the next XX years!
Bye bye 150 737s, don't-know-how-many 787s and all other orders for Boeing planes, not to mention future sales and what about other businesses like cars, software etc etc....???
Luckily, the ideology of the PRC has changed and although the rhetoric is still there, they are not really planning on invading Taiwan, because all the US would/could do is stand by and look at them taking the island back and not even 7 7th fleets would prevent them from doing so...
Trex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 3970 posts, RR: 14 Reply 17, posted (7 years 2 months 5 days ago) and read 6342 times:
Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 15): If there is not a clear winner on merits between the 748 and the A380, politics will decide the winner. The U.S. 7th fleet has prevented PRC from taking Taiwan for 50 years. If the PRC attacks Taiwan, no chance Europe would stop them. IMHO, all things being equal the 748 will be the choice. Same logic with El Al.
you are missing several factors, first, the perceived personal insults Boeing has inflicted on the present Taiwanese administration in the last several years (the cancellation of the VPs visit at the last minute to Everett) and its reluctance to be seen by Beijing as doing anything to help the Taiwan military unless specifically ordered by the DoD (failure to talk about industrial cooperation over the AH64D). Whereas other major US defense contractors are still tripping over themselves to do business in Taipei - the contracts are potentially, large, lucrative, they pay cash and don't want every piece of the work outsourced over there. In the past any major CI order would have seen the head of the AIT (the defacto US embassy in Taipei) call the Taiwanese presidential palace and a call would have gone to the CI board. That is far less likely to happen today and CI are probably free to make as commercial a decision as they have ever been able to, free of political interference.
Also it would be quite easy for the Taiwanese to order European and claim US workers are getting significant job benefits, eg a A380 with Engine Alliance engines order may provide more US sourced work than say a 787 order with Rolls! As it is, the AFL- CIO deem Taiwanese military orders far more useful to US workers/industry than comparably valued NATO/Aus/Japan contracts due to the lower industrial offsets that Taiwan expects - only 30% whereas all the others want more than 100% routinely.
It is also unclear exactly how future US adminitsrations will view the US commitment to Taiwan. The Taiwan Relations Act, which is US domestic legislation, only commits the US to "provide arms for the defense" of Taiwan. It never implicitly commits to the US coming to the defense of Taiwan. Though I wouldn't be surprised the US would, it is not a formal or even informal agreement/understanding. GWB has said he will do "whatever it takes" to defend Taiwan but the next President may not and who knows whether he would anyway given his even more recent history towards Taiwan. The present administration has slammed the Taiwan president for cancelling the national uunification council and have prevented the USAF from launching the 3rd Taiwan satellite if it has a ROC flag painted on it!
SJCRRPAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (7 years 2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6245 times:
Quoting Slz396 (Reply 16): So you still think the US would stop them, do you?
I have no idea what the U.S. would do. Taiwan is defenseable if it does not go nuclear. It would takes ships to make a succesfull invasion. Smart weaponry would sink **everything** crossing the straight.
I do know this, the U.S. might help out, but Europe would definetly do nothing, except maybe re-arm PRC.
Interesting article. I'm guessing they will go for 748 for the following reasons;
1. If PAX numbers are falling, why add more seats?
2. If you are trying to decrease types of aircrafts why add a new one?
3. If you want a young fleet, my guess is the 748 conversion makes more sense than the A380 conversion or resale
4. I know this is not scientific, but when I have flown to Taipei (from SFO) during Holidays or Chinese New Year all seats sold out, but other times of year seats available. Adding more seats would probably force EVA to also buy A380, and than every bodies revenue falls down. Profits are maximum when aircraft seats are sold out and passengers start to "bid" for seats.
Trex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 3970 posts, RR: 14 Reply 22, posted (7 years 2 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 5981 times:
I just realised the article does not count the A340 as a "3rd type" but must have for the "6 types" used previously. So what will replace it?
Also if they are starting to go to CTS, maybe they could use that as a stepping stone to flights to US east coast. The distance is almost exactly the same TPE-CTS - US east coast as via ANC. This would save the hassle of ANC stops with little traffic originating there while providing capacity to CTS. Only thing is would a 3000m runway at CTS be sufficient for east bound flights for a fully loaded A343 or even 744? Its 5500nm to JFK.
PanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 3987 posts, RR: 93 Reply 23, posted (7 years 2 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5963 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW COMMUNITY MANAGER
Quoting SJCRRPAX (Reply 21): Adding more seats would probably force EVA to also buy A380,
Only thing is that EVA have stated that the 773ER is to replace all 747s for their longhaul requirement, which seems to rule out the A380 for them. Their 747s are all to be converted to Freighters.
25 Zvezda: There is no way the WhaleJet will have 8000nm still-air range at 560T. At 560T, the current WhaleJet won't fly more than about 6500nm without a tailw
26 Zeke: Flight International 14-20 feb A380 vs the warmed over Dumbojet had the A380 with a greater range over the Dumbojet. Also said that Randy agrees that
27 Rolfen: Well d'uh! You might as well title the thread: "China Airlines to buy either Boeing or Airbus"
28 Zeke: Should have also mentioned that the A380 has already done sectors over 6500 nm as part of its Australian tour.
29 Leelaw: But with what kind of payload, were the water tanks on MSN001 & MSN004 filled to the brim on the Australian and Asian Aerospace tours ?
30 Zvezda: Exactly. There is no doubt that the WhaleJet can fly 8000nm through still-air with full fuel and a minimal payload. The question was the range at 560
31 Atmx2000: Minimal payload? I thought it could fly 8000nm with design payload.
32 Vincewy: If CI or BR ever order A380s, their primary interests will be for cargo, I've mentioned a few articles earlier that CI is very interested in A380F, it
33 Jacobin777: nopes.......even SQ puts its around 7000nm (which to me means somewhere in the 6800-6900nm range).....
34 Trex8: but they were the first 772LR customer and one of the early 773ER customers.
35 Zvezda: What do you mean by "design payload"? Airbus are claiming 8000nm with 555 passengers, their bags and no cargo. That depends on an OEW that is about 2
36 Alexchao: Its going to be a long time before the 744Fs need replacement. EVA is converting some of their Passenger and Combi versions into Freighters as well.
37 DfwRevolution: Tap the brakes: China has a nominal economic output comparable to France or Italy taken individually. China isn't even 1/5 of the United States or 1/
38 Atmx2000: Gotcha. I forget about the real configuration OEW controversy. But 20K lbs will only knock of 500nm at the same passenger load. But if you reduce pas
39 DfwRevolution: Also consider that the A388 won't have a tremendous volume for revenue cargo in the first place. The volume of both cargo holds is 38 LD3 conatiners*
40 LAXDESI: China's GDP is the second highest in the world right behind that of USA and EU- I am using PPP numbers here. China's output is about 66% that of USA
41 B797: They dont actually buy software in China. Its bootlegged j/k
42 FlyingHippo: The current ROC administration has pissed off GWB for more than a few times since the Boeing/ROC VP fiasco, I think the Taiwanese government would tr
43 DfwRevolution: I was using IMF... I'm shocked at the difference in estimates. That being said, it's completly tangent to this thread, so if you'd like to continue i
44 Zvezda: " target=_blank>http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/....html The 1985 CIA World Factbook said that the per capita GDP of East Germany surpassed that o
45 LAXDESI: The numbers/rankings for China are similar based on 2004 World Bank figures. Link: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/D...TASTATISTICS/Resources/GDP_
46 Trex8: GWB isn't looking for a 748 order, he's looking for 8 subs, 3 batteries of Pac3 Patriots and upgrade of the present 2 MADS batteries and 12 P3s. The
47 FlyingHippo: Whne I say that GWB is not happy with President Chen, I'm not just talking about the arms deal, which GWB understand that it's is being held up in th
48 Ikramerica: But a good thought. Really... If you did, so did I. The US threatens China with fullscale war bi-yearly over Taiwan. Nothing has changed. Further, Ch
49 FlyingHippo: Agreed, but I don't think A333 is a "problem" for CI. A350/B748I combo would be the most logical choice, but because their A333 fleet is pratically N
50 Trex8: an A350 order with GEnx engines and a 748I order with the same would make good sense. so if they are keeping their 744s and going to BCF them, will th
51 Astuteman: Good sub designers, the French... . (and I should know ) Not quite as good as us of course....
52 Atmx2000: Does the UK make diesel-electric subs still?
53 Astuteman: No, not any more. The 4 best diesel electric submarines in the world (Upholder class) have been sold to Canada. The UK fleet is "all nuclear" now. Th
54 PanAm_DC10: That is a valid point though IIRC they recently ordered 11 sets of Avaition Partners Blended Winglets for their fleet of 738s. So I assume they will
55 SunriseValley: You must have your tongue in your cheek! Tell that to the Canadian Navy ! What they purchased was garbage and you say it is the best in the world!!
56 Trex8: the Upholders were the best in its class at the time of its design and manufacture. now if they don't actually work for a variety of reasons (maybe M
57 FlyingHippo: 738 will be with CI for a while, however, there is a RFP for AE's fleet renewal plan, which has A32x included. I wouldn't be surprised if AE buy a do
58 Astuteman: When the Canadian Navy learn not to open up HT mains electrics cabinets right underneath the control room hatch, and then open said hatch in heavy se
59 PanAm_DC10: Quite some time I would say, though I do agree that the residual value of the 738s with Blended Winglet's would hold well. The RFP for AE also includ
60 Trex8: AE have said they want some commonality with CIs fleet. I don't really understand this AE RFP, is it for both the F50s and F100s or just the F100s. T
61 PEK18R36L: Fair point, Trex, but please let us not forget that the boys from Toulouse and Hamburg have been kowtowing far more deeply to Beijing lately than the
62 Trex8: CKS is certainly not ready now and likely won't be for a few more years, someone else may have a more definite schedule I doubt BR and CI have a sign
63 Trex8: obviously well, you seek and CI will provide http://www.china-airlines.com/en/newsen/newsen000367.htm
64 Zeke: Maybe the winglets are being looked at to get the 738 performance back to levels they were 2 years after entry. I doubt adding the winglets will impr
65 PanAm_DC10: It is for the replacement of both models you mention. I agree with your point, but the E-170 is not included in the RFP, only the E-190 however, I be
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 3987 posts, 
From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1573 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 7725 posts, 
From France, joined Nov 2004, 2347 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 11358 posts, 
From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2222 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
