Planetime From Singapore, joined Mar 2006, 719 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 13707 times:
EK has been pushing Boeing to develop the 787-10 for a long time. And them being a launch customer for it makes sense. Also Boeing did a smart move by them cannabalizing the 777-200ER than let Airbus doing it.
Well, one thing about the A380, is IT DOES HAVE LESS CARGO SPACE. Its obvious simple physics, regardless of what Airbus says. You have 2 passenger decks (one the size of a 773, the other the size of an A333) and one cargo deck (about the size of a 773). So, if you calculate how much baggage the people on an A330-300 have, and subtract it from the cargo space of a 777-300, you get the total cargo space of the A380, which is alot less than any 400+ seater I have ever seen.
One advantage for the 747-8, its cargo deck is almost equivalent to the passenger deck, which is a good ratio.
Jrlander From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 1107 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 13558 times:
I think airlines like Delta, if it survives, might be a good candidate for the 787-10. Delta is an airline which could order large numbersof 787's to replace an aging 767 fleet. They need a larger plane, a role currently filled by the 777-200ER, but a 787-10 operated alongside 787-8's and 787-9's would be much more efficient than a large number of 787's and 8 777's. NWA might also be a good possibility, if they survive. I could also see Continental making a similar decision. That's just in the US! Other airlines which need a larger plane, but can't afford the costs of adding an entirely new family to the fleet will also look seriously at this plane.
CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4488 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (9 years 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 13502 times:
If EK orders the 787-10, I think that the older A330 and 777s will be replaced by it. This will allow EK to operate 1 aircraft and cockpit type where 2 used to be needed. Overall, I think that the future will see the majority of the A330 and 777-200ER fleet being replaced by the 787. I do not see the A340s lasting that long either. IF the 787 turns out to be as good as predicted, then the A340s will be replaced by it also. In my opinion the future EK fleet will look like this
787-10 and other variants.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
AirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2830 posts, RR: 42
Reply 10, posted (9 years 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 13415 times:
Good for EK, but they asked Boeing to develop the 787-10. That kind of put them on the spot for having to buy it once it was actually developed. I remain skeptical of EK's business plane, but I think it is much more do-able with 787 sized aircraft then 777/380 as the backbone for their fleet.
Airwave From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1117 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (9 years 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 13332 times:
Well that was fast, lol. We only just heard from Boeing that they were going to go ahead with the -10, and we turn around and find out that they're in final negotiations. I'm surprised they wedged them so close together; I thought it was better to spread it out and extend the PR hold.
Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 7): Well, I have a better question. What is EK going to do with so many aircraft?
That's like 50 or so new 777s.
possibly 20 787-9s to replace A330s.
plus all those extra A340-500/-600s which don't have a definite future.
That's ALOT of aircraft.
Quoting CX747 (Reply 9): Overall, I think that the future will see the majority of the A330 and 777-200ER fleet being replaced by the 787.
That makes the most sense, especially a decade out from now. But EK'll still have a pretty sizable fleet mix. And who knows what they'll decide to do next, lol.
Quoting NASOCEANA (Reply 6): Absolutely, this is called Erosion. And it is always better for a business to erode their own product than to let a competitor do it for them!
I thought that was called "planned obsolescence"? Or, no, maybe "cannibalism"? Or are they one and the same? Lol.
At any rate, congrats to Boeing and EK--and all you BA shareholders, lol. This should help send the price up even higher.
When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
Kaniksu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 202 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (9 years 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 13318 times:
Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 10): Good for EK, but they asked Boeing to develop the 787-10. That kind of put them on the spot for having to buy it once it was actually developed
Isn't that what they wanted? Wouldn't that be like ordering a meal at a restaurant and then when it arrives telling them you no longer want to eat it or pay for it? I don't understand why EK would want to do that?
PlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 6146 posts, RR: 29
Reply 15, posted (9 years 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 13254 times:
Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 10): Good for EK, but they asked Boeing to develop the 787-10. That kind of put them on the spot for having to buy it once it was actually developed.
Quoting Kaniksu (Reply 14): Isn't that what they wanted? Wouldn't that be like ordering a meal at a restaurant and then when it arrives telling them you no longer want to eat it or pay for it? I don't understand why EK would want to do that?
I disagree. "This is what we want - now see if you can do it" is a lot different than "If you do it, we will sign". While EK may be ready to sign, they may also be waiting to see what Airbus comes back with again. Better A350 design? Better price? Etc.
Just because Boeing has relented doesn't mean that EK wouldn't still consider an Airbus alternative if it presented itself. IMHO, of course.
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 16, posted (9 years 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 13221 times:
Quoting CWFan (Reply 4): EK's claim that the -10 would have 80% MORE cargo space than an A380 almost defies belief. How's that possible?
1. Because the WhaleJet has such a large cross-section, the portion which tapers at the nose and tail is much longer than on an aircraft like the B787. The tapered part can't accommodate containers.
2. The WhaleJet's undercarriage consumes more than a usual length of the lower deck.
Taken together, this means that (running from the nose aft toward the tail) the WhaleJet's forward cargo hold starts later and ends sooner, then the after cargo hold starts later and ends sooner.
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 18, posted (9 years 5 days ago) and read 13176 times:
Quoting Lordanmol (Reply 17): Boeing seriously needs someone else to order the 787-10
Boeing only announced yesterday, informally, that they will build the B787-10. Have a little patience. I'm sure we'll see orders other than just EK before the end of the year. Anyway, it's 6.5 years from EIS.
Astuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10399 posts, RR: 97
Reply 23, posted (9 years 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 12923 times:
Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 15): While EK may be ready to sign, they may also be waiting to see what Airbus comes back with again. Better A350 design? Better price? Etc.
Quoting Jet-lagged (Reply 22): is any information quoted from Boeing, or other sources, that EK is actually going to place an order?
That was my question too. I think it's great that Boeing are commiting to the 787-10 (it sounds like a seriously capable aircraft ), and it wouldn't surprise me if EK did order, but nothing that I read in the article said that EK had actually made the commitment to the 787-10.
Will EK wait and see what Airbus do with the A359HGW?