Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"  
User currently offlineSangas From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 6945 times:



Quote:
From now through 2015 about 1,600 airplanes in the 200-400 seat market will need to be delivered. If you look at the 787 vs. the A350, the Airbus offering is at least five years later and doesn't appear to have any added technology. And the 777 is available now, 8 years sooner than the competing Airbus product.


http://boeingblogs.com/randy/archives/2007/04/market_timing.html

Is Randy being bold in his assessment or is his logic irrefutable?

[Edited 2007-04-11 23:32:30]

43 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 962 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 6871 times:

Quoting Sangas (Thread starter):
Is Randy being bold in his assessment or is his logic irrefutable?

Randy is basically stating the obvious. The need to fill interim capacity is real, and it's no surprise that orders for the 777 and A330 continue to pour-in at healthy rates.


User currently offlineScorpy From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 400 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 6813 times:

he also fails to point out that most of the first few years of the 787 is now sold out unless the subcontractors speed up the process andmore slots come available.

User currently offlineDanny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3508 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 6780 times:

I thought he never comments on Airbus products...

Anyway obviously he forgot to mention that 787 is sold out until ...A350 arrives. And obviously forgot about A330. Typical spin for B crowd.


User currently offlineSirOmega From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 735 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 6763 times:

Quoting Scorpy (Reply 2):
he also fails to point out that most of the first few years of the 787 is now sold out unless the subcontractors speed up the process andmore slots come available.

I'm not sure that is his point. He is saying that 1500+ planes need to be delivered, and to Boeing thats $$$ - Boeing is earning revenue on those delivered planes and Airbus is shipping 330s that are priced lower because its a less desirable choice than then 787. Even as the 787-10 enters into service, Airbus is still delivering 330s and 340s. And even if the A350 matches 787 performance and Airbus can price it accordingly, Boeing has been delivering them for over 5 years at this point and has a ton of money in the bank to spend on other projects.

Through the other side of the glass, if you're running an airline and your main competitors are replacing and expanding with the 787 and you're still going along with 330s or 767s, you're losing. You have less efficient aircraft and higher CASM, and a smaller profit margin to boot, you're missing out on profitable routes you cant fly because of range or payload capabilities of your a/c.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 6737 times:

I think randy is famous for selecting his numbers & avoiding others.

The 787 as a 767/A300/10 replacement should have been there from 2002, preventing Airbus having a party with the A330 between 2000 and 2010. Timing is everything indeed  Wink


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 962 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 6692 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 5):
The 787 as a 767/A300/10 replacement should have been there from 2002, preventing Airbus having a party with the A330 between 2000 and 2010. Timing is everything indeed

Well, since it's your position to deem when Boeing "should" have introduced the 787, it's no surprise that you would have preferred Boeing to rush a product to the market. Waiting several years allowed Boeing to take advantage of significantly more advanced technology that wasn't viable for EIS in 2002.

Not that I'm expecting a response from you, it's worth noting that three years of 787-8 sales have surpassed a decade of A330-200 sales. Looks like Boeing gets to crash the party after all....


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 6671 times:

I usually enjoy reading his blog, but this is the most factually crooked and one sided one yet.

New 777s are NOT available now, and he ignores the existance of the entire A330/A340 family for some reason.

[Edited 2007-04-12 00:39:02]

User currently offlinePolymerPlane From United States of America, joined May 2006, 991 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 6671 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 6):

Not that I'm expecting a response from you, it's worth noting that three years of 787-8 sales have surpassed a decade of A330-200 sales. Looks like Boeing gets to crash the party after all....

Oh come DfwRevolution, you can't compare A330-200 sales to 787-8.. we all know that noboby's gonna order anymore 787-8.. It's too small for any airlines.

Cheers,
PP



One day there will be 100% polymer plane
User currently offlineJustloveplanes From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 1040 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 6619 times:

I'd like to know what Boeing and Airbus can deliver up to 2015 of those 1500 as yet unspoken for units.

Much Dinero......

Point made earlier, how many slots does Boeing have left? 787 is committed and a runaway success and Boeing will sell everything the can make. So this a sales pitch of 777 now is better than 350-1000 later more than 787 versus A350.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21477 posts, RR: 60
Reply 10, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 6366 times:

There aren't 777s available now. But I guess there are from 2011, so there are still five years of deliveries before the A350-1000.

But it seems that Boeing can't fill all 1590 units by 2015 if they wanted to, even if people continued to buy 767s. Then again, Airbus can deliver 600+ A330s by then (new orders, not backlog as stated), and would start delivering A350s in bulk in 2014.

Seems like both companies will have good years to come!

Quoting Keesje (Reply 5):
I think randy is famous for selecting his numbers & avoiding others.

Yep. He's the only one who does that in sales though. Everyone else is honest, honest, honest. And on A.net, nobody from Holland does that...  Wink



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineJAAlbert From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1557 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 6251 times:

Quoting Justloveplanes (Reply 9):
So this a sales pitch of 777 now is better than 350-1000 later more than 787 versus A350.

I think we put too much emphasis on comparing the 350 against the 787 when it is apparent that the real competitor of the 350 is the 777. Randy realizes this and that is why he focuses on the 777 in his blog. Of course Randy's comments are for people like us who like to chew on this stuff.

What I think Randy's blog reveals is that Boeing is very concerned the 350 will seriously impact the 777 program. Boeing will have to do a lot more than give us cheerful blogs to counter the 350. If Boeing can upgrade the 777 to match the 350s economics, it could continue as a viable competitor to the 350. After all, the 777 has a wider fuselage than the xwb and can market those extra few inches. It will be very interesting to see what Boeing does over the next few years with the 777


User currently offlineTootallsd From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 558 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 6234 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
It will be very interesting to see what Boeing does over the next few years with the 777

And they will have the people resources and money to do something. Unlike Airbus that will still (for 3 years?) be hemorraghing under the A380 launch and designing the A350XWB123.


User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 6171 times:

Quoting Danny (Reply 3):
And obviously forgot about A330. Typical spin for B crowd.

It's already outdated. It'll see leases as a stop gap or buys from government controlled airlines paying cash not worried about long term residual value. Otherwise, its a dead aircraft.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21477 posts, RR: 60
Reply 14, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 6170 times:

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
What I think Randy's blog reveals is that Boeing is very concerned the 350 will seriously impact the 777 program.

Boeing is nervous that the A350 could have the same headstart on the 777 replacement that the 787 has on the 350.

The upside is that a 787-11 could be built by 2015, with 350 seats like the A350-1000. The real question is if the 787-11 is practical. Can it truly replace a 77W?

The other question is does an A350-1000 really replace the 77W? It has fewer seats, but that's not a huge deal. But does it have the payload/range performance? We don't know yet...

And how would things be impacted if Boeing instead of launching the 787-11, launched a new pair of jets in 2012 for EIS of 2016. 340 seat and 400 seat twins with GEnx2 engines. The 808-8 would EIS in 2016, the 808-9 in 2018 or something like that. The 748 and 777 would remain as freighter platforms...

Airbus would still have a head start on sales by years, since they launch their products so early (6-8 year development time!!!), but the A346/77W replacement cycle really won't be starting until 2016 anyway, when "12 year" airlines start dumping their first planes of this generation...



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6154 times:

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
What I think Randy's blog reveals is that Boeing is very concerned the 350 will seriously impact the 777 program

Finally somebody realizes what is happening with the A350. They cannot completely fight off the 787, so Airbus decided to fight the older 777 and the larger variants of the 787. But then again, by the time the A350 flies, the 777 will have completed its 20th year in service.

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
If Boeing can upgrade the 777 to match the 350s economics, it could continue as a viable competitor to the 350

Only choice they have.


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 962 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6154 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 7):
and he ignores the existance of the entire A330/A340 family for some reason

Do you really have to wonder why? What on earth does Randy (and by proxy: Boeing) stand to gain by pointing out how well one of their competitor's products is selling?

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
I think we put too much emphasis on comparing the 350 against the 787 when it is apparent that the real competitor of the 350 is the 777.

Yes and no. For the time being, airlines will likely compare the A350-800/900 to the 787-9 more than the 777.

The A350-1000 is simply too far away with too many unknowns to be an aircraft of serious consideration as of 2007. Assuming Airbus maintains their schedule (which is a BIG if, to say the least) the A350-1000 is nine years away. For comparison, think of all the dynamics that occurred between 1994 and 2003; a nine year period between 772A roll-out and 773ER certification. A whole lot can change in nine years, and the A350-1000 will remain the paperest of paper airplanes for some time.

Randy is spot-on when he says that the 777 (-300ER in particular) several enjoy many more years of solid orders.

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
If Boeing can upgrade the 777 to match the 350s economics, it could continue as a viable competitor to the 350.

The upgrade path is a dangerous one. As Airbus learned with the A350 XWB, the cost of upgrading an existing airframe to competitive specifications is often better spent developing an all-new aircraft.

Boeing does have some options in terms of growing the 787, as has been discussed ad nauseam in other threads, or the possibility of launching a new large aircraft sometime after 2015.


User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6098 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14):
The upside is that a 787-11 could be built by 2015, with 350 seats like the A350-1000. The real question is if the 787-11 is practical. Can it truly replace a 77W?

My hunch is that going to this size will be more appropriate for another airframe vs. another stretch. I'd also put money on the cabin being wider than the WXB for certain, and my guess it will have a cabin about 7.5" wider than a 777 to accomodate 3+3+3 with 21.5" aisles.


User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3392 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6087 times:

I don't think Boeing is that worried about Y3 Vs A350 given that the A350 in many ways isn't on the level of the 787 for technology. I think the bleedless engines alone is something vital that Airbus has left on the table to for Boeing to beat them around the head with.

The concern is however that Boeing might lose some market share on the A350-10 being something that airlines need, and Boeing having no current answer for. On the other hand I think the smallest Y3 will soundly eat the A350-10's lunch in operating economics / lifetime costs if Boeing goes that small with it. Just that well the 737RS won't be out of the engineers hair until around the time the A350 starts delivery. So does Boeing start designing Y-3 in power point and sell airlines on the paper version 6? 7? 8? years before it will be delivered, or so they follow the normal practice of quiet discussions with the airlines about their needs, followed by a aggressive real development program starting a mere 4-5 years before delivery? In other words will Boeing follow Airbus's lead in "marketing and design" with a hell of alot of talk about a plane, years before they actually do "real work" on the plane?


User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2825 posts, RR: 42
Reply 19, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6018 times:

Quoting Danny (Reply 3):
I thought he never comments on Airbus products...

No, he is using Airbus's date projections here, not predicting a 6 month delay on Airbus's products simply so they don't look so bad.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21477 posts, RR: 60
Reply 20, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5944 times:

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 19):
The concern is however that Boeing might lose some market share on the A350-10 being something that airlines need, and Boeing having no current answer for.

They do have a current answer. One airlines are buying. They don't have a 2015 answer...  Wink

It's very similar to Airbus's "current answer" to the 787, the A330. But obviously the 200-300 seat market is bigger than the 300-400 seat market for jetliners.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3392 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5888 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
They do have a current answer. One airlines are buying. They don't have a 2015 answer...

well, the buisness boeing and Airbus are in, you have all kinds of wacky timeframes to deal with. Given that some airlines will be shopping TODAY for a solution in the 2013-2015 range you have some need to be selling now what they need then. Airbus has lately tried to do this by announcing a program when they have no more than a powerpoint slide or three. So while Y3 will be arriving "minutes" after the A350-10 in real hardware, given a typical Boeing development and marketing cycle we will not be hearing about it till just before the first A350 flys, or maybe right around the EIS of the first A350.

Now I think many airlines that REALLY need a A350-10, but don't need it right now will have a intelectual understanding that Boeing will have thier toy in hardware sooner rather than later despite not talking about it now. The problem is that Airlines are run by people, and people HATE uncertainty, so they are much more likley to order a A350-10 today than they are going to wait for a Y3 they know nothing about the specs of. The 737RS has an advantage in that there is very little room for it to shock you in a negative manner, but Y3 we know nothing about what Boeing is thinking in public, and not being constrained by any hard and solid expectations of it.. it could be anything. So if you wait for Y3 to have a small A350-10 version, and it turns out Boeing got the good (bad?) drugs the week they decided to make it the size of a A380-900 to start with and only get bigger from there. So its very easy to convice people that a 737RS is worth waiting for w/o telling them anything, yet a Y3 is very hard to do without actualy selling them a real set of rough specifications.

Then again I think there will be a HUGE 787 effect. One in which suddently after years and years of never getting enough midsize capacity, you get a glut of frames dropping into the used market. So if you are looking at a A350-10 a couple of years from now, you might well just decide to grab a handful of 777/A330/767's on a cheap(ish) lease and wait till you know what both sides are bringing to the game. Of course quality of said frames might be a concern, depending on your airline. Certainly this is what Airbus has been trying to work against the 787 with cheap lease or buys on new A330 frames. Only time will tell if that worked or not. Before anyone yells, cheap does not mean loss leader, or "free" aircraft, it means that people who normaly would be in a long argument to get normal moderate discounts, get a long argument why the A350 is right for them and a quick approval on "best customer" priced A330's.


User currently offlineJustloveplanes From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 1040 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5777 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14):
The upside is that a 787-11 could be built by 2015, with 350 seats like the A350-1000. The real question is if the 787-11 is practical. Can it truly replace a 77W?

Has there been any insider information or press releases on a possible 787-11? It seems like another a340-600 situation and I doubt Boeing would build a triple stretch - they have publicly argued against covering that large a market with one airframe.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 17):
The upgrade path is a dangerous one. As Airbus learned with the A350 XWB, the cost of upgrading an existing airframe to competitive specifications is often better spent developing an all-new aircraft.

Sometimes yes (original A350), sometimes no (737NG). If Boeing can get to 1500 frames with the 777, including freighters, I guess that would be more than enough to target for Y3.

This raises the orginal post by Randy:

1590 frames EXCLUDING BACKLOG....which means the 500 787, etc. as of today, doesn't count.

Proposed mix

Taking Randy's number of 1590 at face value

B777 350
B787 600
A330 300
A350 300

This is roughly the 60% widebody split we have seen the last two years.

How can production for Boeing meet these numbers? that's about 175 787's a year or about 15/month for 2012 to 2015?

777 looks doable at about 6 per month for 2011 to 2015. A330 No problem, but the A350 is about 12 month for two years at startup.


User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 5089 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 5):
think randy is famous for selecting his numbers & avoiding others.

Yes, and we all know that NOBODY form AIRBUS ever does THAT, thank heavens.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 5078 times:

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 23):
Quoting Keesje (Reply 5):
think randy is famous for selecting his numbers & avoiding others.

Yes, and we all know that NOBODY form AIRBUS ever does THAT, thank heavens.

Well for a start, two wrongs dont make a right, and airbus certainly dont publish propaganda like this!


25 AA1818 : I have some questions. The A350 is being built with similar materials to the 787 except they are in pieces and will be 'screwed' together adding weigh
26 Post contains images DfwRevolution : Keep in mind that the A320 didn't offer a fuel burn reduction of +20% over the 737 classic series. Had that been the case, a competitive 737NG may ha
27 EI321 : The trent XWB is intended to have 2% better SFC over the trent 1000. I think the 737NG engines had something like a 7% improvement in fuel burn over
28 Danny : According to Airbus there is no extra weight due to this but there is an ease of maintenance. There is no proof of any advantage of bleedless design.
29 AutoThrust : That has been discussed already and the additional weight using shells against monolithic will be about + /- 500kg. Wrong the A350XWB will not use sa
30 EI321 : Bleedless design does require additional weight elsewhere on the aircraft if im not mistaken.
31 Ikramerica : What propaganda? That the market exists for planes? That Boeing jets are more available until 2013, but then Airbus's new product comes out? I'm not
32 AndesSMF : It is a combination of many things as mentioned, not just the engines. If it reduces MX time, it becomes a part of the efficiency improvement due to
33 EI321 : He is trying to create a false perception of the market. A perception that 777s are available now when they are not. A perception that 787s are avail
34 JayinKitsap : If some of the 787 technologies do really pan out in terms of efficiency to manufacturer, maintain, and operate I would not expect to see any major u
35 EI321 : I think another advantage of less wiring is safety. The less wires on an old plane, the less chance of one of them starting a fire.
36 Post contains links and images Keesje : Randy´s blog has been changed. It is impossible now to get pictures / graphs of him from the past.. I was looking for some embarrasing ones but they
37 AndesSMF : And this goes back again to the expected efficiency of the 787 and what it could do to the airline finances. Less wiring also means less initial cost
38 Post contains images NorCal : Maybe we should also dig up all of those John Lehay quotes about the 787..... That would be very entertaining
39 JAAlbert : Of course the 777 is available now -- maybe not to those who haven't ordered them, but those who have will get em. Also, there is always the ability
40 XT6Wagon : I forgot just how many frames a month Boeing just started increasing the production rate to, but it does mean ALOT of planes will be available each y
41 Post contains images StickShaker : This is a complete myth. The 330's are priced lower because at 1000 frames the R&D costs have largely been amortised. Airbus can sell the aircraft at
42 AirSpare : In hindsight, there may be some merit to that. I really think the 777 cabin width is pretty sweet for the PAX load they carry. I buy'em! Please no..!
43 SEPilot : I posted this on another thread that the A350 was aimed more at the 777 then the 787, as the 777 is with the 787 replacing the 767 the oldest design
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...
Randy's Blog: "Twin Engines For The Long-Haul" posted Fri Jan 12 2007 22:49:27 by Leelaw
Randy's Blog: "Déjà Vu All Over Again" posted Tue Jan 9 2007 12:36:02 by Leelaw
Randy's Blog: 747 Is The "Shape Of The Future" posted Sat Dec 9 2006 09:25:32 by Leelaw
"Pan Am" IV (BMA) Is Upto Something Again.. posted Sat Mar 31 2007 22:21:15 by Matt1167
What Is "Clock" On Delta's 757's? posted Sat Feb 17 2007 06:12:36 by DeltaJet757
How Is "Delta Connection" Doing In New England? posted Mon Nov 13 2006 00:27:32 by Cs03
WestJet Is "Exploring Partnerships" posted Fri Nov 3 2006 23:18:54 by FA4B6
How Is BSL Doing As "Zurich West"? posted Sun Oct 29 2006 15:44:10 by Vfw614
How Is "Largest A/C Manufactorer" Measured? posted Fri Oct 27 2006 19:21:40 by SSTsomeday
Here It Is: AeroRepublica's New "a-la-Copa" Livery posted Mon Sep 4 2006 04:01:23 by SOUTHAMERICA