DL767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6319 times:
NW announced today that when they receive their next few A330s they would have the largest A330 fleet in the world, if this is true then why didn't they go with the A350? I mean it seems if they enjoyed the A330 so much they would have ordered the A350 or even the later XWB version. So what was the reasoning behind the 787 decision?
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21043 posts, RR: 60 Reply 1, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6309 times:
Because they are a launch customer and will get the plane next year, and were not willing to wait until 5 years from now? Because it fits in their fleet? Because they got a good deal?
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Centrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3597 posts, RR: 21 Reply 2, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6271 times:
Quoting DL767captain (Thread starter): NW announced today that when they receive their next few A330s they would have the largest A330 fleet in the world, if this is true then why didn't they go with the A350? I mean it seems if they enjoyed the A330 so much they would have ordered the A350 or even the later XWB version. So what was the reasoning behind the 787 decision?
Good question. The A330 was chosen as a DC-10 replacement as we all know and it had been offered against the 777. The A330 could do much of the DC-10 operations and came in two sizes that fit the demand of NWA. The 777 was too big for what NW really needed at the time.
The 787 is slightly bigger than the A330 and smaller than the 777 and the A350XWB. The 787 will allow NW to open up longer-haul routes to locations where a 777/A350 and 747 would be too big. The A350 in its version 1 would have not met NW's needs and as we have seen didn't meet many airlines needs. The current XWB would again be too big for NW's needs as it is a better replacement for the 777. Now that being said, if NW needs a plane smaller than the 744, the A350XWB would be seriously looked at as it will be the more modern aircraft at delivery than the 777 series. (unless NW goes for teh 787-10 or Y3).
With the 787 NW can re-start JFK-NRT and be far more profitable than they were operating a 744. The capacity for this route is big, but we have seen UA and NW pull out of it leaving JL (744), NH (773), AA (772) and CO (772). NW comes in with a 787 and they can stay profitable.
I believe that what the 767 did for Trans-Atlantic, the 787 will do for Trans-Pacific. Open it up.
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
Burnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7421 posts, RR: 9 Reply 3, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6176 times:
Quoting DL767captain (Thread starter): NW announced today that when they receive their next few A330s they would have the largest A330 fleet in the world, if this is true then why didn't they go with the A350?
Simple answer, the original design at the time NW was looking into both planes was this, Airbus told NW that the A350 could not have the same type rating as the A330, thus NW viewed the other aspects of the 787 larger. Also it was because NW requested that the 787's range be 500 nm longer then what boeing originally said boeing changed it to the likes of NW.
"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 4, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6170 times:
Quoting Centrair (Reply 2): The 787 is slightly bigger than the A330 and smaller than the 777 and the A350XWB.
Well, the 787 will be around the same size as the A330-200, but a fair bit smaller than the A330-300.
ADent From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1187 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6069 times:
It will be more efficient than the A330. The A350 won't be available for years, so why not get 787s now?
RwSEA From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 3024 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 6038 times:
Quoting ADent (Reply 5): It will be more efficient than the A330. The A350 won't be available for years, so why not get 787s now?
The most important factor is the range. NW's current fleet is pretty strapped. While they're adding 333s, they can't really do the Pacific routes. NW needed a smaller aircraft that could fly to Asia from its hubs. The 333 can't do it, and the 744s are too big for most of the routes.
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16001 posts, RR: 59 Reply 7, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5709 times:
NW is likely betting that the transpac market will fragment as did the transatlantic market, with more flights from smaller cities and less reliance on 747-dominant fortress hubs. Not everyone flying to Asia will want to hub thru NW's NRT hub if nonstops are available to smaller Asian markets.
Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3563 posts, RR: 29 Reply 9, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5585 times:
NWA is the North American launch customer. They chose the 787 because they felt it would meet the needs of their fleet the best. The 330s were ordered in 2000 to replace the DC10s and are a different fleet with a different mission than the 787s intended purpose.
Columba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6839 posts, RR: 5 Reply 10, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5534 times:
Quoting Azjubilee (Reply 9): NWA is the North American launch customer. They chose the 787 because they felt it would meet the needs of their fleet the best. The 330s were ordered in 2000 to replace the DC10s and are a different fleet with a different mission than the 787s intended purpose.
So it is A330 transatlantic and 787 transpacific.
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3563 posts, RR: 29 Reply 12, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5476 times:
Columba - not necesarily, since there are 332 flights that cross the Pacific everyday. The 330s with NWA livery can be found everywhere from Mumbai to Singapore to Honolulu to Memphis and many points inbetween. Airlines are fluid businesses that must adapt, change and reinvent themselves continuously. Just because NWA ordered the 787, while the 330s are flying the Atlantic, doesn't mean we won't see a 787 in Europe. Bottom line is that NWA will send the 787s on the missions they feel best suit the bottom line. If they take on a role like the 330s and fly in both the Europe and Pacific networks, which could happen simultaneously with the 330s, then they're just using the equipment to the best of its abilities. That's typical NWA.
BrianDromey From Ireland, joined Dec 2006, 3812 posts, RR: 9 Reply 13, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5436 times:
Quoting Burnsie28 (Reply 3): Airbus told NW that the A350 could not have the same type rating as the A330,
Really, its a pity they did not tell that to EI, becasue they seem to think it will......
Quoting Columba (Reply 10): So it is A330 transatlantic and 787 transpacific.
Basically yes. 744 and 787 for trans-pacific, and the A330 for trans-atlantic. Although there may be exceptions to this, possibly routes to asia from SEA on the A330s.
I think they choose the 787 becasue it has a smaller capacity than the options available when they ordered (777/747) and its range will allow a lot of routes to be operated with a lot less capacity than would be traditionally required, sepecifically I am thinking of routes that would not quite need a 77L for capacity or range/payload, but with the 777-200ER could not perform.
Brian.
Next flights: MAN-ORK-LHR(EI)-MAN(BD); MAN-LHR(BD)-ORK (EI); DUB-ZRH-LAX (LX) LAX-YYZ (AC) YYZ-YHZ-LHR(AC)-DUB(BD)
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7677 posts, RR: 18 Reply 14, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5383 times:
Quoting Azjubilee (Reply 12): Columba - not necesarily, since there are 332 flights that cross the Pacific everyday. The 330s with NWA livery can be found everywhere from Mumbai to Singapore to Honolulu to Memphis and many points inbetween.
True but the transpac A330 services are limited to west coast gateways. The 787 will allow service to new markets in Asia ex- DTW, MSP and other mid west/east coast cities. So like you said it will be an interesting balancing act, matching up equipment to routes that they best fit. You probably will see both 787-8s and A330-200s sitting side-by-side at the gate in NRT. And you'll probably see them sitting side-by-side in AMS as well.
What will be interesting is to see what happens in the longer term, say by 2020, how both fleets are handled. If they keep both or phase out one for another.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
ORDagent From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 823 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5299 times:
In ten years we'll have the perpetual "Why isn't NW retiring the 330 fleet?" threads. If history is any indication they will be flying those birds until 2050!
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3563 posts, RR: 29 Reply 16, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5247 times:
If history is any indication, NWA and every other airline out there* will fly each airplane until it no longer provides a meaningful contribution to the balance sheet. *There are always airlines that have rediculous amounts of cash, due to government support to throw at airplanes and lead people to believe 10 years is OLD. Fortunately the majority of the airlines out there actually function as real businesses and are responsible with their finances and fleet planning.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26961 posts, RR: 83 Reply 17, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5217 times:
Quoting Gigneil (Reply 4): Well, the 787 will be around the same size as the A330-200, but a fair bit smaller than the A330-300.
In terms of raw cabin floorspace to put things like seats, galleys, and lavatories, a 787-8 and A330-200 match up quite nicely, as does the 787-9 and A330-300/A340-300.
Burnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7421 posts, RR: 9 Reply 18, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5037 times:
Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 13): Really, its a pity they did not tell that to EI, becasue they seem to think it will......
Originally when NW was looking, shortly after NW ordered the 787 Airbus did change it. That was the reason NW told the pilots they got the 787 over the A350.
"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
Sh0rtybr0wn From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 528 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4934 times:
Qatar, Emirates, Cathay ll have about 28+ A330s each , so they have similar sized fleets.
Northwest bought the 787 at such an early date, they'll get them next fall. That should save them a lot on fuel and make them instantly more competitive. Plus they have 50 options. How would they use those? 15 more 787-8s and 35 789s?
Lets say they do exercise those options: Do they have to go to the back of the 787 line to 2014, or will Boeing work them in sooner?
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21043 posts, RR: 60 Reply 20, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4887 times:
Quoting Azjubilee (Reply 9): NWA is the North American launch customer. They chose the 787 because they felt it would meet the needs of their fleet the best.
Yes, launch customer doesn't necessarily mean the absolute first to fly the plane. NW is a launch customer, as they are taking delivery of some of the first 8 jets and will be participating in the later stages of certification...
Quoting BrianDromey (Reply 13): Although there may be exceptions to this, possibly routes to asia from SEA on the A330s.
I think these will end once the 787 arrives. They are using them now because they must, because the 742 was just too expensive to operate anymore. This is another reason NW ordered the 787. So they could get them ASAP, and because taking more A330s just wasn't going to cut it because they have limited range...
Quoting Sh0rtybr0wn (Reply 19): Lets say they do exercise those options: Do they have to go to the back of the 787 line to 2014, or will Boeing work them in sooner?
Options almost always have a window of opportunity attached to them. You must notify the company if you plan on using your slots in that window, and convert the options to orders. At least how I understand it, you are not obligated to take planes in that window, but you must notify the manufacturer so they can sell those slots to others, and you go further back in the line.
This happens quite a bit with the 737NG line.
But NW has firm slots attached to those options, which is why Boeing says they are "sold out through 2013." This is because between the options that are exercisable between now and then, and the slot rights some airlines have secured between now and then, there is no room for a new entrant.
NW has some slots during this period, as do QF and others, and one can also assume BA and AA and DL all have negotiated slots during this period that they must commit to officially by certain dates or lose them.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
XT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3150 posts, RR: 4 Reply 21, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4710 times:
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 20): Options almost always have a window of opportunity attached to them. You must notify the company if you plan on using your slots in that window, and convert the options to orders. At least how I understand it, you are not obligated to take planes in that window, but you must notify the manufacturer so they can sell those slots to others, and you go further back in the line.
Yes, that is typicly the way its done, and we have seen a good many "orders" that have been airlines having thier option slots come due for a yes or no.
Be interesting to see if NW was forced to give up option slots, or if they just "sold" them to ILFC, possibly for leasing those exact frames back. Its POSSIBLE that the slots those options covered were all 2014 and later, but ah.. I doubt it.
JetBlueGuy2006 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1615 posts, RR: 2 Reply 23, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3209 times:
Quoting Wingnut767 (Reply 22): CAL is the launch customer for the American legacy carriers
IIRC, NW is the North American and Legacy Carrier launch.
Home Airport: Capital Region International Airport (KLAN)
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21043 posts, RR: 60 Reply 24, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3208 times:
Quoting Wingnut767 (Reply 22): NH is the launch customer. CAL is the launch customer for the American legacy carriers
NW is the north american launch customer. Boeing even says so. NW joins the "launch team" in May of 2005. CO is also on the "launch team" as per the 2004 PR, and is the north american launch customer for the 787-9, but NW earned the right to say they are the north american launch customer for the 787-8 by signing on to take planes starting August 2008 and all the uncertainty and added complications being an "early adopter" brings with it.
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 25, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3159 times:
Quoting ORDagent (Reply 15): In ten years we'll have the perpetual "Why isn't NW retiring the 330 fleet?" threads. If history is any indication they will be flying those birds until 2050!
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, 
From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3597 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 3024 posts, 
From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16001 posts, 
From Indonesia, joined Feb 2006, 258 posts, 
From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6839 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Dec 2006, 3812 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
