Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Strong Sales Of The A332.  
User currently offlineThegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 13782 times:

Just checked airbus.com and the orders for the pax A332 are 502, vs 342 for the A333. Almost every other shrink has significantly weaker sales than it's larger brother, e.g. 731 vs 732, 736 vs 73G, A318 vs A319, A319 vs A320, 747SP vs 747, 762 vs 763, 77E vs 77W. The only other exceptions I know of are 752 vs 753 and 763 vs 764 but in both of those cases the stretch came along significantly later.

For the A330 this situation is reversed: even though the A333 came first it has sold much more slowly than the A332. I'd also question why it's so much better than the B764ER, sure it has a bit more range and takes standard size LD3 containers, but does it have much other advantages? The A332 is heavier than the B764 so I'd think that fuel burn would favour the B764. And the A333 would have heaps better CASM than the A332 except on long range sectors, so I'd think that would be better too.

123 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21474 posts, RR: 60
Reply 1, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 13736 times:

The 762 is not a shrink. The 772 is not a shrink. The 731 was not a shrink. All are/were the base aircraft in the family.

The A333 is a very large medium haul aircraft in many markets, as it is outfitted in 2 classes. The A332 is more manageable in size in that regard, but it also has greater range make it a suitable near-long haul aircraft.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineLufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 3204 posts, RR: 10
Reply 2, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 13652 times:

Quoting Thegeek (Thread starter):
The A332 is heavier than the B764 so I'd think that fuel burn would favour the B764.

One the surface that would appear right, but it completely ignores its ability to generate revenue. The 332 may be heavier...but that extra weight also always it to:

1 - lift more. More fuel, more Freight.

2 - fligh further without weight restrictions.

What this basically means is airlines can make more flying the 332 because they can stuff it to the max with cargo and a full load of passengers where the 764 either can't make the flight non-stop (no way in hell a 764 can do some route like AKL to LAX for example, or CDG to China), or on shorter routes were I can make it non-stop, the 764 can't take the frieght.
On longer stage lengths it becomes more dramatic. Lets say we want LAX to say LHR or CDG. Not only would you be cargo restricted, you'd probably have to on some days restrict passengers as well. Some people have even suggested you'd make more money flying the 763 on these routes as some, such as United and TWA have in the past. (more profit from the reduced capacity of the 763 to the 764). For the 332 however, not a problem!

I have heard the 764 burns about 10% less fuel then the 332, which makes sense and if you look at routes its used on, say EWR and ATL to europe, you'll see a lot of these flights aren't too much longer then 8 hrs, and often a bit less then 8 hrs. On these shorter hops, like say EWR to Brussels or JFK to MAN, the thing can fly out with a full load of cargo and Passengers and come in with lower costs then the 332. Also remember that DL aren't installing PTV's on the 763 because the extra added weight will cause issues on some of their longer legs like JFK to ATH. The 764 this would be even more so or it simply won't make it.

[Edited 2008-04-12 16:49:36]

User currently offlineWorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 13445 times:

The 764 is a great aircraft but the 332 in its heaviest versions can fly about 1000 miles further without restrictions. However, the 764 is no weakling. DL is using it on ATL-SVO which is just shy of 12 hrs long and 5400 miles and there is significant cargo to/from SVO.

The bigger issue is probably looking at who flies other 763s who would be natural candidates for the 764 and those are heavily weighted to US carriers. The Japanese would probably have been a good candidate for 764s for intra-Asia flights but they do not choose the plane.

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 2):
Also remember that DL aren't installing PTV's on the 763 because the extra added weight will cause issues on some of their longer legs like JFK to ATH.

I think that has been debunked since DL said they were putting the Thompson Cozy suite on the 763.

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 2):
The 764 this would be even more so or it simply won't make it.

sure it will.... see above with ATL-SVO. Also, I believe CO has used the 764 on EWR-ATH.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30612 posts, RR: 84
Reply 4, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 13437 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The A330-200 sold well because it was a better long-haul plane (in terms of operating economics) then the A340-200. The A330-300 is a great medium-haul plane, but it lacks the legs to do long-haul, so it handily out-sold the 777-200 for medium-haul, but lost out to the 777-200ER and A340-300 for long-haul.

As for the 767-400ER, it was too little too late. The 767-400ERX would have had longer legs and better lift, but by then everyone had A330s, A340s or 777s so there was no demand.


User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12082 posts, RR: 18
Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 13426 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

The A330s have had a big orders over the last few years because of A380, B787 problems and because of interim lift for A350 customers. Once those new A330 are no longer needed then there will be a drop in demand for newer A330s. For years the A330, especially A333 has been loosing to the B777, but with the above problems/interim lift orders sales have picked up

User currently offlineLufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 3204 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 13394 times:

If you look at boeing's range charts, it tells half the story.
You have a typical range with full load of pax and baggage at a standard
configuration. That it already shows the 763 having a greater range, but
it doesn't tell the frieght story and that modern business and first class
require more weight then the 'standard' configurations both airbus and boeing
use for demonstration purposes.

I might point out the value of frieghts on some routes. DL the other day carried
a record $120 000 worth on a flight out of PVG. That's a million dollars worth of revenue
every four days. At that rate, a single aircraft will carry about 37 million dollars worth per year. Leaving that kinda stuff behind and only carrying PAX changes the equation
dramatically.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 3):
sure it will.... see above with ATL-SVO. Also, I believe CO has used the 764 on EWR-ATH.

It will make it, but add in real lie flat business class seats (both these airlines are yet to use on those aircraft) and you've got extra weight... weight that means either less passengers or less cargo or both if you're still to make the range. Cargo could mean another $50 000 revenue per flight sector easy. If you did that just 300 days a year, that's 15 million dollars extra revenue.

Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 3):
The bigger issue is probably looking at who flies other 763s who would be natural candidates for the 764 and those are heavily weighted to US carriers



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 3):
Also, I believe CO has used the 764 on EWR-ATH.

And I bet my bottom dollar that the flight is weight restricted. Meaning it can make it but without the restrictions it can take more along on the same flight meaning more revenue. ATH isn't a good example. Think of flights into palces like PVG, BKK, DXB etc and you start to get a good picture of routes where one can really make a killing on the cargo... and those routes, funnily enough, are being served by 332s. Go to Boeing weight range charts and see what happens when you add a few tonns of cargo to the range. Like it or not, the 764 just can't do what the 332 can do...and airlines have voted with their feet. The 332 would be more expensive, often take longer to get then a 764(which I'm sure you could get one pretty damn quick if you wanted to order one) which cost boeing next to nothing to develop, and there's 767 spares all round the place. The other thing really is here, that beoing sold 777s to a lot of people who would have bought 764s. It wasn't that much extra to buy but far far more capable for many of the reasons the 332 did better.
764 was ment as an L1011/DC-10 replacement pretty much seat for seat and an answer to the claims that the 772 was too heavy for shorter range routes. That is why it was developed with a shorter range and much like tghe 753, was a niche product developed at low cost to do a specific job. There is a really good possibility that had boeing increased the range (and thus weight too, making it less attractive to DL who at the time had planned to use it as a domestic aircraft) that the aircraft would have sold much better, but that would have ate into 772 sales. Either way it does the job it was intendend for better then any other aircraft. That is, shorter transatlantic hops.


User currently offlineScipio From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 846 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 13352 times:



Quoting 777ER (Reply 5):
The A330s have had a big orders over the last few years because of A380, B787 problems and because of interim lift for A350 customers. Once those new A330 are no longer needed then there will be a drop in demand for newer A330s. For years the A330, especially A333 has been loosing to the B777, but with the above problems/interim lift orders sales have picked up

More is going on. The A330 seems to have improved a lot over the years. In the 1990s, SQ ordered B777s for its intra-Asian flights even though the A330-300 was available. In 2006, it announced that it would replace these B777s with ... A330-300s.

Sales of the 777-200ER have dwindled. The A330, by contrast, has never sold as well as it is doing now.


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8872 posts, RR: 75
Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 13346 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
The A330-300 is a great medium-haul plane, but it lacks the legs to do long-haul, so it handily out-sold the 777-200 for medium-haul, but lost out to the 777-200ER and A340-300 for long-haul.

The A333 is good up to 8-9 hours sectors over the 772/772ER

Quoting 777ER (Reply 5):
The A330s have had a big orders over the last few years because of A380, B787 problems and because of interim lift for A350 customers. Once those new A330 are no longer needed then there will be a drop in demand for newer A330s. For years the A330, especially A333 has been loosing to the B777, but with the above problems/interim lift orders sales have picked up

I don't think that is the sole reason, it is just the best aircraft in the class available at the moment. The A330 has been outselling the 777 for medium haul work for some time. The 772LR/773ER are selling well, they are not in the market as the A330, they almost cost twice the price on list price.

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 6):
I might point out the value of frieghts on some routes.

The A332/A333 that is available today has undergone increase in capability over the 764ER since it was released to the market, when the 764ER went on the market, it out lifted the A333.

A332 available today lifts about 15,000 lb more payload than the 764ER, and the A333 about 19,000 lb more.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6870 posts, RR: 63
Reply 9, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 13320 times:



Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 3):
The 764 is a great aircraft

"great" in what possible sense? "Great" implies unusually popular / successful / capable / something! What is "great" about the 764?

Quoting 777ER (Reply 5):
For years the A330, especially A333 has been loosing to the B777

That's a very simplistic and pretty much inaccurate statement.

Firstly, the inclusion of "especially 333" can only mean that the A332 has also been "losing out" to the B777. Please illustrate where the A332 and B777 (any model) have been in direct competition in recent years.

Secondly, the "B777" includes six distinct variants, few of while directly compete with any version of the A330. The 777-300, 777-300ER and 777-200LR certainly don't. It's stretching a point to argue that the A330F and 777F compete directly. The 777-200ER didn't at first but, as the A330-300 has been developed, their capabilities have become closer. In reality, the A333 has always competed with the 777-200 (non-ER). Sales of the two illustrate that the A330-300 is by far the more popular aircraft in that category.

So the glib statement that "For years the A330, especially A333 has been loosing (sic) to the B777," simply cannot be substantiated.

A final comment. If you are lumping all versions of the 777 together then you must logically include all versions of the A330/A340 family. Take a look at who is ahead in that race...  Wink


User currently offlineScipio From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 846 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 13283 times:

To illustrate the improvement of the A330 over the years, it is useful to compare the (outdated) data posted on a.net, with the latest specs posted on Airbus's website.

a.net gives the following A330-300 specs:

Range with max passengers and RR Trent engines: 8,600 km for the basic version or 10,185 km for the "long-range" version.
MTOW: 212 tonnes, or 217 tonnes for the long-range version.

Airbus.com gives the following A330-300 specs:

Range with max passengers: 10,500 km
MTOW: 230/233 tonnes.

Clearly, Airbus has quietly but significantly improved the A330 over the years. Just as it has significantly improved the A320.

I look forward to the inevitable improvements to the A380  Smile


User currently offlineFuturecaptain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 13218 times:



Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 6):
I might point out the value of frieghts on some routes. DL the other day carried
a record $120 000 worth on a flight out of PVG. That's a million dollars worth of revenue
every four days. At that rate, a single aircraft will carry about 37 million dollars worth per year.

Huh? $120,000 * 4 days = $480,000....not "a million dollars." Perhaps I am missing something with your math.
And at $120,000 a day it is over 43 million a year. Alot more than 37 mil. Perhaps though, I am still missing something.

Quoting PM (Reply 9):
Secondly, the "B777" includes six distinct variants, few of while directly compete with any version of the A330.

 checkmark  I have no idea how the 777 has any reason to be compared to the A330. Completely different planes.


User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12394 posts, RR: 46
Reply 12, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 13192 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 11):
I have no idea how the 777 has any reason to be compared to the A330. Completely different planes.

Yes, but there is capacity overlap in the families as other have pointed out in this thread. The 330-300 and 777-200 (non-ER) are very comparable.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineLufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 3204 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 13182 times:



Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 11):
uh? $120,000 * 4 days = $480,000....not "a million dollars." Perhaps I am missing something with your math

Frieght carried in both direction, so it wasn't explained well. 480 x 2 is nearly 1 million bucks.

also aircraft can't fly 7 days per week, normally because they have to undergo an A check. so that gives you about 312 flight days per year... i used about 300 often to allow for schedualed layovers for curfew's etc.


User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4805 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 13169 times:



Quoting Thegeek (Thread starter):
Just checked airbus.com and the orders for the pax A332 are 502, vs 342 for the A333. Almost every other shrink has significantly weaker sales than it's larger brother, e.g. 731 vs 732, 736 vs 73G, A318 vs A319, A319 vs A320, 747SP vs 747, 762 vs 763, 77E vs 77W. The only other exceptions I know of are 752 vs 753 and 763 vs 764 but in both of those cases the stretch came along significantly later.

For the A330 this situation is reversed: even though the A333 came first it has sold much more slowly than the A332. I'd also question why it's so much better than the B764ER, sure it has a bit more range and takes standard size LD3 containers, but does it have much other advantages? The A332 is heavier than the B764 so I'd think that fuel burn would favour the B764. And the A333 would have heaps better CASM than the A332 except on long range sectors, so I'd think that would be better too.

The A332 is generally for longer distances whilst the A333 is more suited to shorter distances with more pax. So in that regard the A332 competes with the 772ER somewhat whilst the A333 competes with the 772/773 non-ER.

A332 orders have been particularly high of late due to the A380 delay and the 787 delay. Many airlines (particularly QF) were offered free or heavily discounted A332 to help cover capacity constraints and as compensation for the A380 delays. With the 787 delays, some previous operators of the A332 have been topping up their orders once again to cover capacity constraints.



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12082 posts, RR: 18
Reply 15, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 13164 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting Scipio (Reply 7):
it announced that it would replace these B777s with ... A330-300s.

Those A333s are interium lift aircraft, till SQ receives their A350s. SQ are leasing them from Airbus and will be returned once all the A350s are delivered

Quoting Zeke (Reply 8):
Quoting 777ER (Reply 5):
The A330s have had a big orders over the last few years because of A380, B787 problems and because of interim lift for A350 customers. Once those new A330 are no longer needed then there will be a drop in demand for newer A330s. For years the A330, especially A333 has been loosing to the B777, but with the above problems/interim lift orders sales have picked up

I don't think that is the sole reason, it is just the best aircraft in the class available at the moment.

As far as I can see on Airbuses web-site, the only airlines who have ordered A330s recently who arn't A350 customers is Air Asia X. Aer Lingus has ordered more A333s, which will replace some of their earlier A330s, but will also provide interim lift till their A359s arrive. It clearly shows on Airbuses web-site that A330 orderes have gone up thanks to A350 customers, B787 and A380 delays.

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 11):
Quoting PM (Reply 9):
Secondly, the "B777" includes six distinct variants, few of while directly compete with any version of the A330.

I have no idea how the 777 has any reason to be compared to the A330. Completely different planes.

The B772 doesnt compete with the A332, but it does compete in terms of seat numbers and range with the A333


User currently offlineThegeek From Australia, joined Nov 2007, 2638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 13144 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 1):
The A333 is a very large medium haul aircraft in many markets, as it is outfitted in 2 classes. The A332 is more manageable in size in that regard, but it also has greater range make it a suitable near-long haul aircraft.

Surely the CEOs don't fear the wrath of the analysts for sending out A333s with lower load factors than what A332s would have?

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
As for the 767-400ER, it was too little too late. The 767-400ERX would have had longer legs and better lift, but by then everyone had A330s, A340s or 777s so there was no demand.

Wasn't the 764 only about 2 years after the A332? History has made it's judgement on it being to little though.

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 6):
a 764 ... which cost boeing next to nothing to develop

This point I wouldn't be so sure of. They went to the bother of developing a whole new wing. If they were doing it on the cheap they would have just kept the 763ER's wing and traded range for payload. That would have been good for 2/3 of the jobs it now does. I'm sure boeing is disappointed with the sales of the B764ER.



All fair points everyone, but wouldn't the payload at long range advantage when combined with a CASM and cargo disadvantage versus the A333, and the same against a B764 (ignoring the non standard container size, I calculate the 38 LD2s to be equivalent in volume to 29.8 LD3s) make it more of a niche aircraft?

To ask the question in a more direct way, were QF crazy to buy so many A332s only to use them almost completely on routes inside the MZFW range of the A333?


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8872 posts, RR: 75
Reply 17, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 13113 times:



Quoting 777ER (Reply 15):
Those A333s are interium lift aircraft, till SQ receives their A350s. SQ are leasing them from Airbus and will be returned once all the A350s are delivered

They will replace the 777 regionally, until both the 787 and A350 arrive. For the long sectors, it is actually the 772ER which is providing the interim lift, deploying the A330 regionally frees up 772ERs frames, as well as providing additional efficiency.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 15):
It clearly shows on Airbuses web-site that A330 orderes have gone up thanks to A350 customers, B787 and A380 delays.

Statements like that ignore the fact that the market is growing, at a rate of about 5% per annum and the A330 has allowed many of those operators to open new city pairs.

Quoting Thegeek (Reply 16):
This point I wouldn't be so sure of. They went to the bother of developing a whole new wing. If they were doing it on the cheap they would have just kept the 763ER's wing and traded range for payload. That would have been good for 2/3 of the jobs it now does. I'm sure boeing is disappointed with the sales of the B764E

I don't think it was a all new wing, I thought it was the 300ER wing with a raked wing tip extension and new flaps.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25009 posts, RR: 85
Reply 18, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 13097 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting 777ER (Reply 15):
It clearly shows on Airbuses web-site that A330 orderes have gone up thanks to A350 customers, B787 and A380 delays.

An order is an order, for whatever reason it is made.  confused 

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineLufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 3204 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 13046 times:



Quoting Thegeek (Reply 16):
They went to the bother of developing a whole new wing.

It's not a new wing, its the 767-300 wing plus raked wingtip extensions that just bolt on. Basically winglets except there was no need to sacrifice lift and point them upwards for small gate space etc, they just kept them flat. 77W and 77L got similar treatment.

So basically all boeing did when they produced the 764 was:

uprated the CF-6 engine slightly
adopted the 777 style LCD flightdeck which some 763s also feature now
added the new interior
Changed the window shape
stretched the fuselarge
increased the strenght of the landing gear and with this came a slight height increase ?
added the 'bolt on' raked wingtip extensions
made some changes to the flaps.

Most of those changes are minor and in somecases basically just software changes/ redeploying existing technology from other projects (similar to the 744ER engine wise etc...nothing new to develop).
What this ment is the break even for the thing was never going to be very expensive, as earlier 767 programs had already paid for most of the development costs. So for boeing, this was a low risk aircraft, and it kept to of its most important customers happy, so why not do it?


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6870 posts, RR: 63
Reply 20, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 12954 times:

Quoting 777ER (Reply 15):
SQ are leasing them from Airbus and will be returned once all the A350s are delivered

I think that is far from clear. The SQ deal for A330s seems rather complex. The deal certainly appears on the Airbus O&D sheet as a sale to SQ.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 15):
It clearly shows on Airbuses web-site that A330 orderes have gone up thanks to A350 customers, B787 and A380 delays.

I think you are being far too grudging about the A330 gaining sales in its own right.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 15):
As far as I can see on Airbuses web-site, the only airlines who have ordered A330s recently who arn't A350 customers is Air Asia X.

then you haven't looked closely!

Here are airlines who have ordered the A330 but have no A350s on order.

2008
China Southern (10)
Air Asia X (10)

2007
Cathay Pacific (8)
KLM (2)
Jet Airways (5)
Oman Air (5)
Swiss (9)
Air Caraibes (2)
Hong Kong Airlines (20)
Egyptair (5)
Etihad (5)
Thai (8)

2006
MEA (4)
Qantas (6)
Lufthansa (5)
Air Mauritius (1)
Air Caraibes (1)

The above doesn't include A330 orders placed by Aer Lingus, TAM, Avianca and others prior to ordering the A350.

Nor does it begin to count freighters.

Nor does it include airlines such as Hainan, LTU and Sichuan who are leasing A330s but have no A350s on order.

Nor does it include substantial sales to leasing companies.

The argument that A330 sales are artificially high because of (a) delays to the A380, (b) concurrent sales of the A350 or (c) delays to the 787 wilfully ignores the very real success of the model in the marketplace in its own right.

[Edited 2008-04-12 22:39:11]

User currently offlineQwame From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 12839 times:

Can a B762 or B763 be deployed on a route from Houston to Lagos without a refueling stop?

User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8872 posts, RR: 75
Reply 22, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 12802 times:



Quoting Qwame (Reply 21):
Can a B762 or B763 be deployed on a route from Houston to Lagos without a refueling stop?

No, the ER models could.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12082 posts, RR: 18
Reply 23, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 12717 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR



Quoting Zeke (Reply 17):
Quoting 777ER (Reply 15):
Those A333s are interium lift aircraft, till SQ receives their A350s. SQ are leasing them from Airbus and will be returned once all the A350s are delivered

They will replace the 777 regionally

The A330s are better for regional then B777s

Quoting PM (Reply 20):
Qantas (6)

QFs LCC JQ has taken a few of QF A330s

Quoting PM (Reply 20):
Swiss (9)

Didn't they order the A350, or am I thinking of an A340 order?

Quoting PM (Reply 20):
2008
China Southern (10)
Air Asia X (10)

2007
Cathay Pacific (8)
KLM (2)
Jet Airways (5)
Oman Air (5)
Swiss (9)
Air Caraibes (2)
Hong Kong Airlines (20)
Egyptair (5)
Etihad (5)
Thai (8)

2006
MEA (4)
Qantas (6)
Lufthansa (5)
Air Mauritius (1)
Air Caraibes (1)

How many of those are compensation orders for A380 delays?


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8872 posts, RR: 75
Reply 24, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 12694 times:



Quoting 777ER (Reply 23):
How many of those are compensation orders for A380 delays?

If you look at the Kingfisher MOU/LOI that was on here a few days back, you can see how that was structured. The A330s were not provided as compensation for the late A380s, the A380s had a separate settlement, and the money offset from settlement was used in lieu of pre-delivery payments on new aircraft.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
25 PM : So? No. Swiss have not ordered any A350s. Why don't you tell me? You are the one arguing that all these A330 sales aren't quite authentic. But I can
26 DeltaL1011man : i wish Delta would order about 30 A332s with RR Trents. (I would bet PM would like it too ) (its the Trent 700s that are for the A330s right?)
27 777ER : Thats why I also said "or am I thinking of an A340 order?" I know QF got A330s in compensation, I think SQ did also, but not sure on who else did, so
28 Post contains links and images BrianDromey : The 330 has definately become more capable, for example EI has very early 330-300s which can only serve the east coast of the US from DUB and can not
29 Zeke : Good to see customers produce this sort of information, it provides a somewhat independent analysis of capabilities. On a similar note, CX operate 7
30 PM : Wouldn't complain... !
31 Burkhard : The A332 just can be used in a very flexible way. It has the range for most long range routes, but still is competitive on the medium range, and even
32 Kappel : Actually no, the 767 line is sold out for years, and has a very low production output. The a319 has actually sold very well, but indeed, still less t
33 ANstar : Correct - Jetstar currently have 6 x A330-200's with 6 more on the way with the new leasing deal Qantas also have 3 x 332's in service with another 3
34 Thegeek : Only one short of their B767 fleet!! For something that was initially mostly bought to have MX and pilot training with the Airbus philosophy, it must
35 HUyfan : I also have to say that the A330-200 is one of the sharpest looking aircraft around, the 764 is just plain boring. It is a very capable aircraft, and
36 PM : When the A330-200 was launched I recall John Leahy saying that, in retrospect, it should have been the first model with the -300 following later. I as
37 Moo : I actually did a quick study on this claim a few weeks back in another thread - the outcome was that only around 30% of A330 sales in 2005, 2006 and
38 EK413 : 2 EBE,EBF... Once the B787s come online (IF the aircraft becomes airborne) JQ A330 will return to QF longhaul / Perth City flyer (EBA,EBB,EBC,EBD) fl
39 ANstar : Now that is the REAL question!
40 Andhen : I agree!! andhen
41 Astuteman : This sentiment has cropped up twice on this thread. Didn't the QF accounts expressly identify the CASH compensation that Airbus made as a consequence
42 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ..comments such as these reflect the same ignorance a few years ago when some people were commenting on whether the A380 will fly or not.. [Edited 20
43 Bobnwa : Freight is almost non-existent from the US to China so they are highly unlikely to carry 120,000 in week in that direction.
44 PM : It doesn't do to read too much into these numbers but - to date - Boeing have sold 538 x 767-300ER, Airbus have sold 502 x A330-200 and Boeing have so
45 Lufthansa : Thats good from an airlines perspective in some ways... it makes competition from freight airlines all that much more difficult (you can't really fil
46 Stitch : I have never found any evidence Airbus gave away an A330-300 as compensation. Some "strategic" A330-300 orders have gone out for around $80 million a
47 WorldTraveler : ATHEWR in the summer is about an hour shorter than SVOATL right now and SVOATL does carry cargo and full passenger loads now. DL has also operated the
48 Kaitak : Thanks for that Brian. Aer Lingus is an airline that has been a strong supporter of the A330 almost from Day One; I can still remember the night the
49 Trex8 : its amazing what an extra 17000kg increase in MTOW does for you! PS are you sure EIs new A333s are "E"s and not just "X"s?
50 Gearup : I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder but............. The 332 is without doubt the most elegant and attractive WB twin out there. It is pure jo
51 Andhen : We see a ramp up of the a330 while we see 787 delays.. Could this be more than a lucky chance for Airbus..? Do you think they anticipated this scenari
52 Stitch : I actually think it looks a bit ungainly (though not as much as the A330-300) with that long fuselage and those long wings and those stubby little en
53 Kaitak : I agree; gorgeous aircraft. I do think the GE and PW engines look better than the RR ones, though; just my gut instinct! Is there a difference betwee
54 IliriBDL : When will US Air start getting their A332s? I know it's supposed to be next year but not sure when it starts.
55 777ER : Thats what I must have been thinking off, thanks I'm wondering how many more A330 sales we'll see as a result of B787 delays, or will some airlines g
56 Post contains links and images BlueShamu330s : Oh Stitch, how can you say that about a fine pair of RRs hanging from an A332's beautifully elegant wigs?! View Large View Medium Photo © Jens Breue
57 Thegeek : There's the rub. The A333 would be a significantly more capable aircraft for those routes, even if it's one of the earlier ones with the lower MTOW.
58 Ikramerica : I spent a lot of time staring at the underside of a chinese A330 at SYD (when the temp QF F lounge was on ground level). Being that close, it really w
59 Scipio : Thai Airways has publicly said that they ordered A330s at a discounted price (but by no means free) as compensation for the A380 delays. From Airbus'
60 Trex8 : X is an official designation, IIRC it denotes a larger fuel capacity. The E is for more recent aircraft with enhancements taken from the A345/6- most
61 Zkpilot : It is well known (at least within QF) that QF scored a very, very good deal on its recent 6xA332 purchases...so much so that they were considered to
62 ZK-NBT : Yes but these 332s have derated engines and can't operate long haul like the new 332s QF have that fly routes like AKL-LAX and SYD-BOM. QF initially
63 ANstar : Actually, the engines were uprated again when they went over to Jetstar International, hence why they now fly SYD-HNL
64 ZK-NBT : I thought they would have to rewire the whole engine fitting? The aircraft are still 330-201s and 202s where as the newere ones are 203s.
65 Lufthansa : I think since the advent of FADEC, or about that time anyway, its largely just a software update. I know this is the case for 737NGs and A320s for su
66 ANstar : All the JQ ones were uprated to -203's It is just a software adjustment
67 Astuteman : Just following up a thought..... Airbus have said that they will continue to offer the A330 even after the A350 goes into service. In the case of the
68 EPA001 : A very interesting thought. I always expected that the A330 would go on for some time, but in this perspective it could be a lot longer than I antici
69 Slz396 : It might be worth mentioning that -R versions of the A330 are non-existend, because they are in fact the corresponding A340s... The MD-11 -> A340 ->
70 Moo : They may be shown as belonging to SQ on the order book, but every thing both SQ and Airbus have said publicly about this deal is that the airframes a
71 Trex8 : do all the new A330s have -A3 engines??
72 Astuteman : Although funnily enough, new-build A330-200's may well be getting within a 250Nm or so of the range of a 744 by the end of next year... Sort of begs
73 Slz396 : They may be intended as interim lift indeed, but the fact still is that it is SQ itself which is acting as buyer in the purchase of these planes, not
74 Stitch : One wonders if Boeing is not thinking the same thing about the 777 family. Right now the 777-200LR and 777-300ER match or exceed the range of the A35
75 Astuteman : That can be sold at pretty sharp prices too, compared to a platform still swallowing its development costs.. If the 350 goes very late, or misses its
76 EK413 : Freedom of Speech not ignorance I am looking forward to witnessing this beauty become airborne, however these rolling delays are becoming a real conc
77 ANstar : Whilst they may be odd ball, I would expect them to move back to domestic ops and be in a domestic config to ops SYD/MEL-PER/AKL flights. The 332's t
78 Astuteman : Afterthought - Gets my vote. However, the advent of a Trent 1000 based Trent 700 upgrade towards the back end of next year suggests that Airbus/RR ha
79 Slz396 : I don't know really. Don't forget that an A330-300R would have to have stronger (and larger) engines, a larger fuel capacity, larger wings, a reinfor
80 PM : I think this is a little unfair. SQ ordered the MD-11s in good faith but were let down by the manufacturer. (If I remember correctly, SIN-CDG was the
81 Slz396 : Sure, I am not contesting that fact that SQ has no intention of being the long-term owner of any of those 19 A330s they have placed an order for. Wha
82 PM : Agreed!
83 Jacobin777 : While that's certainly true, it shouldn't preclude people from making ignorant and asinine comments...
84 Rheinwaldner : That would be the ... A350! In ten years I can see the combined two-and-four-holer family repeated again by Airbus. Cross section, gears, cockpit, wi
85 Thegeek : Maybe, but while QF seem to acknowledge that the weak floor was a mistake, they don't seem to acknowledge that they (IMO) over ordered the A332 vs th
86 Andhen : Does the a330 have Al-Lithium? Laserbeam welding? I guess composite floorbeams and maybe a composite rear pressure bulkhead could shave off some hound
87 Jacobin777 : ..costs (as such as development, maintenance, etc.) would probably outweigh the profits for such a niche market.
88 Baroque : Could you give more on T700 updates Astuteman? I think we were told that is the way RR will go rather than switching to new engines so they will be T
89 Scipio : One would think that some of the development work that went into the original A350 could easily be recycled and applied to the A330. BMW-developed in
90 Moo : The A350 crew rest was moved to above the cabin early last year.
91 Astuteman : I suspect it's more to do with Airbus than RR. As Scipio says, developments require Engineering resources. I suspect RR are a bit better placed than
92 Jfk777 : The SQ A333 are in compensation for the two years delay of the A380 at reduced lease rates. SQ still has new 777-300ER coming from Boeing, so what th
93 Astuteman : Airbus got a fair way down the road with the old A350's engineering. I like it.... Spend $1Bn - $1.5Bn on engineering the old A350. Cancel it. Write
94 Gigneil : They of course compete with each other... its not so cut and dry. The existence of the A330-200 was a reason for NW to select the A330 over the 777,
95 A342 : Do you happen to know if early A333s can be upgraded to the 233t MTOW?
96 SXDFC : Since OA has had some pretty full loads in the summer with the 343, I don't think the 333 could do JFK-ATH N/S right with out being weight restricted
97 Gigneil : They cannot, no. There are a variety of structural changes, the integral centre fuel tank, and the larger horizontal tailplane. NS
98 A342 : Assuming MTOW is the same, the stretched aircraft has a heavier structure and will typically carry a higher payload, thus the weight of fuel you can
99 Post contains links OldAeroGuy : If SQ bought the A333's from Airbus, how do explain this Airbus press release that clearly says they are leased? http://www.airbus.com/en/presscentre
100 Gigneil : It isn't just hot and high. Field performance can also matter, and that can have to do not just with length but also terrain or airspace issues. But h
101 Thegeek : That will make the A330 a significantly better plane. A 10% SFC improvement (i.e. most of the Trent 1000's advantage) will make the A332 fly as far a
102 Astuteman : FWIW I don't think it will be anywhere remotely near that. Very sadly. If I was a betting man, I'd go for 2%-3% at most, but allied to a 40%-50% drop
103 EK413 : The NEWLY delivered birds EBG,EBH and EBI have the strengthened floor... My opinion QF should sell EBA,EBB,EBC and EBD... EK413
104 Post contains links and images Cedarjet : Near-long haul? Koreanair fly em to Prague nonstop, NW across the Pacific... The A330-200 is very much a long haul aircraft. And a lovely one, ironic
105 Lufthansa : Yes something like what NW did! QF also shouldn't have bought GE, these engines should have been Trents or the most efficient of the lot, the PW ones
106 Gigneil : The PW engine for the platform frankly would have been horrible choices given they now operate the plane longhaul. RR had a huge lead because GE and
107 Viscount724 : And many significantly longer routes than those including AKL-LAX, SYD-BOM, CDG-GRU, CDG-NRT. I think you mean THF.
108 Andrewtang : What is interesting to note is that in QF's recent 20 years of factory order history, it has shown that they seem to prefer GE/CFM for twins (minus p
109 Astuteman : Certainly don't have the knowledge to contradict that, Neil. It's interesting, though that RR's already leading position on the A330 has, over the la
110 Lufthansa : Tell that to Lightsabre.... that and it does have the lowest SPC of all three engines. Yes Indeed they are. "Rolls Royce - Dependable engines" Seriou
111 PM : In the last two years GE have added three new A330/CF6 customers; Air Mauritius (2) Afriqiyah (3) Finnair (7) In the same time RR have added: Singapo
112 Terry : PM do you have a breakdown of the engines chosen for the A330F First I thought RR had done a clean sweep, but I have a sneaking feeling it's more bala
113 PM : I do but I'm just logging off (gotta go and cook the wife's dinner!). I'll be back but Flyington Freighters (India) have chosen PW... They'll actuall
114 Teme82 : What GE engine you are referring to?? The newest variant of CF6???
115 Astuteman : OK, OK - NEARLY 2/3.......... Nitpicker Rgds
116 PM : LOL! Don't forget the PW sales - Kingfisher, TAM, Air Caraibes and Grupo Marsans. 2/3 for RR is probably about right!
117 Lufthansa : Yes, Not even 10%. One of the big problems for the GE a330 operators out there, is that there is little incentive for GE to invest in upgrading those
118 Slz396 : It doesn't say from whom, does it? The fact remains that ALL of the 19 A330s are FIRMLY SOLD by Airbus, with SQ having the clear intention to sell th
119 Moo : I don't think that's 'clear' at all.
120 Post contains links OldAeroGuy : Other than hot and/or high, 773ER takeoff performance doesn't suffer relative to the A346IGW. Remember that the A346IGW requires at least 28.5t (8.1%
121 SXDFC : Heres a good question: Now that A3 has the 320 and 321 will they ever get the 332 or maybe even 333?
122 A342 : I'd say the decision will be influenced by OA's future. But why not? If they want to start intercontinental service, the A332 is a very good choice.
123 Thegeek : Might have been concerned about engine commonality. The CF6 is on most of their 767s and their 744ERs.
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...
Bankruptcy: 2008 - The Year Of The Dying Airlines posted Fri Apr 4 2008 21:06:16 by Imapilotaz
Status Of The A380-re-wiring Process? posted Thu Mar 27 2008 05:53:54 by N14AZ
Pictures Of The US A319 Incident! posted Wed Mar 26 2008 08:26:42 by DL763
VIDEO: Behold The Power Of The 757! posted Mon Mar 24 2008 09:01:26 by Mattnrsa
AC//TLV - Return Of The "Old" Schedule posted Mon Mar 17 2008 14:19:50 by FLYACYYZ
Has Production of the B717 Ceased? posted Sat Mar 15 2008 06:13:50 by Adman737
Will 773ER Sales Surpass The 772ER? posted Thu Mar 6 2008 09:51:57 by OldAeroGuy
Malév Named Hungary's Airline Of The Year posted Tue Feb 19 2008 07:32:25 by AJMIA
Republic Airways: ATW Regional Of The Year 2007 posted Mon Jan 28 2008 07:09:56 by Loggat
Air Transport World Mag. Hails Airline Of The Year posted Mon Jan 28 2008 06:39:39 by SINGAPORE_AIR
Status Of The A380-re-wiring Process? posted Thu Mar 27 2008 05:53:54 by N14AZ
Pictures Of The US A319 Incident! posted Wed Mar 26 2008 08:26:42 by DL763
VIDEO: Behold The Power Of The 757! posted Mon Mar 24 2008 09:01:26 by Mattnrsa
AC//TLV - Return Of The "Old" Schedule posted Mon Mar 17 2008 14:19:50 by FLYACYYZ
Has Production of the B717 Ceased? posted Sat Mar 15 2008 06:13:50 by Adman737
Will 773ER Sales Surpass The 772ER? posted Thu Mar 6 2008 09:51:57 by OldAeroGuy
Malév Named Hungary's Airline Of The Year posted Tue Feb 19 2008 07:32:25 by AJMIA
Republic Airways: ATW Regional Of The Year 2007 posted Mon Jan 28 2008 07:09:56 by Loggat
Air Transport World Mag. Hails Airline Of The Year posted Mon Jan 28 2008 06:39:39 by SINGAPORE_AIR
AF/KL King Of The North Atlantic Skies? posted Fri Apr 11 2008 12:00:18 by Pihero
Colgan Wants Out Of The EAS Business? posted Wed Apr 9 2008 22:55:07 by MasseyBrown
Why The End Of The AZ MXP Hub? posted Sat Apr 5 2008 18:28:16 by AFKLMLHLX
Bankruptcy: 2008 - The Year Of The Dying Airlines posted Fri Apr 4 2008 21:06:16 by Imapilotaz
Status Of The A380-re-wiring Process? posted Thu Mar 27 2008 05:53:54 by N14AZ
Pictures Of The US A319 Incident! posted Wed Mar 26 2008 08:26:42 by DL763
VIDEO: Behold The Power Of The 757! posted Mon Mar 24 2008 09:01:26 by Mattnrsa
AC//TLV - Return Of The "Old" Schedule posted Mon Mar 17 2008 14:19:50 by FLYACYYZ
Has Production of the B717 Ceased? posted Sat Mar 15 2008 06:13:50 by Adman737
Will 773ER Sales Surpass The 772ER? posted Thu Mar 6 2008 09:51:57 by OldAeroGuy