Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
787 Compensation: ANA, JAL Seek 767 Leases  
User currently offlineAviationbuff From India, joined Mar 2008, 1425 posts, RR: 3
Posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 13759 times:

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ases-to-fill-787-capacity-gap.html

Quote:
All Nippon Airways (ANA) and Japan Airlines (JAL) are negotiating compensation deals with Boeing that are expected to see them leasing new-build 767-300ERs to fill capacity shortfalls caused by 787 delays.

Industry sources say early compensation negotiations have begun and the airframer has offered to build new 767s and lease them to the two carriers. This was first floated as a possibility to some 787 customers earlier this year and the sources say the Japanese carriers expressed serious interest.

The sources say ANA earlier this month put in a request to take 15 767-300ERs on lease, with tentative lease terms to be determined. ANA wants the right to give the aircraft back at any time.


[Edited 2008-05-14 07:35:48]

128 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineIceberg210 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 147 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 13554 times:

This could be very interesting if Boeing does this deal, of making 767's for interim lift. If I were Boring I'd jump on the opportunity, you get to keep you're 767 line moving, and its cheaper than paying out millions in compensation relative to the opportunity cost. Plus you can always find homes for newer 767's right now so if ANA returned them at a moments notice it wouldn't really be an issue. finally there is no cost to high to pay to keep your costumer happy especially at this point for the 787. These delays are rough for everyone involved and it would definately be in Boeing's best interest to keep the delayed airlines as happy as they can.


Erik Berg (Foster's is over but never forgotten)
User currently offlineNycbjr From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 447 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 13501 times:

I wonder if they are going to up production to more than 1 per month to get these in the hands of the airlines faster?

however its not like boeing could do this very fast either..


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21474 posts, RR: 60
Reply 3, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 13390 times:

Pretty much the same as the A330 deals for the A380. Good thing about both is they can be converted to F models after the leases are up if demand for second hand 763s is low.


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12382 posts, RR: 47
Reply 4, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 13368 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Nycbjr (Reply 2):
I wonder if they are going to up production to more than 1 per month to get these in the hands of the airlines faster?

This is exactly the problem for Boeing. The only two planes Boeing can offer for interim lift (767 & 777) both have backlogs stretching to four years. It's not like Boeing suddenly has a couple of dozen 767s kicking around that they can lease out to 787 customers.

It will take a long time to ramp up 767 production to the point where it's actually worth these airlines taking them before their 787s eventually arrive. Boeing may be able to persuade some of the existing 767 freighter customers to defer delivery (thus freeing up some slots), but they'd likely want compensation for that as well.

No easy option for Boeing as far as I can see.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineKhobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 13278 times:



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 4):
This is exactly the problem for Boeing. The only two planes Boeing can offer for interim lift (767 & 777) both have backlogs stretching to four years. It's not like Boeing suddenly has a couple of dozen 767s kicking around that they can lease out to 787 customers.

The 767 has a backlog of 4 years because they are producing so few per year. The question is - why? Is Boeing physically unable to produce more than 1 767 per month, or is production that slow by choice? I know the tanker deal had a lot to do with the production rate, and since the tanker deal is in limbo, that rate is unlikely to change - unless this compensation deal takes off (or there really is a physical limitation).


User currently offlineTISTPAA727 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 324 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 13247 times:



Quoting Iceberg210 (Reply 1):
finally there is no cost to high to pay to keep your costumer happy especially at this point for the 787.

I'd be careful with this statement. There is definitely a point where it becomes bad for the company and shareholders. Boeing will do pretty much anything it can (within reason) to keep customers on board, but there is a limit. Also, where would these customers go? Airbus? They would be even further out on the delivery schedule.



Don't sweat the little things.
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 13109 times:

...sux that it's the 300ER though. Was sorta hoping that if Boeing offered newbuild 767s for interim lift, that it'd be 764ERs. Be a great chance to finally see them with foreign carriers, but I guess Boeing figured that the resale/reuse potential would be higher with the 763ER.

Always sorta wondered why the Japanese chose not to take the 764ER... seems like it'd be almost a perfect aircraft for their ops.


User currently offlineWINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 68
Reply 8, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 12912 times:



Quoting ConcordeBoy (Reply 7):

Always sorta wondered why the Japanese chose not to take the 764ER... seems like it'd be almost a perfect aircraft for their ops.

I have always wondered why ANA and JAL never opted for the A330-300. This aircraft would have been the perfect choice for their ops.

Seems that they are basically just about the only major Asian airlines that did not opt to go down this path.  Sad

Regards,
Wings



Aviation Is A Passion.
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12382 posts, RR: 47
Reply 9, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 12908 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Khobar (Reply 5):
The 767 has a backlog of 4 years because they are producing so few per year.

One a month will do that to you!

Quoting Khobar (Reply 5):
Is Boeing physically unable to produce more than 1 767 per month, or is production that slow by choice?

In 2000, they pumped out nearly 4 a month. As the backlog has declined, the production rate has slowed (this is normal). So yes, Boeing clearly knows how to build more than one 767 a month, but to increase production to the point where disappointed customers can get useful service from the planes before their 787s arrive, will not be easy or quick. I believe their best bet is to try and persuade (i.e. pay) UPS and DHL to defer delivery of their 767Fs.

Quoting Khobar (Reply 5):
I know the tanker deal had a lot to do with the production rate, and since the tanker deal is in limbo, that rate is unlikely to change - unless this compensation deal takes off (or there really is a physical limitation).

Yes, I believe Boeing deliberately slowed down 767 production to ensure the line was still open when they won the tanker deal. It would have been a close run thing but for a bumper sales year for the 767 in 2007. Just about 75% of the current backlog was ordered last year!



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3476 posts, RR: 67
Reply 10, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 12823 times:



Quoting WINGS (Reply 8):
I have always wondered why ANA and JAL never opted for the A330-300.

Do they build the A330 fuselage in Japan?



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineSimProgrammer From France, joined Aug 2004, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 12736 times:

Britain imports Kawasaki Motorbikes from Japan. Are the frames made in Britain? No.

Why would we need to build A330 frames in Japan?



Drive a bus, an Airbus, easier than a London bus!
User currently offlineMotorHussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3135 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 12618 times:



Quoting SimProgrammer (Reply 11):
Why would we need to build A330 frames in Japan?

Maybe ask Boeing that question about 777 and 787 frames.



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3476 posts, RR: 67
Reply 13, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 12511 times:



Quoting SimProgrammer (Reply 11):
Britain imports Kawasaki Motorbikes from Japan. Are the frames made in Britain? No.

Why would we need to build A330 frames in Japan?

Is Britain Japan?



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineManfredj From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 11675 times:



Quoting Iceberg210 (Reply 1):
This could be very interesting if Boeing does this deal, of making 767's for interim lift. If I were Boring I'd jump on the opportunity, you get to keep you're 767 line moving, and its cheaper than paying out millions in compensation relative to the opportunity cost.

I don't understand...any way you slice or dice it, this looks like a loss to me. How many millions of dollars does it take to produce a 767 only to have them returned when the 787 arrives? In my book, the 767 is old news once the 787 ramps up. I guess they could be turned into freighters once they are taken back and sold as such.

Quoting WINGS (Reply 8):
I have always wondered why ANA and JAL never opted for the A330-300.

Because they wanted the 767! To each his own. Besides these carriers have been long time Boeing aficionados.



757: The last of the best
User currently offlineDrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5157 posts, RR: 8
Reply 15, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 11529 times:

I wish CO would get a hold of some 763s in the interim. In my opinion that bird should have been with CO's fleet years ago.


Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently onlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24812 posts, RR: 22
Reply 16, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 11292 times:



Quoting WINGS (Reply 8):
Always sorta wondered why the Japanese chose not to take the 764ER... seems like it'd be almost a perfect aircraft for their ops.


I have always wondered why ANA and JAL never opted for the A330-300. This aircraft would have been the perfect choice for their ops.

I think the Japanese government has historically put pressure on carriers to buy U.S. aircraft to help offset the big trade imbalance.


User currently offlineTeme82 From Finland, joined Mar 2007, 1481 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 11018 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Man I had the picture that NH and JL would go straight to get some money back from Boeing ... Anyways the 767 deal looks good if they get it with 95% discount.  Smile


Flying high and low
User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 10961 times:



Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 10):
Do they build the A330 fuselage in Japan?



Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 13):
Is Britain Japan?

What on earth are you talking about?

Quoting MotorHussy (Reply 12):
Maybe ask Boeing that question about 777 and 787 frames.

Ah! but are we not always told these are 'American-made' a/c?


User currently offlinePar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7055 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 10730 times:



Quoting AirNZ (Reply 18):
Ah! but are we not always told these are 'American-made' a/c?

Now you understand why people believe Airbus is French, think its the same difference.

Boeing's biggest issue is that they took too long to ramp up production of the B767 and offer it as a alternative to compensation for the delayed B-787.

1. Boeing knew the delays on the B-787
2. Irrespective of the tanker deal, the B-767 was the only alternative with any growth possibility. The B-777 line is full, and they are already working to increase production to meet existing demand and delivery schedules, it's not that easy to just say throw a few more in the works, see Airbus and it's issues ramping up production for the in demand A-330
3. The B-787 is expensive, ditto the A-350 when it arrives, until then you have the expensive B-777 much more a/c and the in demand A-330 which ain't cheap either, cheap B-767's would have a market, irrespective of those who call it old, how young are the B-737, A-320, A-330??? younger than the B-767 is not much of an answer.


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26361 posts, RR: 76
Reply 20, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 10686 times:



Quoting WINGS (Reply 8):

I have always wondered why ANA and JAL never opted for the A330-300. This aircraft would have been the perfect choice for their ops.

Probably because the A330, as good an aircraft as it is, absolutely sucks at short-hauls with quick turns. Ask Qantas about that one.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineNcelhr From Vatican City, joined Jul 2006, 357 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 10402 times:



Quoting Iceberg210 (Reply 1):
This could be very interesting if Boeing does this deal, of making 767's for interim lift. If I were Boring I'd jump on the opportunity, you get to keep you're 767 line moving, and its cheaper than paying out millions in compensation relative to the opportunity cost.

As a quick fix, yes. In the long term, this might bite them back.

Quoting Iceberg210 (Reply 1):
Plus you can always find homes for newer 767's right now

Right now, probably. Right then (ie. when the 787 comes in service and they'll be returned) they'll be worth nothing because they'll be seen as gas guzzlers compared to the 787s. These birds are doomed to be discounted metal all their life.


User currently offlineNomadd22 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 1829 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 10306 times:

You don't just increase production by whipping the workers harder. It would take two or three years to ramp up manufacture of the thousands of components again, in addition to the personnel you'd need. Not something you do for just a few years of extra frames.


Andy Goetsch
User currently offlineTrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4692 posts, RR: 14
Reply 23, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 10198 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting N1120A (Reply 20):
Probably because the A330, as good an aircraft as it is, absolutely sucks at short-hauls with quick turns. Ask Qantas about that one.

how quick do QF want?? CX and CI don't seem to have a problem with HKG-TPE!


User currently offlineDrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5157 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (6 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 10064 times:



Quoting Ncelhr (Reply 21):
Right now, probably. Right then (ie. when the 787 comes in service and they'll be returned) they'll be worth nothing because they'll be seen as gas guzzlers compared to the 787s. These birds are doomed to be discounted metal all their life.

Not true...763s will be valuable due to the backlog of 787s. Besides that they ultimately could have a lucrative cargo afterlife. Don't bet on 767 values tanking when the 787 comes out...maybe when the backlog begins to be
filled.



Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
25 N1120A : HKG-TPE is longer than SYD-MEL, and much longer than HND-ITM. Further, the turn times are not nearly as strict.
26 Stitch : The key to how quickly Boeing can raise production is how quickly their suppliers can get them the parts. It stands to reason the suppliers have exces
27 CX747 : The main questions are; how long will it take Boeing to ramp up 767 production to meet their client's needs and what will be the financial cost of doi
28 MrBrightSide : Erm.... chief... you might want to reconsider that one... CI boards pax 15 min before ac departs... and has a really good fast turn around time on TP
29 Pnwtraveler : Boeing has been talking about his for a couple of months - hinting there was a solution for the airlines. They must have put the word out already to t
30 Carpethead : The truth of the matter is that a slippage of a year is something NH & JL deemed acceptable. However with the looming expansion of both HND & NRT airp
31 Warren747sp : Maybe they can revers the air force tanker decision and start converting tankers as well!
32 Denverdanny : For the same reasons the A320 is being built in China and tanker in Alabama? Airbus has tried to gain orders by extending their jobs program overseas
33 Ikramerica : Not to mention that the French government likes to go and be there when deals are signed. And this also sometimes happens with Boeing orders, but usu
34 Jokestar : Crew training for the A330 for a short-term operation (assuming they discarded the 330's at the time the 787 arrives would most likely also be more pa
35 WINGS : Correct. Has it crossed your mind that it might be an issue with Qantas and not the A330 itself? I don't see how it would be an issue for JAL or ANA,
36 Carpethead : That's with 9-abreast seating and very tight seat pitches. The 772 with 10-abreast seating has about 400 to 415 pax at NH & JL. An A333 in equivalent
37 DistantHorizon : Plus, off course, an excellent aircraft. Some minor detail, though... What you are saying is that politics play a major role in japanese airliners bu
38 OldAeroGuy : This. Major portions of the 767, 777, and 787 are produced in Japan. Boeing has cultivated this relationship for decades and it has paid off as Japan
39 RobK : Both ANA and JAL like the 767 and are still taking new pax and cargo ones even now so a few more aren't going to hurt. Finding homes for them once th
40 FlyingClrs727 : Boeing was stretching out production to keep the line moving in case they won the KC-45 contract to replace the KC-135E's. If they had won the contra
41 Stitch : And considering Boeing expected they had the contract, I wonder if suppliers were already starting to ramp production? So Boeing might very well alre
42 Trex8 : but would they have sped up production form the dozen/year? that was one of the issues the USAF had and which they used as a negative point for the 7
43 Stitch : Unlikely. However, the KC-45A used parts from three different 767 models - the 767-200ER, the 767-300F and the 767-400ER. That would most likely make
44 Centrair : What will be interesting is how NH and JL will use these leased 767s? We know that NH was looking to use the 787-8s for regional expansion and some lo
45 Scbriml : IIRC, the AF would be taking only 12-15 new tankers per year, so the current production rate would have been just about spot-on. Ironically, last yea
46 N1120A : It is not about the turn time, or the size. It is about reliability on such a taxing mission. Um, Qantas has the best reputation in the world for saf
47 WINGS : Mate, you must be suffering a spell of short term memory loss. We were discussing turn - around times, and not safety/maintenace issues. Probably bec
48 RedChili : I would like to have an explanation on exactly how the 773 and 744D were built from the ground up for short turn-around times.
49 Scbriml : While I understand some of the differences of the 744D (like no winglets, reduced weight), in what other ways were they both "built from the ground u
50 AirNZ : I think you've misunderstood, lol!! I was meaning it lighthearted in context of the hoopla going on because after winning the USAF tanker deal and th
51 AirNZ : Hmmm! okay, let me explain this to you to help you with your obvious difficulty. If you will kindly note, I was asking in reply 18 what you were talk
52 OldAeroGuy : Are you trying to schedule how often I read Airliners so I can always reply within a prescribed number of posts? Is the limit 10 or less?
53 EMB170 : Agree here...what this basically does is torpedo 767 demand in the long run, because now customers who might have preferred the 767 to the 787 (for a
54 RobK : Boeing were 99.9% unlikely to sell anymore pax 767s anyway so your argument is moot. I can't recall what plans they have for the 767 line when the la
55 Jacobin777 : Don't forget, its just not JL and NH..there are other carriers who might be potentially interested in more B767's....
56 RobK : How many 767s are ANA and JAL wanting to lease anyway? If they're only talking of half a dozen then Boeing can probably squeeze them in somewhere but
57 BrianDromey : LAN being one that immediately springs to mind. I think the thing we need to bear in mind is that these leases will not be as short term as many have
58 AirNZ : Not at all, and you are fully aware of that. What I was stating was that after a period of time, in which no answer was received from yourself and in
59 Ikramerica : The 763ER can be used for this now. It can fill in for the 788 early on, then once the 788s start arriving be moved to the role of the 783 until (if)
60 AirNZ : Fair enough, and I didn't mean to misunderstand you.
61 Ikramerica : No problem. Though I have been critical of the French government in the past, like when they try to get Boeing civilian deals overturned through poli
62 Post contains links Scbriml : This week's Flight has an interesting piece about the scramble to find pax widebodies to fill the gap left by the delay of the 787. http://www.flightg
63 Astuteman : This bit caught my eye, too.... . An interesting article...... Seems we'll see life in a few of these "old dogs" for a bit longer than we might have
64 Scbriml : Yes. Unfortunately, A330/340 production rate seems to be "resisting" rising much above 7 a month.
65 Stitch : One wonders if Boeing and Airbus are risking their futures for present gains? By the mid-2010's we could see Airbus building 30 A330s/A340s/A350s/A380
66 Astuteman : My flippant comment notwithstanding, I'd be surprised if high-volume A330 production AND A350 production was anything more than a transient, if it ha
67 Post contains images Slz396 : Anybody wants to estimate how many additional 767s Boeing will have to produce to satisfy the demand for interim lift from its many dissatisfied custo
68 Stitch : I expect most customers will take the 777, instead. JL and NH need 767s for domestic ops where 777s don't fit as well. LAN also has recently added to
69 Jacobin777 : LoL...too bad, as a 2-3-2 B767 are great!
70 Post contains images Slz396 : Since Boeing can't possibly ramp up production of the 767 line to at least 30 a year in such a sort period, the 777 option is the next best solution
71 Post contains links WINGS : Stitch, I have to disagree with you on this point. The leasing companies will get a much better return with allocating those A330's (PAX) rather then
72 Teme82 : There are still now new news about compensations made by Boeing in cash to airliners???[Edited 2008-05-19 08:09:28]
73 Pnwtraveler : If the slow down continues it is conceivable that some higher mileage 767's will be parked. Boeing could easily have the more expensive later checks d
74 Slz396 : Correct! If a 767 based freighter would be such an attractive plane that customers would forgo their A330Fs for it, then I fail to understand why Boe
75 Danny : And what makes you think Stich that lessors will buy new 767 now? Think what a lessor will be able to do with 6 year old 767 in 6 years from now? Onc
76 ERAUgrad02 : I think the best thing boeing could do is deliver these new build 767 with the Aviation Partners winglets. Why you ask? Well it brings the 767 a littl
77 Scbriml : Leahy seemed very confident that any lessors switching A330Fs to pax versions would be placing supplemental F orders. While Boeing only found 3 767 c
78 Slz396 : I think the problem Boeing has at its hand, is not so much that there won't be a market for 5 years old 767s in 6 years, because there definitely will
79 OldAeroGuy : Are you sure? Last year Boeing produced 12 767's at the rate of one per month. An increase to 2.5 per month (30 per year) would not seem to be imposs
80 Slz396 : I can actually see 3 main problems for Boeing: 1- 2- avoid filling too many 777 production slots. 3- dispose of all the interim 767s at the end. The 7
81 OldAeroGuy : No doubt about this one.
82 Slz396 : Boeing can certainly produce more than 12 767s a year, but the need time to do so, given the long lead in times, so it's not like they can produce 30
83 OldAeroGuy : How did Airbus provide interim lift that matched the A380 delivery slides? A delay in interim lift is not unprecedented.
84 Amberair732 : Makes perfect sense. Presumably adding winglets will also make the aircraft more saleable once the 787s are in service, and the 767s have been return
85 Post contains links OyKIE : The 764ER would provide a much better CASM if JAL and ANA are able to fill the airplane. Just dreaming here, but should Boeing dust of the 767-300ERX
86 Scbriml : As recently as 2000, Boeing was pumping out 4 767s a month, so they certainly can do it. However, as you correctly point out, it will take them some
87 Hamlet69 : Bingo! A full 17 months after program launch, and 65% of the A330-200F's orderbook is still unassigned leasor orders (i.e. no end-user). With both Ai
88 Slz396 : They didn't. Operators just had to keep flying their aging 747s (SQ, QF) or bitch about how they had to delay their expansion plans when they couldn'
89 Danny : Care to explain how an A332 will burn according to you 50% more fuel than 763? Btw - maximum payload of 763F is 53.6t not 55t as you conveniently rou
90 Amirs : those 763 can go to LY after ANA/JAl get their 787's.
91 Astuteman : I suspect the VERY last thing Boeing will want to do is divert ANY engineering resources whatsoever to the 767 at this time.... I'll echo Danny's que
92 OldAeroGuy : And why do you think there will need to be 100 - 150 767's to supply interim lift for late 787's? It's likely that operators will continue to fly the
93 Drerx7 : What's the likelihood that CO would get in on 763s? What have the N.A. carriers asked for in compensations?
94 Hamlet69 : If you're referring to the fact that it has garnered 9 customers to date, you're correct. However, don't believe for a second that all of those custo
95 Stitch : Far too many comments to reply directly, so I'm going general: 767 Ramp-Up: The weak point here is the suppliers. However, five years ago those suppli
96 PlanesNTrains : That would make sense. That would be fortunate for Boeing if they do defer some. Afterall, they could eliminate a major ramp up expense and get them
97 Astuteman : I'll give you 2 fairly reputable ones for a start-off.. 1. Boeing Commercial Airliners. One of their biggest claims in their appeal against the tanke
98 Astuteman : For what it's worth, the sort of planes that burn around 50% more fuel than a 763ER with their nominal pax payloads, on a typical c. 6000 Nm nominal
99 Scbriml : To quote John McEnroe "You cannot be serious!" If the A330 really did burn 50% more fuel than the 767, I doubt A330 sales would be anywhere close to
100 Rheinwaldner : Interesting is that Airbus had no interim lift at all that could replace the role of an A380. Interim lift is different from compensation. Compensati
101 Alessandro : So how many B767 are up for lease now, is it a sought after airframe?
102 Stitch : I have not checked since about this time last year, but 767-300ER rates were stable with the long-term outlook expecting them to remain so (so no app
103 Astuteman : Unless one substantially outclasses the other in its segment.... .. Rgds
104 Stitch : Yes, but perhaps the "performance gap" is not the chasm some might be assuming. Lessors were quick to snap A332Fs up (in at least one case, likely du
105 Ikramerica : Maybe it's a case of "can't teach an old dog new tricks" in that, despite the growth, freight companies are so accustomed to going after converted pr
106 Astuteman : True. I'm pretty sure the A330F doesn't burn 50% more fuel than the 767F.... Mmmm. I suspect the reasoning behind wanting to convert some to pax vers
107 Sabenapilot : I'd love to see the justification too for that claim to actually... So basically you've just looked at the max tank capacity of each of the 2 planes
108 Stitch : If you have a customer lined-up to lease an A330-200F from you, and you then tell them "never mind, we're going to get an A330-200 instead and lease
109 Post contains links Nomadd22 : The PI is quoting "people familiar with the plans" as saying Boeing plans to bump the 767 to 2 a month. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/363939_
110 Stitch : Makes sense.
111 RobK : One could be mistaken into thinking they're already at that as 2x LAN 767s will be delivered this month but it's back to one again next month . R
112 Hamlet69 : My apologies, everyone. I've spent the last 24 hours looking into the numbers that I had been provided, and it seems that the fuel numbers did indeed
113 Scbriml : Not really a surprise, the only question is, how quickly can they get to 2 a month? "Next year" doesn't narrow it down much! That's the difference be
114 Astuteman : I suspect you got so many responses because it seemed a most "un-Hamlet69-esque" thing to do. My (our) turn will undoubtedly come.. Hope you get to c
115 Sabenapilot : Allow me to congratulate you, sir! Not many people dare to admit to an error on this site, even in the face of overwhelmingly convincing proof of the
116 Post contains images Stitch : You know, Boeing did sell two 767s for every three A330-200s Airbus sold since the latter entered service. Folks (conveniently, in my view) keep igno
117 Ikramerica : Actually, it was when Boeing delivered the 77W… Of course, that's not really true, but it's close.
118 Astuteman : That is true. But both the A340 and 767 have pretty much gone in terms of passenger sales, whilst the backlogs for A330's and 777's are at all-time h
119 MotorHussy : I think Airbus should incorporate the proposed initial A330 changes that were going to make it an A350 and go for more of the smaller end 787 market -
120 Post contains links Aviationbuff : 767 production may get boost http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-767-production-may-get-boost.html
121 Moo : Since January 1998, Boeing has sold 210 767s (all types). Since January 2005, Airbus has sold 319 A330-200 (all types). That's your 3:2 ratio right t
122 Stitch : Well Airbus' A330 fire-sale over the past eighteen months has definitely skewed the numbers in favor of the A330-200, but as of late 2006 the 3:2 rat
123 Moo : Firesale? Did I not prove in another thread recently that only a third of sales could be linked in any way to customers of the A380 and A350 over the
124 OldAeroGuy : Except in the case of the 773ER vs its direct counterpart, the A346. As of the end of April '08, 773ER sales stood at 368 while 105 A346's have been
125 Stitch : I have long argued that Airbus sells the large majority of their planes at deals that generate positive revenue, and I am not changing that view here
126 Ikramerica : well the A340 had a 3.5 year head start on the 777-200ER and also a psychological early advantage with carriers worried about long range ETOPS. But i
127 Astuteman : No. That's most definitely true. It took a long time for the A330 to "take off". (in fact early sales were dismal IIRC). But I think its important to
128 FlyingClrs727 : And PW still doesn't have a geared tubofan available for any aircraft.
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...
ANA, JAL Planes Bump Wings At Airport In China posted Mon Mar 5 2007 08:32:40 by CinJA
What Feelings ANA/JAL/JAS Give You? posted Sat Dec 15 2001 08:45:24 by Hkniceguy
Swissair, ANA, JAL Seat Pitch posted Tue Jul 10 2001 11:39:01 by Cabinboy
Air India To Seek 787 Delay Compensation posted Fri Jan 4 2008 15:31:09 by EI321
BA Will Lease 767/777 A/c Due 787 Delays posted Tue May 6 2008 02:12:19 by BALHRWWCC
Airlines Getting Compensation For 787 A380 Delays posted Sun May 4 2008 02:55:21 by Hypersonic
787: JAL Switching To A350? posted Thu Feb 21 2008 21:17:48 by RedFlyer
Air Berlin Leases Three (3) New 787-8 From Ilfc posted Thu Dec 20 2007 07:35:53 by Columba
ANA Will Pay Cash For 10 787 posted Thu Nov 29 2007 09:03:57 by USADreamliner
JAL And ANA To Fly To Taiwan Themselves posted Fri Oct 26 2007 20:53:16 by SMOLT
Boeing 787 Delays: A Few More Pax 767 Built? posted Tue Oct 16 2007 07:13:07 by American 767
ANA, JAL Planes Bump Wings At Airport In China posted Mon Mar 5 2007 08:32:40 by CinJA
What Feelings ANA/JAL/JAS Give You? posted Sat Dec 15 2001 08:45:24 by Hkniceguy
Swissair, ANA, JAL Seat Pitch posted Tue Jul 10 2001 11:39:01 by Cabinboy
Air India To Seek 787 Delay Compensation posted Fri Jan 4 2008 15:31:09 by EI321
BA Will Lease 767/777 A/c Due 787 Delays posted Tue May 6 2008 02:12:19 by BALHRWWCC
Airlines Getting Compensation For 787 A380 Delays posted Sun May 4 2008 02:55:21 by Hypersonic
787: JAL Switching To A350? posted Thu Feb 21 2008 21:17:48 by RedFlyer
Air Berlin Leases Three (3) New 787-8 From Ilfc posted Thu Dec 20 2007 07:35:53 by Columba
ANA Will Pay Cash For 10 787 posted Thu Nov 29 2007 09:03:57 by USADreamliner
Air India To Seek 787 Delay Compensation posted Fri Jan 4 2008 15:31:09 by EI321
BA Will Lease 767/777 A/c Due 787 Delays posted Tue May 6 2008 02:12:19 by BALHRWWCC
ANA Will Pay Cash For 10 787 posted Thu Nov 29 2007 09:03:57 by USADreamliner
Airlines Getting Compensation For 787 A380 Delays posted Sun May 4 2008 02:55:21 by Hypersonic
787: JAL Switching To A350? posted Thu Feb 21 2008 21:17:48 by RedFlyer
Air Berlin Leases Three (3) New 787-8 From Ilfc posted Thu Dec 20 2007 07:35:53 by Columba
ANA Will Pay Cash For 10 787 posted Thu Nov 29 2007 09:03:57 by USADreamliner
BA Will Lease 767/777 A/c Due 787 Delays posted Tue May 6 2008 02:12:19 by BALHRWWCC
Airlines Getting Compensation For 787 A380 Delays posted Sun May 4 2008 02:55:21 by Hypersonic
787: JAL Switching To A350? posted Thu Feb 21 2008 21:17:48 by RedFlyer
Air Berlin Leases Three (3) New 787-8 From Ilfc posted Thu Dec 20 2007 07:35:53 by Columba
ANA Will Pay Cash For 10 787 posted Thu Nov 29 2007 09:03:57 by USADreamliner
ANA Will Pay Cash For 10 787 posted Thu Nov 29 2007 09:03:57 by USADreamliner