Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A330F "pushed Back To 2010"  
User currently offlineN1786b From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 559 posts, RR: 17
Posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 11040 times:

Due to high demand for the 330 pax versions, AB has pushed back deliveries of the 330F to 2010. First flight is expected towards the end of 2009 with deliveries starting in spring 2010.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...0f-first-deliveries-into-2010.html

44 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlineAgill From Sweden, joined Feb 2004, 1010 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 10985 times:

I wonder if this is also connected to the tanker deal.

User currently offlineFrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1584 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 10900 times:

So, does this mean Airbus has sold 2009 A330 pax production slots that actually weren't there?  scratchchin 


146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E90,F50/7
User currently offlineWINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 68
Reply 3, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 10807 times:



Quoting Frigatebird (Reply 2):
So, does this mean Airbus has sold 2009 A330 pax production slots that actually weren't there?

Nothing would bring me more joy then to see Airbus make a deal with Virgin Atlantic for some A333's  Smile

Regards,
Wings



Aviation Is A Passion.
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 10818 times:



Quoting Frigatebird (Reply 2):
does this mean Airbus has sold 2009 A330 pax production slots that actually weren't there?

No, because it is something which is known to the market for some time now, hence the fact the A330F is effectively off the market since early/mid last year, not surprisingly shortly after it became clear 787 deliveries will be on average some 29 months late!

It is known that several freighter customers, notably the lessors, have been knocking hard at Airbus' door to turn their early A330F production slots back into A330 Pax ever since, because they feel those frames will be worth more that way.

Airbus would be foolish not to make maximum use of the complete mess the 787 program is in and which puts the world's leading airplane manufacturer in a unique situation by giving them the rare opportunity to crank out tens of additional A330s at premium prices and without any competition at all.

Airbus are laughing all the way to the bank I imagine...


User currently offlineWINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 68
Reply 5, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 10744 times:



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 4):
No, because it is something which is known to the market for some time now, hence the fact the A330F is effectively off the market since early/mid last year, not surprisingly shortly after it became clear 787 deliveries will be on average some 29 months late!

What would be interesting to know is the number of aditional passenger frames, that Airbus will manage to deliver in 2009, up until mid 2010, when the first A332F is delivered.

I can see various unsatisfied 787 customers that might look towards the A332/A333 as an alternative option, and not just one as a simple stop gap measure. Some that come to mind are the following.

Virgin Atlantic
Qatar
Air New Zealand
Qantas/JetStar
Northwest/Delta

and I can still see a place for the A332/A333 with British Airways. (In my dreams)

Regards,
Wings



Aviation Is A Passion.
User currently offlineDanny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3509 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 10684 times:



Quoting Frigatebird (Reply 2):
So, does this mean Airbus has sold 2009 A330 pax production slots that actually weren't there?

Both Boeing and airbus overbooked in recent years with expectation of some cancellations.

Quoting WINGS (Reply 3):
Nothing would bring me more joy then to see Airbus make a deal with Virgin Atlantic for some A333's

Regards,
Wings

That's been romoured for a while but nothing came out of it so far.


User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 10633 times:



Quoting WINGS (Reply 5):
What would be interesting to know is the number of aditional passenger frames, that Airbus will manage to deliver in 2009, up until mid 2010, when the first A332F is delivered.

Well, that will depend on:

- the number of A330F frames that were originally scheduled for delivery between Q3 2009 and Q2 2010 and which are now all turned into A330 Pax: you're much more into this kind of program details, so make an educated guess...

-) the number of additional A330s Airbus can crank out of their production line this year...

Quoting WINGS (Reply 5):
I can see various unsatisfied 787 customers that might look towards the A332/A333 as an alternative option, and not just one as a simple stop gap measure.

I don't think any 787 is going to jump ship and certainly not for the A330; DL/NW or VS might be ordering some A330s this year, but that would just be as fleet expansion - in case of VS: if you consider the A330/A340 as one family- to cover their urgent expansion, rather than permanently swap the 787 for the A330.

What is happening is that as 787 customers hold on to their current fleets much longer than planned and Boeing clearly won't be able to produce anywhere near the numbers of 787s it had planned to do for a very looooong time, relatively few 787s will be delivered before well into the next decade and the global lease market isn't going to see the tsunami of cheap 767s it was expecting. That means leasing companies have to start thinking about covering global demand diferently and may thus increase the number of A330s they will have on offer then, hence them bringing deliveries forward and potentially ordering some more...

All in all this is pretty bad news for 787 customers and current 767 owners, because by the the time they will finally be getting their hands on their new 787, the re-sale market for the 767 will have shrunk tremendously as it will be covered by more efficient and pretty new A330s... it seems more likely that many of the planes the 787 will replace will now be send straight to the desert rather than find a second life or will have to be disposed off at lower prices than what was thought at first...

It's a nice exemple of how the 787 fiasco is not only costing Boeing and its future customers a small fortune, but also its past customers. And the winners are obviously Airbus and those who own A330s.


User currently offlineSwallow From Uganda, joined Jul 2007, 555 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 10337 times:



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 7):
's a nice exemple of how the 787 fiasco is not only costing Boeing and its future customers a small fortune, but also its past customers. And the winners are obviously Airbus and those who own A330s.

What I find interesting is that the 330 has benefited from delays on both the 380 and 787 programs.

We are also told that the FAL will be in Toulouse after the USAF deal was put on ice.

Airbus is doing the right thing by making hay while the sun shines. And with RR improving fuel burn on the T700, this puppy is looking better and better.

Recent improvements include increased fuel efficiency resulting in a significant 1.3 per cent improvement in fuel consumption on new build engines and a 1.0 per cent improvement on engines fitted with the EP retrofit kit


http://www.rolls-royce.com/media/showPR.jsp?PR_ID=40743



The grass is greener where you water it
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21511 posts, RR: 60
Reply 9, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 10250 times:



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 4):
787 deliveries will be on average some 29 months late

Please provide a source for "on average 29 months late."



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineFrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1584 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 10202 times:



Quoting Danny (Reply 6):
Both Boeing and airbus overbooked in recent years with expectation of some cancellations.

Really? Never heard that before... You may be right, but it sounds a bit risky to me. I know it's a common thing to do with options, but with firm orders... With new programs like the A380 and B787 it's logical that early production numbers turned to be optimistic (to say the least!), but with up and running production lines like the B777 or A330...  scratchchin  And until half a year ago, airlines couldn't get their hands on new airplanes fast enough, there was hardly an airline that cancelled an order. Now, in this economic climate, yes, but who could have envisioned it a year ago...

Still, IT's deferral of it's remaining A330 deliveries must have given some space in the production line. So I guess that the margins for the pax orders must be quite a lot better than for the launch order fort Flyington. They canceled a MoU for 777F's in favour of the A330F, certainly it must have been a very sweet deal Flyington.



146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E90,F50/7
User currently offlineKogge From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 75 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 10171 times:

How realistic is it that Flyington Freighters of India will ever take delivery of an A330F ? Is the company still existing ? They wanted to be operating wide body freighters a long time ago, but nothing was heard for a long time...

And how many A330F orders are there for airlines ? As far as I know only Etihad and MNG ordered the type, all the other orders are from leasing companys, and I have not heard that they have a single final customer for their ordered freighters...
Icelandair Cargo commited to some of those ordered by Avion. Then Icelandair cancelled these plans, and the Avion order has been transfered to some OH Aviation in the Airbus books. Whoever OH aviation is...

So may be the delay of the A330 freighter has other resons ???



Flown in Caravelle, Coronado, Friendship, Fellowship, Herald, Heron, One-Eleven, Trident, Viscount & others
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 10149 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 9):
Please provide a source for "on average 29 months late."


"27 months on average", dixit key customer IFLC
http://wordpress.com/tag/787-delays
plus
2 months additional delay caused by the strikes of last year,
gives
29 months on average.
29 months is BTW still very optimistic, as it seems 1 day of strike caused 2 days of delays on the deliveries of the 747-8 program for instance, so we could in fact be looking at 31 or more months on average for a key customer like ILFC!!!
God forbit thinki what the average delay must be for ALL 787 customers combined???

[Edited 2009-01-06 08:08:58]

User currently offlineSwallow From Uganda, joined Jul 2007, 555 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 10080 times:



Quoting Kogge (Reply 11):
So may be the delay of the A330 freighter has other reasons ???

With IATA reporting a decline in international cargo traffic, which is much steeper than that for passenger traffic, the freighter market is facing challenges. Factor in the lower oil price plus the global credit crunch and the attractiveness of new build freighters loses some sheen. P2F conversions are much cheaper than new freighters, so lets see how this pans out.



The grass is greener where you water it
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21511 posts, RR: 60
Reply 14, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 10075 times:



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 12):
Dixit IFLC plus 2 months additional delay caused by the strikes

So where is the actual source of the ILFC 25 months AVERAGE delay statement? A lot has been thrown around, so I really would like to see it.

As for 2 months additional, it would be more like 4-6 months based on the other Boeing programs after the strike.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 10025 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14):
So where is the actual source of the ILFC 25 months AVERAGE delay statement?

Not 25, its 27 according to ILFC....

http://leehamnews.wordpress.com/2008...e-27-month-delay-for-all-74-orders

Strange how you seem to have missed this important piece of guidance from ILFC in their Q1 reporting for 2008....

As you've said yourself, I am pretty forgiving by adding just 2 months additional delay, in fact the strikes could have added 4 to 6 months to the already hopelessly long delay.

Nor am I adding any further delays to the figure ILFC explicity mentioned, despite the fact Boeing ran into further assembly problems on the 787 AFTER ILFC made their comment, so the number of 27 could very well be above 30 in itself already, prior to the strikes!

And this for a key customer who's having some pretty early delivery slots: guess what the average will be for ALL customers combined???

No wonder the lessors are begging Airbus on their knies to shift the new A330F to the right and to produce a few tens of A330 Pax more next year....

BTW- we're still waiting for any link to a source in support of that totally ridiculous remark of yours in another topic the A350 non-XWB needed to sell 1,000. If you repeatedly question other person's remarks, please do not allow yourself to live to far lower standards!

[Edited 2009-01-06 08:24:03]

User currently offlineEC777 From Sweden, joined Feb 2008, 13 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 9967 times:

The average delay of about 24 month is also valid for ANA.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...7253-23349,00.html?from=public_rss


User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 9948 times:

Indeed...

24 for launch customer ANA

27 for ILFC (prior to Boeing's latest round of delays, as well as the strikes)

So both of these key customers are now facing AVERAGE delays in the mid thirties!!!!

It beggs the question what the overall (so all customers combined) average delay is on the 787 program, but it must be HUGE since lessors are begging Airbus to push back the launch of the A330F to accomodate more A330 pax on the production line.

People here have been far too focussed on EIS and the delay to that milestone, but they seem to have forgotten that the very agressive ramp up schedule which Boeing had in mind has been let go off, meaning that the delays will get even worse as Boeing works its way through its backlog...

[Edited 2009-01-06 08:37:33]

User currently offlineMoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3928 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 9931 times:



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 15):

Not 25, its 27 according to ILFC....

http://leehamnews.wordpress.com/2008...e-27-month-delay-for-all-74-orders

Strange how you seem to have missed this important piece of guidance from ILFC in their Q1 reporting for 2008....

And thats before the latest delay announcement last month (was it last month?) pushing first deliveries into Q1 2010 - I wonder how that affects these deliveries...


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21511 posts, RR: 60
Reply 19, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9876 times:



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 15):
Strange how you seem to have missed this important piece of guidance from ILFC in their Q1 reporting for 2008....

I hadn't read the Q1 guidance. I don't read everything in the world. That's why I asked for a link. So I could see where the information was coming from. It's not a crime to ask for a source, especially from someone who always tries to paint the worst picture possible for anything Boeing, and the best possible picture for anything Airbus.

And it seems you have "adjusted" the source information you gave.

Average delay for ILFC may have been 27 months, but not the entire program. It seemed to be on a customer by customer basis, somewhere between 21 and 30 months depending on what their contracts say, the number they ordered, the first delivery date, etc.

ANA's 24 month average delay stated in the newspaper is from an article written after the Boeing strike ended, so should take the strike into account.

So no, you did not provide a source that confirmed the average program delay before the strike was 27 months. And even if it was only 24 months (only, right, that's a lot), it's probably 27 months minimum after the strike.

I'm not defending the mess of a program, I just want to get the data right. And once again, you have exaggerated things a bit out of Boeing's favor.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineEC777 From Sweden, joined Feb 2008, 13 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9831 times:

The press release from ANA is from September 25:th 2008

http://www.ana.co.jp/eng/aboutana/press/index_sm.html

under
"ANA Firms up Boeing 787 Delivery Schedule and Interim Lift Needs"

So I do not know if the strike was taken into account.


User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 9799 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 19):
ANA's 24 month average delay stated in the newspaper is from an article written after the Boeing strike ended, so should take the strike into account

ANA is launch customer

Besides, I am not sure it already takes into account the strike, as the strike wasn't finished yet then...

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 19):
Average delay for ILFC may have been 27 months, but not the entire program

That 27 does NOT include the strike, so is likely close to (or above) 30 now...

The trend seems to be that the further down the production line, the larger the delay, so the entire program should be delayed MORE than what ANA and ILFC face as delay (on average).

This is also in line with Airbus' internal 787 briefing which highlighted a huge bottleneck in deliveries in the years after EIS since Airbus knows from 787 subcontractors Boeing will not be able to ramp up production anywhere near the pace they had hoped for (and selled at), thus pushing an every larger number of delayed 787s out in time.

[Edited 2009-01-06 09:07:40]

User currently offlineKhobar From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2379 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 9637 times:



Quoting N1786b (Thread starter):
Due to high demand for the 330 pax versions, AB has pushed back deliveries of the 330F to 2010. First flight is expected towards the end of 2009 with deliveries starting in spring 2010.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...0f-first-deliveries-into-2010.html

Wait - where's the "A330F program delayed!!!" ?

Strange that Airbus would treat their customers in this fashion. I put in an order for airplanes and Airbus comes back later and says I'm screwed, tough luck, they have to make room for another customer so are bumping me out of line??? It's not like they ordered only one aircraft - they ordered 12 firm. Or is Airbus paying compensation for the inconvenience?

Why didn't they just come out and say what's really going on - that Flyington Freighters are in difficulty (they already scrapped plans to buy Boeing T7's) and that demand for the A330F is too soft to warrant proceeding with the type at this time. Obviously it would make no sense building white tails when you could be building something else.

Ah well...


User currently offlineAirbusA370 From Germany, joined Dec 2008, 253 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 9602 times:



Quoting Khobar (Reply 22):
Strange that Airbus would treat their customers in this fashion. I put in an order for airplanes and Airbus comes back later and says I'm screwed, tough luck, they have to make room for another customer so are bumping me out of line???

I'm 100% certain that Airbus talked with the customer before announcing the shift of deliveries. Probably the customer is happy with that because he needs the planes not that early anyways, because of the economic downturn. Or maybe the customer got offered some "incentives" like free crew training or spares and is kept happy this way.


User currently offlineSwallow From Uganda, joined Jul 2007, 555 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (5 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9391 times:



Quoting Khobar (Reply 22):
Why didn't they just come out and say what's really going on - that Flyington Freighters are in difficulty (they already scrapped plans to buy Boeing T7's) and that demand for the A330F is too soft to warrant proceeding with the type at this time.

To be fair, it wasn't just Flyington. Other customers were swapping freighters for pax versions. True, demand for new build freighters may be softening because of economic realities.

US leasing companies Aircastle and Guggenheim Aviation Partners are responding to the increased demand for widebodies, in the wake of Boeing 787 delivery delays, by switching orders for freighter aircraft to passenger versions.
As part of a revision to its 15-strong Airbus A330-200F order, which has seen it reduce the deal to 12, Aircastle has switched an undisclosed number to the passenger version to "provide a more flexible mix of freighter and passenger aircraft".
"There is a very good demand for the passenger aircraft," says chief executive Ron Wainshal. "[Airbus doesn't] have enough [passenger aircraft] capacity available...I think the deal was a win-win for both of us."



http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ders-to-passenger-to-fill-787.html



The grass is greener where you water it
25 Scbriml : You already answered your own question.. Makes sense for Flyington to defer or convert freighters to pax. That's the "glass half-empty" way of lookin
26 EPA001 : Which is a very good result imho!
27 ER757 : Exactly...that's the elephant in the room that seems to be, as you say, overlooked. When Boeing actually starts delivering these birds to the custome
28 AirNZ : I'm honestly at a loss to actually figure out what you are/are not 'defending. You openly agree the average delay at something between 21-30 months (
29 Lokey123 : What they wouldn't say is that they couldn't find customers for the F version, which was the case. I think this scenario works out best for everyone
30 Cerecl : Huh? Have I missed this completely?
31 Ruscoe : Airbus had originally planned to increase 330 production rate but recently decided to cap the increase, I don't know the figures. This is inconsisten
32 Columba : Me, too...... I guess the decision to push back the A330F has also to do with the postponed tanker decision as it was planned to build the A330F and
33 Mham001 : You've used the word "beg" at least twice here. Where is the source of that information and how does this square with the Airbus announcement of post
34 WINGS : It would be nice to actually see a link to the confirmation of this deal, although it would make perfect sense. Virgin Atlantic currently have 6 rema
35 Lokey123 : No you haven't, it hasn't been announced yet. VS just got formal BoD approval. Of course something could happen between now and any planned announcem
36 Khobar : I'm pretty sure that's correct, but it's an unusual way of announcing things. I could understand if this were an Airbus press release, but for it to
37 Post contains links Part147 : Sadly it seems the recession is starting to really bite now... Bloomberg take on all this... http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...601087&sid=asv7dBL
38 Scbriml : Given demand (even with the current World situation) and the backlog, I can't see them building any white-tail A330s.
39 Frigatebird : " target=_blank>http://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/...s.jsp One of the more optimistic analysts expects a best case scenario of 30% of 2009 deliveri
40 Kogge : I am not so sure... I wanted to make the point in my previous post that in my opinion a lot of the A330F orders are in danger of cancellation. This i
41 Revelation : How do you expect the firms that were expecting to buy used 767s will raise the funds to buy new A330s? That'd be pretty impressive in a good economy
42 Mham001 : I heard Jim? Boyd of the Boyd Group on the radio yesterday say that 2009 would be a stable year for airlines.
43 Khobar : I should have referred to the article - it should have provided information on what was going on or, at the very least, a comment that the company ch
44 Alessandro : You mean that the A330F and the tanker share more components than the A330 pax? I don´t agree completely with that, the winners are those who alread
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...
UA"Back To Basics" What It Might Mean. posted Wed Sep 3 2008 00:07:23 by HNL-Jack
"Welcome Back To Don Muang" posted Sun Mar 25 2007 19:17:20 by Chulalongkorn
Back To Being "Just" A Gate Agent posted Thu Mar 1 2007 18:18:42 by Falcon84
NZ To Bring Back Domestic "Frills" posted Tue Jun 20 2006 10:47:19 by 1Des1
"Back To The Future" For B6 posted Mon Mar 20 2006 16:01:30 by FLALEFTY
When Did DL Switch Back To The More "angled" Logo? posted Mon Mar 6 2006 17:39:15 by Avi8tir
AA ORD-FCO Back To ORD For "security Reasons" posted Mon Jun 27 2005 10:15:41 by LXsaab2000
"The High & The Mighty" Coming Back To TV Soon posted Sun Jun 19 2005 17:16:16 by FlagshipAZ
When Will The "Speedbird" Back To Sky? posted Sun May 27 2001 04:34:25 by H. Simpson
Norwegian To "carpet Bomb" Denmark W/12 New Routes posted Tue Dec 2 2008 07:04:53 by Mortyman