Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will Airbus Retain The A350-800?  
User currently offlineqfa787380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 18754 times:

There have been several recent conversions of the 350-800 to 350-900:

CIT(3)

ILFC(6)

Synergy(10)

TP(10- as rumored in FlightGlobal)

There could be various reasons for this:

(1) Airlines want the more capable -900 earlier, as the -800 has been delayed 18-24 months

(2) the -800 has been reduced to a heavy shrink model not competitive against the 788/9

(3) Airbus are actively trying to convert customers to the -900 so that the program can be cancelled.

Airbus still quite categorically say the -800 will still go ahead but I wonder if they wouldn't be better targetting the -900/-1000 and possibly offering the 330 as the -800 alternative. There has been some talk that Airbus may offer a 330Neo(Air Asia X is interested) and the main 350XWB market does seem centred on the 350-900/-1000. Would it really affect the 350 program too much? I really don't think so.

156 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31394 posts, RR: 85
Reply 1, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 18708 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I imagine it will depend on if current customers continue to stand by their orders and if new customers can be found.

User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6996 posts, RR: 63
Reply 2, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 18678 times:

It is hard not to conclude that it's going the way of the 787-3. In public Airbus say that they are "fully committed" blah blah blah but behind the scenes they and their customers are quietly putting it to sleep.

User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3432 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 18568 times:

Quoting PM (Reply 2):


It is hard not to conclude that it's going the way of the 787-3. In public Airbus say that they are "fully committed" blah blah blah but behind the scenes they and their customers are quietly putting it to sleep.

While i think the A358 has larger window of operations that make sense than the 783... I've long said that now that the A358 is a plain shrink that it doesn't make sense. This is not because of any relative performance difference between it and the 787, but rather that the A359 is so much more capible than the A358.


User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 3020 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 18213 times:

Quoting qfa787380 (Thread starter):
I wonder if they wouldn't be better targetting the -900/-1000 and possibly offering the 330 as the -800 alternative.

I agree. I'd bet that an updated A333 would be more efficient on the sectors that the A358 is designed for anyway, so it seems to be a no brainer to me... I guess that an A333NEO would be cheaper to produce as well.

Airbus are then perfectly set up - highly efficient A333NEO to go up against the 787, A350 to go up against bigger 787s and the 777s, then A380 for the heavy routes.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31394 posts, RR: 85
Reply 5, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 18121 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting qf002 (Reply 4):
I'd bet that an updated A333 would be more efficient on the sectors that the A358 is designed for anyway...

An A330-300 can't begin to fly the distance an A350-800 can, much less an A350-800HGW.

Airbus has been positioning the A350-800 as an A330-200(HGW) replacement, carrying 30 more passengers / 5 tons more payload (in OEM spec) 1400nm farther while burning significantly less fuel per seat (23% less on a 4000nm mission). They believe that there is little to no market for the A330-200 once the A350-800 enters revenue service.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15831 posts, RR: 27
Reply 6, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 18092 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
I imagine it will depend on if current customers continue to stand by their orders and if new customers can be found.

I think that as of now, the -800 is mostly safe. If something happens and the program gets delayed, I'd say all bets are off.

Quoting qfa787380 (Thread starter):
(3) Airbus are actively trying to convert customers to the -900 so that the program can be cancelled.

If I were running Airbus, I'd have done this some time ago.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4409 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 17998 times:

Most of the work that goes into the A358 will also go into later A359 - so the work must be done anyways. The extra effort is minimal, if a few hand full of aircraft can be sold for the ULR role the 77L flies now it is worth.
The A358 will be the basis of the A350 freighter, so it must be done for this anyways. I predict:
a) the A358 will be built
b) the number of threads on a.net if the A358 is a failure or not will be about as high as the number of A358 sold.


User currently offlineqfa787380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 17943 times:

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 7):
Most of the work that goes into the A358 will also go into later A359 - so the work must be done anyways.

But the 359 is the 1st model scheduled for EIS. The work gets done on the 359. The 350 freighter is way into the future at this stage, if ever at all. Ditto for the longer ranged version of the 359.
Maybe it will be built but I wouldn't be surprised to see Airbus positioning themselves for it not to be built. Not sure how QR will view that, for instance, but they could just as well get more -900s.

[Edited 2011-07-31 23:40:19]

User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13520 posts, RR: 100
Reply 9, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 17939 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PM (Reply 2):
It is hard not to conclude that it's going the way of the 787-3.

If you will, it is like a 78G. I do not see the point. It is the 736 of the widebody world.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 3):
I've long said that now that the A358 is a plain shrink that it doesn't make sense. This is not because of any relative performance difference between it and the 787, but rather that the A359 is so much more capible than the A358.

  

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 7):
a) the A358 will be built

I do not see the advantage of certifying another length and the associated costs. It would be cheaper to cut the A358 from the agenda at this point.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4409 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 17869 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 9):
I do not see the advantage of certifying another length and the associated costs. It would be cheaper to cut the A358 from the agenda at this point.

This could happen ONLY if Airbus sees a way and decides to make an A33NEO that beats the 787 in economics. Otherwise they would give a foot in the market of mid size aircraft away for almost nothing. ( OK, I would like that nothing on my bank account ).


User currently offlineRubberJungle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 17698 times:

This is the Flightglobal article mentioned in the OP

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...gal-set-to-defect-to-a350-900.html

Sounds more than just a "rumour", judging by the quote from TAP.


User currently offline328JET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 17553 times:

I think Airbus will keep the A358 until the pressure from potential customers for a real B788-competitor is getting too strong.

I believe that we will see an A330NEO family sooner than later, after the huge success of the A320neo-program.

This A330neo-program could be limitd to current A330-payload/range but with better economics, whereas the A350-900 and -1000 could be the A340-replacement only.


A neo-program costs basically nothing for A or B in contrast to a complete new design.


User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4409 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 17254 times:

Exchange the engines only is cheap, but it will have an uphill battle against the 787.

Make the Skin AlLi and a carbon wing box costs 3 billion and it has a downhill batlle.

Hard decision.


User currently offlineflyAUA From Austria, joined May 2005, 4604 posts, RR: 56
Reply 14, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 17207 times:

According to Airbus, yes!

Although some customers seem like they'd rather go bigger than have the EIS postponed, most are still sticking with the A358 and waiting the delay out. According to Airbus these include:

-Aeroflot 18
-Afriqiyah 6
-Asiana 8
-Bangkok Airways 4
-Hawaiian 6
-Kingfisher 5
-Libyan 4
-Qatar 20
-Tunisair 3
-US Airways 18
-Yemenia 10
-APF 12
-AWAS 2

Sooooo... the numbers sort of speak for themselves.



[Edited 2011-08-01 04:05:11]


Not drinking, also isn't a solution!
User currently onlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12875 posts, RR: 46
Reply 15, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 16876 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 7):
Most of the work that goes into the A358 will also go into later A359 - so the work must be done
anyways.

The -900 is the base model and is the first to be built, so it's really the other way round.

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 7):
The A358 will be the basis of the A350 freighter

I believe the freighter version first mentioned by Airbus at the A350XWB launch is based on the -900 with the -1000's engines and MTOW.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 9):
I do not see the advantage of certifying another length and the associated costs. It would be cheaper to cut the A358 from the agenda at this point.

Given the "simple shrink" nature of the -800, I don't see cost as a significant issue. If the current customers are prepared to wait for it, I don't see why Airbus would cancel it. As Stitch pointed out above, it has significantly better payload/range than the A332 and will burn a lot less fuel. Why would Airbus need to develop an A330neo?



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana! #44cHAMpion
User currently offlinePanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 4217 posts, RR: 89
Reply 16, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 16876 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
COMMUNITY MANAGER

Quoting flyAUA (Reply 14):
Sooooo... the numbers sort of speak for themselves.

They do, last year they had 182 orders for the A358 and now with the conversion by TAP that is down to 123. Not exactly trending in the right direction and the delay to the model of up to 2 years will see more conversions too. Not all bad for Airbus as other XWB variants will benefit along with the 330.



Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
User currently offlineflyAUA From Austria, joined May 2005, 4604 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 16820 times:

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Reply 16):
nd now with the conversion by TAP

I did not mention TAP in the list of carriers still wanting the A358.

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Reply 16):
will see more conversions

This is speculation, not fact. Is it probable, yes, but nobody knows yet.



Not drinking, also isn't a solution!
User currently offlinekmz From Germany, joined Feb 2008, 164 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 16639 times:

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Reply 16):
They do, last year they had 182 orders for the A358 and now with the conversion by TAP that is down to 123.


...and maybe Afriqiyah / Libyan orders might not substantiate if things carry on the way they do... (-10)
...and how well is Kingfisher doing?

I wouldn't bet on the A358, It seems to me airlines are happy with split Boeing-Airbus fleets or might be better of with the A359....


User currently offlinePanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 4217 posts, RR: 89
Reply 19, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 16617 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
COMMUNITY MANAGER

Quoting flyAUA (Reply 17):
This is speculation, not fact. Is it probable, yes, but nobody knows yet.

It's fact, unfortunately it is not yet in the public domain so that makes me the source. I am happy to be proven worng though I won't be as the Airbus O&D spreadsheet is updated over the next 6 months.

Quoting flyAUA (Reply 17):
I did not mention TAP in the list of carriers still wanting the A358.

Nor did you read the article linked in the original post otherwise you would have seen the decline from 182 to 123 rather than listing who you think will remain commited to the model.

Edit - Spelling!

[Edited 2011-08-01 04:55:32]


Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 3020 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 16614 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
An A330-300 can't begin to fly the distance an A350-800 can, much less an A350-800HGW.

Airbus has been positioning the A350-800 as an A330-200(HGW) replacement

I would question just how big that market is though, and whether the cost is really worth it? There is not exactly a giant pile of airlines flying A332s to the edge of their range, and those that do have generally got 787s on order to take that role. The A358 is very similar to the A318 in my view - a shrink of the original that boasts extra range but is eclipsed by the bigger siblings that are far more capable with similar operating costs. We've seen in the lackluster success of the 77L and A345 that ULH isn't what airlines are interested in flying, so I doubt Airbus is going to chase this tiny market with a A358 not least with a HGW variant.

An A333NEO with a bit of range gain through the new engines would be able to take on most A332 (not HGW) routes, which like you say is part of what the A358 is supposed to do. If airlines really need something smaller then the A350 family isn't really the best option from where I'm sitting (of course that's a sweeping statement and there is more to consider...)


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8650 posts, RR: 10
Reply 21, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 16510 times:

We've had this discussion before. For many airlines, the A359 is too big for all of their routes, and a A788/A359 split does not make good financial sense if the feels are too small. The A332 is still Airbus' best selling WB so it makes no sense there there would be no market for an A358.

User currently offlineglideslope From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1628 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 16349 times:

No.

No longer economically viable.



To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.” Sun Tzu
User currently offlinekmz From Germany, joined Feb 2008, 164 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 16180 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 21):
The A332 is still Airbus' best selling WB so it makes no sense there there would be no market for an A358.

i would say 'was best selling' until the A333 became very popular...


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2805 posts, RR: 59
Reply 24, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 16111 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
Airbus has been positioning the A350-800 as an A330-200(HGW) replacement, carrying 30 more passengers / 5 tons more payload (in OEM spec) 1400nm farther while burning significantly less fuel per seat (23% less on a 4000nm mission). They believe that there is little to no market for the A330-200 once the A350-800 enters revenue service


This positioning is fine save for one thing, the A330-200 has a 17 hours reserves flight capacity due to having the 340-300 wing/tankage (139k l), the A330 has only a 11 hours incl. reserves duration (98k l) with the -200 having higher MTOW (they now are the same MTOW at 238t), i.e. the -200 was a well needed long-range complement to the midrange -300.

The A350-800 and 900 has the same tankage at 138k l (110t) and therefore both have 19 vs 18 hours incl. reserves max fuel duration, further the -900 has 9t more MTOW and only 3t more OEW (135t vs 132t), i.e. with the same fuelage it can carry 6t more. The -800 needs more MTOW and/or tankage to find it's nice vs the -900 however how many flights needs more the 18 hours flight range?

At the design range of 8500nm the -800 uses 101 of 111t fuel capacity, i.e. it can go almost 2 more hours before at 5,1t per hour before being fuel limited. The -900 uses 103t of the 111t available for 8100nm, at 5,5t per hour fuel burn it would have 1,4 hours more before being fuel limited. The difference is a bit small for the -800 to find a healty life, expect changes in MTOW (up to the MLG-wing limit of 268t) or slow death.

[Edited 2011-08-01 06:19:45]


Non French in France
25 Carls : IMO you can't take the A32XNEO example and apply it to the A330. The way I see this is that the A32X was competing against the 737 which is a 40+ yea
26 flyAUA : The original post doesn't link to any article. There is also no mention of anything as such.The numbers I provided are from 30th June, subtracting th
27 Post contains images qf002 : So why not do a B788/B789/potential B78X split instead? There are not that many airlines that I can think of where this is an issue. The ones that ne
28 PanAm_DC10 : Yes, the model still has the orders. To be clear, read my posts, nowhere have I stated that Airbus will not continue to offer the model. I did note o
29 Post contains images frigatebird : One thing is certain: Airbus won't let customers convert from the -800 to the -900 for free. Or else they have some explaining to do to the airlines t
30 EddieDude : I am no expert but I think Airbus will launch the -800 at some point. SU, for example, probably doesn't want to switch from the -800 to the -900... t
31 qf002 : Why not? If it's cheaper to give an airline a couple of free upgrades than to go through the entire certification process etc that they would. It com
32 BoeingVista : Personally I'd go with the Air Asia X idea and do a re-engining to eat the 787-10's lunch at probably $10-20m less per bird. I'd then upgauge the A35
33 seabosdca : I'm a bit skeptical. I think the A333neo would end up with the range of the 787-10 but the capacity and economics of the 787-9 (except a bit heavier)
34 BoeingVista : Pretty sure that the 787-10 as proposed will have the same capacity as the A330
35 Stitch : What really will sink the A350-800 is if the trip costs are close to those of the A350-900. We've seen this with the A320-200 and 737-800, where the m
36 motorhussy : Looks to me like there's room in the market for a true 763/764/A332 replacement. The 788 and A358 in many cases are too large.
37 RubberJungle : Just to stir the pot a little more, I hear one of the other -800 customers - and not one of the tiddlers - is preparing to switch.
38 Stitch : The 787-8 is quite close to being an A330-200 replacement. It's only about 2.5 meters shorter in terms of passenger cabin length, but makes up for th
39 ferpe : There is quite a fuel burn advantage, 4900 kg an hour vs 5800, that's some 18% better for the 788.
40 328JET : I could assume that Airbus will do a neo-program of the A332/333 and A332F which includes a bit more than the A32xneo program. 1. A new engine for sur
41 seabosdca : I don't think so, because both 787 variants would have a pronounced weight advantage over their A330neo counterparts. The A320/737NG are much closer
42 Post contains links and images keesje : After delaying the A358 for 2 yrs recently, customers are moving to the -900 and Airbus is supporting this move. Not weakening the business case for a
43 Stitch : How "low risk", though? Rolls-Royce would have to develop a new engine, which will take many, many years. And they are already the engine OEM of choi
44 qfa787380 : Honestly, if all had have gone as planned with the 788, would the 330 have enjoyed as much sales success?
45 lightsaber : That sounds wise. Costs might not be an issue, but it is still wasted money. It would be cheaper to give customers free upgrades to the A359. The oth
46 qfa787380 : Would Airbus consider doing that for the -900 pax version? Do they dump the -800 and upgrade subsequent models with added weight and higher thrust en
47 Stitch : It should be noted that the main reason the A350-800 is being delayed by two years is none of the current customers (including launch customer QR) wa
48 eaa3 : Are there any numbers available to compare the A358 and the B789 in terms of efficiency. The 789 looks to be the direct competitor. Are we sure that t
49 trex8 : Per JP Fleets about the only A358 customer who had deliveries scheduled which would be impacted by the delay are QR. .
50 Stitch : QR's first scheduled delivery has evidently always been 2016, so as no other A350-800 customer wanted to "jump the queue" and move up, Airbus effecti
51 Post contains images scbriml : Maybe not if it's the airline's choice, but if it's Airbus's? Honestly, what's the point in asking the question? It didn't and it has.
52 Post contains images astuteman : According to Widebodyphotog's data, the 787-8's cabin is fractionally smaller.. There is. The A340NG was getting caned by the 777, as well as the A33
53 Post contains images frigatebird : No, it will be bigger than an A330. At 9 abreast will even have more capacity than the A350-900. Payload/range capabilities would be nowhere near tho
54 Post contains images keesje : Adjusting fan size, within reasonable margins is not a huge issue. It was done on many engines, CFM56, CF6, GE90, RR Trents. I think there's room. Ol
55 Post contains images EPA001 : Me too. It would have sold even more copies then the A330 has over the last 5 years. But the developments at that time "forced" Airbus to take anothe
56 Post contains links mdword1959 : In his most recent newsletter Richard Aboulafia suggested an A330NEO as a definite possiblility: http://richardaboulafia.com/shownote.asp?id=342 IMO,
57 airbazar : Tough decision for Airbus. There are a lot of A332's in the market that will need to be replaced at some point. If the A359 is the only option from A
58 Baroque : An A330NEO is probably not as "simple" as sticking a new engine on, it probably needs new wings, the A330 wings are a bit "slow" especially for long
59 Post contains links and images keesje : I think the A330/A340 wing can be refined / optimized. The A350 wing seems to big for the A350-800 and the A330 hasn't exactly small wing either.
60 Post contains images EPA001 : I think so too. Airbus has always selected the larger wing, but a wing can also be too large for a plane. Especially if the numbers of passengers and
61 seabosdca : Recently... perhaps in response to their earlier mistakes. Both the A300 and A320 have run into limitations because of relatively small wing size. Th
62 Post contains images EPA001 : Since the late eighties when the A330/A340 developments started. That is not really recently. . I am not so sure about the fact that the market does
63 Post contains images Stitch : Smaller than the A350-800, yes, but I was referring to the A330-200. My data from WBP shows: A330-200: 213.3m2 B787-8: 223.3m2 A350-800: 243.5m2 I ad
64 Post contains images imiakhtar : I don't think anyone would deny the A330 has received a small boost in sales due to the 787's woes. However, I think you're trying to over-state the
65 mdword1959 : Isn't SQ actually leasing its A330s from Airbus which in turn has been downstreaming the leases elsewhere as the aircraft have been delivered?
66 Post contains images astuteman : Mmmm The one I have saved shows:- A330-200 - 231.3m2 787-8 - 223.5m2 Rgds
67 qf002 : But that wing had to fit into airports and gates so there was hardly any option for them to adopt a larger wing for the A320 family. The A321 was nev
68 Stitch : So it is. Still, I think the 787-8 would make a fine A330-200 replacement as the two rows of Economy Class you sacrifice are made up by being able to
69 packsonflight : It is possibly a smart move for Airbus to drop the -800 and in stead attack the market from below so to speak with the 330RE, and in stead of beefing
70 ferpe : The A330 wing is large as it had to do with the A340 wing which was designed to carry the 275t of the A340-300. This was the time (pre-launch 1987) w
71 flipdewaf : Yeah but it didnt, he plan was far too audacious. Its like saying what if the A340 had gone to plan. I don't think the A358 will be dropped, if it is
72 MoltenRock : To reengine the A320 family cost $1.5 billion from estimates. If that same cost would hold true on an A330 reengine, that's a whole 'lotta money that
73 Post contains images lightsaber : At some point it is worth paying the airlines to upgrade. Perhaps as much as 1/3rd the cost of developing the A358 sub-variant (note: only the costs
74 Post contains images astuteman : Swings and roundabouts.... not just your daydream. It is Airbus's stated plan. As with the 777, an increasing number of airlines, including mainstrea
75 Post contains images BMI727 : At this point, I think Airbus is best served by dropping the -800 as currently constituted and sending that to the back of the line. It's too late fo
76 Post contains images Stitch : I was almost going to call you out on the A330/A340 cross section being an advantage at 9-abreast, but then I realized you were probably being to the
77 474218 : A very smart man once told me; if they take the time to deny it you know its true! I would say the -800 is toast!
78 Post contains links keesje : I never mentioned the A350-800 but Yes, Thai confirmed it too. No magic for the smaller wing in this respect. http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/...
79 Post contains images MoltenRock : I refuse to fly a 777 with 10 abreast in economy, period and I won't fly in an A330/A340 with 9 abreast. I pay an extra $100 to $120 every 2 weeks to
80 Post contains images lightsaber : I missed that my friend. Oops! Cool too. I'm aware of only a few... I'd be curious to know how many. However with the A359/A350-10, I suspect the eco
81 seabosdca : Who has done this except Air Asia X and charter operators? I'm not aware of any other "mainstream" carriers doing it...
82 PavlovsDog : I can imagine HA would take a long look at the 320/321 NEO as compensation for not receiving the 358. The NEO would give them very low CASM aircraft
83 qfa787380 : Yes, I think HA could focus on a Neo/332 fleet and bypass the 358 without too many concerns. They do need NB capability to the US West Coast IMO.
84 qf002 : Because it brings a better return and makes the company more money in the long run. Um, not they aren't.
85 HAL : I think you guys don't understand what HA is all about. We set ourselves apart from the competition because we don't use narrowbodies. The CASM on a
86 Stitch : I am supremely confident in my believe that an A350-800 - especially a properly optimized A350-800 - will make Airbus more money than a warmed-over A
87 qfa787380 : But wuill there ever be a "properly optimised" 358? Not even with 320Neos/737REs that will be 15% more fuel efficient and will allow you higher frequ
88 Stitch : Even if there is not, when it's the only offering from Airbus in that category, they'll sell some by default, if nothing else. And again, even Airbus
89 HAL : The problem with those planes is that they're not optimized for longer-haul & ETOPS flying. On the 6-hour legs to Hawaii from the west coast, the
90 qfa787380 : So, what will be the predominant type for HA operating to the West Coast when the 763s are retired? Both 332 and 358 seem pretty big for that role an
91 frigatebird : Thank you HAL, for your insights. But suppose Airbus does offer a free upgrade, something like: we can't offer any fix delivery dates on the -800, bu
92 Post contains links keesje : They have feasible options; - Live extension for the A330 family (RFP to GE, PW and RR). (reply 42) - Push up payload capability of the A321NEO. http
93 flipdewaf : Yeah, but he's a tit! He just seems to agree with whatever is flavour of the month. I don't think that an NEO will do HNL-Europe non-stop. I wouldn't
94 HAL : I don't think the 763's will be retired for a long time - a decade at least. There will be other options, and the world economy may be quite differen
95 BMI727 : No, and most of them are pretty young. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see Hawaiian flying 787s at some point.
96 328JET : Are the empty weights really so much different? A332: 119,600 kg (264,000 lb) B788: 110,000 kg (242,000 lb) Assuming that Airbus will do some weight
97 seabosdca : The 787 weight will also drop further over time. A 9% difference (especially considering that even a revised A330 wing will also be less efficient th
98 Stitch : We could also see a reversal of the current status quo where Airbus and Boeing swap markets - Boeing takes over the 200-300 seat market (now dominated
99 Post contains links astuteman : The last published document I saw from Boeing had the spec OEW for the 787-8 as 114.7 tonnes, not 110 tonnes. The latest ACAP http://www.boeing.com/c
100 Post contains images lightsaber : Hence why I doubt the A330NEO will happen. The A330s will have a good life on the secondary market, but once A350 and 787 production hits full stride
101 Stitch : Per SUH back in 2007, the 787-9 design was 6.3 tons over spec weight, however I am hearing Boeing has eliminated most, if not all, of that. So as the
102 Post contains images ferpe : This is the spec OEW for the A332, that it is very real is shown by the fact that AF447 (a real Airline equipped 332) had an OEW of 120100kg (it is i
103 qf002 : What if the extra cargo capacity meant that this extra cost was met, maybe even making each flight more profitable than if it was operated with an A3
104 qfa787380 : I disagree and think the 358 is probably too big for HA and the 359 certainly will be too large for them. The 788/332 seems more optimum sized for th
105 Stitch : Was HA one of the original A350 customers, who converted when the A350XWB launched? I know QR and US were.
106 Post contains links mdword1959 : No, the MOU for the A330s & A350s wasn't announced until November 2007. http://www.airbus.com/newsevents/new...h=d25362fa7649be94cd890cb78ca3fb2f
107 keesje : Wasn't HA planning some real long flights?
108 airbazar : I'm not convinced that on Hawaii-Mainland routes, frequency is all that important. It's a 6 hour flight from anywhere on the West Coast to Hawaii. Ju
109 qf002 : They want the A358 for its power and range far more than for its size. If they want to start some serious flights to Europe then they need a plane th
110 airbazar : I don't believe Europe was ever in the cards. There's just no market for it. More Asian destinations and Australia, Yes.
111 Post contains links Scipio : I wouldn't say so. Europeans don't travel to Hawaii in droves because they don't want to, but because it is very hard to get there from Europe. It ta
112 XT6Wagon : Also many closer islands in comparable warm climate. Several of the large EU nations can even pick ex-colonies to minimize the troubles with language
113 airbazar : I have no doubt that a non-stop flight would increase demand. But even if demand increased by 100% it would still not be enough to justify the route.
114 Post contains images qf002 : Because the charter airlines don't have the planes to do it, and because it's a more premium market than flying to FCO, one that doesn't want to sit
115 Post contains links keesje : In 2017, we’ll continue to expand our fleet by adding six new A350XWB-800 (Extra Wide Body) aircraft from Airbus, with options to purchase an additi
116 AirbusA6 : I'd certainly be up for a direct flight to Hawaii from London! It's such a drag to get there currently, when you can get direct flights to 'rival' exo
117 InsideMan : exactly.... I have it on good authority, that the material and production cost is significantly higher (not the mention the sunk cost) and 2t is all
118 frigatebird : I've heard a lot went into additional lightning protection. But CFRP technologies are steadily improving, and Boeing intended to use the latest CFRP'
119 InsideMan : yes, that's what I meant. For a 777NG I agree the best B can do is a CFRP wing...
120 qf002 : Meant MCO sorry! Nice link - thanks for sharing!
121 airbazar : Yes they do. Charters make refueling stops ALL the time. How do you think a 757 makes it form Europe to MCO? Or and 310 from Europe to OAK? It happen
122 airbazar : Last time I checked, Hawaii sees about 115,000 European arrivals per year, half of which originate in the UK. That just about rules out any route oth
123 keesje : Airbazar, reply 115 shows HAL wants to be able to do Europe non stop. The A350 makes that possible, the 767 and A330-200 not.
124 Post contains links airbazar : That means nothing. The paragraph in Hawaiian's web site is a generic marketing statement similar to the one made here: http://blog.flightstory.net/4
125 qf002 : Yes, but 2 stops to get somewhere on a narrowbody (or a 2-4-2 767 or a 3-3-3 A330) is getting excessive and cannot be pulled off. Part of the point t
126 Post contains images airbazar : We'll have to agree to disagree I'll be happy to be proven wrong when those A358's start arriving. I'll just comment on a couple of things... I'm not
127 Post contains images qf002 : Happy to!! Only 5-6 years until we find out for sure
128 HAL : Yes, he has. I don't remember exactly where, but in several newspaper articles when the 358 order was announced, he quite specifically said that Euro
129 Post contains images airbazar : Ahahahah, indeed, if the A358 is even built Actually I just thought of one technical reason why there may not be any charter service between Europe a
130 justloveplanes : Boeing was fairly clear from the outset that CFRP was chosen not so much for weight advantages, which they didn't expect to be great, but for other c
131 Post contains links and images keesje : Internet is my friend "And in seven years they'll be getting the brand new A350's that are capable of flying 8,300 miles non-stop which could reach E
132 Post contains images qf002 : We got a bit ot there...
133 InsideMan : This is not what I have in mind. I'm sure Boeing thought of all the above, but my memory has it, that weight was a primary objective. Have any source
134 Post contains images astuteman : Don't buy that for one second, to be honest. My memory says that Boeing were very clear at the outset (launch) that the 787-8 was going to be a 108t
135 Post contains links and images lightsaber : I wanted to disagree with you, instead I found no routes that contradict your statement. However, I would note that the four engine Airbus are used t
136 Post contains images art : Sorry, been away and have not read the ensuing 200 or so posts. Don't think that matters, though. An airframe delivering more range with 23% fuel sav
137 Post contains images ferpe : This is how the 358 stack up against it's main competitor, the 789: The 358 is limited by it's low MZFW, question is how important that is compared to
138 Post contains links and images frigatebird : Since this thread started, I've heard a number of people here either visited Hawaii or are planning to. A good friend of mine plans to go there to di
139 qf002 : Don't know much about the airline - could they be swayed torwards the A332 if it meant earlier delivery??
140 Post contains images parapente : I think (as stated many times) that it is clear that many of the "defections" are due to the dramatic change in timetable/priorities of the 350 progra
141 airbazar : Or leased/used. I wouldn't be surprised. There will be a lot of cheap second hand A332's on the market once the A350 starts getting delivered.
142 Post contains images lightsaber : Once the 787 and A350 hit the market, expect the values of 767s, 77A/77E, A343/A345/A346 to drop and drop fast. Even harsher, *if* the A321NEO is mad
143 ferpe : 345 and 77L replacment: The 358 has clearly much more potential for a direct ultra long and thin haul then the 789, plainly because by virtue of usin
144 JerseyFlyer : But not in SIA's all-business configuration for its ULH A345s.
145 Stitch : That's likely why they hiked the MZFW and MTOW up like they did. Airbus stated that the A350-800's EIS was shifted back to 2016 because no A350-800 c
146 ferpe : It would make a lot of sense for A to position a HGW variant of the 358 as the replacement for the 345. The 359R was proposed as such a model but give
147 Stitch : With the exception of SQ (and TG?), no current A340-500 operator seems to be using the planes for their range, but more for their lift with premium ca
148 Post contains images ferpe : Then we both agree, the 358 has: - powerful engines for hot and high at high MTOW (up to full 359 power) at the same fuel burn as the 789 - a high MT
149 qf002 : Not sure I'm keen on that logic... Airlines have heavy seats in all their planes, not just their ULH ones... Also, when EK took their A345s, they wer
150 Stitch : Yes, but I believe the A340-500 was the first EK frame to have the enclosed First Class suite and the Business Class suite now found on their A380-80
151 XT6Wagon : I think the A350-900R will be built, just not the current concept of a shrunk A350-1000. 10 years from EIS the A359 should be ripe for some engine up
152 qf002 : But they didn't buy the plane so that they could fly suites to ZRH. They bought them to fly to Australia and the United States, and since more effici
153 Post contains links frigatebird : Reconfirmed by HA CEO Mark Dunkerley, according to Flightglobal: "while not ruling out the -900, said he believes the -800 better fits the carrier's
154 Post contains links and images mdword1959 : Innteresting news news from Honolulu related to this thread: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ins-committed-to-the-a350-800.html Perhaps Mr. Dun
155 Post contains images frigatebird : Or A.net member HAL sent him an e-mail
156 frmrCapCadet : It would not at all be news that ten years after a new build comes out, it ends up being used in ways that were unexpected. And if those ways are impo
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...
What If Airbus Launched The A350 Non XWB In 2005 posted Mon Sep 8 2008 11:30:53 by OyKIE
Should Airbus Widen The A350 - Even Now? posted Sat Jun 7 2008 02:04:42 by Astuteman
Will Airbus's "XWB-A350" Be Delivered On Time? posted Fri Dec 8 2006 23:20:39 by OU812
Can Airbus Afford The A350? posted Mon Dec 4 2006 22:58:28 by OU812
Will Airbus Offer The ACJ2 And ACJ3 A320/21LR? posted Mon Dec 4 2006 12:08:31 by OyKIE
Why Did Airbus Make The A350 Wider? posted Sat Jul 15 2006 02:22:34 by 787KQ
WSJ: Airbus Redesigns The A350 - Mr. U-H's C-note posted Fri Jul 14 2006 11:58:55 by Leelaw
Will Airbus Do A Freighter A350? posted Fri May 26 2006 20:20:16 by Keta
Will Airbus Reach 200 A350 Commitments This Week? posted Sun Dec 25 2005 05:49:07 by AC787
Can Airbus Send The A350 Back To Redesign? posted Thu Dec 15 2005 08:09:41 by MrComet