Flyingbronco05 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3841 posts, RR: 2 Posted (13 years 1 day ago) and read 2854 times:
KLM says will not buy A380 superjumbo jet
By Chris Stetkiewicz
"SEATTLE, May 29 (Reuters) - KLM Royal Dutch Airlines NV (Amsterdam:KLM.AS - News; NYSE:KLM - News) said on Wednesday it would not order Airbus SAS' massive 555-seat A380 airliner, preferring jets half that size and possibly a faster new jet proposed by Boeing Co. (NYSE:BA - News)."
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 17
Reply 5, posted (13 years 19 hours ago) and read 2614 times:
No surprise to me at all they're looking at the SC. Would make an ideal aircraft for long low-density routes, could even make some destinations that are not economical with a 747 worth flying (like Australia, which was dropped a few years ago when passenger demand dropped to below economic levels).
A faster smaller aircraft would mean less time on the route. Not only does that make the route cheaper to operate but you have an edge over others using slower aircraft especially in the very lucrative market of business travel.
Joni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (13 years 18 hours ago) and read 2565 times:
The KLM statement is really interesting, since they're basically saying that they agree with and support Boeing on everything:
-388 is too big for them and many other airlines, too.
-They prefer to buy 777s even though they cost more than 343. The reasons are e.g. larger capacity, their relationship with Boeing and the _climb rates_.
-They are interested, _to buy_, the Sonic Cruiser
-Their passengers prefer frequencies to cheaper fares.
They apparently really do have an excellent relationship.
Tom_eddf From Germany, joined Apr 2000, 453 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (13 years 18 hours ago) and read 2549 times:
Joni, could you please provide us with a source for your statement that KLM perfers the 777 over the A340 because of the "_climb rates_"?
*Some* passengers prefer frequencies to cheaper fares. But others, especially in those challenging times, prefer cheaper fares, even business customers do that (e.g. my employer, a leading american computer manufacturer, didn't allow us to fly business class anymore!). And just look at the success of low cost airlines as an indicator.
The sonic cruiser is therefore also a niche aircraft and not a 767 replacement IMHO. I would see it on some routes, e.g. on second daily's from Europe to NYC or LAX, but not in a widespread use...
Joni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 16 hours ago) and read 2492 times:
The article referenced in the first post in this thread mentions that KLM prefers the 777's climb rate. I mentioned it, since it's been bandied on this forum many times with only a vague reference to singapore airlines wanting a faster climb than the 343 can offer.
Similarly, in the article KLM says that "passengers prefer frequencies". I mentioned all these points, since KLM (an important airline) was in fact repeating what the Boeing-faithful have been saying on this forum many times, which I found to be significant.
PH-BFA From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 562 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (13 years 14 hours ago) and read 2397 times:
Originally KLM is one of the most loyal Douglas(and McDonnelDouglas) customer. They operated DC 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 and MD-11. It is quite obvious Boeing has taken that place. I think the Netherlands is not really an Airbus-country. As far as I know it is the only country, which has no passenger-Airbus airplanes, in Europe.
DTW/ORD Fan! From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 288 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (13 years 13 hours ago) and read 2343 times:
Umm, if I remember correctly, didn't KLM just order 777's AND A330's?????? That would make it their first ever Airbus the operate. This could be interesting. I hope they go for more 744's, and 744ER's.
A388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 10258 posts, RR: 15
Reply 14, posted (13 years 13 hours ago) and read 2328 times:
I agree with PH-BFA,
KLM is a very loyal Boeing customer, that's why it surprised me that have shown interest in the A330-200 all of a sudden. I can imagine that they are looking at the A330-200 as their 767-300ER replacement, because there still is no Next Generation 767 and this is not expected to happen any time soon as Boeing is pushing ahead with their Sonic Cruiser. I don't see how some people see the Sonic Cruiser as a 767 replacement aircraft as this aircraft is totally different in my opinion. I also don't understand why KLM is not interested in the A340-500. KLM says they were not interested in the A340-300 because of the aircraft's low climb performance, but the A340-500 is slightly bigger than the A340-300, has a much higher range and has more powerfull engines (isn't the A340-500 believed to be over-powered?).
The A340-500 would suit KLM's network because of its range and it can be used on the mentioned long-haul, low-density destinations such as Australia and some North and South American destinations as well. Why is KLM still not interested in the A340-500? It would fit perfectly if KLM also ordered the A330-200 to replace their 767 fleet and some A340-500's to replace the (remaining) MD11/747-300 fleet.
A388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 10258 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (13 years 13 hours ago) and read 2301 times:
That's another unclear thing,
At first KLM announces they will order/lease 777/A330's, than they lease more 777's and the A330-200 order is in doubt. Others believe the A330-200 order/lease is only a way of trying to get Boeing to offer a better deal to KLM. So, what's it going to be? Has the A330-200 order been confirmed by both KLM/Airbus? I haven't seen it on Airbus' website.
Greg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (13 years 11 hours ago) and read 2209 times:
They mentioned that their preference of the 777 was for economics...not performance. They also mentioned the 777's cost more.
Airlines do not purchase aircraft based on climb performance unless is impacts their economics. While the 340 may not be a rocket ship on climb, it satisfies perfectly the mission for which it was designed. They are both excellently designed and manufactued aircraft.
Areopagus From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1376 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (13 years 11 hours ago) and read 2185 times:
When management commits to a big deal, they feel a need to justify their decision, which leads to echoing the vendor's advertising. I have no doubt that KLM will say nice things about Airbus when they finalize the 330 deal.
RogueTrader From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (13 years 9 hours ago) and read 2088 times:
I think KLM is an outstanding airline without the normal political entaglements that have bothered BA, AF, and LH.
The comment of the KL executive that the A380 will work on one or possibly two North Atlantic routes, and a few 'thick' Pacific routes is exactly right.
There are virtually no 747s left crossing the N. Atlantic right now, and it has the lowest cost per seat mile for the airlines that use it. So, the airlines RIGHT NOW don't use a larger cheaper airplane when they could: and why? Because passengers want (in the words of KLM) increased frequency and more point to point service where possible. They don't want to connect to one big plane in NY, fly to London, and then connect again, when they could fly nonstop from their home city to Europe, reducing the connections by at least one.
Only on (North Atlantic) routes where the A380 can match a smaller planes frequency will it work well: like KL says, there are one or maybe two. I'd say JFK-LHR it could work, leaving JFK-CDG as a possible second.
KLM is exactly right and as the only major European carrier without political ties to Airbus, I think their evaluation is pivotal.
PW100 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2002, 2799 posts, RR: 17
Reply 22, posted (13 years 8 hours ago) and read 2050 times:
I don't really see why KLM would need 330s for themselves... I do see quite some routes were a 330 would be preferred over a 777. But couldn't they just use NW 330 for this, like they now use NW D10s on quite some routes out of AMS?
BTW which version of the 330 did NW order and what engine type?
It would give them tremendous savings if KLM would concentrate on 744 and 777 for the long haul services. Just two longhaul types! Although for the time being [at least until 2006/2007] they will keep flying the 767 and MD11.
What is the range of the 777ER? Could it do AMS-JKT, AMS-EZE non stop year round?
BTW The article did reveal an interesting point: "KLM will take eight 300-seat Boeing 777-200ERs (extended range), including four on leases, plus two more in a sale and lease-back deal".
So this confirms what I have stated before: KLM has ordered only 10 777s so far: 8 to replace the 747-300 Combi and 2 to replace the two oldest MD11s. The leases on the 12 767s have been extended by two years. The first 767 lease will now expire in 2005.
It looks like KLM is keeping its options open on how to replace the rest of their longhaul fleet, maybe they are waiting for hard performance guarantees from Boeing on the SC, and gave them a couple of years to come up with it, prior to KLMs decision on how to replace the rest of the longhaul fleet.
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
Nightcruiser From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (13 years 8 hours ago) and read 2020 times:
KLM has not ordered the A330 DTW/ORDfan. They have only ordered 777's to replace the 747-300 and MD-11. I believe that KLM will probably keep the 767 for a long while without replacing it. Their 767's are young and still have a lot of years on them.
Racko From Germany, joined Nov 2001, 4887 posts, RR: 19
Reply 24, posted (13 years 8 hours ago) and read 2012 times:
"I think KLM is an outstanding airline without the normal political entaglements that have bothered BA, AF, and LH."
"There are virtually no 747s left crossing the N. Atlantic right now"
AF, BA and LH use 747s on north atlantic routes, and they have no problems to fill them. And at least LH & AF were highly proftable before 11.9. and afaik they both still operating profitable. (LH had an operational profit of 20Mio € in 2001)
LH is denationalized since the early 90s, and they relationship with the government isn't really the best (ask the LH CEO about FRA-TXL fares or ask him about a little airport called Hahn).
You simply can't compare KLM with LH, their home market is much smaller. The Netherlands have 15 Million Inhabitants while Germany has 82 Millions and is the 3rd biggest economy in the world...of course this huge population and the strong economy generate much more passengers for an airline. So it's absolutely possible that KLM has problems filling an A380 while LH can fill them easily.
Please think about this before damning Europe, I know you're smart and open-minded enough to understand
: Racko, I have to respectfully disagree with you. A larger market like Germany would indicate more market fragmentation, like the USA. The places where
: Didn't JAL at one time mentioned that they would never order the A380? Never say never...
: Roguetrader, "Racko, I have to respectfully disagree with you. A larger market like Germany would indicate more market fragmentation, like the USA. Th
: Spaceman, Talking about die hard Boeing fans, talk about Continental and Delta. All Boeing fleet.. Heck, CO's CEO used to be a Boeing exec..
: The reason why LH will buy the A380-800 is simple: the demand for such a big plane is already there. After all, why do you think LH flights to JFK, LA
: The only way I could see the A380 necessary on a route for KLM is if they took over the Bombay- DTW route with the stop in AMS that Northwest currentl
: Smaller twins have captured market share from rhe 747 over the Atlantic over the past 20 years, but this doesn't preclude the possibility that 380 wo
: The A380 would not fit into KLM's operations. None of the routes operated out of AMS are big enough for this plane, unless you reduce the frequency on
: PH-BFA, "...I think the Netherlands is not really an Airbus-country. As far as I know it is the only country, which has no passenger-Airbus airplanes,
: Konstantinos, Fokker didn't even manage to sell their F100s to KLM (yes KLM boughta few but couldn't get rid of them fast enough allthough KLM is cure
: Racko, actually The Netherlands have already more then 16 million inhabitants but still not many compared to our big neighbour Germany...
: Sorry, didn't know the correct figure but I also made a mistake with the German figure in my first post, I wrote 82 Mio instead of of 83 Mio
37 BWIA 772
: With regard to the 767s and A330. The 767 needs the NG phase the 400 is trying to attemp it but is failing. What needs to be done is for boeing to ha