Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Aspire: Will The 330S Become 330neo?  
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2805 posts, RR: 59
Posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 8230 times:

Aspire aviation has a majority well written speculation into a possible re-engine decision by A come second half of 2012:

http://www.aspireaviation.com/2012/0...engined-a330-along-with-sharklets/

The only thing I wonder about is their claim that the 787-9 would have a 247t MTOW and the 787-10 at 251t, IMO the 787-9 is already announced as 251t, will that change? If so perhaps as GE can't grow the GEnx as easily for 2014 but I thought they should be OK   .


Non French in France
17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 1, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 8162 times:

I see the article indicates a 'typical' pax load of 335 in 2-class config. Wow ! AC's 330-300s are fitted for about 280 in 2-class. That is a big difference.


Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineStickShaker From Australia, joined Sep 2004, 759 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 7944 times:

This is a good article by Aspire.

Interesting points regarding a re-engined A333 include:

1. 7000nm range - (250nm more than the 787-10) which may require extra fuel tankage.
2. Possible EIS of 2016/17 will fill the gap if delays occur in 358 EIS.
3. Potential to drop the 358 program not mentioned.
4. Both GE and RR engines discussed - RR more complex.
5. New engines will add weight.
6. 9 to 10% improvement in SFC over current generation 330's
7. Approx 10% SFC delta with 787-10 (advantage 787-10)
8. EIS 2 to 3 years ahead of 787-10 (Aspire figures)
9. Widebody market likely to increase - particularly regional market in Asia.
10. Availability of 787-10 may be production constrained.
11. Low risk program - leverages existing 330 client base and early 350 Mk 1 R and D.
12. 330neo will have pricing advantage over 787-10.

These moves by Airbus are a clear response to the now (finally) emerging threat of the 787-10. The 330 program is to Airbus what the 77W is to Boeing - a cash cow that is worth defending.
I suggest that pricing advantage of the 330neo will be more powerful than Aspire suggest as the current line would be fully amortized - something the 787 program wont be for many years. I'm also curious if the 10% SFC delta between the two aircraft is constant across different stage lengths or is reduced for sub 4000nm hops. With powerful pricing advantage along with all those commonality issues such as spares and training a SFC delta of less then 10% is unlikely to tip the scales for existing 330 operators.


Regards,
StickShaker




.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31418 posts, RR: 85
Reply 3, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 7933 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I just don't see a NEO option being available for the A330 family, unless it comes from Pratt in the form of a GTF.

Rolls-Royce has no real incentive to offer one. The Trent 700 is already the engine of choice on the A330 and they are the engine of requirement on the A350. They are also an engine option on the 787.

General Electric has already completed a bleed-air version of the GEnx for the 747-8 and had plans to develop one for the A350 Mk. I, but they had demanded two years of exclusivity on the airframe. As such, I could see them demanding to be the only new engine option on the A330. And in such a scenario, would they be very successful? How many Trent 700 operators placing top-up orders would go with a GEnx?


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 47
Reply 4, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 7533 times:

IMO, only the A332NEO makes sense as it is right at the operating efficiency dividing line of 240-250 seats(3 class marketing) between 8-abreast and 9-abreast platform. A333NEO(8-abreast) will be at a competitive disadvantage against B789(9-abreast) as it is too far from 240-250 seat dividing line.

In the event that an operator (like CX) plans on configuring B789 with 8-abreast Y, then A333NEO may be competitive on medium haul routes against B789 if A333NEO is offered at a significant discount to B789.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31418 posts, RR: 85
Reply 5, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks ago) and read 7227 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

At 8-abreast, the 4 meter longer fuselage of the 787-10 gives it a seating capacity advantage over the A330-300neo. In fact, since the 787-10 cabin is very close to the same length as the A340-500, we can actually plug in Airbus' numbers for the A340-500 for the 787-10 and therefore eliminate the cabin configuration variables between Airbus and Boeing. Using Airbus' numbers for two class seating, that would be 359 seats for the 787-10 and 335 seats for the A330-300neo. An 8-abreast 787-10 would hold 7% more people and would also offer 38% more cargo volume, so CASM would be lower and cargo revenues would be higher.

Using Boeing's current list prices, a 787-9 is 17.5% more expensive than a 787-8. So if we assume a 787-10 is 18% more than a 787-9, that would put list at $269 million. An A330-300 is $231 million and figure the new engines will be $14 million, bringing the total list to $245 million. So the A330-300neo would be almost $25 million cheaper (at list). However, the 787-10 is a straight stretch of the 787-9 whereas the 787-9 is more than just a stretch of the 787-8) so if Boeing went with, say, a 10% premium, that would bring the 787-10's list to $256 million. The A330-300neo would save you $11 million up-front, but I expect the 787-10's lower CASM and greater revenue opportunities from the extra seats and cargo volume would address that difference relatively quickly.


User currently offlinecosmofly From United States of America, joined May 2009, 649 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6932 times:

Boeing has new 787 and plans to NG 777. Airbus has new A350 and talks about NG 330. They are both putting new engines on their NBs. Are they trying to keep the universe balanced?  

IMHO both companies will have problems industrializing 2 new types so it only make sense to NG one to stay in the game in a reasonable manner.

The A330s have proven that the 6000nm market is huge and is only going to grow more rapidly. I think the 787-10 will be a huge threat that A cannot counter with any A350 variant. So the NG330 is not only created because of availability advantages, but also to give existing customers a competitive roadmap to leverage the infrastructures such as pilot pools, maintenance facilities and expertise.....


User currently offlineStickShaker From Australia, joined Sep 2004, 759 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 6010 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
The A330-300neo would save you $11 million up-front, but I expect the 787-10's lower CASM and greater revenue opportunities from the extra seats and cargo volume would address that difference relatively quickly.

I think the street prices will tell a different story as Airbus will have far more room to move in terms of discounting the 330neo price than Boeing will with the 787-10 at what will still be a relatively early stage of the 787 life cycle.
The 787-10 will inevitably have a performance edge over the 330 but there are many other factors at play. A 330neo would be the logical choice for existing 330 operators while the 787-10 would be the logical choice for 787 operators.

A real shot in the arm for any 330neo would be the cancellation of the 358 program.

Airbus are sending signals that they will defend the 330's market share just as Boeing will do so with the 777.


Regards,
StickShaker


User currently onlinerotating14 From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 730 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5071 times:

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the 789, not the 787-10, more in line with 330S??

User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31418 posts, RR: 85
Reply 9, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 4963 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting StickShaker (Reply 7):
I think the street prices will tell a different story as Airbus will have far more room to move in terms of discounting the 330neo price than Boeing will with the 787-10 at what will still be a relatively early stage of the 787 life cycle.

Airline fleet purchasing decisions are not made on pricing alone, otherwise the skies would be full of 767s instead of A330s, A340s instead of 777s and 747s instead of A380s.  
Quoting StickShaker (Reply 7):
The 787-10 will inevitably have a performance edge over the 330 but there are many other factors at play. A 330neo would be the logical choice for existing 330 operators while the 787-10 would be the logical choice for 787 operators.

A number of A330 operators ordered the 787 instead of the A350 Mk I...



Quoting StickShaker (Reply 7):
A real shot in the arm for any 330neo would be the cancellation of the 358 program.

If the market is rejecting the A350-800 in favor of the 787-9, then yes, Airbus would be effectively forced to bring back the A350 Mk. I to protect marketshare. That being said, the 777 did fine with just two sizes, so I imagine the A350 will be fine with only the -900 and -1000.



Quoting rotating14 (Reply 8):
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the 789, not the 787-10, more in line with 330S??

The 787-9 is a closer match to the A330-300 and some carriers have placed 787-9 orders that will likely be used to replace A330-300s. But the 787-10 will be able to perform all the missions an A330-300 can, as well, so I expect both will be pitched in RFPs.


User currently offlineStickShaker From Australia, joined Sep 2004, 759 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3687 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
Quoting StickShaker (Reply 7):
I think the street prices will tell a different story as Airbus will have far more room to move in terms of discounting the 330neo price than Boeing will with the 787-10 at what will still be a relatively early stage of the 787 life cycle.

Airline fleet purchasing decisions are not made on pricing alone, otherwise the skies would be full of 767s instead of A330s, A340s instead of 777s and 747s instead of A380s.

I'm not sure if 767/330, 340/777 are accurate analogies as there was clearly one superior airframe in each case. No-one bought the 346 in preference to the 77W because it was cheaper - the SFC delta was simply too much to ignore. The 787-10 and 330neo, however, are more closely matched. I don't disagree that there's more involved than just pricing but it could be significantly more than a subtle difference. There were many 320/737 sales contests that were won by the 320 due to pricing. The 787 itself gained many of its early sales (during the drug like rush) due to very keen pricing from Boeing (along with impressive specs). Boeing even went to the extent of changing their final assembly for the 787 in order to achieve Airbus like costs.

I've had quite a few arguments with accountants and CFO's that pricing isn't everything but I didn't win too many of them unless I had a mighty solid case.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
A number of A330 operators ordered the 787 instead of the A350 Mk I...

And a large number of operators later ordered 330's once the 787 delays became obvious - plenty of scope for replacement.


The 787-10 will undoubtedly do very well - it has better specs than any 330neo and is more future proof. However, I think there is plenty of room for both A and B in this market.



Regards,
StickShaker

[Edited 2012-03-05 22:48:39]

[Edited 2012-03-05 22:49:27]

User currently offlineRickNRoll From Afghanistan, joined Jan 2012, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3334 times:

If you can do it with the 777, why not the 330?

User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31418 posts, RR: 85
Reply 12, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2996 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting StickShaker (Reply 10):
I'm not sure if 767/330, 340/777 are accurate analogies as there was clearly one superior airframe in each case.

I believe the 787 to be a clearly superior airframe to the A330 - neo or otherwise.


Quoting StickShaker (Reply 10):
And a large number of operators later ordered 330's once the 787 delays became obvious - plenty of scope for replacement.

Yes, because it is the best available option available at the time.

Same reason airlines are buying 777-300ERs by the hundreds today, even though I believe that the A350-1000 is a clearly superior airframe in comparison.


User currently offlinefruitbat From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 552 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2638 times:

I think we have an answer:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...rbus-cool-on-a330neo-plans-369319/

So that's put that idea to bed.



Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel.
User currently offlineSchorschNG From Germany, joined Sep 2010, 517 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2349 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 12):
I believe the 787 to be a clearly superior airframe to the A330 - neo or otherwise.

A theoretical A330NEO would come close to the B787, but always come in behind. In widebody market the winner usually takes all, so being 5% worse at exactly similar payload-range performance means you get probably only a small fraction of the market.



From a structural standpoint, passengers are the worst possible payload. [Michael Chun-Yung Niu]
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20343 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2250 times:

Quoting SchorschNG (Reply 14):
A theoretical A330NEO would come close to the B787, but always come in behind. In widebody market the winner usually takes all, so being 5% worse at exactly similar payload-range performance means you get probably only a small fraction of the market.

True, but you also get to drive your competition's prices down.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31418 posts, RR: 85
Reply 16, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2245 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 15):
True, but you also get to drive your competition's prices down.

The list price of the 787 is lower than that of the A330 and I would expect Airbus to not set the list price of the A330neo below that of the A330.


User currently offlineRickNRoll From Afghanistan, joined Jan 2012, 899 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2003 times:

I think you will find that Airbus has a fair bit they can easily strip off the A330 margin to make it more competitive but stil make a healthy profit.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Aspire: Will The 330S Become 330neo?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will The A350XWB Main Gear Bogies Tilt Forward? posted Thu Sep 15 2011 18:03:18 by 747400sp
Will The PW1000G Trump The CFM Leap-X? posted Tue Aug 31 2010 07:53:28 by keesje
Will The 787 And A350 Make The A380 Look Out Dated posted Mon Feb 22 2010 20:48:48 by 747400sp
Will The 748 Use The "super" Suffix? posted Tue Feb 9 2010 15:01:32 by CatIII
What Approach Will The A380 Be Taking Into BHD? posted Sat Sep 5 2009 03:46:29 by Loughrey1
Will The B787 Be Flight Certified In 9 Months? posted Sat Feb 7 2009 15:04:12 by Keesje
Will The 787/350 Be The Only CF Airplanes posted Wed Sep 26 2007 18:21:57 by Revo1059
What Will The Next Cessna Piston Be? posted Sat Nov 5 2005 12:25:11 by KBFIspotter
Will The Terroist Attacks Effect Airline Security? posted Tue Sep 11 2001 19:10:21 by De727ups
When Will The A3XX Be Finished? posted Fri Nov 3 2000 15:18:13 by MD11man

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format