User avatar
keesje
Posts: 10322
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 7:43 am

I think Inevitable w'll see Boeing cut back on capacity and range of it's offering. The segment they identified seems to only to get strong support from Boeing executives.

Spacey 6 abreast with AKH capability seems hard to beat by any WB, and would be at least 20% more costly to operate if all recently developped aircraft specs mean anything.

Lean and mean stretches of the A321 and CS300 seems strong cases. After that Airbus will probably look at filling the segment inbeteeen the A321 family and the A350-900. Replacing the A330.

I think this increasing starts to look like a big NB, it always did IMO.. :psst:

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Eyad89
Posts: 277
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:47 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 7:49 am

dare100em wrote:
astuteman wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
I thought we all came to the agreement that Boeing's MOM would be a tight 8ab?

With the same cabin length that provides 88% the capacity if the 9ab 788. The longest MOM member would be shorter, so at most 85% capacity of the 788. Then the shorter length MOM's would probably be 65% and 75% capacity of the 788. That's clearly half way between a 737-10 and 787-8. So 8AB isn't too wide.

Saying the 797 is Boeings second attempt at killing the A330 is drawing a long bow. The 787 beats the A330 in nearly every way. Sure, a very low purchase price can bring the A330 up to par of the 787 on short flights but I consider that very niche.

Most of the A330neo orders would be because the 787 has a 5 year backlog of orders and they already operate A330ceo.

A short/medium range 8AB 797 is not an admission of failure of the long range 9AB 787. They cater for completely different markets. The 787 is a sales success and will sell 2000+ frames easily.

The 797 could easily sell 2000 frames by simply taking the top 5-10% of the narrowbody market. There are so many short thick routes.


I suspect most readers think MOM is going to be a tight 7ab with limited to nil cargo space - because Boeing have told us that is what they think it is going to be.

I really struggle to understand why, if a tight 8ab was the answer to a market that is so big, we haven't already got a 767NEO.
The market seems to suggest that there is no space for such a plane.
The market preferred the A330 over the 767 - no reason to suggest that NEO's would be different.
The market also preferred the 787 over a 767NEO - the 787 started off at 767 size, but the airlines demanded that it got bigger.

I think the MOM gap has existed, and still exists for a good reason - there is a space where it is better and more convenient to either stretch the legs of a narrowbody, or abuse a widebody (a proper one). Either option allows airlines to plug the gap with mainstream volume products that have the economics and flexibility to do everything else the airline wants to do, without requiring another family.
Has this gap grown large enough to put a dedicated small widebody in?
I think the jury's still out on that.
I'm not saying it won't happen, but I don't think it's the slam-dunk some seem to think, and the recently announced delay looks like a behaviour that supports this.

Reality also suggests that despite "beating the A330 in nearly every way", the 787 has not killed off the A330, as large parts of a-net expected it to.
You already posit two reasons why the A330 will continue - availability and incumbency, although I don't think availability is as big an advantage as it once was. Price is a third.
The A330NEO is a very fine aeroplane, and however the 787 beats it, it does not beat it by enough to "kill it", not in the way the 77W did to the A340NG.
The A339 seems to have similar operating costs to the 787-9. The A338 seems to be a tad more expensive to operate than the 787-8, but in a niche which is either saturated or not required by the market any more

I don't think the 797 will kill the A330NEO either.
If as you say, the 787 caters for a different market, then by definition so does the A330 NEO.
And frankly, the gap, if any, between the 787 and A330NEO is small enough that anything that does "kill" the A330NEO will damage the 787 pretty badly too.
I don't see it.

Rgds


I'm not sure this is really the case. The facts ATM speak for themselves. The A330neo had a moderate start and since then not much. That may change or may not change - we'll know probably in about a year or two. Beside Delta - which got deep discounts when rumours are true - there are very few if any BlueChip Customer for the A330neo. With the 787 going to 14/month changes are not zero that the A330neo hasn’t that much future.

So "killing" may be a little exuberated - it just send the A330 on life support ;)



But A330 family as a whole (CEO+NEO) outsold 787 family in both 2015 and 2016. I am not trying to say "look A sold more than B", I am merely replying to you by saying that sales of A330NEO in the past two years was kinda hindered by Airbus trying aggressively to sell all A330CEO remaining slots, which they did very well.
 
Eyad89
Posts: 277
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:47 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 8:09 am

keesje wrote:

I think this increasing starts to look like a big NB, it always did IMO.. :psst:







Image

Is it okay to use this photo to try and guess the size of 797? I mean, it was at least made by Boeing
By comparing it against the sizes of 757, 767, and 787 in that photo, it does seem to me that 797 would be more of a 757 size plane. I was always personally puzzled as why a 225 pax wide-body is even debated. I mean, A310 didn't sell well back in the day even when most airlines were owned by governments and making profit wasn't as important as it is now.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 25789
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 10:30 am

Newbiepilot wrote:
I didn't say there would be two clean sheet programs. I am envisioning two models of a new airplane from Boeing. The shorter one with more range competes against the A321LR on medium haul (transatlantic) and the longer one with less range competes against the A330neo on short haul (regional flying within Asia).


Well, you did say Airbus have to compete with a small widebody aircraft. I disagree, and market intelligence suggest there will be no small widebody aircraft from Airbus.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 10322
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 11:25 am

Newbiepilot wrote:
I didn't say there would be two clean sheet programs. I am envisioning two models of a new airplane from Boeing. The shorter one with more range competes against the A321LR on medium haul (transatlantic) and the longer one with less range competes against the A330neo on short haul (regional flying within Asia).


Such an aircraft would be the best direction to go for Boeing IMO, benefiting from the large demand around 180-220 seats medium haul and offer a larger real efficient aircraft for flights up to 3-4 hours. It would also open the way to develop a real optimized NSA for the huge ~150 seats / 1000NM segment later on. Because more capability would be covered.

It's however not what Boeing promoted so far. It would be a change of insight / strategy.

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 2161
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 11:40 am

KarelXWB wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I didn't say there would be two clean sheet programs. I am envisioning two models of a new airplane from Boeing. The shorter one with more range competes against the A321LR on medium haul (transatlantic) and the longer one with less range competes against the A330neo on short haul (regional flying within Asia).


Well, you did say Airbus have to compete with a small widebody aircraft. I disagree, and market intelligence suggest there will be no small widebody aircraft from Airbus.


English can be annoying since compete with and compete against can mean the same thing. I see no small widebody from Airbus
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 281
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 1:00 pm

astuteman wrote:
I suspect most readers think MOM is going to be a tight 7ab with limited to nil cargo space - because Boeing have told us that is what they think it is going to be.

I really struggle to understand why, if a tight 8ab was the answer to a market that is so big, we haven't already got a 767NEO.

A 767NEO with its improved engine efficiency would have 7500nm and 7000nm range for the 762 and 763 lengths. That's no where near middle of market. Lowering the maximum takeoff weight and derating the engines does not gain any efficiency. The wing, wingbox and landing gear will still be sized to support that larger weight. The 767 also has too much belly cargo space its simply overweight in the order of 20-30%. So Boeing not going with a 767NEO does not prove there is not a large MOM market.

astuteman wrote:
The market seems to suggest that there is no space for such a plane.
The market preferred the A330 over the 767 - no reason to suggest that NEO's would be different.
The market also preferred the 787 over a 767NEO - the 787 started off at 767 size, but the airlines demanded that it got bigger.

The A330 won simply due to the 7AB vs 8AB issue. That 5% cabin area penalty for having an extra aisle for only one seat directly translates into a 5% CASM disadvantage. Similar technology, similar engines, the A330 won.

That is why the MOM will be 8AB. Any 7AB design can easily be trumped by a similar technology 8ab design.

It will be easy for the MOM to beat the A330NEO. The A330 with new engines is now pushing over 7500nm range. Designing a plane with 4000-5000nm range will result in an aircraft with a much lower structural weight per passenger. On a short 2000-3000nm flight that is a 20+% fuel burn advantage over the A330NEO. It was these short flights where the A330NEO could hold its own against the 787. The 797 will demolish the A330NEO on these short thick routes.

Airbus will definitely need a new light 8ab aircraft to replace the A330 when its sales stop. They can't just have the A322 and A350-900 selling big numbers with a massive empty gap in between totally owned by Boeing.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 281
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 1:13 pm

Eyad89 wrote:
Image

Is it okay to use this photo to try and guess the size of 797? I mean, it was at least made by Boeing
By comparing it against the sizes of 757, 767, and 787 in that photo, it does seem to me that 797 would be more of a 757 size plane. I was always personally puzzled as why a 225 pax wide-body is even debated. I mean, A310 didn't sell well back in the day even when most airlines were owned by governments and making profit wasn't as important as it is now.

If the aircraft has a reduced height compared to the width that Boeing image could be an 8AB aircraft. From the side it would appear to be similar to a narrowbody.

The A310 sold pretty good consider how small the market was back then. The A300, A310 and A330 were simply too similar. The A310 being the long range shrink of an A300. The A330 being the heavy long ranged model of the A300. Newer narrowbody aircraft started to eat away at the A310 and Airbus couldn't justify new fuel efficient engines for it.

The A310, A300 and 767 were once selling decent number in the 80's. The market size has since doubled. There's definitely space for a brand new light widebody.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1442
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 1:34 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
It will be easy for the MOM to beat the A330NEO. The A330 with new engines is now pushing over 7500nm range. Designing a plane with 4000-5000nm range will result in an aircraft with a much lower structural weight per passenger. On a short 2000-3000nm flight that is a 20+% fuel burn advantage over the A330NEO. It was these short flights where the A330NEO could hold its own against the 787.


My problem with this logic is the mass movement there was from ordering A332 to ordering A333 when MTOW increases allowed the range (of both) to rise.

Did it cross a range threshold of sorts with airlines? Its not as if the CASM of A333 wasn't always much better than A332.


Airlines say lots of things when their money isn't on the line. When they have to put their money where their mouth is...
 
parapente
Posts: 1981
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 1:59 pm

Just got off my first 320 NEO-EasyJet.About a week old they said.Looks fabulous with those engines and quiet too.But...
It had the new denser configuration (186 seats I think).Pitch is supposed to have remained at 29".Not for me to argue but it was a noticeably tight 29"!At 5'10 I was ok.Tray abit close.But at 6' I think knees would be rubbing.However only a 2.5 hour flight so no real issues (but do any others find these slimline seats hard on the bottom or is it just me).But the big But..

Firstly I accept he loading was odd with most entering by the rear door.And yes he flight was full.But OMG was the boarding slooooow.was joking with one of the attendants that they must be going fo a record and she laughed and agreed.I was by no means last on but here was zero overhead luggage space left -along the whole aircraft.I had a soft bag so put it under my chair -with my jacket.De boarding was slow but they used fore and aft so ok.But would have been terrible if just the front exit as is normal.
Why am I wittering on about this?

Well this was 186 pax.Their new A321NEO will be 240 pax I am told.Boy is that gonna be sloooow.
The 'simple'. 'Plus' version one assumes will be a straight small stretch to 250 pax as they stared to offer about 15 odd years ago.That would clearly cut off Boeing MOM at the shorter ranges (80% of LCC journeys anyway).
But imho that would the absolute limit to what is practical with any sort of singleaisle.And frankly probably too much unless the turnaround speed is not too important.
So I can well see when Boeing state 220-270 pax MOM as their target- why they are going for this ovoid X7 twin aisle fuse.It would work so much better.If they really can get 'single aisle economics then fine but I accept this may be difficult.But perhaps they have found a way.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 281
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 2:22 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
My problem with this logic is the mass movement there was from ordering A332 to ordering A333 when MTOW increases allowed the range (of both) to rise.

Did it cross a range threshold of sorts with airlines? Its not as if the CASM of A333 wasn't always much better than A332.

There was no mass movement. There is no range threshold.

You've got A300 and A310 production ending. And the airlines naturally increasing their fleet size.

The A332 came 5 years after the A333. Airlines knew it was coming and put off ordering more A300's. So the A332 simply had a big launch.

CASM has only overtaken frequency fairly recently when it comes to the main factor when ordering. This is why the A321 and 787-10 are selling well.

The A333 selling well recently is nothing unusual. An assembly line in China which will only be doing A333's. So you've got some big orders there. Considering most A330's are doing short routes further proves its nothing to do with its range threshold.

The A330 regional has lower range and its included in the A333 order list.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 6119
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 3:32 pm

dare100em wrote:
astuteman wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
I thought we all came to the agreement that Boeing's MOM would be a tight 8ab?

With the same cabin length that provides 88% the capacity if the 9ab 788. The longest MOM member would be shorter, so at most 85% capacity of the 788. Then the shorter length MOM's would probably be 65% and 75% capacity of the 788. That's clearly half way between a 737-10 and 787-8. So 8AB isn't too wide.

Saying the 797 is Boeings second attempt at killing the A330 is drawing a long bow. The 787 beats the A330 in nearly every way. Sure, a very low purchase price can bring the A330 up to par of the 787 on short flights but I consider that very niche.

Most of the A330neo orders would be because the 787 has a 5 year backlog of orders and they already operate A330ceo.

A short/medium range 8AB 797 is not an admission of failure of the long range 9AB 787. They cater for completely different markets. The 787 is a sales success and will sell 2000+ frames easily.

The 797 could easily sell 2000 frames by simply taking the top 5-10% of the narrowbody market. There are so many short thick routes.


I suspect most readers think MOM is going to be a tight 7ab with limited to nil cargo space - because Boeing have told us that is what they think it is going to be.

I really struggle to understand why, if a tight 8ab was the answer to a market that is so big, we haven't already got a 767NEO.
The market seems to suggest that there is no space for such a plane.
The market preferred the A330 over the 767 - no reason to suggest that NEO's would be different.
The market also preferred the 787 over a 767NEO - the 787 started off at 767 size, but the airlines demanded that it got bigger.

I think the MOM gap has existed, and still exists for a good reason - there is a space where it is better and more convenient to either stretch the legs of a narrowbody, or abuse a widebody (a proper one). Either option allows airlines to plug the gap with mainstream volume products that have the economics and flexibility to do everything else the airline wants to do, without requiring another family.
Has this gap grown large enough to put a dedicated small widebody in?
I think the jury's still out on that.
I'm not saying it won't happen, but I don't think it's the slam-dunk some seem to think, and the recently announced delay looks like a behaviour that supports this.

Reality also suggests that despite "beating the A330 in nearly every way", the 787 has not killed off the A330, as large parts of a-net expected it to.
You already posit two reasons why the A330 will continue - availability and incumbency, although I don't think availability is as big an advantage as it once was. Price is a third.
The A330NEO is a very fine aeroplane, and however the 787 beats it, it does not beat it by enough to "kill it", not in the way the 77W did to the A340NG.
The A339 seems to have similar operating costs to the 787-9. The A338 seems to be a tad more expensive to operate than the 787-8, but in a niche which is either saturated or not required by the market any more

I don't think the 797 will kill the A330NEO either.
If as you say, the 787 caters for a different market, then by definition so does the A330 NEO.
And frankly, the gap, if any, between the 787 and A330NEO is small enough that anything that does "kill" the A330NEO will damage the 787 pretty badly too.
I don't see it.

Rgds


I'm not sure this is really the case. The facts ATM speak for themselves. The A330neo had a moderate start and since then not much. That may change or may not change - we'll know probably in about a year or two. Beside Delta - which got deep discounts when rumours are true - there are very few if any BlueChip Customer for the A330neo. With the 787 going to 14/month changes are not zero that the A330neo hasn’t that much future.

So "killing" may be a little exuberated - it just send the A330 on life support ;)


Sales of A330 the last 5 years: 454 frames.
2017 12
2016 83
2015 136
2014 154
2013 69
Sales of 787 the last 5 years: 440 frames.
2017 88
2016 58
2015 71
2014 41
2013 182

The life support for the A330 seems to be quite sufficient.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1135
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 4:17 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
dare100em wrote:
astuteman wrote:

I suspect most readers think MOM is going to be a tight 7ab with limited to nil cargo space - because Boeing have told us that is what they think it is going to be.

I really struggle to understand why, if a tight 8ab was the answer to a market that is so big, we haven't already got a 767NEO.
The market seems to suggest that there is no space for such a plane.
The market preferred the A330 over the 767 - no reason to suggest that NEO's would be different.
The market also preferred the 787 over a 767NEO - the 787 started off at 767 size, but the airlines demanded that it got bigger.

I think the MOM gap has existed, and still exists for a good reason - there is a space where it is better and more convenient to either stretch the legs of a narrowbody, or abuse a widebody (a proper one). Either option allows airlines to plug the gap with mainstream volume products that have the economics and flexibility to do everything else the airline wants to do, without requiring another family.
Has this gap grown large enough to put a dedicated small widebody in?
I think the jury's still out on that.
I'm not saying it won't happen, but I don't think it's the slam-dunk some seem to think, and the recently announced delay looks like a behaviour that supports this.

Reality also suggests that despite "beating the A330 in nearly every way", the 787 has not killed off the A330, as large parts of a-net expected it to.
You already posit two reasons why the A330 will continue - availability and incumbency, although I don't think availability is as big an advantage as it once was. Price is a third.
The A330NEO is a very fine aeroplane, and however the 787 beats it, it does not beat it by enough to "kill it", not in the way the 77W did to the A340NG.
The A339 seems to have similar operating costs to the 787-9. The A338 seems to be a tad more expensive to operate than the 787-8, but in a niche which is either saturated or not required by the market any more

I don't think the 797 will kill the A330NEO either.
If as you say, the 787 caters for a different market, then by definition so does the A330 NEO.
And frankly, the gap, if any, between the 787 and A330NEO is small enough that anything that does "kill" the A330NEO will damage the 787 pretty badly too.
I don't see it.

Rgds


I'm not sure this is really the case. The facts ATM speak for themselves. The A330neo had a moderate start and since then not much. That may change or may not change - we'll know probably in about a year or two. Beside Delta - which got deep discounts when rumours are true - there are very few if any BlueChip Customer for the A330neo. With the 787 going to 14/month changes are not zero that the A330neo hasn’t that much future.

So "killing" may be a little exuberated - it just send the A330 on life support ;)


Sales of A330 the last 5 years: 454 frames.
2017 12
2016 83
2015 136
2014 154
2013 69
Sales of 787 the last 5 years: 440 frames.
2017 88
2016 58
2015 71
2014 41
2013 182

The life support for the A330 seems to be quite sufficient.


That’s a fairly selective sample. The A330 in that period launched a new engine variant that spiked sales in 2014 and 2015. The 787 has a backlog of 799 planes going into 2013 and a spinning up production rate. The A330 had a backlog of around 750 and were building 108 a year. The 787 backlog has diminished by 186 planes with deliveries of 499 in that period. Airbus delivered 531 planes and has seen its backlog drop to 363 aircraft over that period for a drop of 387 aircraft.

The present issues for the A330 are being downplayed a bit too much. At present production rates Airbus doesn’t have that many years left and the year to date sales are 16% of a production year. If the EK deal hits the books for Boeing they will have sales of 73% of a production year and a longer backlog.

Airbus planned to go to a production rate of 7 per month going into 2017 but weak sales scrubbed that idea and it stayed at 6. When Leahy discusses the plane back in 2014-15 he discussed a rate of 9-10 per month. Clearly the a330NEO program hasn’t run into anticipated demand to this point. I am curious what impact a production rate significantly lower than what was anticipated at program outset does for margins and cost. It can’t be good.

There seems to be a clear gap where the right mixture of purchase price and capability can exist. I think the A330neo is just too high up the capability scale. It’s still a big airplane.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1442
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 5:24 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:
My problem with this logic is the mass movement there was from ordering A332 to ordering A333 when MTOW increases allowed the range (of both) to rise.

Did it cross a range threshold of sorts with airlines? Its not as if the CASM of A333 wasn't always much better than A332.

There was no mass movement. There is no range threshold.


Compare the relative orders/deliveries of A332 to A333 by year. Its a stark turnaround at 2009/2010.

There is a mass movement. Whether its due to range or more refined risk modelling or something else is up for debate, but the shift definitely occurs.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1442
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 5:26 pm

parapente wrote:
But imho that would the absolute limit to what is practical with any sort of singleaisle.And frankly probably too much unless the turnaround speed is not too important.


If it was designed to board through L2 and the rear door you immediately make a quasi-1.5 aisle.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1442
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 5:36 pm

bigjku wrote:
That’s a fairly selective sample. The A330 in that period launched a new engine variant that spiked sales in 2014 and 2015.


Boeing launched the 787-10 in 2013 which no doubt impacted on sales... 171 orders to date? Remove those and 186+171 = 357

Which, while obviously apples to oranges, is comparable to the 363 frame drop of the A330 backlog.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 6119
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 7:43 pm

bigjku wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
dare100em wrote:

I'm not sure this is really the case. The facts ATM speak for themselves. The A330neo had a moderate start and since then not much. That may change or may not change - we'll know probably in about a year or two. Beside Delta - which got deep discounts when rumours are true - there are very few if any BlueChip Customer for the A330neo. With the 787 going to 14/month changes are not zero that the A330neo hasn’t that much future.

So "killing" may be a little exuberated - it just send the A330 on life support ;)


Sales of A330 the last 5 years: 454 frames.
2017 12
2016 83
2015 136
2014 154
2013 69
Sales of 787 the last 5 years: 440 frames.
2017 88
2016 58
2015 71
2014 41
2013 182

The life support for the A330 seems to be quite sufficient.


That’s a fairly selective sample. The A330 in that period launched a new engine variant that spiked sales in 2014 and 2015. The 787 has a backlog of 799 planes going into 2013 and a spinning up production rate. The A330 had a backlog of around 750 and were building 108 a year. The 787 backlog has diminished by 186 planes with deliveries of 499 in that period. Airbus delivered 531 planes and has seen its backlog drop to 363 aircraft over that period for a drop of 387 aircraft.

The present issues for the A330 are being downplayed a bit too much. At present production rates Airbus doesn’t have that many years left and the year to date sales are 16% of a production year. If the EK deal hits the books for Boeing they will have sales of 73% of a production year and a longer backlog.

Airbus planned to go to a production rate of 7 per month going into 2017 but weak sales scrubbed that idea and it stayed at 6. When Leahy discusses the plane back in 2014-15 he discussed a rate of 9-10 per month. Clearly the a330NEO program hasn’t run into anticipated demand to this point. I am curious what impact a production rate significantly lower than what was anticipated at program outset does for margins and cost. It can’t be good.

There seems to be a clear gap where the right mixture of purchase price and capability can exist. I think the A330neo is just too high up the capability scale. It’s still a big airplane.


OK let us look at a 10 years sample:sales of A330 the last 10 years: 841 frames.
2017 12
2016 83
2015 136
2014 154
2013 69
2012 58
2011 85
2910 62
2009 45
2008 137
Sales of 787 the last 10 years: 471 frames.
2017 88
2016 58
2015 71
2014 41
2013 182
2012 -12
2011 13
2010 -4
2009 -59
2008 93

Or 3 years
A330
2017 12
2016 83
2015 136 gives 231
787
2017 88
2016 58
2015 71 gives 217

Or 4 years
A330
2017 12
2016 83
2015 136
2014 154 gives 385
787
2017 88
2016 58
2015 217
2014 41 gives 258

2017 is a down year for the A330, the 787 had also down years around the time of EIS, even some with negative net orders.
The A330 has a backlog of 316 frames, at a rate of 66 a year, a backlog of slightly less than 5 years.
The 787 has a backlog of 670 frames, at the current rate of 135 frames a year, a backlog of 5 years.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1135
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 8:23 pm

Again this ignores the fact that the 787 is undergoing production rate increases and current strong sales while a planned increase for the A330 was not implemented and that plan was well below what was floated at the time the NEO program was launched. Which program seems have have momentum at the moment? It’s just fine to be honest.

Here is a list of the worse selling major aircraft types or major revisions (new engines or wings) since Airbus found its footing.

A340-200/300: 246
A340-500/600: 131
A330NEO: 212
767-400: 37 (Fits if we call wingtip extensions a new wing)
747-8: 118
A380: 317
A350-1000: 122 (If we call the 764 a new wing this is too)

These are the big selling products.

777 Base: 570
77W/LR/F: 1061
762/3: 1,128
A330ceo: 1,482
787: 1,283
A359: 681

I am not counting the A310 or A300 as Airbus was still spinning up its credibility. My point is that the A330neo looks a lot more like the programs I have it grouped with than the ones below it. A good idea perhaps and a very nice fit for a few airlines. And yes once it hits testing if the 77X is still hovering around where it is I will be worried about its overall success too.

I think there is some head in the sand given recent ordering trends if one thinks that having only 212 orders on the verge of EIS for an aircraft which had its sister sell 1,500ish plus and it’s competitor sell 1,300ish and growing. In general what we have seen is that pure re engine jobs like the NEO and MAX in the narrowbody have sold even faster than their predecessor aircraft. Probably because they are well known products already.

Sometimes things that make sense on some level don’t work out. Both companies have missed. Tell me why the A330NEO isn’t going to be more like the bad list than the good one?
 
astuteman
Posts: 6639
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 9:03 pm

bigjku wrote:
Again this ignores the fact that the 787 is undergoing production rate increases and current strong sales while a planned increase for the A330 was not implemented and that plan was well below what was floated at the time the NEO program was launched. Which program seems have have momentum at the moment? It’s just fine to be honest.

Here is a list of the worse selling major aircraft types or major revisions (new engines or wings) since Airbus found its footing.

A340-200/300: 246
A340-500/600: 131
A330NEO: 212
767-400: 37 (Fits if we call wingtip extensions a new wing)
747-8: 118
A380: 317
A350-1000: 122 (If we call the 764 a new wing this is too)

These are the big selling products.

777 Base: 570
77W/LR/F: 1061
762/3: 1,128
A330ceo: 1,482
787: 1,283
A359: 681

I am not counting the A310 or A300 as Airbus was still spinning up its credibility. My point is that the A330neo looks a lot more like the programs I have it grouped with than the ones below it. A good idea perhaps and a very nice fit for a few airlines. And yes once it hits testing if the 77X is still hovering around where it is I will be worried about its overall success too.

I think there is some head in the sand given recent ordering trends if one thinks that having only 212 orders on the verge of EIS for an aircraft which had its sister sell 1,500ish plus and it’s competitor sell 1,300ish and growing. In general what we have seen is that pure re engine jobs like the NEO and MAX in the narrowbody have sold even faster than their predecessor aircraft. Probably because they are well known products already.

Sometimes things that make sense on some level don’t work out. Both companies have missed. Tell me why the A330NEO isn’t going to be more like the bad list than the good one?


I think it's time for me to get out of this thread.

When we start comparing a frame that hasn't even entered service yet with a list of planes that are either now out of production, or have been in production for periods measured in decades, and declaring it a failure on that basis, you know that reason has left the building.
It seems to escape people's attention that the NEO has suffered some 9 months delay in the last 12, and delay is notorious for suppressing sales for a period.

What with that, and all the ways that a MOM is going to beat the crap out of an A330NEO - at ranges up to about 2 500Nm .....
but the 787 will only get stronger when MOM comes along :scratchchin:

You would think I'd know better after 12 years on the forum.

:white:
Last edited by astuteman on Tue Dec 05, 2017 9:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
StTim
Posts: 2519
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 9:08 pm

astuteman wrote:
bigjku wrote:
Again this ignores the fact that the 787 is undergoing production rate increases and current strong sales while a planned increase for the A330 was not implemented and that plan was well below what was floated at the time the NEO program was launched. Which program seems have have momentum at the moment? It’s just fine to be honest.

Here is a list of the worse selling major aircraft types or major revisions (new engines or wings) since Airbus found its footing.

A340-200/300: 246
A340-500/600: 131
A330NEO: 212
767-400: 37 (Fits if we call wingtip extensions a new wing)
747-8: 118
A380: 317
A350-1000: 122 (If we call the 764 a new wing this is too)

These are the big selling products.

777 Base: 570
77W/LR/F: 1061
762/3: 1,128
A330ceo: 1,482
787: 1,283
A359: 681

I am not counting the A310 or A300 as Airbus was still spinning up its credibility. My point is that the A330neo looks a lot more like the programs I have it grouped with than the ones below it. A good idea perhaps and a very nice fit for a few airlines. And yes once it hits testing if the 77X is still hovering around where it is I will be worried about its overall success too.

I think there is some head in the sand given recent ordering trends if one thinks that having only 212 orders on the verge of EIS for an aircraft which had its sister sell 1,500ish plus and it’s competitor sell 1,300ish and growing. In general what we have seen is that pure re engine jobs like the NEO and MAX in the narrowbody have sold even faster than their predecessor aircraft. Probably because they are well known products already.

Sometimes things that make sense on some level don’t work out. Both companies have missed. Tell me why the A330NEO isn’t going to be more like the bad list than the good one?


I think it's time for me to get out of this thread.

When we start comparing a frame that hasn't even entered service yet with a list of planes that are either now out of production, or have been in production for periods measured in decades, you know that reason has left the building.
It seems to escape people's attention that the NEO has suffered some 9 months delay in the last 12, and delay is notorious for suppressing sales for a period.

What with that, and all the ways that a MOM is going to beat the crap out of an A330NEO - at ranges up to about 2 500Nm .....
but the 787 will only get stronger when MOM comes along :scratchchin:

You would think I'd know better after 12 years on the forum.

:white:


Careful - you will be called an airbus fanboy soon...
 
astuteman
Posts: 6639
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 9:14 pm

StTim wrote:
astuteman wrote:
bigjku wrote:
Again this ignores the fact that the 787 is undergoing production rate increases and current strong sales while a planned increase for the A330 was not implemented and that plan was well below what was floated at the time the NEO program was launched. Which program seems have have momentum at the moment? It’s just fine to be honest.

Here is a list of the worse selling major aircraft types or major revisions (new engines or wings) since Airbus found its footing.

A340-200/300: 246
A340-500/600: 131
A330NEO: 212
767-400: 37 (Fits if we call wingtip extensions a new wing)
747-8: 118
A380: 317
A350-1000: 122 (If we call the 764 a new wing this is too)

These are the big selling products.

777 Base: 570
77W/LR/F: 1061
762/3: 1,128
A330ceo: 1,482
787: 1,283
A359: 681

I am not counting the A310 or A300 as Airbus was still spinning up its credibility. My point is that the A330neo looks a lot more like the programs I have it grouped with than the ones below it. A good idea perhaps and a very nice fit for a few airlines. And yes once it hits testing if the 77X is still hovering around where it is I will be worried about its overall success too.

I think there is some head in the sand given recent ordering trends if one thinks that having only 212 orders on the verge of EIS for an aircraft which had its sister sell 1,500ish plus and it’s competitor sell 1,300ish and growing. In general what we have seen is that pure re engine jobs like the NEO and MAX in the narrowbody have sold even faster than their predecessor aircraft. Probably because they are well known products already.

Sometimes things that make sense on some level don’t work out. Both companies have missed. Tell me why the A330NEO isn’t going to be more like the bad list than the good one?


I think it's time for me to get out of this thread.

When we start comparing a frame that hasn't even entered service yet with a list of planes that are either now out of production, or have been in production for periods measured in decades, you know that reason has left the building.
It seems to escape people's attention that the NEO has suffered some 9 months delay in the last 12, and delay is notorious for suppressing sales for a period.

What with that, and all the ways that a MOM is going to beat the crap out of an A330NEO - at ranges up to about 2 500Nm .....
but the 787 will only get stronger when MOM comes along :scratchchin:

You would think I'd know better after 12 years on the forum.

:white:


Careful - you will be called an airbus fanboy soon...


Talking of which, you notice the A350-1000 is in the failure list too - not yet entered service.
But the 777X is conspicuous by it's absence, but on the basis that it has only achieved about 300 sales, presumably it too will be going on the reject pile.
Boeing might as well give up now, given the criteria being used - but it's not on the list.
We talk a lot at work about "unconscious bias"....

I'll leave it there ...

Rgds
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 2161
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 9:15 pm

The A330 has sold well over the last 5 years. The 787 is also selling. The 777 is the widebody sales leader for the past 5 years.

Looking backwards isn't the same as looking forward, but we shouldn't diminish that the A330 has sold well. I think this is very important when discussing the NMA. If we look at those sales I generally bucket them in three categories.

One is immediate need for capacity and incremental orders that the A330ceo filled. There is a big A330 fleet and this will likely transition to the A330neo.

The second set of customers are those needing high capacity over short distances like the airlines in Asia like Chinese carriers and other airlines in Asia and the middle East such as Qatar or singapore. The A330 has been one of the best options for this segment.

The third is smaller airlines, less established airlines, airlines very capital conscious, etc looking for low cost entry or growth in the widebody market. Consider these the most cost conscious.

The first category will stay with the A330 family. The second and third may get swayed by the NMA. The second group may get swayed by lower operating costs since the A330 is more capable than necessary. The third group may be attracted to a smaller and cheaper widebody for international routes that has lower acquisition prices and lower operating costs.

My buckets are my own opinion and generalizations and not every airline fits in that category but I see the sales success of the A330 as an opportunity. The 787 kind of misses the mark on short haul for the second group where it isn't optimized for. It also misses the mark for the third group since it is expensive. The NMA may perfectly complement the 787 and will force some reevaluation of the A330 by Airbus.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 281
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 9:52 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
Compare the relative orders/deliveries of A332 to A333 by year. Its a stark turnaround at 2009/2010.

There is a mass movement. Whether its due to range or more refined risk modelling or something else is up for debate, but the shift definitely occurs.

You have jumped to the biggest conclusion based on a spike of deliveries in a single year.

In 2010 the A332 production was switching over to a strengthened wing. So Airbus produced additional A333's while this was getting sorted. The A333 got the stronger wing years later. The 2011s deliveries became even again.

200 vs 300
2009 - 38 vs 38
2011 - 40 vs 43

Another argument is that Airbus made the freighters from the factory only in the 200 length. The A333 freighters were produced as normal passenger models and converted by an external company. So you should be adding the A332F's deliveries to the A332's total. Once you do that there is no mass movement.

Add the Chinese assembly line announcement that only produces A333's and that explains the order increase in 2014. China plans on using the A333's on domestic short thick routes. So they picked to produce the best CASM model. A range threshold had nothing to do with it.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1135
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 10:10 pm

astuteman wrote:
StTim wrote:
astuteman wrote:

I think it's time for me to get out of this thread.

When we start comparing a frame that hasn't even entered service yet with a list of planes that are either now out of production, or have been in production for periods measured in decades, you know that reason has left the building.
It seems to escape people's attention that the NEO has suffered some 9 months delay in the last 12, and delay is notorious for suppressing sales for a period.

What with that, and all the ways that a MOM is going to beat the crap out of an A330NEO - at ranges up to about 2 500Nm .....
but the 787 will only get stronger when MOM comes along :scratchchin:

You would think I'd know better after 12 years on the forum.

:white:


Careful - you will be called an airbus fanboy soon...


Talking of which, you notice the A350-1000 is in the failure list too - not yet entered service.
But the 777X is conspicuous by it's absence, but on the basis that it has only achieved about 300 sales, presumably it too will be going on the reject pile.
Boeing might as well give up now, given the criteria being used - but it's not on the list.
We talk a lot at work about "unconscious bias"....

I'll leave it there ...

Rgds


First I don’t think anyone is a fanboy...

To be fair I specifically said if the 77X doesn’t sell well it goes on the bad list for me as well. It’s right there in my post. No passes to Boeing on that. I picked planes that are flying and was posting from a phone. I also left off the A310 as I didnt think that would be fair given where Airbus was as a company then.

I don’t think one can deny that is worrying when sales are that low at the time of first flight EIS. The 787 had 67% of its orders prior to EIS and is still going. The 77W was more like 1/3rd just eyeballing it. The A380 was around 40%.

I think a reasonable assumption based on the last three widebody programs to pass through EIS is it will maybe double it’s orders post EIS over the next 5-10 years. So we have 5 years or production now at 66 aircraft per year. If we sell another 200 that buys us a 3 more years of production. To maintain that production rate over 10 years we need to have a 77W like post EIS sales run. But that was a unique circumstance where the A340 just flat lost and the 777 took almost all of that market.

Again I am not critical of the A330. I like the plane. But I think if we are all honest it’s clear Airbus didn’t expect to not be ramping up production to 9-10 per month when this was launched rather than holding at 6. Hell the initial projection was it would start at 7-8 so production rate is lower by anywhere from 15-40% than what was anticipated at program launch. That does impact profit margins substantially so we can assume they likely aren’t going to make as much as they thought when they figured rates would be higher. Seriously ask yourself how many more you think they will reasonably sell over the next 5 years.

I think in general my view on widebody market projections would be this. Airbus has made the most mistakes and Boeing made the single dumbest market read with the 748 which was an utter waste of time and effort even if it’s pretty. It was the “hold my beer” drunken response to the A380. Everyone makes mistakes. It does happen. The 77X will be just as big of a disappointment if it’s sales don’t pickup over the next 12-18 months IMHO.

I just think given the way things go now that pre-EIS sales are an important thing to look at. The winners (A359, A320Neo, 737max, 787) are pretty clear. The other programs for the most part aren’t company killers. But if I would bet lunch that a330 isn’t doing what Airbus expected. They are telling us as much by holding rates at 6 at the moment. Maybe it gains traction but recent history sees a very large percentage of sales happening pre-EIS compared to when the 767 and A330ceo were first launched.
 
sofianec
Posts: 132
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:39 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Tue Dec 05, 2017 10:21 pm

I really wish they resurrect A300 and A310. I used to love those planes, now they all so big. :lol:
A350WARP
 
AvObserver
Posts: 2511
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:40 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 3:17 am

sofianec wrote:
I really wish they resurrect A300 and A310. I used to love those planes, now they all so big. :lol:

And I'm somewhat wistful that McDonnell-Douglas never launched the DC-10 Twin which might have proved competitive with both the A300 and the 767 back in the day. Too bad we'll never know how it might have fared in that regard but I'd like to think that it might have saved McDonnell-Douglas, given how good the market for widebody twins finally became.
 
parapente
Posts: 1981
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:05 am

Well re Leeham.The 797 EIS has now been put back to 2027.So there is no need for Airbus to rush!
Whist one can -re this thread- discuss the 'Airbus response'.But is that all Airbus is?Only able to respond to what others do?
If we give Airbus the same EIS (10 years) we can assume (I think) that Airbus won't be launching any other clean sheet in those 10 years.
So in a sense it's probably better to think 'what will Airbus want/need to create their best portfolio of aircraft?' Rather than worry about Boeing.
2027/8
Its likely that the A380 will be finishing about then or at very best a NEO.
The A350 9 and 10 should be selling well.
If they need a bigger product one imagines it will be the stretched '11' that they have already talked about
Their A320/321 family is doing phenomenally well and they have an LR in the wings.Nothing to worry about there.
We know it's capable of a stretch (322) to create a 250 seat aircraft as they originally proposed this stretch 15 years ago!
The 100-150 seat market is covered by the 'C' series.

The problem child (if that's fair) is the 339.Firstly it's looking awfully like it's going to be an orphan.The 338 is dead in the water right now.
The fundamental aircraft is over 30 years old.In a decade it will (obviously) be 40+ years old.
They have tried to replace it once with a 350 shrink (8).It did not cut it.

Whilst all the press ,Boeing leaks,patented ovoid papers etc all point to a X7 fuse,the majority here feel that X8 would be better.
Well maybe not for Boeing from what we hear,but I would be very surprised if it wasn't what Airbus did!
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1442
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:31 am

RJMAZ wrote:
You have jumped to the biggest conclusion based on a spike of deliveries in a single year.


Admittedly I am assuming wikipedias delivery record is right, but there is no single year spike. Or you are really cherry picking to try to maintain a flimsy premise!

Deliveries by year
           2017   2016   2015   2014   2013  2012  2011   2010   2009   2008   2007   2006
A330-200   12     21     30     28     43    37    40     32     38     49     42     39
A330-300   31     42     70     75     57    56    43     50     38     23     26     23




RJMAZ wrote:
Another argument is that Airbus made the freighters from the factory only in the 200 length. The A333 freighters were produced as normal passenger models


Eh? There is no A330-300 newbuilds converted to freighters. P2F happens at the end of passenger carrying life.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1442
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 10:13 am

RJMAZ wrote:
Add the Chinese assembly line announcement that only produces A333's and that explains the order increase in 2014.


Those are deliveries.

The A330 completion centre in China started construction in 2016, and came online in 2017. It has had no effect on A333 deliveries prior to that.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 10322
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 10:24 am

There are 1700 A330/A340 build so far. With far reaching commonality between the A340s and the A330's.

To isolate the A340 type as a failure, seems a little baised / opportunistic. It sold "just" 377 aicraft, but the ROI should be calculated on unique A340 investments only. Engines, engine pylons, center gear, A345/6 mods. I don't have the figure but I assume 370 is significant above break even!

The A330 changed the business. It ended the life cycles of the MD11, 777-200(ER), 767-300/400ER, Sonic Cruiser and sold 1000 aircraft since the 787 was launched. An 787 that has almost exactly the layout & dimensions of the A330, if you are willing to see.

Writing of the A330 (again) risks anyone joining the long still growing list of experts dismissing this airframe prematurely. What is FEDEX orders 75 A339F NEO's. ? Or -the 900 is stretched 40 seats. MTOW 251t anyone? Trent 7000 PIPs? What is the China completion line going to do for the next 10 years?

1000 A330/A340 are up for replacement in the next 15 years, the NEO offers unparalleled commonality for its 100 operators and an A339 is cheaper than a 787-8.

There some big names on this "the A330 is done" list :yes: :veryhappy:

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Amiga500
Posts: 1442
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:47 am

keesje wrote:
To isolate the A340 type as a failure, seems a little baised / opportunistic. It sold "just" 377 aicraft, but the ROI should be calculated on unique A340 investments only.


Not even.

When the concept was first conceived, Airbus were very unconvinced they'd ever be able to get the FAA to agree to ETOPS180. Given that the FAA

So, the A340 was built to cover their back. If the FAA didn't increase ETOPS, then the 777 would never have sold as well. The A330 then was able to move up into the long range twin.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 16647
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:43 pm

Airbus's MOM-killer ( :eek: ): the A330-800!

A new article, Leeham: Airbus’ strategy for the A330-800, says:

“There are about 1,600 airplanes flying [in the MOM sector],” Hamilton says. “We have 95 operators for 330-200. The problem is the fleet is really, really, young. The average age is only nine years. There aren’t that many aircraft to replace today. These start to kick in beyond 2020. It would have been silly for us to develop the A330-900 and wait three or four years to develop the 800.

“The cherry on the cake is the 767-300/400, which are 15 years older,” Hamilton says. In the short term is the 767 market. Longer term are the 330-200s.

All bases covered.
Last edited by Revelation on Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The gun is NOT a precious symbol of freedom
It is a deadly cancer on American society
Those who believe otherwise are consumed by an ideology
That is impervious to evidence
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 25789
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:49 pm

Revelation wrote:
Airbus's MOM-killer (see what I did there?): the A330-800!

A new article, Leeham: Airbus’ strategy for the A330-800, says:

“There are about 1,600 airplanes flying [in the MOM sector],” Hamilton says. “We have 95 operators for 330-200. The problem is the fleet is really, really, young. The average age is only nine years. There aren’t that many aircraft to replace today. These start to kick in beyond 2020. It would have been silly for us to develop the A330-900 and wait three or four years to develop the 800.

“The cherry on the cake is the 767-300/400, which are 15 years older,” Hamilton says. In the short term is the 767 market. Longer term are the 330-200s.

All bases covered.


As always, the issue is de definition of "middle of market". As there is no clear definition, the A330-200 may or may not be included in that market segment.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 16647
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:56 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
As always, the issue is de definition of "middle of market". As there is no clear definition, the A330-200 may or may not be included in that market segment.

Yes, the market segment is ill defined, and Boeing's product to address that market segment (if one even happens) is absolutely not defined, yet. That's why it's silly that some are accusing Boeing of changing strategies. It's silly because there is no strategy to change! They're trying to figure out what that strategy is. There have been trial balloons floated, but intentionally only the broadest outlines have been discussed publicly. In the end, this could be a way of feeling out the market, or nothing more than a dis-information campaign ( ref: http://www.avgeekery.com/urban-legend-b ... 7-program/ ).
The gun is NOT a precious symbol of freedom
It is a deadly cancer on American society
Those who believe otherwise are consumed by an ideology
That is impervious to evidence
 
parapente
Posts: 1981
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:56 pm

The key is in 'the average (note average) is only 9 years old'.
So yes they will need to be replaced in circa 10 years.Mmmm and what's arriving then?
The 338 looks a fine aircraft.I really hope it sells,but right now it's dead in the water.But it will never be a replacement for operators that want 5,000 - nm legs.The 332 regional is probably better suited for shorter trips.
As the article states in LCC guise it may have some mileage.The reason the 339 does well is that it offers more than the 8 for only a little more cost (like most stretches).
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 25789
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 1:02 pm

Revelation wrote:
Yes, the market segment is ill defined, and Boeing's product to address that market segment (if one even happens) is absolutely not defined, yet. That's why it's silly that some are accusing Boeing of changing strategies. It's silly because there is no strategy to change! They're trying to figure out what that strategy is. There have been trial balloons floated, but intentionally only the broadest outlines have been discussed publicly. In the end, this could be a way of feeling out the market, or nothing more than a dis-information campaign ( ref: http://www.avgeekery.com/urban-legend-b ... 7-program/ ).


At least Boeing and several analysts believe the A330-200/800 is not included in the "middle of market" segment (chart below).

And yet people continue to wheel in the A330.

Image
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 16647
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 1:13 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
At least Boeing and several analysts believe the A330-200/800 is not included in the "middle of market" segment (chart below).

It's not, because it is built for much more range than needed to fill the market segment, which means it's heavier than needed, BUT:

KarelXWB wrote:
And yet people continue to wheel in the A330.

Because if you want to buy a new airliner with the desired passenger capacity today, you really only have one choice, A330.

A330 in theory is vulnerable to a product optimized for the segment, but one can't buy a theoretical product, so...
The gun is NOT a precious symbol of freedom
It is a deadly cancer on American society
Those who believe otherwise are consumed by an ideology
That is impervious to evidence
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 5750
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:34 pm

It seems the chart now favors Boeing's 767-200.....

Image
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-YTIr ... Bshift.jpg


Revelation wrote:
A330 in theory is vulnerable to a product optimized for the segment, but one can't buy a theoretical product, so...

Hypothetically, carriers could buy a new airliner derived from this.....

Image
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/base/u ... 7_1510.jpg

With the NMA EIS pushed to 2027, there might even be a chance to scale down GE's GEnx2B based on a smaller core with which to "neo" the 767. It would be funnily ironic if after years of debates and hair-splitting here, a plane so derided could emerge a winner. :checkeredflag:
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 7358
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:54 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
keesje wrote:
To isolate the A340 type as a failure, seems a little baised / opportunistic. It sold "just" 377 aicraft, but the ROI should be calculated on unique A340 investments only.


Not even.

When the concept was first conceived, Airbus were very unconvinced they'd ever be able to get the FAA to agree to ETOPS180. Given that the FAA

So, the A340 was built to cover their back. If the FAA didn't increase ETOPS, then the 777 would never have sold as well. The A330 then was able to move up into the long range twin.

The A340 has four engines because at the time there wasn't an engine powerful enough for a long range big twin, and Airbus still lacked clout to convince engine manufacturers to go out on a limb and build them one. ETOPS180 already existed, but required one year of ETOPS120 with no issues. Airbus built and designed the A330 fully expected that it would be flown over the Atlantic under ETOPS regulations. All Boeing did was push to allow ETOPS180 at EIS (which the JAA disagreed with and did not allow until later- still did not hurt the 777). Lets be honest, if Airbus had a big long range twin in the pipeline they would have pressured the JAA to allow ETOPS180 out of the box like Boeing did with the FAA and probably gotten it.

The A330 has moved up from a medirum range to a long range twin, but the latest ceo's range still does not hold a candle to the A340's or 777's because of its engines and therefore allowable max weight.
 
WIederling
Posts: 4652
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Wed Dec 06, 2017 10:04 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
The A330 has sold well over the last 5 years. The 787 is also selling. The 777 is the widebody sales leader for the past 5 years.


I am waiting for Chavier Irastorzas next dissemination on Boeing rebates.
https://theblogbyjavier.com/
https://theblogbyjavier.com/?s=discount
Murphy is an optimist
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 2161
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Dec 07, 2017 1:25 pm

Keesje, I find your commentary conflicting.

First you say that you think the NMA will shrink in capacity and range

keesje wrote:
I think Inevitable w'll see Boeing cut back on capacity and range of it's offering. The segment they identified seems to only to get strong support from Boeing executives.

Spacey 6 abreast with AKH capability seems hard to beat by any WB, and would be at least 20% more costly to operate if all recently developped aircraft specs mean anything.

Lean and mean stretches of the A321 and CS300 seems strong cases. After that Airbus will probably look at filling the segment inbeteeen the A321 family and the A350-900. Replacing the A330.

I think this increasing starts to look like a big NB, it always did IMO.. :psst: ]


Then you talk about all the A330 sales

keesje wrote:

The A330 changed the business. It ended the life cycles of the MD11, 777-200(ER), 767-300/400ER, Sonic Cruiser and sold 1000 aircraft since the 787 was launched. An 787 that has almost exactly the layout & dimensions of the A330, if you are willing to see.

Writing of the A330 (again) risks anyone joining the long still growing list of experts dismissing this airframe prematurely. What is FEDEX orders 75 A339F NEO's. ? Or -the 900 is stretched 40 seats. MTOW 251t anyone? Trent 7000 PIPs? What is the China completion line going to do for the next 10 years?

1000 A330/A340 are up for replacement in the next 15 years, the NEO offers unparalleled commonality for its 100 operators and an A339 is cheaper than a 787-8.

There some big names on this "the A330 is done" list :yes: :veryhappy:
]


All these A330 sales since the 787 was launched that are being used on regional routes or because the airplane is cheap make it a perfect target for a new design that is optimized for shorter missions with lower production costs.

The logic is that the NMA should be a bigger plane if it will compete with the A330 not smaller. Bigger also puts it above the striking range of an A321 stretch. I find your posts have the theme of the A321 is fantastic and also that the A330neo is fantastic so Airbus doesn’t have to worry much about the NMA since they can stretch the A321 and pop champagne bottle and celebrate. If that is why you believe, I think it is a very biased opinion, but everyone is welcome to have their own opinion and cast doubt over the competitions designs if they want to. My opinion is that if the larger MOM has similar capacity to the A332/788, with lower CASM than an A339 on routes under 4000 miles, Airbus will have a very hard time selling A330neos, which may result in production rate cuts. A smaller MOM plane may erode the market that the A321LR is going after and may result in Airbus doing something to compete in the form of an A322.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 10322
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Dec 07, 2017 2:30 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
Keesje, I find your commentary conflicting.

First you say that you think the NMA will shrink in capacity and range

keesje wrote:
I think Inevitable w'll see Boeing cut back on capacity and range of it's offering. The segment they identified seems to only to get strong support from Boeing executives.

Spacey 6 abreast with AKH capability seems hard to beat by any WB, and would be at least 20% more costly to operate if all recently developped aircraft specs mean anything.

Lean and mean stretches of the A321 and CS300 seems strong cases. After that Airbus will probably look at filling the segment inbeteeen the A321 family and the A350-900. Replacing the A330.

I think this increasing starts to look like a big NB, it always did IMO.. :psst: ]


Then you talk about all the A330 sales

keesje wrote:

The A330 changed the business. It ended the life cycles of the MD11, 777-200(ER), 767-300/400ER, Sonic Cruiser and sold 1000 aircraft since the 787 was launched. An 787 that has almost exactly the layout & dimensions of the A330, if you are willing to see.

Writing of the A330 (again) risks anyone joining the long still growing list of experts dismissing this airframe prematurely. What is FEDEX orders 75 A339F NEO's. ? Or -the 900 is stretched 40 seats. MTOW 251t anyone? Trent 7000 PIPs? What is the China completion line going to do for the next 10 years?

1000 A330/A340 are up for replacement in the next 15 years, the NEO offers unparalleled commonality for its 100 operators and an A339 is cheaper than a 787-8.

There some big names on this "the A330 is done" list :yes: :veryhappy:
]


All these A330 sales since the 787 was launched that are being used on regional routes or because the airplane is cheap make it a perfect target for a new design that is optimized for shorter missions with lower production costs.

The logic is that the NMA should be a bigger plane if it will compete with the A330 not smaller. Bigger also puts it above the striking range of an A321 stretch. I find your posts have the theme of the A321 is fantastic and also that the A330neo is fantastic so Airbus doesn’t have to worry much about the NMA since they can stretch the A321 and pop champagne bottle and celebrate. If that is why you believe, I think it is a very biased opinion, but everyone is welcome to have their own opinion and cast doubt over the competitions designs if they want to. My opinion is that if the larger MOM has similar capacity to the A332/788, with lower CASM than an A339 on routes under 4000 miles, Airbus will have a very hard time selling A330neos, which may result in production rate cuts. A smaller MOM plane may erode the market that the A321LR is going after and may result in Airbus doing something to compete in the form of an A322.



Re the a330 comparing to a Boeing big NMA, it's pretty useless. One has been successful for years, the other one hasn't left the drawing board.

A widebody, but not LD3 capable NMA widebody is facing the obvious downside: it can't do LD3 and can't be used on longer flights. Airlines proved un enthusiastic about that. It has to do with flexibility, risks & one trick pony's. You can send an A330 on a 2 hour rotation in the morning and send it to Asia later that day. And good cargo with it. Utilization.

The main difference between a new WB NMA and the A330 will be the latter is cheaper, available and you are flying it already.
Those are rock solid selling points. I'm not suprised if Boeing is delaying a launch decision.. and / or downsizing their specification from their earlier 767 sized concepts. It think it would be a logical progressing insight.

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Slug71
Posts: 645
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:08 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:27 pm

Slug71 wrote:
Perhaps a modular type approach where the A321R (Replacement ) and "A322" are the same length, use the same wings, components etc.
Difference being that the "A322" is a twin aisle in 2-3-2 and A321R is still a single. A320R a shrink of the A321R and a A323, a stretch of the A322. Thus you have a lot of commonality between 2 types essentially.
Can use the RR Ultrafan engines.


What if you replaced the A320 and A321 fuselage with an elliptical shaped one that is roughly 4.2m wide and 5.2m tall for 3-3, and rotate the fuselage 90 degrees on it's side for a 2-3-2 A322? Wing etc based on the A321?
 
SCAT15F
Posts: 717
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Dec 07, 2017 6:02 pm

The only course that really makes sense for Boeing is to address MOM with a version of their 737 replacement (NSA). This shouldn't be too hard as the optimum size for both the 737 and 320 keeps moving up. A318, A319, 737-600/7 are basically non-factors.. NSA will probably start with 738/A320 size and could extend to 757-300 size. The most I can see happening is Boeing doing a 767neo and AB doing an A322 in the meantime.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 16647
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Dec 07, 2017 6:33 pm

SCAT15F wrote:
The only course that really makes sense for Boeing is to address MOM with a version of their 737 replacement (NSA). This shouldn't be too hard as the optimum size for both the 737 and 320 keeps moving up. A318, A319, 737-600/7 are basically non-factors.. NSA will probably start with 738/A320 size and could extend to 757-300 size. The most I can see happening is Boeing doing a 767neo and AB doing an A322 in the meantime.

Our game theory affectionados might tell you that this is what NMA/MOM really is, and the public statements are nothing more than a vast Boeing conspiracy to cloak the development of NSA. Some feel that Sonic Cruiser was nothing more than a giant disinformation campaign for what became 787. It's nice to live in the Twilight Zone, isn't it?
The gun is NOT a precious symbol of freedom
It is a deadly cancer on American society
Those who believe otherwise are consumed by an ideology
That is impervious to evidence
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 2161
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus weighs response if Boeing launches new mid-market model

Thu Dec 07, 2017 7:40 pm

keesje wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
Keesje, I find your commentary conflicting.

First you say that you think the NMA will shrink in capacity and range

keesje wrote:
I think Inevitable w'll see Boeing cut back on capacity and range of it's offering. The segment they identified seems to only to get strong support from Boeing executives.

Spacey 6 abreast with AKH capability seems hard to beat by any WB, and would be at least 20% more costly to operate if all recently developped aircraft specs mean anything.

Lean and mean stretches of the A321 and CS300 seems strong cases. After that Airbus will probably look at filling the segment inbeteeen the A321 family and the A350-900. Replacing the A330.

I think this increasing starts to look like a big NB, it always did IMO.. :psst: ]


Then you talk about all the A330 sales

keesje wrote:

The A330 changed the business. It ended the life cycles of the MD11, 777-200(ER), 767-300/400ER, Sonic Cruiser and sold 1000 aircraft since the 787 was launched. An 787 that has almost exactly the layout & dimensions of the A330, if you are willing to see.

Writing of the A330 (again) risks anyone joining the long still growing list of experts dismissing this airframe prematurely. What is FEDEX orders 75 A339F NEO's. ? Or -the 900 is stretched 40 seats. MTOW 251t anyone? Trent 7000 PIPs? What is the China completion line going to do for the next 10 years?

1000 A330/A340 are up for replacement in the next 15 years, the NEO offers unparalleled commonality for its 100 operators and an A339 is cheaper than a 787-8.

There some big names on this "the A330 is done" list :yes: :veryhappy:
]


All these A330 sales since the 787 was launched that are being used on regional routes or because the airplane is cheap make it a perfect target for a new design that is optimized for shorter missions with lower production costs.

The logic is that the NMA should be a bigger plane if it will compete with the A330 not smaller. Bigger also puts it above the striking range of an A321 stretch. I find your posts have the theme of the A321 is fantastic and also that the A330neo is fantastic so Airbus doesn’t have to worry much about the NMA since they can stretch the A321 and pop champagne bottle and celebrate. If that is why you believe, I think it is a very biased opinion, but everyone is welcome to have their own opinion and cast doubt over the competitions designs if they want to. My opinion is that if the larger MOM has similar capacity to the A332/788, with lower CASM than an A339 on routes under 4000 miles, Airbus will have a very hard time selling A330neos, which may result in production rate cuts. A smaller MOM plane may erode the market that the A321LR is going after and may result in Airbus doing something to compete in the form of an A322.



Re the a330 comparing to a Boeing big NMA, it's pretty useless. One has been successful for years, the other one hasn't left the drawing board.

A widebody, but not LD3 capable NMA widebody is facing the obvious downside: it can't do LD3 and can't be used on longer flights. Airlines proved un enthusiastic about that. It has to do with flexibility, risks & one trick pony's. You can send an A330 on a 2 hour rotation in the morning and send it to Asia later that day. And good cargo with it. Utilization.

The main difference between a new WB NMA and the A330 will be the latter is cheaper, available and you are flying it already.
Those are rock solid selling points. ]


The reason is LD3s? That is the reason why Boeing would shrink the airplane and it can't compete with the A330? Hogwash.

Range flexibility is a good point but look at all the A330s and how many are flying short and long haul?

A widebody NMA may very well be cheaper than the A330neo.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos