TinkerBelle
Topic Author
Posts: 1436
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:46 am

SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 5:02 am

Some people here on a.net already gave this order to Boeing but don't count your chicks just yet. Funny how most articles (not to mention most a.netters) seem to suggest that Airbus have to sell their planes dirt checp to be competitive.

http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=112822
If you are going through hell, keep going.
 
cloud4000
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:38 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 5:17 am

What does Airbus have that piques SQ's interest whatsoever? They've ordered the A380, they don't seem to be interested in the A320, A330, A340 (which they got rid of), or, for that matter, the A350.
Boston, USA
 
TinkerBelle
Topic Author
Posts: 1436
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:46 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 5:26 am

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 1):
What does Airbus have that piques SQ's interest whatsoever?

Maybe some more whalejets. Don't forget SQ operates A340-500's so maybe Airbus figured they can sell SQ more of those instead of SQ buying 772LR's. I would think the A350 would also come into play here.
If you are going through hell, keep going.
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 5:28 am

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 1):
What does Airbus have that piques SQ's interest whatsoever? They've ordered the A380, they don't seem to be interested in the A320, A330, A340 (which they got rid of), or, for that matter, the A350.

Well, they havent ordered the 787 yet, so they must be at least mildly interested in the A350 in order to consider tenders for it.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13848
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 5:33 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 3):
Well, they havent ordered the 787 yet, so they must be at least mildly interested in the A350 in order to consider tenders for it.

That could be true, and it could also be true that SQ is faking interest in A350 to try to get Boeing to lower the price of the 787. Lots of things are possible.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8573
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 5:35 am

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 1):
They've ordered the A380, they don't seem to be interested in the A320, A330, A340 (which they got rid of), or, for that matter, the A350.

The A350/787 order, IMO, could still go either way. It very may well be the best deal that wins.

The economics of the 777, however, are a shoe-in. The 772LR fits in perfectly with the 777 fleet and kills the A345 on B/C-routes.
 
boeingbus
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 12:37 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 5:45 am

Quoting TinkerBelle (Thread starter):
Funny how most articles (not to mention most a.netters) seem to suggest that Airbus have to sell their planes dirt checp to be competitive.


I don't think its funny at all becuase there is some merit.

IMHO, Airbus did not take the 787 program seriously, as they should. Maybe hindsight is 20/20... but I think the Toulouse execs are re-evaluating the A350 as we speak. You can drop the price so far... but at the end of the day, its the product that count.

You have almost 30 airlines adopting the 787. Look at the impressive customer list...

http://www.newairplane.com/en-US/787Dreamliner/Customers.htm

Airbus has a lot to lose if it does not sign Singapore. So you bet they are going to low ball the A350.

But Boeing stirred the pot once more... This time they announced the 787-10 is a sure bet in the future, and as soon as 2012. The A350 is now old news and their numbers are not competitive any longer.

Cheers,

Ric

[Edited 2005-12-28 21:46:44]
Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4834
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:02 am

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 1):
What does Airbus have that piques SQ's interest whatsoever? They've ordered the A380, they don't seem to be interested in the A320...

I don't know if you've noticed but SQ only fly widebodies. Their last narrowbodies were 757s which they also "got rid of" quite quickly. But they do have a narrowbody subsidiary - Silkair - which flies or has on order 16 A319s and A320s with which they seem to be rather happy. So to argue that SQ aren't interested in the A320 seems to be a somewhat questionable statement on two counts.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18197
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:03 am

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 6):
Airbus has a lot to lose if it does not sign Singapore. So you bet they are going to low ball the A350.

If the rumors are true and ANA got their 787's for $60 million each, Airbus would have to discount phenomenally to beat that. Well, I suppose they might.

But SQ isn't cheap. At the end of the day, they have shown they want aircraft that do the job.

You say the A350 is old news. If that's true, Airbus is wasting their time at SQ no matter how low they go.

That would mean that SQ is wasting their time, too, of course.

cheers

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:14 am

The most plausible scenario I've seen floated for an Airbus "win" at SQ in the upcoming months is that Airbus would buy back SQ's 5 A340-500s and then lease to SQ 10 A340-500s. At the same time, SQ would order 10 B777-200LRs for delivery in 2007-08 to replace the Airbii. That would give Airbus plenty of time to find a new buyer or lessor for the A340s on a predictable schedule. It would give SQ the capacity they need now and the aircraft they want when it becomes available.
 
TinkerBelle
Topic Author
Posts: 1436
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:46 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:24 am

Quoting Mariner (Reply 8):
That would mean that SQ is wasting their time, too, of course.

One can also argue that if by SQ engaging in talks with Airbus about the A350 leads to Boeing slashing their prices for the dreamliner, SQ isn't really wasting their time. Unfortunately, none of us here will probably ever know  biggrin 
If you are going through hell, keep going.
 
keesje
Posts: 8754
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:31 am

Quoting TinkerBelle (Thread starter):
Funny how most articles (not to mention most a.netters) seem to suggest that Airbus have to sell their planes dirt checp to be competitive.

Never let facts come in the way of a good story line? I think JAL, ANA, NWA and QF showed a different light on reality.

IMO it is a kind a save fall back argumentation. If B wins the product was simply best. If they loose the product was still best but they didn´t want to go dirt cheap. The option of a customer thinking A offers a better product is conveniently avoided this way.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 9):
The most plausible scenario I've seen floated for an Airbus "win" at SQ in the upcoming months is that Airbus would buy back SQ's 5 A340-500s and then lease to SQ 10 A340-500s. At the same time, SQ would order 10 B777-200LRs for delivery in 2007-08 to replace the Airbii.

This a new modification of the "rumor" I guess. In the one I saw the 345 just would stay, no date for any 772LR & A330´s would soon come in too..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Halibut
Posts: 943
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 8:43 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:43 am

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 6):
I don't think its funny at all becuase there is some merit.

IMHO, Airbus did not take the 787 program seriously, as they should. Maybe hindsight is 20/20... but I think the Toulouse execs are re-evaluating the A350 as we speak. You can drop the price so far... but at the end of the day, its the product that count.

You have almost 30 airlines adopting the 787. Look at the impressive customer list...

Good point .
The Boeing 787 may enable Boeing to capture primarily Airbus customers to go mostly Boeing or all Boeing .
Boeing - SQ Must Buy Boeing To Compete With QF? (by Halibut Dec 26 2005 in Civil Aviation)

Halibut
6 million Jews were slaughtered-Do you see Jews flying planes into buildings in Germany to kill 1000s of innocent, NO !
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18197
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:44 am

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 10):
One can also argue that if by SQ engaging in talks with Airbus about the A350 leads to Boeing slashing their prices for the dreamliner, SQ isn't really wasting their time.

Well, yes, but there comes a point - I think - when a sale isn't worth it.

As I say, if it is true that the ANA price for the 787's was $60 million, then Airbus would be straining to match it.

And how much lower could Boeing go than $60 million?

If they did go lower, every customer in the world would get wind of it in a nanosecond. At the very least, the Indian Government would be demanding a renegotiation of the Air India price.

cheers

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:52 am

Quoting Halibut (Reply 12):
The Boeing 787 may enable Boeing to capture primarily Airbus customers to go mostly Boeing or all Boeing

Although NW and AC went 787, this was done at an early stage in the program when the A350 was not nearly as competitive as it is now.

Since then, TP, AY and TAM, all known to be addicted to Airbus (both narrow and wide bodies) have selected the A350 in a tender in which there was no talk of any serious competition from the 787.

It seems that the A350 can now annihilate any remaining advantages the 787 still has for those airlines already operating A330s and A320s, by the simple fact it is an almost identical Airbus like the rest.

[Edited 2005-12-28 22:55:36]
 
cloud4000
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:38 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 7:02 am

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 2):
Maybe some more whalejets. Don't forget SQ operates A340-500's so maybe Airbus figured they can sell SQ more of those instead of SQ buying 772LR's. I would think the A350 would also come into play here.

If SQ wanted more A345s, they would've ordered more of them. Why feign interest in the 777LR if you're going to buy A345s?

Quoting PM (Reply 7):
I don't know if you've noticed but SQ only fly widebodies. Their last narrowbodies were 757s which they also "got rid of" quite quickly. But they do have a narrowbody subsidiary - Silkair - which flies or has on order 16 A319s and A320s with which they seem to be rather happy. So to argue that SQ aren't interested in the A320 seems to be a somewhat questionable statement on two counts.

I know SQ has widebodies only, I just listed the A320 to show that besides the A380, SQ has expressed no interest in any other Airbus model. As for SilkAir, unless there are plan afoots to expand it, I can't see SQ buying more A320s in the near future.
Boston, USA
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 7:03 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 11):
If B wins the product was simply best. If they loose the product was still best but they didn´t want to go dirt cheap. The option of a customer thinking A offers a better product is conveniently avoided this way.

Airbus has one aircraft that beats the Boeing competitor hands down: A330-200. That is about it. The rest of them either equal the Boeing (A320) or have been regarded as inferior by the broad marketplace. (A340)

With the exception of 787, it is common knowledge that Boeing aircraft have higher prices-- that is not something to brag about. A low price is a positive attribute in the eyes of consumers. Airlines such as Emirates have complained about Boeing prices openly. In contrast, Airbus is known for lower acquistion prices but pricey spare parts.

The 777-300ER is the most expensive Boeing airplane and it is no secret that A340-600 costs millions less. Yet the former is decimating the latter in the latest head-to-head sales battles. If the higher-priced product costs more and also sells more that is evidence of "better."
 
StuckInCA
Posts: 1618
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 12:55 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 7:06 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 11):
IMO it is a kind a save fall back argumentation. If B wins the product was simply best. If they loose the product was still best but they didn´t want to go dirt cheap. The option of a customer thinking A offers a better product is conveniently avoided this way.

I agree with what you're saying, but I think you are guilty of exactly the same behavior.
Official Qantas Order Result - Boeing 115 787s (by PanAm_DC10 Dec 14 2005 in Civil Aviation)

see reply 199. Maybe I just misinterpret your suggestions.
 
TinkerBelle
Topic Author
Posts: 1436
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:46 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 7:17 am

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 15):
If SQ wanted more A345s, they would've ordered more of them. Why feign interest in the 777LR if you're going to buy A345s?

Just for the heck of repeating it, maybe to get A to lower prices on the A345 and vice versa. It's a widely used tactic buy many airlines. Just ask Boeing as far as IB is concerned.
If you are going through hell, keep going.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 7:24 am

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 15):
If SQ wanted more A345s, they would've ordered more of them.

Reportedly, SQ tried to strike a 5 year leasing deal for the 5 A340-500s previously on option and none of the lessors wanted to be stuck with them after 5 years.

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 15):
Why feign interest in the 777LR if you're going to buy A345s?

Either to get a lower price on the Airbii or because SQ won't decide until they have the last set of offers.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23093
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 7:43 am

Quoting Cloud4000 (Reply 15):
If SQ wanted more A345s, they would've ordered more of them. Why feign interest in the 777LR if you're going to buy A345s?

As Zvezda notes above, SQ wanted to sell their A345s and lease them back. Why? Well you could hypothesize that as with the A343 vs. the 772ER, SQ wanted the 777 model but needed something now. However, the leasing agencies willing to do it wanted too much money on the lease, so SQ just kept them and allowed their five orders to expire.

Latest rumor floated by an "SQ insider" on the other SQ Boeing thread is that SQ has accepted Airbus' offer to buy back the five, and then take them and five new ones on lease so they can launch SIN-JFK and SIN-SFO immediately.

I then hypothesized that leasing A345s allows SQ to service existing and new ULR markets now while they wait for the 772LRs to come. Since they don't own the A345s, they can just give them up one-for-one as the 772LR enters the fleet. And then Airbus can use the time SQ is operating them to try and place them with TG, SA, VS or whomever when they come off-lease at SQ.
 
Ken777
Posts: 9048
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 7:58 am

As I recall, SQ was close to being one of the original launch customers for the 787 when Airbus basically said they were coming up with the 350 and SQ should wait to see it before deciding. I have no doubts that SQ will give the 350 a close look and that Airbus will be pushing the price down hard, but will it be enough? That's the hard part to guess, especially since SQ lost out on the original launch customer discounts AND delivery slots for the 787.

As for the 345s, SQ can always insist that they want to trade them in for picking up options on the 380 and I doubt that Airbus will complain too much after the problems of the last year. This would be especially true if SQ picks up a few 748is.

I wouldn't put money on this one until SQ makes an announcement as Airbus is under a lot of pressure to deliver and just might.
 
luisca
Posts: 1530
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2001 11:37 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:19 am

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 14):
It seems that the A350 can now annihilate any remaining advantages the 787 still has for those airlines already operating A330s and A320s, by the simple fact it is an almost identical Airbus like the rest.

LOL, you should work for the democrat's, you have some spinning skill

Why don't you tell that to QF and AC, according to you they made a huge mistake then. You should open your own fleet consultant business, you would make millions educating the idiots that make decisions in airlines.

We all know that you despise anything that comes from Seattle Sabenapilot, so cut the crap.

Even with the added cost of a different fleet type, the better operating economics of the 787 beat the A350, no matter how you spin it.

JJ, TP, etc, dont have a single Boeing on the fleet and never plan to. They have sold their soul to AB so there really was no competition there.

At the end of the day, the A350 has lost every single battle in which it had the same chance of winning as the 787. Qatar has still not firmed up, EK has not made up its mind and is apperantly (rumors) leaning for Boeing. The only battle left in the future will be LH, AF, UA. If they fail to win at least one of those then it is certainly doomed.
If it ain't Boeing (or Embraer ;-)) I ain't Going!
 
keesje
Posts: 8754
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:19 am

The leasing periods for the A350´s would expire. 777LR are flying today.

Lets not forget Boeing has tried to sell ULH 777´s to SQ for nearly ten years now. http://airtransportbiz.free.fr/Aircraft/777X-2.html. Another "not good enough" from SQ is something Boeing will try to avoid fiercely.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 5):
The economics of the 777, however, are a shoe-in. The 772LR fits in perfectly with the 777 fleet and kills the A345 on B/C-routes.

Ok let me help. Keywords:
- ETOPS (silent vaporization of ETOPS330)
- Belly tanks eating cargo space
- Cockpit cross qualification
- MTOW limitations
- Engine transport..
- Cabin noise level
- No middle seats in business
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:34 am

Quoting Mariner (Reply 8):
That would mean that SQ is wasting their time, too, of course.

their "fleet deciding" employees are probably getting paid anyways, better to get maximum work out of them...

 Smile
"Up the Irons!"
 
luisca
Posts: 1530
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2001 11:37 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:35 am

Just when you think you've heard the craziest pro Airbus spin, Keesje comes along and proves you wrong.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
Lets not forget Boeing has tried to sell ULH 777´s to SQ for nearly ten years now. http://airtransportbiz.free.fr/Aircraft/777X-2.html. Another "not good enough" from SQ is something Boeing will try to avoid fiercely.

SQ bought the A345 when their was no Boeing option and when they still had A343's

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
ETOPS (silent vaporization of ETOPS330)

Hardly an issue if LROPS go into place, besides SQ already uses twins on longhauls and common passengers wont notice the difference between a twin and a quad even if it is staring them in the face

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
Belly tanks eating cargo space

A345 uses the same belly tanks, besides they are removable, so depending on the mission the airlines chooses to use them or not.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
Cockpit cross qualification

Tell me what airbus SQ operates (will operate) besides the A345 and the A380?

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
MTOW limitations

The 777-200LR can carry more useful payload than the A345, if the A345 has a higher MTOW it is because of higher empty weight.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
Engine transport..

I have no idea what you mean by this

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
Cabin noise level



Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
No middle seats in business

These 2 I will give the A345 credit for, but they are hardly a factor at the end of the day, SQ will chose the aircraft that can perform the mission cheaper and better, that aircraft is the 772LR.
If it ain't Boeing (or Embraer ;-)) I ain't Going!
 
keesje
Posts: 8754
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:37 am

Quoting Luisca (Reply 22):
the better operating economics of the 787 beat the A350

Lets not get carried away. They are paper planes.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23093
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:45 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
Lets not forget Boeing has tried to sell ULH 777´s to SQ for nearly ten years now.

Yes, but the shrunk 777-100 would have had too high a seat-kilometer costs when it was offered in 1996 (though I wonder how it would have compared to the A345...) and with more powerful engines coming, Boeing could negate that by putting them on the 777-200 and improving range. The 777-200IGW was the first offshoot of this program and the 777-200LR the latest.

Quote:
Ok let me help. Keywords:
- ETOPS (silent vaporization of ETOPS330)

If all of SQ's routes are doable with ETOPS-207, then it doesn't matter. And ETOPS-240 should become a standard soon enough, as well.

Quote:
- Belly tanks eating cargo space

Yet the 772LR evidently has more cargo space to begin with, so it can afford to give some of it away and still match (or exceed) the A345 over the same stage lengths at the extreme end.

Quote:
- Cockpit cross qualification

Which favors the 777 in SQ's case since they operate the 772ER and 773ER. It also favors the 787 since it will draw on the 773ER and 772LR cockpit.

Quote:
- MTOW limitations

Boeing has been improving performance so MTOW issues continue to be negated.

Quote:
- Engine transport

That's what freighters are for.  Smile

Quote:
- Cabin noise level

A 777 is quiet enough. The babies and loudmouthed louts make more noise then the engines on most modern airliners.

Quote:
- No middle seats in business

And I am sure the airlines just love to leave those revenues on the table.  Silly

And ask most folks if they would prefer to be in a window or aisle in Economy or a middle in Business...  Wink
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:49 am

Quoting Luisca (Reply 22):

We all know that you despise anything that comes from Seattle Sabenapilot, so cut the crap.

Well, the first jet I flew myself came from Seattle (B732) and I loved every minute of it, so I'll blame this silly comment of you on complete ignorance of my background.

Quoting Luisca (Reply 22):

Even with the added cost of a different fleet type, the better operating economics of the 787 beat the A350, no matter how you spin it.

Good to see you have personally conducted your own full in-depth cost impact analysis of the introduction of the A350 in an all Airbus fleet like was done at AY, JJ, and TP too very recently.

Have you informed the airlines already about your very different and clearly unambiguous findings??? They might still be able to revise their choice!

Quoting Luisca (Reply 22):

The only battle left in the future will be LH, AF and UA. If they fail to win at least one of those then it is certainly doomed.

Unless you think all other airlines too are so biased like a handful of US based airlines to simply commit to one manufacturer, no matter what the other might have to offer and will sign for the 787 without even asking for the best offer from Airbus, this remark can only mean you think the market for the A350/787 is really that limited then?

Again: have you informed those concerned already, because B and A clearly think the market is HUGE and are currently spending big in it!

If there is one person around here who could make millions by starting his own fleet consultant business, it would be you so it seems, if only there would be at least a flair of realism in your ideas.

[Edited 2005-12-29 01:00:38]
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:00 am

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 14):
It seems that the A350 can now annihilate any remaining advantages the 787 still has for those airlines already operating A330s and A320s, by the simple fact it is an almost identical Airbus like the rest.

Have gone from highly optimistic into delusional territory. The cockpit commonality cannot overcome better overall economics and does not extend much outside the cockpit.
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:08 am

Quoting N79969 (Reply 29):
The cockpit commonality cannot overcome better overall economics and does not extend much outside the cockpit.

US
TP
AY
JJ

Anybody has the address of their HQs, seems some people here need to URGENTLY write them a letter to protect them from making a bad choice!
 
TinkerBelle
Topic Author
Posts: 1436
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:46 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:13 am

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 28):
Unless you think all other airlines too are so biased like a handful of US based airlines to simply commit to one manufacturer,

Would you be kind enough to name the 'handful'! All I can think of is maybe WN and Jetblue...Maybe Alaska too.
If you are going through hell, keep going.
 
B2707SST
Posts: 1258
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2003 5:25 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:21 am

Wow -- Keesje, you may be the biggest Airbus cheerleader on A.net, but you've really outdone yourself here. Other people have already made comments on these "advantages," but here are some more:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
Ok let me help. Keywords:
- ETOPS (silent vaporization of ETOPS330)

What ULH routes is SQ flying or considering that are not attainable with ETOPS-207? With the exception of some South American routes, in which I can't recall SQ expressing any interest, every city in the world is reachable from SIN with ETOPS-207.

I hope Airbus itself isn't dumb enough to make this argument, considering it is trying to sell SQ twin-engine A350s, the smaller of which (A358) has very nearly the same range as the A345 (200nm difference).

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
- Belly tanks eating cargo space

On a ULH route such as SIN-EWR, how much cargo does the A340-500 fly?

Almost none: the A340-500 is MTOW-limited to the weight of the passengers, their bags, and fuel.

The increased payload-range capability of the 777-200LR will allow SQ to actually fly meaningful amounts of cargo on this run, but still not enough to fill the holds. The belly tanks make no difference.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
- Cockpit cross qualification

Which is more valuable: cockpit cross-qualification between 5-10 A340s and 10-20 A380s with two different type certificates, or between 5-10 772LRs and 77 other 777s with identical type certificates?

Both the 787 and A350 would be new cockpit types for SQ, so there is no cross-qualification benefit here.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
- MTOW limitations

I'm not sure what you mean by this. The 777-200LR is fuel-limited, not MTOW-limited, on ULH routes. It can fly a larger payload farther and faster than the A340-500 at a lower gross takeoff weight. This is an advantage, not a limitation.


Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
- Engine transport..

If you're referring to transportability of GE90-115Bs, they can be disassembled into fan and propulsor units and shipped on a 747F. This certainly hasn't stopped SQ from ordering 773ERs in quantity, and the A380, A350, and 787 will also have very large high-bypass fans:

EA acknowledges that a full GP7200 must be shipped in an An-124 but adds that the 747F's capability to ship Trent 900s is marginal, with door clearances of less than 1 in. per side.

...

The EA solution to engine transportability is to facilitate the splitting of fan propulsor and core into separate modules. Due to the robustness of wide-chord titanium fan blades and the power margin of the core, it will be possible to swap whatever module is damaged "with no need for a power assurance check in a test cell," Thompson says. "GE90s do this every day," Saia adds.


http://www.atwonline.com/channels/ai...ipment/article.html?articleID=1086

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
- Cabin noise level

Anecdotal, and certainly of much lower importance than operating costs, payload-range capability, dispatch reliability, purchase price, etc.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
No middle seats in business

No one is holding a gun to 777 operators' collective heads and forcing them to put in middle seats in business. Airlines exist for one reason: to make money. If SQ thinks additional passenger comfort is more valuable than the additional revenue potential, there will be no middle seat. Otherwise, SQ must think it can make more money from the extra seat than it would lose by annoying its C-class passengers.

You're trying to argue that having the option of adding a middle seat due to a wider cabin is a disadvantage. Do you realize how silly (not to mention desperate) that sounds?

--B2707SST

[Edited 2005-12-29 01:23:42]
Keynes is dead and we are living in his long run.
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 2442
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:21 am

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 31):
Would you be kind enough to name the 'handful'! All I can think of is maybe WN and Jetblue...Maybe Alaska too.

Guess you've never heard of that infamous deal signed by CO, AA and DL a few years ago in which they committed to buy ONLY from Boeing for what was it: 10, 20 or even 30 years???

Only after the EU trade commissioner threatened to take this case to the WTO, did the US administration step in to declare the contract void.

It still stands as a gentleman's agreement these days as CO for instance didn't even bother to ask for a price quote in TLS when they ordered new planes.... Talking about narrow minded people, when on the other side of the pond, AF flies the 773 and is rightfully very happy doing so.

http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/1997/07/21/daily11.html

[Edited 2005-12-29 01:35:22]
 
dagell
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 12:21 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:41 am

Even if SQ preferred Boeing, would they be stupid enough to say it?! Of course not!

I'm sure Airbus is going to make SQ a very attractive offer, SQ will take it or make sure that Boeing knows the price Airbus is giving them is very competitive... and since they already operate the A345, it does give them a card to play in negociating the price with Boeing.

I hope they go Boeing in the end, but it would be wiser for SQ buyers to be more patient... what is a few more months when you're talking about m/billions of dollars in potential savings?
 
boeingbus
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 12:37 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:51 am

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 33):
t still stands as a gentleman's agreement these days as CO for instance didn't even bother to ask for a price quote in TLS when they ordered new planes.... Talking about narrow minded people, when on the other side of the pond, AF flies the 773 and is rightfully very happy doing so.

Oh, and there are no gentleman agreements when it comes to Airbus sales?

Look, the fact remains that Airbus' largest customers are in the US. These A vs B sales campaigns are everything to do with the airlines bottom line.

When it comes to US based airlines politics are not considered like it is in the EU. Product and costs are the two factors... Most Americans just DO NOT care of the Airplanes place of origin.

AA, CO and DL go Boeing because it better suits their needs - simple as that. Also, you have to take into account that CEO's/boards or any leaders do not last forever... so Boeing can't take these 3 for granted... right? If Airbus contibues to be proactive in garnishing new sales than it will continue being sucessful here. Airbus just needs to have a competitive widedoby planes for 2010 and beyond.
Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8573
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:04 am

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 33):
Guess you've never heard of that infamous deal signed by CO, AA and DL a few years ago in which they committed to buy ONLY from Boeing for what was it: 10, 20 or even 30 years???

A Boeing countermeasure to Airbus signing the first exclusive arrangement with US Airways.

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 33):
It still stands as a gentleman's agreement these days as CO for instance didn't even bother to ask for a price quote in TLS when they ordered new planes.... Talking about narrow minded people

What were they going to ask for? CO ordered in December 04 when the 787 was still the 7E7. It wasn't until November 04 that Airbus stopped insisting that a simple A330 re-engine was adequate to nullify Boeing's massive investment.

Tough choice between launch-offer 787 and regular A330?

Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):

Ok let me help. Keywords:- ETOPS (silent vaporization of ETOPS330) - Belly tanks eating cargo space - Cockpit cross qualification - MTOW limitations - Engine transport..- Cabin noise level - No middle seats in business

Seriously Keesje, you're better than that...

SQ has no routes that demand ETOPS 330. Even if they did, Boeing fully demonstrated the ETOPS 330 capabilities of the 777 and Airbus is building the A350 to the same standard. How many SQ routes would even need the 777LR belly tanks? The 772LR has the exact cockpit of the other 75+ 777 SQ flies. The 772LR lifts a far greater payload than the A345. Engine transport has not proven to be any challenge to the 777 in its 10th year of service. The A345 is quieter? The 777 is faster. And a C-market 777 would likely have a premium cabin the A345 isn't capable of lifting in the first place.

It's open and shut. The A345 does not cut-it with the 772LR.

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 30):
Anybody has the address of their HQs, seems some people here need to URGENTLY write them a letter to protect them from making a bad choice!

A twice bankrupt carrier in reorganization and B-team lightweights. Impressive list.

When the economics of scale in large fleets come into play, ordering the most optimal aircraft for the designated role is the only sensible option. Note the much more impressive list of A332/B777 customers.

[Edited 2005-12-29 02:05:15]
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11831
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:07 am

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 33):
Guess you've never heard of that infamous deal signed by CO, AA and DL a few years ago in which they committed to buy ONLY from Boeing for what was it: 10, 20 or even 30 years???

As noted, contract is voided. As to US airlines not bidding Airbus, I assume you exclude B6, HP/US, F9, UA, and NW. As to AA, CO, or DL... I'm thinking that they're not going to be as loyal as some assume. The previous deals were made in an environment where not as much discounting went on.

If an airline wants to throw away Billions ignoring the other aircraft maker(s), that is going to be shooting themselves in the foot. Personally, one reason I think B6 opted for the E190 was to improve the negotiation position on the A320's (a minor consideration I admit) .

As to SQ, the 772LR definitely would fill certain roles very nicely in their fleet. As to 787/350, who knows. I like what airbus has done with provisions for crew rest space (as I am also with the latest in the 777). In many ways, it will come down to production slot allocation in the near years (2009/2010/2011/2012). It seems quite a few airlines like the 787/350 concept of more "point to point." Although, is it just me or are these aircraft being used to help secure hubs more than anything else?

This begs the question should Boeing commit to a 2nd 787 production line. Tough call. The enthusiast in me says yes. The risk analyst in me doesn't know enough to make the call on putting forth the dough for a 2nd source of carbon fibre (IIRC, the limiting factor currently on 787 production). In my opinion, launching the 787-10 (What will that be, 78A?) requires this level of commitment in the near term but might not in the mid or long term.

I'm a *big* fan of carbon fibre. Not the least of which is that my company is having a tough time getting enough titanium, nickel, and some grades of aircraft aluminum right now. Gee... have a four year downturn and the metal foundries/mills converted their shops over to new products and the foundries/mills want real money to convert back.  scratchchin 

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
keesje
Posts: 8754
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:10 am

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 32):
What ULH routes is SQ flying or considering that are not attainable with ETOPS-207?

You can fly many routes with ETOPS 120. Question : is it the shortest route.

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 32):
The increased payload-range capability of the 777-200LR will allow SQ to actually fly meaningful amounts of cargo on this run

LAX-SIN meaningfull cargo? any numbers?

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 32):
Which is more valuable: cockpit cross-qualification between 5-10 A340s and 10-20 A380s with two different type certificates, or between 5-10 772LRs and 77 other 777s with identical type certificates?

But they are getting the A380 anyway, so what is smarter in this respect another 10 777 or Airbusses?  Wink

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 32):
I'm not sure what you mean by this. The 777-200LR is fuel-limited, not MTOW-limited, on ULH routes. It can fly a larger payload farther and faster than the A340-500 at a lower gross takeoff weight. This is an advantage, not a limitation.

I think many people here just look at some general Boeing specs. The 777LR can take a lot of fuel, people, cargo and has a long max range. But not everything together. A MTOW take off from a hot & not so long runway on one engine after V1 is something authorities hate. To cut it short you start of loading payload from the 777LR at trips above 6500NM. (pay load/weight diagram).

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 32):
acknowledges that a full GP7200 must be shipped in an An-124 ..... Thompson says. "GE90s do this every day," Saia adds.

I think you´ve got the point.

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 32):
Quoting Keesje (Reply 23):
- Cabin noise level

Anecdotal, and certainly of much lower importance than operating costs

No it´s not. Expereincing it for more then 12 hours is no fun. Denying it is irritating revenue paying premium passengers in front and therefore the airlines they fly. So Boeing / GE are spending big bugs to make it "even quieter".
http://www.ge.com/stories/en/20375.html?category=Product_Business
http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/ts_sf07.html


Quoting B2707SST (Reply 32):
No one is holding a gun to 777 operators' collective heads and forcing them to put in middle seats in business. Airlines exist for one reason: to make money.

Ever noticed how big the business cabins are on ULH flights?
http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Sin...Air/Singapore_Air_Airbus_A345.php. Thing is a SQ 772 also has 6 abreast business cabin, very nice wide aisles and so on, but not efficient for the overall seatcount -> seat mile costs. Dead space.


Damn, now I realise I put my time into responding to the least civilized poster. Sorry Stich/Luisca..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
trex8
Posts: 4605
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:24 am

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 37):
This begs the question should Boeing commit to a 2nd 787 production line.

that is highly unlikely given the significant capital costs that the major suppliers like, Alenia etc, will have to invest to ramp up production of , in this case the fuselage sections, by essentially having to double the size of their factory! unless Boeing is willing to fork out that money themselves rather than having their risk sharing partners do it, but I wouldn't hold my breath on that!
of course I guess they could ask Rome for more aid money to build the factory, I'm sure Tokyo would be more than happy to fork out a few billion more yen to help MHI, KHI and FHI too if they felt increasing the 787 production rate significantly was beneficial to the bottom line of the Japanese suppliers.
 
kaitak744
Posts: 2086
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:32 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:34 am

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 37):
This begs the question should Boeing commit to a 2nd 787 production line.

HAHAHA, there is always a disadvantage in getting 800+ orders in per year.
 
Alitalia744
Posts: 3777
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 8:22 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:37 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
But they are getting the A380 anyway, so what is smarter in this respect another 10 777 or Airbusses?

You answered your question - 777s obviously.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
So Boeing / GE are spending big bugs to make it "even quieter".

Exactly how do bugs help make an airplane quieter?
Some see lines, others see between the lines.
 
F4N
Posts: 507
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2000 11:37 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 11:10 am

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 14):
It seems that the A350 can now annihilate any remaining advantages the 787 still has for those airlines already operating A330s and A320s, by the simple fact it is an almost identical Airbus like the rest.

Sabenapilot:

It would seem that QF missed that particularly simple fact.  scratchchin 

regards,

F4N
 
boeingfever777
Posts: 1990
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:35 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 11:54 am

I think Airbus has this one in the bag. More A380s, A350s... and maybe some more A345s since they love them so much and LAX needs to see all 3x daily be A345s. Forget the 744 and 772ER.  stirthepot 
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre.
 
ual747-600
Posts: 591
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 1999 12:57 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:15 pm

Quoting F4N (Reply 42):
Sabenapilot:

It would seem that QF missed that particularly simple fact.

As did AC, KE, NW and CX.

UAL747-600
 
B2707SST
Posts: 1258
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2003 5:25 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:30 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
You can fly many routes with ETOPS 120. Question : is it the shortest route.

The 772LR will be at least ETOPS-207 compliant, as will the A350, so I'm not sure what relevance ETOPS-120 has.

Please tell me which routes that SQ flies or wants to fly would require a diversion for ETOPS-207:



Notice that not one route from SIN to Europe, North America, Africa, Asia, or Oceania comes anywhere near the no-go zones. South America is the only problem. You tell me: has SQ shown any interest in EZE or GIG?

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
LAX-SIN meaningfull cargo? any numbers?

I tried look up the route on Airbus' charts, but they were kind enough to remove their payload-range graphs from their web site. Luckily, the Internet Archive has saved a copy of the 365-ton A345 chart, which is representative of SQ's machines:



Compare it to the 772LR's, available at:

http://www.boeing.com/assocproducts/aircompat/acaps/777rsec3.pdf (page 4)

I aggregated these two charts into one in Excel for easier comparison. I would post the result, but my web hosting server is down at the moment. I'll post it ASAP when the server comes back up.

In summary, the 772LR has more uplift capability on any given route than the A345. This is even true of the yet-to-be-ordered 380-ton A345. Note that Boeing's payload-range charts have not been updated in 18 months, so in-service improvements to the 773ER will yield even better performance.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
But they are getting the A380 anyway, so what is smarter in this respect another 10 777 or Airbusses?

If you think the marginal cost of a fleet of 5 or 10 A340s for an airline that:

- flies no A330s
- no other A340-series model
- and whose foreseeable Airbus fleet aside from the aircraft in question will consist solely of 10 or 20 A380s

is lower than the marginal cost of a fleet of 5 or 10 772LRs for an airline that currently flies the world's largest fleet of 777s, including numerous nearly identical -300ERs, you've lost touch with reality.

Again, which is more likely: a pilot jumping back and forth from the A340-500 to the A380-800, which carry different type certificates, fly different missions, are physically very different; or a pilot jumping from the 777-200LR to the 777-200A/200ER/300 or especially -300ER, all of which are essentially the same aircraft?

Beyond cockpit commonality, the 772LR has almost total parts and systems commonality with the -300ER, which SQ is buying in bulk; and 70% commonality with earlier 777s. The A340-500 and A380-800 are much more distant relations.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
A MTOW take off from a hot & not so long runway on one engine after V1 is something authorities hate. To cut it short you start of loading payload from the 777LR at trips above 6500NM. (pay load/weight diagram).

Your claim is completely unsubstantiated by Boeing data. Runway length for all jets in all weather conditions is governed by the critical case -- an engine failure at V1. At ISA+20C and maximum takeoff weight, the 777-200LR needs an unremarkable 11,600 feet of runway. The 747-400ER, a quad with similar power loading to and lower wing loading than the A345, needs a comparable amount runway under ISA+17C conditions.

Since Boeing's reference 9,420nm ULH trip is accomplished at less than MTOW -- again, the 772LR is fuel-limited, not weight-limited like the A345 -- less runway would be needed.

http://www.boeing.com/assocproducts/aircompat/acaps/777rsec3.pdf (p. 39)

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
I think you´ve got the point.

That ellipsis you conveniently added completely alters the meaning of the text I posted. A plain reading of the text shows that GE90s "swap whatever module is damaged 'with no need for a power assurance check in a test cell'" everday. They do not "fly around in Antonovs every day." Your need to manipulate text to prove your argument betrays its weakness.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
No it´s not. Expereincing it for more then 12 hours is no fun. Denying it is irritating revenue paying premium passengers in front and therefore the airlines they fly. So Boeing / GE are spending big bugs to make it "even quieter".

The market says otherwise; just look at 777 vs. A340 sales this year. If the A340 is really so much quieter, and if cabin noise were really a big concern to premium passengers and therefore the airlines they fly, those airlines would be buying A340s. They are not. The 777 is crushing the A340 this year.

Obviously, quieter cabins are always better, but much of the QTD2 program was to reduce external noise levels (which Airbus is also doing) and flight-test the 787's soundproofing technology. If Boeing can reduce the 777's internal noise, that's great, but it would be ridiculous to claim that this is actually costing them orders.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
Thing is a SQ 772 also has 6 abreast business cabin, very nice wide aisles and so on, but not efficient for the overall seatcount -> seat mile costs. Dead space.

How is it dead space if SQ believes premium passengers will pay more (or fly SQ more often) for a 6-abreast cabin? In SQ's estimation, either the 7-abreast business class cabin will pay for itself, or it will not. The 20-inch difference in cabin width between the 777 and A340 is not so great that 6-abreast C seating carries an fatal economic penalty, especially since the larger and wider 772LR is already a whopping 65,000 pounds lighter than the A345.

Further, if SQ is concerned about seat-mile costs, then the A340 is certainly the wrong place to go, since its lack of uplift capability forced SQ to reduce its seat-count and leave out high-revenue F seats entirely. The 777-200LR will likely have at least 30 more seats than the A345 and still have lower fuel burn, which blows the seat-mile argument out of the water whether they have two or three middle seats in C.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 38):
Damn, now I realise I put my time into responding to the least civilized poster.

I'm sorry you feel attacked when others point out that your arguments are completely unsupported by the available facts. If you have further information to back up your point of view, by all means, share it.

--B2707SST

[Edited 2005-12-29 04:33:26]
Keynes is dead and we are living in his long run.
 
9v-svc
Posts: 1703
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 5:19 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:32 pm

My guess is that SQ is trying to use this tactic in hoping for Boeing to slash the prices of the aircrafts they are interested in as Airbus could have offer extreme low prices on their aircrafts they are offering to SQ . I am pretty sure that SQ is more keen on the Boeings then Airbus.

Boeing 787 and Boeing 777-200LR are perfect additions to the fleet.
Airliners is the wings of my life.
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:37 pm

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 6):
I don't think its funny at all becuase there is some merit.

IMHO, Airbus did not take the 787 program seriously, as they should. Maybe hindsight is 20/20... but I think the Toulouse execs are re-evaluating the A350 as we speak. You can drop the price so far... but at the end of the day, its the product that count.

You have almost 30 airlines adopting the 787. Look at the impressive customer list...

Perhaps the A-350's economics are viewed with perhaps a bit of skepticism by the market, or perhaps there are other problems ?????

Or perhpas Boeing is being totally cut-throat it the pricing of the 787 in an effort to drive Airbus down in the market????

I still think this one could go either way; both sides are really fighting for it, but I think Airbus has the most to gain or lose with the outcome.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 5):
The A350/787 order, IMO, could still go either way. It very may well be the best deal that wins.
One Nation Under God
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 12:59 pm

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 30):
US
TP
AY
JJ

Anybody has the address of their HQs, seems some people here need to URGENTLY write them a letter to protect them from making a bad choice!

What a compelling list. USAirways? I am sure you know that as a condition of financing their merger, they are contractually bound to buy A350. That is not much of an endorsement.

Quoting UAL747-600 (Reply 44):
Quoting F4N (Reply 42):
Sabenapilot:

It would seem that QF missed that particularly simple fact.

As did AC, KE, NW and CX.

UAL747-600

Exactly.

Keesje,

When enough operators actually need and want ETOPS 330, then there will be applications and certification processes. Until then there is no point in applying for it. It is simple.
 
manni
Posts: 4049
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 1:48 am

RE: SQ Still Weighing Boeing And Airbus Offers

Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:00 pm

Quoting UAL747-600 (Reply 44):
Quoting F4N (Reply 42):
Sabenapilot:

It would seem that QF missed that particularly simple fact.

As did AC, KE, NW and CX.



Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 14):
Since then, TP, AY and TAM, all known to be addicted to Airbus (both narrow and wide bodies) have selected the A350 in a tender in which there was no talk of any serious competition from the 787.

It seems that the A350 can now annihilate any remaining advantages the 787 still has for those airlines already operating A330s and A320s, by the simple fact it is an almost identical Airbus like the rest.

I think you're missing the point here. Sabenapilot clearly names smaller airlines with a nearly all Airbus fleet. Smaller airlines, can't afford as easily to add a subfleet of a different type, since the required amount of frames would be rather small.

As pointed out by Sabenapilot, AC and NW ordered before the A350 took its current identity.

CX has not ordered the 787, if anything similar sizewise, it has ordered additional A330s recently.
SUPPORT THE LEBANESE CIVILIANS