• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 14
 
flyabr
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:42 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 3:58 am

For airlines that currently fly 789s and A333s, I could see the 787-10 as a replacement of older A333s down the road given its decent capacity upgrade and similar range, particularly for TATL hub to hub flying.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3444
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 5:34 am

Polot wrote:
Which just highlights how close they are in size unless you go basically all 9Y in the A330.


They are pretty close, but I think the current comparison isn't quite fair. New 789s off the line are "densified" to current standards. It's effectively at its maximum for usable seat space. Many current A330 configurations aren't efficient, and we know the NEO will come with more space due to interior adjustments. In comparable configurations, it appears the 8-across A339 will have at least 15-20 more seats than the 789. But if 9-across becomes the norm, and I think it will by the time these planes leave service, the A339 will be way ahead in capacity. That's a pro and con of the A330NEO. Is there enough demand for the extra size.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 5:56 am

MSPNWA wrote:
But if 9-across becomes the norm, and I think it will by the time these planes leave service, the A339 will be way ahead in capacity. That's a pro and con of the A330NEO. Is there enough demand for the extra size.


That'll keep it interesting. It also will be humorous watching - yet again - the 180 by the A and B crowds as the B guys bemoan the lack of room in the A339 at 9 abreast, just as the A crowd is enjoying doing to the B guys with the 787 today. And the A crowd will point to the hypocrisy of the B guys, and the B guys will do the same to the A crowd. lol

Regardless, they are both great machines, and I'm a fan of the 330neo/350 combo at DL that's forthcoming.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
MoKa777
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:47 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:51 am

It would help if Airbus did a 777X-style cabin widening on the A330neo. Obviously, they have worked themselves into a corner with all the 18" or bust talk but it would add to the attraction of the A330neo. 17" seats will most certainly be possible with such a widening and would make for a highly efficient aircraft (even more efficient than it is planned to be).
Never be proud. Always be grateful.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:59 am

Okcflyer wrote:
Not as important as payload range, but the 789 features significant improvements in the the maintenance department. Composite materials are not subject to traditional metal fatigue so C checks are much less intensive and are spaced out longer. Troubleshooting and maintenance are suppose to be similar / quicker / easier with the all electric system, significantly less bleed piping to deal with. Overall design focused heavily on reliability and maintenance intervals.


I would be interested to know real world MRO cost for both aircraft. What I've seen in pricing for engines overhauls, components and consumables I do not see lower pricing, contrary.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 2903
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:15 am

Okcflyer wrote:
Troubleshooting and maintenance are suppose to be similar / quicker / easier with the all electric system, significantly less bleed piping to deal with.
LOL! I dare you to ask a sparky how long it will take to find the problem when he has his head in a cabinet and a multimeter in his hand. Fluids are easy, you can see where the useful stuff is coming out. If you leak any of the blue smoke that powers electronics you are too late.

Didn't the A330 maintenance intervals increase dramatically around the time of the 787 hype? To similar system of no specific checks (b,c,d), with a sort of staged approach. The A380 has such a system I believe and that isn't because its plastic.

Fred
Image
 
Strato2
Posts: 447
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:16 am

PlanesNTrains wrote:
That'll keep it interesting. It also will be humorous watching - yet again - the 180 by the A and B crowds


There is nothing humorous if Airbus takes the horrible Boeing seating comfort and makes it even worse.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8742
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:41 am

The really interesting fact imho is that it shows how little influence the actual aircraft makes to the performance. All new fancy fuselage and all new wings and still the warmed over design from the 1980ies is competitive. Imho this must be a warning for the industry. The current plane design has reached the limits, where the actual airframe can only add small amounts of efficiency gain. Even CFRP is no longer the saviour, due to new alloys, metal composites and 3D printing.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:46 am

Strato2 wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
That'll keep it interesting. It also will be humorous watching - yet again - the 180 by the A and B crowds


There is nothing humorous if Airbus takes the horrible Boeing seating comfort and makes it even worse.


Is that what I said? Because I'm pretty sure it isn't.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13995
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:56 am

JoeCanuck wrote:
The pair of Trent 7000 engines will weigh an extra 7000 lbs, (so 3.5 tons), compared to the Trent 700's on the ceo, so using your numbers, with just the engine weight added on to a ceo, the weight of a neo, (with catering), could be from 126.5 - 131 tons.


Best to wait until the TCDS for the engine is available, as only then will you know what is considered to be included in the "engine", for example some engines have the cowl and reverse included in the engine mass and others dont. The point I was making with my post is the 130+ tonnes figure the poster claimed for the A330-300 (not 900) was way off base, this then perpetuates into people adding other numbers than all of a sudden the next comparison is the A330-900 DOW plus engines is heavier than the 787-900 MEW. Many people do no understand the difference between MEW, BW, OEW, DOW etc, they see one "empty" number fits all.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1756
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:28 am

Stitch wrote:
...The A350 and 787 are also first generation CFRP designs so they're conservatively "overbuilt".

CFRP does offer real weight savings - the 787-9 and A350-900 are lighter than the 777-200 and the A350-1000 is fair bit lighter than the 777-300ER.

To me it seems, the A350 realizes more of the potential weight savings by composites...

astuteman wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
I mean, if AC's seats are torture...the 9 abreast 339 would have to be classified as positively criminal.

Conversely, if that 1/2" is more an imagined difference than a real one, 9-abreast A330's will surely be the way to go - no? :)

The 9 abreast 787 and the 10 abreast 777 overwhelmingly get more "will avoid at all cost" reviews even for the best airlines, than the A330/A340s...

How can LX be proud of such feedback as published here?
https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Swiss ... -300ER.php

http://www.blickamabend.ch/360-panorama ... 19365.html
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:44 am

The anti-787 threads have really taken on a life of their own. Definitely up with the A380, 757, and MOL threads. I'm guessing that there are one or two people trying to think up some other comparisons as we speak in order to start another thread. It's all fair game, though, and there's always something new to learn along the way. Hopefully the next iteration that Boeing comes up with avoids the 1"/seat discrepancy so we can avoid it all in the decades to come.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
MoKa777
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:47 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:54 am

I agree with rheinwaldner that the A350 better represents and showcases the benefits of CFRP. I do not believe that the OEMs would have invested billions in a material technology that would not significantly benefit them in any way. The 787-8 (and to a lesser extent, the 787-9) were poorly handled, as we all already know by now. Hopefully the 787-10 will remedy this situation over at Boeing since, after all, they have improved the 787-9 significantly on the back of the 787-8.
Never be proud. Always be grateful.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8742
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:01 am

Technology evolves. When the 787 and even the A350 was designed CFRP was the hot topic, but the competition did not sleep. New alloys made metals competitive again, 3D printing is to change production by a lot and other composites (like Glass laminate aluminium reinforced epoxy (GLARE)) are also getting commercially ready for large scale applications.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:01 am

MoKa777 wrote:
I agree with rheinwaldner that the A350 better represents and showcases the benefits of CFRP. I do not believe that the OEMs would have invested billions in a material technology that would not significantly benefit them in any way. The 787-8 (and to a lesser extent, the 787-9) were poorly handled, as we all already know by now. Hopefully the 787-10 will remedy this situation over at Boeing since, after all, they have improved the 787-9 significantly on the back of the 787-8.


What would the -10 remedy that the -9 hasn't? Just wondering what your thoughts are on that.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
Matt6461
Posts: 2910
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:36 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:02 am

Rheinwaldner wrote:
To me it seems, the A350 realizes more of the potential weight savings by composites...


This seems true for the -1000, haven't looked too closely - or had sufficient data - to look at A350 vs. 789.

I recall a Boeing exec stating that a lot of the 787's material thickness is set by the minimum gauge required to avoid catastrophic damage from commonplace ramp handling mishaps. In that case, we'd expect a bigger plane like A35K, which requires more strengthening on the wing and fuse sections, to show greater benefit - more of its basic structural requirements will exceed the characteristics of minimum gauge CFRP. If that's so, then maybe the 787-10 will realize CFRP weight savings to a greater extent.
 
User avatar
MoKa777
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:47 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:02 am

PlanesNTrains wrote:
The anti-787 threads have really taken on a life of their own. Definitely up with the A380, 757, and MOL threads. I'm guessing that there are one or two people trying to think up some other comparisons as we speak in order to start another thread. It's all fair game, though, and there's always something new to learn along the way. Hopefully the next iteration that Boeing comes up with avoids the 1"/seat discrepancy so we can avoid it all in the decades to come.


Yes, it is quite annoying. Just like the A380 is a phenomenal aircraft that works very well for airlines who require an aircraft of its size and capability, the A340-300 is not the gas guzzler people like to believe, the A340-600 works exceptionally well for the airlines who need it, the difference in seat comfort between the A350 and 787 is not as significant as most people like to believe!
Never be proud. Always be grateful.
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1756
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:10 am

seahawk wrote:
The really interesting fact imho is that it shows how little influence the actual aircraft makes to the performance. All new fancy fuselage and all new wings and still the warmed over design from the 1980ies is competitive. Imho this must be a warning for the industry. The current plane design has reached the limits, where the actual airframe can only add small amounts of efficiency gain. Even CFRP is no longer the saviour, due to new alloys, metal composites and 3D printing.

You must be talking strictly about the 787...
The A350-1000 vs 77W does realize significant structural efficiency gains against an even younger legacy design.

I see it this way:
787: overbuilt 1st gen CFRP design. Airbus' answer is a warmed over, not stretched, re-engined 30 year old design (45 years for the fuselage cross section).
A350: better CFRP design. Boeings answer is half of a new design, stretched, re-engined, re-winged, of a 20 year old design. If the current 77W payload/range capabilities represent "a market", the new 77X offering had to be placed entirely outside of that "market", to stay competitive.
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
User avatar
MoKa777
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:47 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:11 am

PlanesNTrains wrote:
MoKa777 wrote:
I agree with rheinwaldner that the A350 better represents and showcases the benefits of CFRP. I do not believe that the OEMs would have invested billions in a material technology that would not significantly benefit them in any way. The 787-8 (and to a lesser extent, the 787-9) were poorly handled, as we all already know by now. Hopefully the 787-10 will remedy this situation over at Boeing since, after all, they have improved the 787-9 significantly on the back of the 787-8.


What would the -10 remedy that the -9 hasn't? Just wondering what your thoughts are on that.


From my years of following all things commercial aircraft related, I have observed that the 787-8 missed expectations to a greater degree than the 787-9. If I am not mistaken, the 787-9 exceeded expectations. Obviously, newer/later variants of a new aircraft type will always have built-in improvements solely from the manufacturer taken lessons from the initial variant. The 787-10 should offer even more improvements when it arrives.
Never be proud. Always be grateful.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:20 am

MoKa777 wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
MoKa777 wrote:
I agree with rheinwaldner that the A350 better represents and showcases the benefits of CFRP. I do not believe that the OEMs would have invested billions in a material technology that would not significantly benefit them in any way. The 787-8 (and to a lesser extent, the 787-9) were poorly handled, as we all already know by now. Hopefully the 787-10 will remedy this situation over at Boeing since, after all, they have improved the 787-9 significantly on the back of the 787-8.


What would the -10 remedy that the -9 hasn't? Just wondering what your thoughts are on that.


From my years of following all things commercial aircraft related, I have observed that the 787-8 missed expectations to a greater degree than the 787-9. If I am not mistaken, the 787-9 exceeded expectations. Obviously, newer/later variants of a new aircraft type will always have built-in improvements solely from the manufacturer taken lessons from the initial variant. The 787-10 should offer even more improvements when it arrives.


It might - I don't personally know - but I believe the -10 is a pretty simple straight stretch of the -9, so not a lot of changes.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:55 am

Strato2 wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
That'll keep it interesting. It also will be humorous watching - yet again - the 180 by the A and B crowds


There is nothing humorous if Airbus takes the horrible Boeing seating comfort and makes it even worse.


For the 787 8 across will stay the exception. ( Like ANA, .. and 9 across is required to be competitive.)
For the A330 9 across will stay the exception. ( absolute LCC )

5 years later I'll probably have to eat my hat : A330 in 9 across are en vogue
and 787 at 10 across gets a sound hazing but is there to stay.
Murphy is an optimist
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 10:16 am

seahawk wrote:
The really interesting fact imho is that it shows how little influence the actual aircraft makes to the performance. All new fancy fuselage and all new wings and still the warmed over design from the 1980ies is competitive. Imho this must be a warning for the industry. The current plane design has reached the limits, where the actual airframe can only add small amounts of efficiency gain. Even CFRP is no longer the saviour, due to new alloys, metal composites and 3D printing.


Airbus' word and stance in answer to the Dreamliner.

But everybody and his or her dog had to nip from the cool aid and go into that druglike rush
that brought mirages of CFRP, Barrelsauce and unbleeding engines.

Now it is time for Cold Turkey, .... sandwiches, hmmmm.

That new material can make a difference ( if you first put the PR department in chains ( and maybe take out their tongues for added savety :-) ) is visible on the A350-1000 over the 77W,
Still, even there the gains are to a significant part carried by engine progress.
Murphy is an optimist
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3639
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 11:22 am

PlanesNTrains wrote:
The anti-787 threads have really taken on a life of their own. Definitely up with the A380, 757, and MOL threads. I'm guessing that there are one or two people trying to think up some other comparisons as we speak in order to start another thread. It's all fair game, though, and there's always something new to learn along the way. Hopefully the next iteration that Boeing comes up with avoids the 1"/seat discrepancy so we can avoid it all in the decades to come.


The anti-787 threads and discussions are relentless. The criticism of that plane is never ending. Like you mentioned the biggest complaint that always comes up is economy class seat width. The topic comes up on almost every thread where the 787 is mentioned. Accounting methods are the second most common discussion topic.

The comparison to start this thread isn't much of a comparison. Length, wingspan, list price, marketing range figures, and a guess at OEW differences don't provide a whole lot to discuss. There are enough technical people on the forum to dive deeper. Real world Range, payload, MTOW, fuel burn, maintenance costs, acquisition costs, cruising speed, comfort, availability etc are all more critical factors for airlines making purchasing decisions. Out of those categories, I expect

-787-9 real world range to be about 1000-2000sm more
-787-9 payload is about 5-15 tons higher depending on what weight options are chosen,
-787-9 MTOW similarly is higher
-Analysts are a little divided in fuel burn, but most give the 787 an advantage of 0.5% to 4% per seat depending on seating counts and distance. Consensus is that the 787-9 has a bigger fuel burn advantage for longer flights.
-Maintenance costs are hard to determine but early 787 maintenance costs while they go through the entry into service period are higher than expected. Assuming A330neo EIS goes well it may have a line maintenance cost advantage.
-Acquisition costs likely favor the A330neo but this is something hard to know. Most believe 787 manufacturing costs are too high
-787-9 has a cruising speed advantage allowing higher utilization and lower crew costs
-Regarding comfort, the 787 has an advantage in premium classes with its bigger windows, higher cabin pressure and humidity. Economy comfort depends on configuration and for most airlines the A330neo will have seats that are roughly half an inch wider. This isn't always the case. It is a nebulous argument whether the 787 windows, pressure have an offsetting factor that probably isn't worth discussing since that topic has already been discussed 3 times in the last week.
-availability has been an A330 advantage for years, but as we have seen with the latest 787 orders, it looks like production slots 24 months in the future can be obtained for the 787 since over 500 have been built. The A330neo most recently had a 3 month delay to its launch customer, so the availability might be starting to look similar despite the 787 having a much larger backlog.

I am eager to see a real world analysis comparing operating costs. We have seen a few dating back a year or two.
 
airbazar
Posts: 9702
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:03 pm

There's little need to guess eachothers capacity. VS operates both with the same 3-class config style. It's incredible how identical in terms of seats, the 2 are. The 789 seats 264 and the A333 seats 266. The main difference is that the A333 has more Y+ seats and the 789 has more Y seats. Which makes perfect sense. It allows the airline to deploy the less fuel efficient aircraft where there's more Y+ demand.
787
https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Virgi ... 87-900.php
A333
https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Virgi ... 300_3C.php
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 10043
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:18 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
The anti-787 threads and discussions are relentless. The criticism of that plane is never ending. Like you mentioned the biggest complaint that always comes up is economy class seat width. The topic comes up on almost every thread where the 787 is mentioned. Accounting methods are the second most common discussion topic.


I see it like this, the A330Neo is to the B789 as the 737MAX is to the A32XNeo, both have their place in the market, but the B789 is probably better and therefore can command a premium, but the other option will keep the prices reasonable competitieve.

For the prices, the B789 is said indeed to be more expensive to build and the development cost are said not to be paid off until line number 1500 or so, but that is Boeings problem, isn't it ;-)

For the A330Neo, much less investment of course - airframe has been payed of long ago - , most will be with its engines anyway, so with the current orders Airbus will probably make a profit on it.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
spacecookie
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2015 3:57 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:45 pm

Okcflyer wrote:
Not as important as payload range, but the 789 features significant improvements in the the maintenance department. Composite materials are not subject to traditional metal fatigue so C checks are much less intensive and are spaced out longer. Troubleshooting and maintenance are suppose to be similar / quicker / easier with the all electric system, significantly less bleed piping to deal with. Overall design focused heavily on reliability and maintenance intervals.

I am a 787 fanboy but I don't see why this composite is no subject tu fatigue is an advance, what will it mean, will it break off one day without signs ?
Will it last forever?
What is the weight difference between an traditional plane an this new composite stuff ? Not much, because they have to add aluminium in the structure...
 
Eyad89
Posts: 637
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:47 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:14 pm

It is really interesting to see that those two birds share an almost identical OEW. So, let's look at it this way:

- Their engines should offer similar performance when it comes to fuel efficiency. One of them may be slightly better than the other though.
-A339 offers a longer wingspan and possibly a higher L/D ratio.
- 789 cruises at higher speeds, it should reach its destination faster when compared against A339.
- As mentioned above, they have almost identical OEW.


Based on those facts, can we assume that A339 could offer a similar performance when it comes to fuel efficiency?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21456
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 3:53 pm

MoKa777 wrote:
It would help if Airbus did a 777X-style cabin widening on the A330neo. Obviously, they have worked themselves into a corner with all the 18" or bust talk but it would add to the attraction of the A330neo. 17" seats will most certainly be possible with such a widening and would make for a highly efficient aircraft (even more efficient than it is planned to be).

Personally I'm hoping the race to the bottom will stop.

MoKa777 wrote:
I agree with rheinwaldner that the A350 better represents and showcases the benefits of CFRP. I do not believe that the OEMs would have invested billions in a material technology that would not significantly benefit them in any way. The 787-8 (and to a lesser extent, the 787-9) were poorly handled, as we all already know by now. Hopefully the 787-10 will remedy this situation over at Boeing since, after all, they have improved the 787-9 significantly on the back of the 787-8.


http://aviationweek.com/commercial-avia ... -execution is the best description of what was changed for the -10, and they emphasize that they went out of their way to keep commonality, and achieved 95% commonality. It says the wing strengthening needed for the -10 was back-ported to the -9 and the side-of-body joints are common too. The major differences are improved tail strike protection and changes to the gear so it can pivot on the rear wheel, which allows for earlier and steeper rotation.

So, I think we can say that we won't see major improvements to the -9 due to the -10 effort. The main goal was to have high commonality which reduces production cost as opposed to optimizing each platform.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
reidar76
Posts: 448
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:16 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 4:19 pm

JoeCanuck wrote:
9 abreast 330 seating [...] it has been an available option for decades and it hasn't really caught on except for a few charter type operations, so I doubt it will be a very popular configuration with airlines


LCC doing long haul is a relatively new thing, so we might see many 9 abreast A339s in the coming years. Airbus is also doing research and innovation concerning slightly angled seats in order to accommodate 17 inch wide seats at 9 abreast in the A330 family.

I think it remains to be seen if the 789 is more fuel efficient per seat than the A339 when both are configured with 9 abreast seating in Y. Another thing is that the A330 has certified solutions for using cargo space for toilets and gallery, an option that for example Thomas Cook have used on their A330s. This increases available space for more seats, and might be interesting for LCCs.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 4:48 pm

I'm actively avoiding 9 abreast 787 & A330, 10 abreast 777. However I just had to book a 787 9 abreast, medium flight because of schedule restrictions. :indifferent: And no I didn't get any discount, extra legroom of FF points because of having to deal with a smaller seats then the 9 abeast 777 of the past. No options, the alternative EK A380 flight is significant more expensive, so probably full. :grumpy:
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
pygmalion
Posts: 836
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:47 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 5:17 pm

keesje wrote:
The planned aircraft MTOW increase to 245 metric tons might increase range for the A330-900 by 200NM. Maybe before EIS. (The 7T MTOW increase on the CEO (from 235T to 242T) increased range by 500NM))
Looking at current A330 operations, it doesn't seem range is a real issue. It might not be the best machine for flying to/from Asia, but their are lots alternatives there.

Another advantage of the 787-9 seems to to be it enables overhead crew rests, A330s often use below floor crew rests.
Image


The cargo deck crew rests just steal cargo volume and revenue. The 787-9 already has about 9% more cargo volume over the A330-300. With the cargo volume unchanged on the A330-900neo, this is a substantial revenue hit to an airline and is even worse with the cargo volume taken up by a crew rest.
 
User avatar
QuarkFly
Posts: 369
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 4:20 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 5:21 pm

MoKa777 wrote:
It would help if Airbus did a 777X-style cabin widening on the A330neo. Obviously, they have worked themselves into a corner with all the 18" or bust talk but it would add to the attraction of the A330neo. 17" seats will most certainly be possible with such a widening and would make for a highly efficient aircraft (even more efficient than it is planned to be).


Unlikely new investment in the A330 platform after this NEO...A350 is the future midrange product for Airbus that will get enhancements. We don't want any more than 8-across Y in A330 anyhow. Sorry situation here... looking for A330's to avoid cramped cabins, and 767 7-across is like paradise.

The 17" seat is really the least significant issue...9-across Y on a 787 (to a lesser extent A350) or 10-across 777 means more middle seats instead of isle/window, crowded feel, climbing over people, narrow isles, less standing room for taller passengers who try to stand during long-haul flights...it's not like airlines are providing more seat pitch to ease the crowding...lines at restrooms, etc.

I'm hoping as the Asian population gets larger in physical stature and flys even more... some carriers not so bottom line oriented will ease up on Y-class crowding...others will have to follow. 787 at 8-across Y would be fantastic (A350 even better)...ditto for 777X not more than 9-across Y with the few inches more being provided.
Always take the Red Eye if possible
 
texl1649
Posts: 1065
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:11 pm

This is a classic a.net "competition" without real variables/mission stats. Pick two dissimilar generation aircraft, which the manufacturers disagree as to their respective competitor model, and claim a tough time deciphering a winner based on weight and seating configurations.

This also neglects depreciation. Was a ca. 1998 MD11 worth as much as the A330 it competed with 10 years later (and by the way, I'd guess the CFRP frames will be worth more than AL counterparts in 10 years)? What will wind up being in production in 2030 vs. today? Airlines don't buy based on a given route/passenger density, but almost always over-buy vs. current needs (see: well, any major airline narrow body fleet). Aircraft mfg's don't make direct competitors, for a good reason. They want to sell vs. the gaps in range/capacity of the competitor's offerings.

I'd like to think the carbon frames, and all the other bits in service-related costs (such as electric/non bleed air), will wind up winning vs. previous generation aircraft over time. The same goes for the A350 vs. 77x.
 
sf260
Posts: 276
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 9:59 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:57 pm

zeke wrote:
waly777 wrote:
All of our A333s have a basic weight between 120-123t (2&3 class, regional and medium haul configs), and catering adds between 3-4.5 tonnes depending on the sector. 131 tonnes sounds like B/S.

That is really low, what is (not) included in your numbers?

Ours range from 126t to 130t (later sn's being the heavier. this includes, catering, standard spare parts kit, etc). Airbus gave us a 6t increase for the neo. We have based our future fleet decision on 136t empty weight for the A330neo.
 
Strato2
Posts: 447
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:08 pm

pygmalion wrote:
The cargo deck crew rests just steal cargo volume and revenue. The 787-9 already has about 9% more cargo volume over the A330-300. With the cargo volume unchanged on the A330-900neo, this is a substantial revenue hit to an airline and is even worse with the cargo volume taken up by a crew rest.


So what? With cargo yields tanking with no recovery in sight as more and more belly cargo friendly aircraft flying in the skies it is not a negative at all to devote as much space for pax seats as possible.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13183
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:47 pm

texl1649 wrote:
This is a classic a.net "competition" without real variables/mission stats. Pick two dissimilar generation aircraft, which the manufacturers disagree as to their respective competitor model, and claim a tough time deciphering a winner based on weight and seating configurations.

This also neglects depreciation. Was a ca. 1998 MD11 worth as much as the A330 it competed with 10 years later (and by the way, I'd guess the CFRP frames will be worth more than AL counterparts in 10 years)? What will wind up being in production in 2030 vs. today? Airlines don't buy based on a given route/passenger density, but almost always over-buy vs. current needs (see: well, any major airline narrow body fleet). Aircraft mfg's don't make direct competitors, for a good reason. They want to sell vs. the gaps in range/capacity of the competitor's offerings.

I'd like to think the carbon frames, and all the other bits in service-related costs (such as electric/non bleed air), will wind up winning vs. previous generation aircraft over time. The same goes for the A350 vs. 77x.


Depreciation is calculated towards a certain restvalue after a period of time. Rest value is determined by e.g value of engines, LDG's and other components, driven by demand from aircraftfleets in service. Or e.g potential for cargo conversion. Or ease of recycling of materials. I'm no expert here on A330 vs 787 rest values. I have a suspision though.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
texl1649
Posts: 1065
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:00 pm

The 748 has largely similar range/cost/weight/depreciated cost/huge legacy installed base wrt long haul tier 1 carriers/cargo advantages vs. the A388.

Neither sell worth a darn though, nor are they likely to do so, anytime soon.

Airline WB decisions, when being made this year or next, will keep in mind fleet goals for a multi decade period. This is not akin to "pick model x or y" around 1985. The engine options are, I believe, more significant than otherwise indicated in this thread. It's enormously important when it comes to the value of the aircraft 5-10 years down the road.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26406
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 11:36 pm

rheinwaldner wrote:
To me it seems, the A350 realizes more of the potential weight savings by composites...


Well it's a larger family so that probably improves the weight saving benefits. But the OEW spread between the 787-8 and 787-9 is a fair bit smaller as a percentage than that between the 767-300 and 767-400 or 777-200 and 777-300 so it looks like Boeing was able to find significant improvements in the 787-9 so I would argue it also represents "more potential".
 
grbauc
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:05 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Tue Jan 10, 2017 11:47 pm

keesje wrote:
The planned aircraft MTOW increase to 245 metric tons might increase range for the A330-900 by 200NM. Maybe before EIS. (The 7T MTOW increase on the CEO (from 235T to 242T) increased range by 500NM))
Looking at current A330 operations, it doesn't seem range is a real issue. It might not be the best machine for flying to/from Asia, but their are lots alternatives there.

Another advantage of the 787-9 seems to to be it enables overhead crew rests, A330s often use below floor crew rests.
Image


That crew rest looks great. : ) Looks like the bunks on the boats I take to Catalina Islands for Scuba diving.
 
Armodeen
Posts: 1184
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:17 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Wed Jan 11, 2017 12:31 am

rheinwaldner wrote:
Stitch wrote:
...The A350 and 787 are also first generation CFRP designs so they're conservatively "overbuilt".

CFRP does offer real weight savings - the 787-9 and A350-900 are lighter than the 777-200 and the A350-1000 is fair bit lighter than the 777-300ER.

To me it seems, the A350 realizes more of the potential weight savings by composites...

astuteman wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
I mean, if AC's seats are torture...the 9 abreast 339 would have to be classified as positively criminal.

Conversely, if that 1/2" is more an imagined difference than a real one, 9-abreast A330's will surely be the way to go - no? :)

The 9 abreast 787 and the 10 abreast 777 overwhelmingly get more "will avoid at all cost" reviews even for the best airlines, than the A330/A340s...

How can LX be proud of such feedback as published here?
https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Swiss ... -300ER.php

http://www.blickamabend.ch/360-panorama ... 19365.html


Wow absolutely savage comments from those customers! You see that a lot with 777/787 reviews though, but still people on Anet will tell you the general public won't notice the difference.
 
Swadian
Posts: 539
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:56 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Wed Jan 11, 2017 12:46 am

I could only find one airline (not a leasing company) that ordered both the 787-9 and A339 - IZ.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3639
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Wed Jan 11, 2017 12:51 am

Swadian wrote:
I could only find one airline (not a leasing company) that ordered both the 787-9 and A339 - IZ.


Well only about 5 airlines have directly ordered the A339. Over 30 have ordered the 787-9. With so few customers, it doesn't surprise me that airlines who have ordered the A339 have not necessarily ordered the 789.
 
jagraham
Posts: 928
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Wed Jan 11, 2017 1:43 am

keesje wrote:
Okcflyer wrote:
Not as important as payload range, but the 789 features significant improvements in the the maintenance department. Composite materials are not subject to traditional metal fatigue so C checks are much less intensive and are spaced out longer. Troubleshooting and maintenance are suppose to be similar / quicker / easier with the all electric system, significantly less bleed piping to deal with. Overall design focused heavily on reliability and maintenance intervals.


I would be interested to know real world MRO cost for both aircraft. What I've seen in pricing for engines overhauls, components and consumables I do not see lower pricing, contrary.


With regards to engines, RR is apparently claiming 5 shop visits over 25 years, while GE says only 3 for GEnX and GE9x. IF they achieve that, the savings will be considerable.
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1756
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Wed Jan 11, 2017 5:50 am

Stitch wrote:
...so it looks like Boeing was able to find significant improvements in the 787-9 so I would argue it also represents "more potential".

Agreed.
Also, if the 787 is overbuilt, it only means that larger/higher performance options will be easier to develop (because the structure needed is already there). I think a 787-10 with 1000-15000nm more range would make the 787 family even more attractive.
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 1728
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Wed Jan 11, 2017 5:53 am

seahawk wrote:
The really interesting fact imho is that it shows how little influence the actual aircraft makes to the performance. All new fancy fuselage and all new wings and still the warmed over design from the 1980ies is competitive. Imho this must be a warning for the industry. The current plane design has reached the limits, where the actual airframe can only add small amounts of efficiency gain. Even CFRP is no longer the saviour, due to new alloys, metal composites and 3D printing.


It never was "the saviour", except for marketing and fanboys.
"As with most things related to aircraft design, it's all about the trade-offs and much more nuanced than A.net likes to make out."
 
gloom
Posts: 320
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2016 4:24 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Wed Jan 11, 2017 7:57 am

sf260 wrote:
zeke wrote:
waly777 wrote:
All of our A333s have a basic weight between 120-123t (2&3 class, regional and medium haul configs), and catering adds between 3-4.5 tonnes depending on the sector. 131 tonnes sounds like B/S.

That is really low, what is (not) included in your numbers?


Your numbers match (more or less).

From my understanding, Zeke claims BW (basic weight) numbers. So, an empty plane with no fluids, no pantry. He mentions another 4 tons for pantry.

What you show, is OEW (Operating Empty Weight), basically all-ready plane; just before fuel fill-up and boarding. If you add 1-2 t extra for fluids (hydraulics, oils, etc) and 4.5 t for galleys, you get extra 6 tons, which is more or less the difference.

Cheers,
Adam
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 990
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:34 am

rheinwaldner wrote:
Stitch wrote:
...so it looks like Boeing was able to find significant improvements in the 787-9 so I would argue it also represents "more potential".

Agreed.
Also, if the 787 is overbuilt, it only means that larger/higher performance options will be easier to develop (because the structure needed is already there). I think a 787-10 with 1000-15000nm more range would make the 787 family even more attractive.

I believe that CFRP technology aircraft tends to benefit larger aircraft more due to its higher rigidity and strength. If the aircraft is too small, it might be overbuilt. That is why we may not see the technology fully implemented in narrow bodies as they will not be cost effective.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Wed Jan 11, 2017 10:18 am

The 788 had so many shortfalls that made it mandatory to do "significant improvements" to the family followups.
More of that went into the 789 ( some from new details ) than into the 788 ( so much fixed by design ).

In the process all design leeway in the basic concept has been used up. Moving MTOW beyond 253t seems to require a further major redesign. ( won't happen in the next decade ( or two?)

( Same actually is valid for the 777 : starting from the -200 : -300, LR, ER, F : all the typepermutations required significant redesign and beefing up of structures. Step changes documented in rather hefty OEW increases. Primary difference : the original 777 mostly met its projected progress though generating about twice the projected cost.)
Murphy is an optimist
 
waly777
Posts: 730
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:11 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Wed Jan 11, 2017 10:53 am

zeke wrote:
waly777 wrote:
Hello, please clarify where you got A339 empty weight? I have a 3 class A333 DOW as roughly 131T and would be surprised if the neo is lighter with the larger wing.


All of our A333s have a basic weight between 120-123t (2&3 class, regional and medium haul configs), and catering adds between 3-4.5 tonnes depending on the sector. 131 tonnes sounds like B/S.


No need to be rude @ BS, I would like to believe you are capable of disagreeing with someone and remaining civil.

I specifically mentioned DOW not basic emtpy weight as i figured that's what he meant based on the 129T which is quite close to the 789 DOW....
The test of first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold 2 opposed ideas in the mind concurrently, and still function
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9483
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Boeing 787-9 <-> Airbus A330-900 Competition

Wed Jan 11, 2017 12:12 pm

Swadian wrote:
I could only find one airline (not a leasing company) that ordered both the 787-9 and A339 - IZ.

IZ is not going to operate the 789. They transferred the order to their leasing arm (sister company) and the planes are now delivered and flying for DY.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 14

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