TheFlyingRaven
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:56 am

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Thu Jul 20, 2017 8:41 am

Boeing778X wrote:
reidar76 wrote:
I’m more worried about the 777x than the A350. There aren’t any orders for the 777x placed by North- or South American carriers.

The 777x order book is slim: 20 777x for Europe (Lufthansa, which are reviewing that order and is a large A350 operator), 20 for Japan (ANA) and 30 still listed as “unidentified” (probably Singapore Airlines, which is also a huge A350 operator).

Additionally, there is of course the orders from the ME3, but those orders are based on a continued two digit yearly growth, political stability in the gulf, and continued unhindered access to EU/US skies (and elsewhere).


It's way to early to worry about the 777X in the Americas.

AA, AC and LATAM are the most likely, in my opinion, to order the 777X.

Give it time.


You post upthread that you're worried for current A350 orders as, presumably, it's too big, too expensive, not already in service or has additional unneeded performance, yet you're predicting that not only will the 777X be fine, but airlines that haven't ordered it yet (and have the A350) will buy it, even though the 777X is bigger, more expensive, not in service (or even flown yet) and (in the case of the 778) even more performance?

Why? Because it's your name?

This is why:
VSMUT wrote:

I'm neither (personally I am in favour of the newest and best aircraft for the pilot, irrespective of manufacturer), and honestly, Airbus gets bashed significantly more than Boeing when it comes to non-factual and dubious arguments.



I've been a long-time lurker on here and you've finally encouraged me to write something.

VFR
 
FrancisBegbie
Posts: 142
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 7:22 am

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Thu Jul 20, 2017 12:35 pm

azjubilee wrote:
VCEflyboy wrote:
For the record Hawaiian didn't voluntary swap their order for the neo. They we actually quite adamant in receiving the a350-800. When it was cancelled altogether they had no choice but to accept a probably heavily discount neo order but they were the very last airline to have a350-800 on order and were very disappointed it never came to light.


And now HA is faced with the same dilemma, in that the A330-800neo may not be built. As such, HA is shopping... the picture will be more clear by the end of the year.


HA seem a bit luckless indeed with their fleet renewal plans. Whichever side you prefer, if there ever was an airline that could be 'excused' for jumping the fence to the other vendor it would be 2017 HA. With their size they ideally have one WB type; I could imagine why they would prefer 'abusing' a more capable 788/9 on West Coast (& near Asia) flights versus having a NEO struggling with full payloads to further destinations such as east coast US.
 
User avatar
RL777
Posts: 649
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:43 am

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Thu Jul 20, 2017 12:55 pm

I don't think anybody can call the A350 or 777X program "failures" in any region yet, we're still quite early in the replacement cycle and low oil prices haven't benefitted either aircraft. The A350 has been ordered by 2/3 legacy carriers in the US, not a failure by an stretch (Whether UA takes theirs remains to be seen).
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3639
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Thu Jul 20, 2017 1:02 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
VSMUT wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
I think this might be selective reading though. If you are an A fan, you will obviously remember all the A bashing threads. If you are a B fan, you will obviously remember all the B bashing threads. As a B fan more than A, trust me, the B bashing is very active as well. :-)


I'm neither (personally I am in favour of the newest and best aircraft for the pilot, irrespective of manufacturer), and honestly, Airbus gets bashed significantly more than Boeing when it comes to non-factual and dubious arguments.


Have it your way. I'm sure you've got the stats to back that up and I sure don't, so you win.


I think it is best to let people win. Few admit when they are biased. Users like VSMUT may not believe they are biased but others may perceive those users as biased. It is much easier to notice criticism against your favored product than against a product you don't favor. I see some outrageous or outright incorrect statements for and against A and B. I tend to notice the ones against B more than A and tend to just read over the outrageous pro B commentary with a chuckle and move on. There are fanboys and haters on both sides and I don't have the stats for which side is bigger but both can be pretty obnoxious. Even though I may have bias, I try to back up most of my statements with facts, references, articles and quotes and acknowledge when I am wrong. Some of these A vs B arguments can be very educational. I have learned a lot from posters like KarelXWB and Astuteman when they jump in an A vs B argument with a different opinion than mine. Ever since 747Skipper left there doesn't ever appear to be anyone on this forum who is always right.

With regards to this thread, the article in the Original post is from Seeking Alpha, which tends to have some prop Boeing bias. The original poster took an article titled "Airbus A350 Fails to Gain Ground in North America" and I think exaggerated it to "A350 Dead in North America". The article starts out with a bold title, but not as much of a anti-Airbus slant as this thread started with. I think this is to get a reaction and it certainly worked, but unfortunately started the thread in an A vs B way that made it difficult to actually discuss the question of whether we can expect more orders or more cancellations.

The discussion in the article is mostly factual. 4 US airlines ordered the A350 and all four have converted or delayed A350 deliveries while 2 of the 4 have taken delivery of 61 787s. Those statements are true, but doesn't really support the attention getting title.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9244
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Thu Jul 20, 2017 1:29 pm

As also mentioned, USA carriers are not responsible for the most successful model of the 777 family which is the 777W, what we can gather from past executive comments is that the a/c offered capabilities which the USA carriers did not need, namely range and additional capacity.
Airbus has placed the A350 slightly above the 777-200ER which most USA carriers had ordered, and a bit below the 777W in terms of payload, in a similar vein to what was done with the initial A321 versus the 757. A more efficient frame with slightly less payload.
If USA carriers forecast additional international growth, then frames bigger and or more efficient than the 777-200ER will be required, the A350 any variant and the 777X fall in that category, for the most part, the 787 is larger than the 767 and basically on par with the 777-200ER.
 
User avatar
IslandRob
Posts: 623
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 2:04 am

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Thu Jul 20, 2017 1:57 pm

zeke wrote:
Airbus and Boeing have similar offerings in almost every market segment, as the numbers show that is where the demand is.

The market is big enough to handle both manufacturers without cause for concern. Neither will be closing shop any time soon.

One of the wiser things I've read on a.net.

A lot of members here need to take a deep breath and stop being so ridiculous. -ir
If you wrote me off, I'd understand it
'Cause I've been on some other planet
So come pick me up, I've landed
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Posts: 3268
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Thu Jul 20, 2017 2:05 pm

TheFlyingRaven wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
reidar76 wrote:
I’m more worried about the 777x than the A350. There aren’t any orders for the 777x placed by North- or South American carriers.

The 777x order book is slim: 20 777x for Europe (Lufthansa, which are reviewing that order and is a large A350 operator), 20 for Japan (ANA) and 30 still listed as “unidentified” (probably Singapore Airlines, which is also a huge A350 operator).

Additionally, there is of course the orders from the ME3, but those orders are based on a continued two digit yearly growth, political stability in the gulf, and continued unhindered access to EU/US skies (and elsewhere).


It's way to early to worry about the 777X in the Americas.

AA, AC and LATAM are the most likely, in my opinion, to order the 777X.

Give it time.


You post upthread that you're worried for current A350 orders as, presumably, it's too big, too expensive, not already in service or has additional unneeded performance, yet you're predicting that not only will the 777X be fine, but airlines that haven't ordered it yet (and have the A350) will buy it, even though the 777X is bigger, more expensive, not in service (or even flown yet) and (in the case of the 778) even more performance?

Why? Because it's your name?

This is why:
VSMUT wrote:

I'm neither (personally I am in favour of the newest and best aircraft for the pilot, irrespective of manufacturer), and honestly, Airbus gets bashed significantly more than Boeing when it comes to non-factual and dubious arguments.



I've been a long-time lurker on here and you've finally encouraged me to write something.

VFR


I never claimed the A350 is any of what you think I said :? Speculation is one thing, observation is another. And isn't it only natural that the 777X will get additional orders? I really don't understand this post of yours. What's your point?

What about my username? Boeing778X. Again, what's your point?
United Airlines: $#!ttin' On Everyone Since 1931
 
TheFlyingRaven
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:56 am

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Thu Jul 20, 2017 5:11 pm

Boeing778X wrote:
TheFlyingRaven wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:

It's way to early to worry about the 777X in the Americas.

AA, AC and LATAM are the most likely, in my opinion, to order the 777X.

Give it time.


You post upthread that you're worried for current A350 orders as, presumably, it's too big, too expensive, not already in service or has additional unneeded performance, yet you're predicting that not only will the 777X be fine, but airlines that haven't ordered it yet (and have the A350) will buy it, even though the 777X is bigger, more expensive, not in service (or even flown yet) and (in the case of the 778) even more performance?

Why? Because it's your name?

This is why:
VSMUT wrote:

I'm neither (personally I am in favour of the newest and best aircraft for the pilot, irrespective of manufacturer), and honestly, Airbus gets bashed significantly more than Boeing when it comes to non-factual and dubious arguments.



I've been a long-time lurker on here and you've finally encouraged me to write something.

VFR


I never claimed the A350 is any of what you think I said :? Speculation is one thing, observation is another. And isn't it only natural that the 777X will get additional orders? I really don't understand this post of yours. What's your point?

What about my username? Boeing778X. Again, what's your point?


So you didn't write:

Boeing778X wrote:
I really can't see AA going through with the A350 at this point. It may be better to invest in the A330neo to replace the A333 and 763, and replace the 77Es with additional 789s, perhaps the 787-10, and I'm still adamant about AA ordering the 777-9 down the road.

Having an A330, 787 and 777 fleet would actually be great.


And, no it's isn't "only natural that the 77X will get additional orders". No more natural than the A350 or A380, which you're pessimistic about. And it's not additional orders: none of the three airlines you've named, or any in the Americas have ordered it.

So humour me, why would the 77X be a good fit at AA (which they haven't ordered) and the A350 a bad fit (which they have)?

As for your name, you don't think you're slightly partisan?
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2734
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Thu Jul 20, 2017 5:16 pm

TheFlyingRaven wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
TheFlyingRaven wrote:

You post upthread that you're worried for current A350 orders as, presumably, it's too big, too expensive, not already in service or has additional unneeded performance, yet you're predicting that not only will the 777X be fine, but airlines that haven't ordered it yet (and have the A350) will buy it, even though the 777X is bigger, more expensive, not in service (or even flown yet) and (in the case of the 778) even more performance?

Why? Because it's your name?

This is why:


I've been a long-time lurker on here and you've finally encouraged me to write something.

VFR


I never claimed the A350 is any of what you think I said :? Speculation is one thing, observation is another. And isn't it only natural that the 777X will get additional orders? I really don't understand this post of yours. What's your point?

What about my username? Boeing778X. Again, what's your point?


So you didn't write:

Boeing778X wrote:
I really can't see AA going through with the A350 at this point. It may be better to invest in the A330neo to replace the A333 and 763, and replace the 77Es with additional 789s, perhaps the 787-10, and I'm still adamant about AA ordering the 777-9 down the road.

Having an A330, 787 and 777 fleet would actually be great.


And, no it's isn't "only natural that the 77X will get additional orders". No more natural than the A350 or A380, which you're pessimistic about. And it's not additional orders: none of the three airlines you've named, or any in the Americas have ordered it.

So humour me, why would the 77X be a good fit at AA (which they haven't ordered) and the A350 a bad fit (which they have)?

As for your name, you don't think you're slightly partisan?



Don't mean to get super technical but AA never ordered the A350, US Airways did. Ever since he merger AA has kept on pushing them back.
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 1023
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Fri Jul 21, 2017 1:19 am

Aren't North American airlines obsessed with frequency? Wouldn't they prefer smaller aircraft than the 777-9 - that way, they will have more frequencies?

For most long haul flights, passengers would prefer a double daily frequency as they can arrive in the morning and depart in the evening. This would point to the B789/A359 as being more suitable for them.
 
Varsity1
Posts: 2026
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Fri Jul 21, 2017 7:29 am

The A350 and 777X are the two biggest twins, if demand isn't strong in this segment both will struggle.
"PPRuNe will no longer allow discussions regarding Etihad Airlines, its employees, executives, agents, or other representatives. Such threads will be deleted." - ME3 thug airlines suing anyone who brings negative information public..
 
Varsity1
Posts: 2026
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Fri Jul 21, 2017 7:30 am

flee wrote:
Aren't North American airlines obsessed with frequency? Wouldn't they prefer smaller aircraft than the 777-9 - that way, they will have more frequencies?

For most long haul flights, passengers would prefer a double daily frequency as they can arrive in the morning and depart in the evening. This would point to the B789/A359 as being more suitable for them.


Some routes are slot restricted. Others have the capacity to support multiple 777-9's.
"PPRuNe will no longer allow discussions regarding Etihad Airlines, its employees, executives, agents, or other representatives. Such threads will be deleted." - ME3 thug airlines suing anyone who brings negative information public..
 
FlyHappy
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sat May 13, 2017 1:06 pm

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Fri Jul 21, 2017 1:30 pm

Boeing778X wrote:
TheFlyingRaven wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:

I could answer all your questions, but your coming across as a smart A, so I wont waste my time.


No, you're coming across as wrong and condescending. You stated that you can't see AA taking up the A350 order, but adamant that they'd order the 77X, but you have nothing to back that up, except that you love the 77X program.

Sure, don't answer. That only proves that I'm right. (Now that's being a smart A.)


Are you serious? Are you like 10 or something? Shame on you! Having an intelligent conversation seems to be beyond your current abilities. Just so other users don't see me being dragged to your level, I'll clarify.

You post upthread that you're worried for current A350 orders as, presumably, it's too big, too expensive, not already in service or has additional unneeded performance


BS. I never claimed, nor did I imply any of that. That's completely made up by you.

On the contrary, the A350 is one of the most important widebody aircraft in recent history, and its influence will be seen for decades. I'm strictly talking about whether or not it's needed at AA, but I'll get to that in a moment.

yet you're predicting that not only will the 777X be fine, but airlines that haven't ordered it yet (and have the A350) will buy it


I honestly do not understand how you find that statement controversial. In other threads, I've listed quite a few potentially 777X customers, many with the A350 as well.

It's not just one or the other.

even though the 777X is bigger, more expensive, not in service (or even flown yet) and (in the case of the 778) even more performance?


Size and price are irrelevant.

If an aircraft satisfies a need the airlines have, the airlines will buy it. You're dismissing the 777X before it even rolls out.

And, no it's isn't "only natural that the 77X will get additional orders


What a ridiculous statement! So, let me get this straight; You do not think the 777X will ever gain an order ever again? :? Got it!

No more natural than the A350 or A380, which you're pessimistic about


BS! I have never now, nor have ever been, pessimistic about the A350! On several occasions, I even stated the A350-1000 is "the next 777-300ER", sales wise. Even the prospect of the A380plus gives me hope the program.

But let's be frank. Anyone with the situational awareness of a rock can see the A380 in its current form IS NOT SELLING. So even if I were pessimistic about the A380, I would be 100% justified in being so.

And it's not additional orders: none of the three airlines you've named, or any in the Americas have ordered it


American and United didn't order the 777-300ER off the bat, did they? :?

So humour me, why would the 77X be a good fit at AA (which they haven't ordered) and the A350 a bad fit (which they have)?


I don't have time to humor you, so I'll get right to it.

And before I explain (once again) this topic, let me state something. I am employed by AAG, which means my understanding of the company and internal affairs are exponentially better than yours, so if you want to call it "bias" and "partisanship", that's your prerogative.

American, in many ways, is a premium airline. We have premium routes, destinations, services, and, in this case, aircraft. The 777-300ER provides the perfect platform for international services. The destinations served by the aircraft, notably LHR, sees several 77W flights a day to DFW, JFK, MIA and LAX. Eventually, traffic and commerce to cities where the 77W goes will increase. The 777-9 is a great aircraft for AA not only to grow these cities and compliment the 777-300ER, but also open new markets that could open, and perhaps even grow 77E routes.

The A350 is not a bad fit at all. I question whether it's needed, however. AA has numerous 787s on order and on option. Aircraft like the 77E will need to be replaced in the not so distant future, and while the A350 is a perfect replacement, AA already has a perfect 77E replacement active: The 787-9, and it matches the 77E almost down to the seat.

AA is a 787/777 airline going forward, and since both aircraft have the same type rating, adding the 787-10 and 777-9 would be painless. The A350 was not ordered by AA, rather by US years before the merger, and after 2 deferrals in less than 6 months, I think I have a right to be skeptical about the A350 at AA.

There is one aircraft I do think could benefit AA greatly, but I guess you were busy writing ignorant banter like this...

Why? Because it's your name?[

As for your name, you don't think you're slightly partisan?


...assuming I was a fanboy, to notice. I don't see you going after KarelXWB or TWA772LR just because they have specific aircraft in their usernames too.

I had suggested that the A350 order be swapped to A330-900neos, to replace the Boeing 767-300ER. Oh yes, how "slightly partisan" of me :?


Heya Mr B-X, maybe that little rant was aggravating for you to write, but personally I thank you ;)

Not only does it nicely summarize and clarify your perspective and opinions from other threads (which I both miss, and cannot recollect and attribute to you), but puts an easy to understand spin on the situation at AA. Now, I better understand why AA may never take the A350, and why that would be a pretty sensible decision.

So, thank you.
 
planespotter20
Posts: 174
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Fri Jul 21, 2017 8:08 pm

So, to sum up what this thread has been, two users arguing about who said what and how and what they implied with their writing.

To steer it straighter, this is how I see the a350’s in NA.
DL: 100% (duh)
AA: 30%
UA: 50%

Why? Well DL took their delivery of the first, AA has differed them similarly to the DL 787, while UA is kinda meh about them.
 
grbauc
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:05 pm

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Fri Jul 21, 2017 8:26 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
I think it'll be fine. A lot of that is timing, with the 787 coming earlier and replacing older widebodies while the A350 will be an ideal if not perfect 777 replacement. We just hit a slump in widebody orders and haven't reached the peak 777 replacement cycle.



I think you hit the nail on the head end of story..
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Posts: 3268
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Fri Jul 21, 2017 8:32 pm

planespotter20 wrote:
So, to sum up what this thread has been, two users arguing about who said what and how and what they implied with their writing.

To steer it straighter, this is how I see the a350’s in NA.
DL: 100% (duh)
AA: 30%
UA: 50%

Why? Well DL took their delivery of the first, AA has differed them similarly to the DL 787, while UA is kinda meh about them.


I can agree with those numbers.
United Airlines: $#!ttin' On Everyone Since 1931
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Fri Jul 21, 2017 9:36 pm

When the US3 make so much money flying within North America, it's increasingly difficult to justify new acquisitions to fly internationally.

US3 must have massive 787 launch discounts and soft contract terms (including free model and version hopping, and deferrals), which likely improved further with 787 delivery delays, so will clearly stick with the 787, or switch orders to other Boeing models.

Only when these 787 orders are delivered, or consumed in other ways, will we see new acquisitions based on current attributes and pricing.
 
User avatar
N717TW
Posts: 544
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016 9:24 pm

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Fri Jul 21, 2017 11:46 pm

anfromme wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Never subscribed to that point of view. Most airlines will just order what they need, regardless whether it says Boeing or Airbus, they mostly are a business and are in there to make money.

I used to subscribe to that view as well, but have found this to not be quite that black and white.
Quite a few companies will simply go with what's best for their business needs.
But occasionally, there is also some form of favoritism at play. That doesn't necessarily mean that the other option has no chance, but it does mean that the competition has a bit of an uphill battle to fight against people's preferences, what they're used to, resistance to change, etc. Sometimes plain-old prejudices as well.
Also, there's usually something to be said for having established trusted relationships with your account manager(s), key support staff, processes, etc. Sometimes that even differs between different departments within the same company.
So while business considerations usually dictate the outcome, that "usually" is an important qualifier.

VSMUT wrote:
What apparent pro-Airbus direction? What I read on a daily basis on these forums is: "AA/DL/UA regrets ordering the Airbus Axxx, is about to order the Boeing 7x7 instead", "A380 is dead", "The Boeing 757 is better than the A321 in any way imaginable", "Delta defers A350, they practically cancelled it already!" and "The A330NEO is dead"!

In fairness, that's my impression as well.
Case in point is this thread - "A350 Dead in North America" is not something you'll find about Boeing aircraft, even if you change the geographical area in the title.
That said - UA's actions around the A350 order are a bit... ominous. They've deferred those due for delivery in 2018, and mention something about there being a lot of attention paid to that order. Whatever that means. (Although KarelXWB pointed out that the latter quote is actually from February.)

reidar76 wrote:
20 777x for Europe (Lufthansa, which are reviewing that order and is a large A350 operator)

Had to fact-check it to believe it - that completely slipped past me.
It's still roughly 3 years to EIS, but I bet a lot of people here (me included) would have expected there to be more than 320-odd orders within 3 1/2 years of launch.


People buy things from people they like, more often than not.
 
globalcabotage
Posts: 534
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:42 pm

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Sat Jul 22, 2017 2:56 am

Not dead, but I expect UA to cancel and AA to covert to narrow bodies.

I'm sure Boeing will credit the 350 cancellation fees to late model, on-demand 77Ws.
 
77H
Posts: 1513
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: A350 Dead In North America?

Sat Jul 22, 2017 10:14 pm

I'm not sure about AA and DL but by 2020 UA will have 92 777 frames and almost 50 787 frames. It's hard to imagine the 77A frames will leave the fleet before 2025. The 77E will most likely be in the fleet longer than that. With the slow down in the long haul market where exactly does the 350 fit in that fleet before the middle of next decade? Will Airbus allow UA to defer for ~8+ years? Will UA create routes for the planes? Will UA allow them to collect dust in the desert or perhaps lease them?

I just don't see where they fit at the moment.

77H

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