User avatar
Slug71
Posts: 1115
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:08 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:04 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
IMO one difference between the A350-800 and the A330-800 is, that the A330-800 will be the base for the future MRTT and the Base for the continuation of the A330 freighter. So declining numbers of passenger A330-800 orders will not lead to the A330-800 being dropped even if HA switches its order now. Their will be a live for the A330-800 apart from being a passenger aircraft. And IMO Airbus will change all the production over to the neo in the not to far future.


The A358 could/should have been the base of the future MRTT and Freighter too.

Richard28 wrote:
Importantly the A330neo also uses a separate production line to that of the A350XWB, so every A330 sold does not impede sales of A359's or A35K's.

Had the A358 been continued it would have been fighting for production slots.. this is not the case with the A330.


Assemble the A358 in Mobile, AB.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3160
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:11 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
enzo011 wrote:
[Wow, that is some accusation that you are making. Airbus is lying about the A330 and is using 9-abreast seating for economics but is marketing the aircraft at 8-abreast for comfort. Do I have that right?.

Yes. Its the only explanation. The A330 is sold and marketed with 9 abreast. Its CASM advantage must be calculated when using 9 abreast. The CASM advantage is said to be on short flights which means lots of economy seats. The 787-9 has more cabin area than the A330-900.

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/AirAs ... 0-300.php#

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Ameri ... _787-9.php

Same layout and number of seats. The 787 has significantly better comfort in this comparison. If the A330 had 8 abreast for the full length of the aircraft it has 10% less seats. I don't understand how the A330 could have better CASM on short domestic flights with an 8 abreast domestic cabin. Same weights with 10% less seats.


Your comments regarding 9 abreast seating and CASM differences with 10% seat differences don't make much sense. Both manufacturers fudge the numbers a bit with seat count, but not by 10%

A330 vs 787 CASM differences changing with different ranges is not a factor of the seat count. It's caused by a variety of reasons such as the 787 having a wing and pneumatic/systems architecture more suited for long range cruise. The 787-8 to A330-800 fuel comparisons are more favorable for the 787 than the 787-9 to A330-900 numbers that Leeham news attributes to the lighter weight 787-8.

https://leehamnews.com/2014/07/17/airbu ... more-12550
 
osupoke07
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 1:39 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:33 pm

MrHMSH wrote:
Would be a shame, but I can see why it would happen. Similar to AA there are a few ways to 'compensate' Airbus, but would Airbus play hardball to avoid losing the only customer for the -800?

While it doesn't look great now, I think the A338 could get a new lease of life (pun intended) as the A330neo transitions into the A330ceo lease market which is still quite strong even as A332 sales have slowed.


I haven't read anything past this reply yet, but after Airbus pulled the A358 out from under Hawaiian, I doubt there are significant penalties to cancel their current A338 order.
MD82, MD83, MD88, B717, B732, B733, B735, B737, B738, B739, B752, B763, B77W, CR2, CR7, CR9, A320
 
User avatar
MaxiAir
Posts: 257
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:35 pm

enzo011 wrote:
So no, the A333 is not 10% smaller than the 789, no matter how much you want it to be. This we can see based on how airlines configure their aircraft at the moment. I doubt the A332 will be 10% smaller than the 788 seeing that is more than 2m longer, or about 3 rows of Y, but we don't have a comparison of airline configured cabins as we do with the 789 and A333.

Avianca, American, China Southern, Qatar, Hainan, Oman operate both, the A330-200 and the 787-8, although Business seating can be quite different and Royal Jordanian and Jetstar did operate both as well.

AA
332 20C 12Y+ 226Y (238Y)
788 28C 55Y+ 143Y (198Y)
as 40Y seats is more than 8C seats, A332 is "bigger"

AV
332 30C 222Y
788 28C 222Y
different C class seats, might be advantage 788 here

MU
332 v1 4F 24C 48Y+ 142Y
332 v2 24C 50Y+ 184Y
788 4F 24C 200Y
call this a draw, as 6 rows Y+ cost about one row Y

QR
332 v1 24C 248Y
332 v2 24C 236Y (flatbed C)
788 22C 232Y
close to equal


HU
332 36C 186Y
788 36C 177Y
probably the best comparison here! Both use roughly the same seat.


WY
332 30C 196Y (new Business)
788 18C 249Y (new Business)
Oman Air has an immensely big Business Class seat. 12 Business class seats would take out 7 rows Economy according to their seat maps. That equals 63 seats and would bring the 788 to
potential 788 30C 186Y (or 195Y, if you assume only 6 rows of Y removed)


Overall though, for roughly the same seat amouts or slightly more onboard the A332, the A330 offers a serious comfort advantage. I personally tried both and find it impossible sitting in 3-4-3 (777) or 3-3-3 (787) for more than 3 or 4 hours. Thats actually my idea of hell.

Regards, Max
Flown on - 306,313,318,319,320,321,332,333,343,345,346,359,388, 712,733,734,735,736,73G,738,744,748,752,753,763,77E,77L,77W, M11,M88, CR7,CR9, E35,E45,E75,E90,E95, AR1,AR8, DHT,DH1,DH4, and some more ;)

http://www.facebook.com/flyMaxiAir
 
tphuang
Posts: 1766
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:37 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
enzo011 wrote:
[Wow, that is some accusation that you are making. Airbus is lying about the A330 and is using 9-abreast seating for economics but is marketing the aircraft at 8-abreast for comfort. Do I have that right?.

Yes. Its the only explanation. The A330 is sold and marketed with 9 abreast. Its CASM advantage must be calculated when using 9 abreast. The CASM advantage is said to be on short flights which means lots of economy seats. The 787-9 has more cabin area than the A330-900.

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/AirAs ... 0-300.php#

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Ameri ... _787-9.php

Same layout and number of seats. The 787 has significantly better comfort in this comparison. If the A330 had 8 abreast for the full length of the aircraft it has 10% less seats. I don't understand how the A330 could have better CASM on short domestic flights with an 8 abreast domestic cabin. Same weights with 10% less seats.

Please stop lying.

A330 is marketed as 8 across and only a couple of operators chose to do 9 across. The casm numbers that leeham and others have looked at vs 787 have all been based on 8 across in y.
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1550
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 4:07 pm

MaxiAir wrote:
enzo011 wrote:
So no, the A333 is not 10% smaller than the 789, no matter how much you want it to be. This we can see based on how airlines configure their aircraft at the moment. I doubt the A332 will be 10% smaller than the 788 seeing that is more than 2m longer, or about 3 rows of Y, but we don't have a comparison of airline configured cabins as we do with the 789 and A333.

Avianca, American, China Southern, Qatar, Hainan, Oman operate both, the A330-200 and the 787-8, although Business seating can be quite different and Royal Jordanian and Jetstar did operate both as well.

AA
332 20C 12Y+ 226Y (238Y)
788 28C 55Y+ 143Y (198Y)
as 40Y seats is more than 8C seats, A332 is "bigger"

AV
332 30C 222Y
788 28C 222Y
different C class seats, might be advantage 788 here

MU
332 v1 4F 24C 48Y+ 142Y
332 v2 24C 50Y+ 184Y
788 4F 24C 200Y
call this a draw, as 6 rows Y+ cost about one row Y

QR
332 v1 24C 248Y
332 v2 24C 236Y (flatbed C)
788 22C 232Y
close to equal


HU
332 36C 186Y
788 36C 177Y
probably the best comparison here! Both use roughly the same seat.


WY
332 30C 196Y (new Business)
788 18C 249Y (new Business)
Oman Air has an immensely big Business Class seat. 12 Business class seats would take out 7 rows Economy according to their seat maps. That equals 63 seats and would bring the 788 to
potential 788 30C 186Y (or 195Y, if you assume only 6 rows of Y removed)


Overall though, for roughly the same seat amouts or slightly more onboard the A332, the A330 offers a serious comfort advantage. I personally tried both and find it impossible sitting in 3-4-3 (777) or 3-3-3 (787) for more than 3 or 4 hours. Thats actually my idea of hell.

Regards, Max



Thank you for the comparisons, I wasn't aware of these. It passed my mind that QR would have both, but even then they use so many different seats once again so a direct comparison is difficult. The Hainan Airlines comparison looks good to use and it seems to show that with equal premium seating the A332 will hold more seats than the 788. This shouldn't be a surprise as it is a lot longer than the 788. If the A333 and 789 has about equal seating and the difference in length is less than a meter, then you would expect a 2 meter extension to hold an advantage over the shorter design.

I think enough has been said about comfort between the A330 and 787, but yeah it is much better in the A330 in Y. For those lucky enough to fly J, they should go for the wider cabin of the 787.

tphuang wrote:
Please stop lying.

A330 is marketed as 8 across and only a couple of operators chose to do 9 across. The casm numbers that leeham and others have looked at vs 787 have all been based on 8 across in y.


I know the early 787 marketing had the comfort level comparisons at 8-abreast to be able to claim a more comfortable cabin than the competition. After the weight gains though the efficiency comparisons was done with 9-abreast Y, but the comfort marketing wasn't changed to reflect this. Then again I doubt many companies will show their products in a negative light, even when they had to change the way their marketing slides are calculated.
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 866
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 4:08 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
Yes. Its the only explanation. The A330 is sold and marketed with 9 abreast. Its CASM advantage must be calculated when using 9 abreast. The CASM advantage is said to be on short flights which means lots of economy seats. The 787-9 has more cabin area than the A330-900.

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/AirAs ... 0-300.php#

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Ameri ... _787-9.php

Same layout and number of seats. The 787 has significantly better comfort in this comparison. If the A330 had 8 abreast for the full length of the aircraft it has 10% less seats. I don't understand how the A330 could have better CASM on short domestic flights with an 8 abreast domestic cabin. Same weights with 10% less seats.

False, KLM can fit more seats in their A333 than their 789:
https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/KLM/KLM_Airbus_A330-300.php
https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/KLM/KLM_Boeing_787-900.php
Notice the 8 across economy pitch is the same and the J configuration in the A330 takes up more space with greater pitch yet it manages to have more seats.

Hainan seems to be able to get more seats in their A332 than their 788:
https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Hainan_Airlines/Hainan_Airlines_Boeing_787-8.php
https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Hainan_Airlines/Hainan_Airlines_Airbus_A330-200.php
The J seats appear to be the same with the same pitch and everything and the 8 across economy has the same pitch and yet it has more seats.

And no the A330 is not primarily marketed in 9 across just like the A350 is not primarily marketed in 10 across or the 767 was not primarily marketed in 8 across. Maybe some fact checking would help...
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 8525
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 4:21 pm

767333ER wrote:
Notice the 8 across economy pitch is the same and the J configuration in the A330 takes up more space with greater pitch yet it manages to have more seats.

The J seat may have greater pitch but it is also 2-2-2 versus 1-2-1. Hence why it needs only 5 rows to get 30 seats (300" total at 60" pitch) instead of 8 rows for the 787 (336" total at 42" pitch). The KLM 787 J cabin takes up more floorspace than the A333 J cabin despite the smaller pitch.

The 789 has more room between Doors 1 and 2 than the A333 but I believe slightly less room between doors 2 and 4.
 
trex8
Posts: 5162
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:16 pm

armchairceonr1 wrote:
I think many people overstress fuel consumption when comparing economics of different aircraft. I think we can assume that factory new A339 lease cost is about 200000$ lower per month than 789. If 789 fly 15 hours every day, it use about 2500 tons fuel, which cost today 1,25 million$. If A339 use 5% more per seat mile, it cover only 62500$ of 789s extra lease cost. So 789 operator has to still save 137500$/month from other costs, or get extra revenue somehow..

When the neo was launched Rolls said they would provide maintenance for the Trent 7000 at the same cost as a 700 which is probably significantly less than a 1000 TEN ( or XWB). That could add up to significant $$ compared to getting a 787 or A350
 
trex8
Posts: 5162
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:25 pm

MrHMSH wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
enzo011 wrote:
[Wow, that is some accusation that you are making. Airbus is lying about the A330 and is using 9-abreast seating for economics but is marketing the aircraft at 8-abreast for comfort. Do I have that right?.

Yes. Its the only explanation. The A330 is sold and marketed with 9 abreast. Its CASM advantage must be calculated when using 9 abreast. The CASM advantage is said to be on short flights which means lots of economy seats. The 787-9 has more cabin area than the A330-900.

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/AirAs ... 0-300.php#

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Ameri ... _787-9.php

Same layout and number of seats. The 787 has significantly better comfort in this comparison. If the A330 had 8 abreast for the full length of the aircraft it has 10% less seats. I don't understand how the A330 could have better CASM on short domestic flights with an 8 abreast domestic cabin. Same weights with 10% less seats.


The A330-300 is nowhere near 10% smaller than the 787-9. They're almost identical for area, the A330 is a touch longer but narrower.

Totally fair comparison, a Premium configured aircraft for a premium airline against an economy configured aircraft for a low-cost airline.

The A330 is marketed and sold at 8 abreast, and the vast majority of A330s have 8 seats per row in economy. Unless you can find a statement from an airline saying that the economics are not as good as promised then you have absolutely no leg to stand on. If it were the case you wouldn't have to look far.

CASM doesn't just mean operating costs, it also means ownership/capital costs. When the low cost of acquiring/leasing and early availability of A330s is factored in, and especially in an environment where fuel prices are relatively low, it competes with the 787 on many short and medium haul routes, which is an easy explanation as to why so many A330s have been sold since the 787 launched and since it has entered service.

Someone on another thread mentioned something along the lines that at VS the A333 costs less to operate when capital costs are also factored in than their 789s. Unless oil gets to 100$ A barrel again you can burn a lot of jet fuel for the price difference in lease or finance costs between an a330 and a 787
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 8525
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:30 pm

trex8 wrote:
armchairceonr1 wrote:
I think many people overstress fuel consumption when comparing economics of different aircraft. I think we can assume that factory new A339 lease cost is about 200000$ lower per month than 789. If 789 fly 15 hours every day, it use about 2500 tons fuel, which cost today 1,25 million$. If A339 use 5% more per seat mile, it cover only 62500$ of 789s extra lease cost. So 789 operator has to still save 137500$/month from other costs, or get extra revenue somehow..

When the neo was launched Rolls said they would provide maintenance for the Trent 7000 at the same cost as a 700 which is probably significantly less than a 1000 TEN ( or XWB). That could add up to significant $$ compared to getting a 787 or A350


I don't recall when RR said that but considering the Trent 7000 probably has more in common with the Trent 1000Ten than the Trent 700 I find that difficult to believe unless RR/Airbus eats some of the Trent 7000 maintenance costs to make sure the Neo engine deals stay attractive (since with the 787 RR also has to compete with GE). I suspect that deal would depend on just how big/important you are to RR. A large airline could probably negotiate a similar cost deal on the 787 in order to get RR's business and not GE's.
 
trex8
Posts: 5162
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 5:44 pm

Polot wrote:
trex8 wrote:
armchairceonr1 wrote:
I think many people overstress fuel consumption when comparing economics of different aircraft. I think we can assume that factory new A339 lease cost is about 200000$ lower per month than 789. If 789 fly 15 hours every day, it use about 2500 tons fuel, which cost today 1,25 million$. If A339 use 5% more per seat mile, it cover only 62500$ of 789s extra lease cost. So 789 operator has to still save 137500$/month from other costs, or get extra revenue somehow..

When the neo was launched Rolls said they would provide maintenance for the Trent 7000 at the same cost as a 700 which is probably significantly less than a 1000 TEN ( or XWB). That could add up to significant $$ compared to getting a 787 or A350


I don't recall when RR said that but considering the Trent 7000 probably has more in common with the Trent 1000Ten than the Trent 700 I find that difficult to believe unless RR/Airbus eats some of the Trent 7000 maintenance costs to make sure the Neo engine deals stay attractive (since with the 787 RR also has to compete with GE). I suspect that deal would depend on just how big/important you are to RR. A large airline could probably negotiate a similar cost deal on the 787 in order to get RR's business and not GE's.

Found it
https://leehamnews.com/2014/07/15/airbu ... nce-costs/

“It means that an airline ordering an A330ceo or A330neo will be offered similar prices for our Total Care maintenance including Life-Limited Parts.”
This is significant as engine maintenance costs constitutes about 2/3 of total maintenance costs and the 787 engines have higher maintenance costs, according to our market intelligence.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8111
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:00 pm

trex8 wrote:

Found it
https://leehamnews.com/2014/07/15/airbu ... nce-costs/

“It means that an airline ordering an A330ceo or A330neo will be offered similar prices for our Total Care maintenance including Life-Limited Parts.”
This is significant as engine maintenance costs constitutes about 2/3 of total maintenance costs and the 787 engines have higher maintenance costs, according to our market intelligence.[/quote]
So no total care on the RR engines on the 787???what am I missing, we are talking about engine maintenance done by the same company, if the 787 is higher, did they deploy less efficient engines on the 787 versus the A330?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 18623
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:08 pm

Meanwhile, FG: Airbus aims for first A330-800 final assembly by year-end tells us:

The airframer states that components already undergoing manufacture include the fuselage sections being built in Hamburg, the centre wing-box in Nantes, and titanium pylons in Toulouse for the type's Rolls-Royce Trent 7000 engines.

Korean-built sharklet wing-tips are also under construction for attachment to the wing, which is undergoing installation at Airbus's high-lift systems plant Bremen.

Airbus is aiming to commence final assembly of the A330-800 by the end of this year, ahead of first flight in 2018.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has it's beaches, it's homeland and thoughts of it's own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has it's seasons, it's evenings and songs of it's own
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 25643
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:10 pm

On the flip side, RR pretty much now owns the new-build A330ceo engine market so they may not be offering as aggressive pricing as they are on the 787 program where they are very much in competition with GE. So a Trent 700/7000 Total Care engine deal may not be exceptionally cheaper than a Trent 1000 deal.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 8525
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:20 pm

Stitch wrote:
On the flip side, RR pretty much now owns the new-build A330ceo engine market so they may not be offering as aggressive pricing as they are on the 787 program where they are very much in competition with GE. So a Trent 700/7000 Total Care engine deal may not be exceptionally cheaper than a Trent 1000 deal.

:checkmark:
Nothing in the article really says the A330neo will be much cheaper in engine overhaul department over the 787, that is coming more from Leeham. Also important to remember that the article is 3 years old. Since then far more Trent 1000s have been built and more experience gained so Trent 1000 maintenance costs have likely fallen since the "market intelligence" in that article. This is something RR would be anticipating when crafting deals in 2014 for Trent 7000s not intended to be delivered until 2017/2018+.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 15312
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:51 pm

par13del wrote:
trex8 wrote:

Found it
https://leehamnews.com/2014/07/15/airbu ... nce-costs/

“It means that an airline ordering an A330ceo or A330neo will be offered similar prices for our Total Care maintenance including Life-Limited Parts.”
This is significant as engine maintenance costs constitutes about 2/3 of total maintenance costs and the 787 engines have higher maintenance costs, according to our market intelligence.

So no total care on the RR engines on the 787???what am I missing, we are talking about engine maintenance done by the same company, if the 787 is higher, did they deploy less efficient engines on the 787 versus the A330?[/quote]
Leeham spin on 787 engine maintenance costs. There is total care on the 787. RR just priced it in the past for more profit. With the GEnX competition, RR has had to discount on the 787.

Lightsaber
You only have the first amendment with the 2nd. If you're not going to offend someone with what you say, you don't have the 1st.
 
trex8
Posts: 5162
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:24 pm

RR has been competing with GE since day one on the 787 program. Whats changed in the last few years to make them discount even more to bring 1000 costs down??? The article implies 700 costs are less than 1000 though given theres not much difference in thrust between them Im not sure why that would be except marketing issues. As you say they could have artificially jacked up the 1000 prices early on but surely the competition was as tough
early on in the 787 program as it is now. If the neo concept and business case was based at least in part on keeping mx costs down (and lower if not comparable to the 1000, which seems to be what Rolls is telling Leeham), I dont see Rolls not maintaining a significant price differential between the Total Care costs for 700/7000 versus 1000. Maybe costs on the 700 are also down now as well. Whether that is executable or profitable long term is another issue.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 25643
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:54 pm

trex8 wrote:
The article implies 700 costs are less than 1000 though given theres not much difference in thrust between them Im not sure why that would be except marketing issues.


Well the 700 is a more mature design in terms of service life so I expect Rolls has better MBTF models and therefore a more accurate view of actual costs to base their Total Care pricing on compared to the Trent 1000 and Trent XWB.

That being said, the 1000 and XWB programs have their own RoI that Rolls needs to consider, as well as the 7000's. Pricing the 7000 too attractively could be good for that program, but it is not the one Rolls has invested significant resources in and has large amounts to recover.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6751
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:56 am

Newbiepilot wrote:
Your comments regarding 9 abreast seating and CASM differences with 10% seat differences don't make much sense. Both manufacturers fudge the numbers a bit with seat count, but not by 10%

A330 vs 787 CASM differences changing with different ranges is not a factor of the seat count. It's caused by a variety of reasons such as the 787 having a wing and pneumatic/systems architecture more suited for long range cruise. The 787-8 to A330-800 fuel comparisons are more favorable for the 787 than the 787-9 to A330-900 numbers that Leeham news attributes to the lighter weight 787-8.

https://leehamnews.com/2014/07/17/airbu ... more-12550


I agree with you that there is no 10% seat difference.
Seat counts in the real world for both the 787 models and A330 models look remarkably similar.
I also agree about the 787-8/A338 and 787-9/A339 comparisons.
787-8 is a 227t aircraft, A338 is a 242t aircraft - 787-8 top weight is 15t less - A338 flies further
787-9 is a 253t aircraft, A339 is a 242t aircraft - 787-9 top weight is 11t more - 787-9 flies further

I don't think I can agree with you about the wing architecture.
With a 64m span for the A330NEO, relofted to accommodate both the longer winglets and bigger engines, vs a 60m span for the 787, I can't see how the 787's wing is more optimised for long range. If anything I'd expect the opposite to be true, with the greater span of the A330NEO providing more relief from induced drag at higher weights than the 787's wing

Rgds
 
Varsity1
Posts: 1608
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:18 am

astuteman wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
Your comments regarding 9 abreast seating and CASM differences with 10% seat differences don't make much sense. Both manufacturers fudge the numbers a bit with seat count, but not by 10%

A330 vs 787 CASM differences changing with different ranges is not a factor of the seat count. It's caused by a variety of reasons such as the 787 having a wing and pneumatic/systems architecture more suited for long range cruise. The 787-8 to A330-800 fuel comparisons are more favorable for the 787 than the 787-9 to A330-900 numbers that Leeham news attributes to the lighter weight 787-8.

https://leehamnews.com/2014/07/17/airbu ... more-12550


I agree with you that there is no 10% seat difference.
Seat counts in the real world for both the 787 models and A330 models look remarkably similar.
I also agree about the 787-8/A338 and 787-9/A339 comparisons.
787-8 is a 227t aircraft, A338 is a 242t aircraft - 787-8 top weight is 15t less - A338 flies further
787-9 is a 253t aircraft, A339 is a 242t aircraft - 787-9 top weight is 11t more - 787-9 flies further

I don't think I can agree with you about the wing architecture.
With a 64m span for the A330NEO, relofted to accommodate both the longer winglets and bigger engines, vs a 60m span for the 787, I can't see how the 787's wing is more optimised for long range. If anything I'd expect the opposite to be true, with the greater span of the A330NEO providing more relief from induced drag at higher weights than the 787's wing

Rgds


The benefits of a high aspect ratio wing decrease as you approach critical mach. It goes without saying that the 787's wing is 30 years newer than the A330's. Hence why Boeing is pulling out a new one for the 777X.
"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..
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1820
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:30 am

Interesting development, even if only a marketing ploy by HA. I've always thought the 787 series was the perfect aircraft for HA. Efficient, new cabin features that shine on long trips (windows, humidity, though cramped in Y), and three models offer growth and flexibility. I agree it seems a long shot that HA will jump to Boeing given the deposits. Still, HA must find it disappointing that Airbus can't deliver the plane it needs.

My questions:
1. Another poster mentioned several airlines that switched to the 777 shortly after ordering the a340 (Singapore and CX, among others). Did they lose their deposits, or did the 340 fail to meet their contractual conditions allowing them an escape? Or did the airlines just switch their orders to other airbus aircraft?

2. I realize this is proprietary information which varies from contract to contract, but how much might HA actually lose if it cancels the 330 order? Or is there the possibility of a contractual escape clause?

3. If HA sticks with Airbus, what are its options for aircraft? The 359 seems too big as does the 339.

4. Is Airbus' line up lacking a viable offering on the lower end of capacity?
 
rbavfan
Posts: 2452
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:50 am

RJMAZ wrote:
enzo011 wrote:
[Wow, that is some accusation that you are making. Airbus is lying about the A330 and is using 9-abreast seating for economics but is marketing the aircraft at 8-abreast for comfort. Do I have that right?.

Yes. Its the only explanation. The A330 is sold and marketed with 9 abreast. Its CASM advantage must be calculated when using 9 abreast. The CASM advantage is said to be on short flights which means lots of economy seats. The 787-9 has more cabin area than the A330-900.

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/AirAs ... 0-300.php#

https://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Ameri ... _787-9.php

Same layout and number of seats. The 787 has significantly better comfort in this comparison. If the A330 had 8 abreast for the full length of the aircraft it has 10% less seats. I don't understand how the A330 could have better CASM on short domestic flights with an 8 abreast domestic cabin. Same weights with 10% less seats.


American uses the A330 in 8x seating which is Airbus standard for the frame. Air Asia X is one of onl 2 carriers I know that pacs 9x in an A330. You seem to be using Air Asia X layout as a base for the A330 & using American as a base for the 787. Not an accurate comparison. See the Virgin Atlantic & Etihad listing above. The bot operate A333/789 combinations in the same airlines and they seat the same number of total passengers in 8x A330 & 9x 787. Don't take a cheap shot by using a non standard layout on Air Asia X and compare it to a standard configuration on a different carrier. Virgin & Etihad prove you wrong. Your post also show a massive bias toward Boeing. I like both frames for different uses as do several carriers. Your post shows you just do not like Airbus.
 
User avatar
Slug71
Posts: 1115
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:08 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:13 am

Varsity1 wrote:
astuteman wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
Your comments regarding 9 abreast seating and CASM differences with 10% seat differences don't make much sense. Both manufacturers fudge the numbers a bit with seat count, but not by 10%

A330 vs 787 CASM differences changing with different ranges is not a factor of the seat count. It's caused by a variety of reasons such as the 787 having a wing and pneumatic/systems architecture more suited for long range cruise. The 787-8 to A330-800 fuel comparisons are more favorable for the 787 than the 787-9 to A330-900 numbers that Leeham news attributes to the lighter weight 787-8.

https://leehamnews.com/2014/07/17/airbu ... more-12550


I agree with you that there is no 10% seat difference.
Seat counts in the real world for both the 787 models and A330 models look remarkably similar.
I also agree about the 787-8/A338 and 787-9/A339 comparisons.
787-8 is a 227t aircraft, A338 is a 242t aircraft - 787-8 top weight is 15t less - A338 flies further
787-9 is a 253t aircraft, A339 is a 242t aircraft - 787-9 top weight is 11t more - 787-9 flies further

I don't think I can agree with you about the wing architecture.
With a 64m span for the A330NEO, relofted to accommodate both the longer winglets and bigger engines, vs a 60m span for the 787, I can't see how the 787's wing is more optimised for long range. If anything I'd expect the opposite to be true, with the greater span of the A330NEO providing more relief from induced drag at higher weights than the 787's wing

Rgds


The benefits of a high aspect ratio wing decrease as you approach critical mach. It goes without saying that the 787's wing is 30 years newer than the A330's. Hence why Boeing is pulling out a new one for the 777X.


The A330NEO has a new wing.
 
User avatar
Slug71
Posts: 1115
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:08 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:16 am

JAAlbert wrote:
3. If HA sticks with Airbus, what are its options for aircraft? The 359 seems too big as does the 339.


A338

I'd like to see them troll Airbus and convert the order back to the A358. :lol:
 
astuteman
Posts: 6751
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 5:04 am

Varsity1 wrote:
astuteman wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
Your comments regarding 9 abreast seating and CASM differences with 10% seat differences don't make much sense. Both manufacturers fudge the numbers a bit with seat count, but not by 10%

A330 vs 787 CASM differences changing with different ranges is not a factor of the seat count. It's caused by a variety of reasons such as the 787 having a wing and pneumatic/systems architecture more suited for long range cruise. The 787-8 to A330-800 fuel comparisons are more favorable for the 787 than the 787-9 to A330-900 numbers that Leeham news attributes to the lighter weight 787-8.

https://leehamnews.com/2014/07/17/airbu ... more-12550


I agree with you that there is no 10% seat difference.
Seat counts in the real world for both the 787 models and A330 models look remarkably similar.
I also agree about the 787-8/A338 and 787-9/A339 comparisons.
787-8 is a 227t aircraft, A338 is a 242t aircraft - 787-8 top weight is 15t less - A338 flies further
787-9 is a 253t aircraft, A339 is a 242t aircraft - 787-9 top weight is 11t more - 787-9 flies further

I don't think I can agree with you about the wing architecture.
With a 64m span for the A330NEO, relofted to accommodate both the longer winglets and bigger engines, vs a 60m span for the 787, I can't see how the 787's wing is more optimised for long range. If anything I'd expect the opposite to be true, with the greater span of the A330NEO providing more relief from induced drag at higher weights than the 787's wing

Rgds


The benefits of a high aspect ratio wing decrease as you approach critical mach. It goes without saying that the 787's wing is 30 years newer than the A330's. Hence why Boeing is pulling out a new one for the 777X.


No. Boeing is pulling out a new one for the 777X in order to achieve a higher aspect ratio to offset its higher weight vs the A350-1000.

As a point of order, it goes without saying that the 787's wing is NOT 30 years newer than the A330's.
1987 to 2004 is 17 years, not 30.
And as stated, the NEO's wing is considerably upgraded aerodynamically.

Rgds
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 25643
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 5:13 am

JAAlbert wrote:
2. I realize this is proprietary information which varies from contract to contract, but how much might HA actually lose if it cancels the 330 order?


Per Leeham.net they have a "walkaway clause" so perhaps nothing.


Slug71 wrote:
The A330NEO has a new wing.


It has new wingtips (sharklets).
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 7389
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:11 am

Slug71 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
IMO one difference between the A350-800 and the A330-800 is, that the A330-800 will be the base for the future MRTT and the Base for the continuation of the A330 freighter. So declining numbers of passenger A330-800 orders will not lead to the A330-800 being dropped even if HA switches its order now. Their will be a live for the A330-800 apart from being a passenger aircraft. And IMO Airbus will change all the production over to the neo in the not to far future.


The A358 could/should have been the base of the future MRTT and Freighter too.


The A330-200 is the current base and to move that to the A330-800 is little additional investment, after the decision was maid to build the neo.
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2261
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:36 am

I wonder how more money it would have been to certify the A358..Airbus should definitely reexamine reoffering the A358..maybe with the right marketing strategy that may have a better go round this time around with the A358
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 7389
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 8:44 am

Stitch wrote:

Slug71 wrote:
The A330NEO has a new wing.


It has new wingtips (sharklets).


I agree that the 330neo does not have a new wing, but talking about new wingtips only fails a bit short. You could call the new sharklets a wing extension The span is increased by 3.7 m. The wing is re lofted and some other aerodynamic work done. The wing body fairings are reworked.
 
User avatar
Slug71
Posts: 1115
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:08 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:55 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Stitch wrote:

Slug71 wrote:
The A330NEO has a new wing.


It has new wingtips (sharklets).


I agree that the 330neo does not have a new wing, but talking about new wingtips only fails a bit short. You could call the new sharklets a wing extension The span is increased by 3.7 m. The wing is re lofted and some other aerodynamic work done. The wing body fairings are reworked.


Thanks for the corrections. For some reason I thought the NEO wing was all new.
 
Strato2
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:05 pm

Varsity1 wrote:
It goes without saying that the 787's wing is 30 years newer than the A330's.


A330 was designed in the 70's?
 
User avatar
Slug71
Posts: 1115
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:08 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:28 pm

INFINITI329 wrote:
I wonder how more money it would have been to certify the A358..Airbus should definitely reexamine reoffering the A358..maybe with the right marketing strategy that may have a better go round this time around with the A358


No more than certifying the -1000. However, there would be a little more cost involved in trying to reduce it's weight maybe. The marketing was fine, It had over 100 orders at one time. It was just overweight for being a simple shrink and economics therefore favoured the -900. IIRC, Airbus had a plan to reduce weight at around frame 20 though. And theres since been a number of weight improvements to the -900 and -1000 which could no doubt benefit the -800 right from the start now. The -900 has also got a MTOW bump and will get another soon. So maybe there is enough separation now to make it (A358) more viable again? I'm clueless on the technical side though. The A358 could easily replace the 333/339 too since it's only a handful of seats short of what they have, and it's list price is cheaper than the A339.
If the NEO doesn't get any significant orders at Dubai, I wouldn't be surprised if Airbus revisits this model.
Set up the assembly line in Mobile and use the completion and delivery center in Tianjin solely for the A358.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 8525
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:36 pm

The A358 was too heavy, especially after Airbus decided not to focus extensive engineering resources on it and made it just a A359 shrink. Without a major engineering effort (that also lowers commonality with the rest of the A350 family both for airlines and for Airbus production) the A358 would (and did) end up just like the A338 or A319neo: effectively dead as airlines shun it for its larger sister that has very similar operating costs but far greater revenue potential.

The heavier A358 would also struggle against the 787 on shorter routes, where the A330neo is most competitive. Having both the A358 and A339 in your portfolio makes no sense, they are too close in size (the A358 being slightly smaller but still larger than the A338 is). Airbus is not going to go through all that effort to satisfy a handful of customers. Remember at the end of the day HA is a rather small fish in a very big pond.
Last edited by Polot on Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 7389
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:38 pm

Strato2 wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
It goes without saying that the 787's wing is 30 years newer than the A330's.


A330 was designed in the 70's?


There are 18 years between the first flight of the A340 in 1991, first flight before the A330 in 1992, and the first flight of the 787 in 2009. The wings are therefore not more than 18 years apart.
 
NZ321
Posts: 890
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:38 pm

Back to an earlier topic in this thread.... the rationale for HA on this order could be to enter the NZ/Australia (Down-under) -London + Europe market and HNL-HKG / SE Asia. Nobody in their right mind is going to use HA from SE Asia to Europe but down-under to Europe is a market controlled presently by SQ, NZ, EK, QF and maybe CX and between them they fly considerable sectors per day. That's not counting the likes of CZ and LA and KE. Indeed, EK has 4x A380 per day from AKL and hardly any of that traffic is bound for DXB. Similarly from Australia. HNL is certainly attractive to the loyal NZ-LHR market as a transit point as it is slightly over 300 nm shorter. So when we think about the rationale we need to think beyond the purely HNL-Europe market. There is an opportunity here if HA want to have a go. Also HNL is attractive in terms of distance for central/north Asia-South America. That expands things a little in terms of rationale for a longer range bird.
Plane mad!
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:38 pm

Polot wrote:
Remember at the end of the day HA is a rather small fish in a very big pond.


Yet that small fish seem to be attracting a lot of attention on a.net
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 8525
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:43 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Polot wrote:
Remember at the end of the day HA is a rather small fish in a very big pond.


Yet that small fish seem to be attracting a lot of attention on a.net

Because it is an interesting order to talk about versus say a LH A359 order. That doesn’t mean we should overstate it’s ultimate importance to Airbus/Boeing though. Airbus is not going to give the moon to keep HA satisfied.
 
godsbeloved
Posts: 45
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 11:32 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:54 pm

par13del wrote:
trex8 wrote:

Found it
https://leehamnews.com/2014/07/15/airbu ... nce-costs/

“It means that an airline ordering an A330ceo or A330neo will be offered similar prices for our Total Care maintenance including Life-Limited Parts.”
This is significant as engine maintenance costs constitutes about 2/3 of total maintenance costs and the 787 engines have higher maintenance costs, according to our market intelligence.

So no total care on the RR engines on the 787???what am I missing, we are talking about engine maintenance done by the same company, if the 787 is higher, did they deploy less efficient engines on the 787 versus the A330?[/quote]

One of the reasons Airbus chose to stay with a bleed air system is lower maintenance costs. Maybe the heavier loads on generators in the 787 engines make maintenance more expensive...
 
WIederling
Posts: 6547
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:56 pm

Strato2 wrote:
Varsity1 wrote:
It goes without saying that the 787's wing is 30 years newer than the A330's.


A330 was designed in the 70's?


The 767 wing was. The A310 wing done in the same time frame featured more advancement.
The A330 wing is ~10 years younger and 20..30 years more modern?

Boeing has now stepped up to Airbus wings? :-)
Murphy is an optimist
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 7389
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:56 pm

I find this discussion getting of the track. HA ordered the A330-800, if they want to take the 787 instead, they can of course cancel the A330-800.

But coming to the point of why. If the reason is range, than the 787 does not do better than the A330-800, the 787-8 will have slightly less range and the 787-9 slightly more, not a difference to really matter. If they want a frame that does lift the same or more over a longer range than the A330-800, than they have to look at the A350-900 or on the Boeing side to the 777-8.
If the talk is about CASM, than it could be that the lower investments for the A330 beats out the lower running cost of the 787, if the A330-800 comes out that high. If the A330-800 beats specs, it could be a small difference to non.
An understandable reason is not having a frame that is only sold in very few quantities, with other words flying orphans. But financial problems regarding the resale value of the A330-800 could be overcome by a contract that allows HA to sell the A330-800 after a fixed time for a fixed price to Airbus again. Regarding service the A330-800 will not be orphans because of the high commonality to the A330-900 and also to A330-200/300.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:56 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
I may be called a fanboy for saying it, but I think the 787 has a good chance at getting an order from Hawaiian. Even though they operate A330s now I think the 787 is a better option for them than being the only A338 operator.


Hawaiian doesn't have to be the sole A338 operator if Airbus sells more aircraft. Frankly I don't believe they won't sell more aircraft. As long as Airbus sells A330-200s - and they still do - it has potential to sell more A330-800s when the A330-200 goes out of production.

No other solvent airline has ordered that plane in three years, so that must mean something.


The market is recovering from a slump in sales, let's see what happens in the next three years.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8111
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:16 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
The market is recovering from a slump in sales, let's see what happens in the next three years.

So what does this mean if assembly on first frame has already started, a very slow build rate, rapid build rate to settle HA order, or white tails?
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 8525
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:18 pm

godsbeloved wrote:
One of the reasons Airbus chose to stay with a bleed air system is lower maintenance costs. Maybe the heavier loads on generators in the 787 engines make maintenance more expensive...

The reason the A330neo sticks with a bleed air system is because to do otherwise would require extensive redesign of many of the A330's systems which would require more time, more money, and result in a plane with less commonality with the Ceo. (Same reason why the 748, 777X, and 737Max have not followed the 787 in having a bleedless system over at Boeing).

I imagine RR 787 engine overhaul costs will be similar to the A330neo's.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 18623
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:34 pm

WIederling wrote:
Boeing has now stepped up to Airbus wings? :-)

Or maybe Boeing is now using some of Airbus's former "consultants"? :-)
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has it's beaches, it's homeland and thoughts of it's own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has it's seasons, it's evenings and songs of it's own
 
WIederling
Posts: 6547
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 4:54 pm

Revelation wrote:
WIederling wrote:
Boeing has now stepped up to Airbus wings? :-)

Or maybe Boeing is now using some of Airbus's former "consultants"? :-)


Wasn't that way back when ... :-()

B has gone towards simpler but effective high lift devices following Airbus lead.
They still seem to go for "thinner" wings that show this spectacular flex
but incur quite a bit of weight penalty afaics.
The 777X wing will show quite a bit more about the way to be taken in the future.

They seem to do less twiddling of FBW algorithms to improve on performance over time.
.. or they don't mention it ( which would be surprising : the "don't mention" that is ;-)
... or the hardware design doesn't allow it?
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 25643
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:00 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
No other solvent airline has ordered that plane in three years, so that must mean something.

The market is recovering from a slump in sales, let's see what happens in the next three years.


For that specific size, perhaps (8 A338s and 22 788s), but for the overall 200-300 seat widebody market, Boeing has sold 217 787-9s and Airbus has recorded 206 A330-900 orders and 76 A350-900 orders since November 2014. And then there were also the A330-200 and A330-300 orders recorded during that time. So that is over 180 orders (perhaps well over) per year, which may be a "slump" from the "Happy Times" when the 787 and A350 were recording 300+ orders a year, but still seems pretty strong to me. As such, I think it is the frame (both A338 and 788) are the issue, more than the market demand for 200-300 seat widebodies.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:06 pm

Stitch wrote:
For that specific size, perhaps (8 A338s and 22 788s), but for the overall 200-300 seat widebody market, Boeing has sold 217 787-9s and Airbus has recorded 206 A330-900 orders and 76 A350-900 orders since November 2014. And then there were also the A330-200 and A330-300 orders recorded during that time. So that is over 180 orders (perhaps well over) per year, which may be a "slump" from the "Happy Times" when the 787 and A350 were recording 300+ orders a year, but still seems pretty strong to me. As such, I think it is the frame (both A338 and 788) are the issue, more than the market demand for 200-300 seat widebodies.


For the record, I didn't claim the market for those aircraft is big. The point I was trying to make, and clearly failed to do so, is that as long as Airbus manages to sell A330-200 aircraft it shouldn't be too difficult to sell A330-800 jets once the A330ceo goes out of production. There is still demand for this size, be it in small numbers, and I suppose that's the reason why Airbus will certify the aircraft.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:20 pm

par13del wrote:
So what does this mean if assembly on first frame has already started, a very slow build rate, rapid build rate to settle HA order, or white tails?


The first aircraft is just a test aircraft and will be used to certify the A330-800. It may stay at Airbus a little longer, or gets converted and delivered to HA.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3160
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Hawaiian Airlines having second thoughts on A330neos, could order 787's instead

Tue Oct 10, 2017 11:07 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I may be called a fanboy for saying it, but I think the 787 has a good chance at getting an order from Hawaiian. Even though they operate A330s now I think the 787 is a better option for them than being the only A338 operator.


Hawaiian doesn't have to be the sole A338 operator if Airbus sells more aircraft. Frankly I don't believe they won't sell more aircraft. As long as Airbus sells A330-200s - and they still do - it has potential to sell more A330-800s when the A330-200 goes out of production.

No other solvent airline has ordered that plane in three years, so that must mean something.


The market is recovering from a slump in sales, let's see what happens in the next three years.


Since you deleted my prior comment, I will repeat that finance companies and leasing companies are going to likely charge higher rates for an orphan model like the A330-800. There is risk with there not being a solid resale market. Banks don't want the risk of an airplane having its value plummet or it being broken up for parts in less than a decade like some A318s were if an airline needs to dispose of the airplanes. The higher rates to accommodate the risks hurt the business case for airlines ordering the A338. Hawaiian may be having financing challenges where rates are not favorable. With the 788, 789, A339 and A350 all being viable optioms, Hawaiian may find it attractive to switch its order.

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