kaitak wrote:

Good move by AC; a very fine aircraft. I doubt if they'll be the AB aircraft, as they're (mostly) -200s. I think they'll be looking for RR powered -300s. Cathay springs to mind?

SN is getting retired CX/SQ 333s currently.
Maybe AC can go for MU, because MU is retiring some 330s now (mainly 333s, some 332s). MU's 332/333s are also RR powered as well.

And TS just got 2 332s from MU.

Apart from everything else, this seems like a very strong message to Boeing; if you want us to order more 787s, we want the same prices HA got. Otherwise they can keep flying A333s until there's no life left in them and maybe even replace them with A330-900s.

I think there are quite a few A330's available in the market making them an attractive aircraft for existing A330 operators.

I think we have to remember quite a few A330's delivered between the 2010-2015 period were used by airlines waiting for their 787's and A350's to arrive.

If we consider low fuel prices postponed the retirement of older aircraft, the current glut of relatively new A330's could be very short lived now that fuel prices are rising. This could have been a case of opportunity rather than selecting the best aircraft for AC's needs.

In a couple of years time the lease rates for A330's could normalise making new aircraft such as the 787 the more attractive option for airlines like AC.

zkojq wrote:

Apart from everything else, this seems like a very strong message to Boeing; if you want us to order more 787s, we want the same prices HA got. Otherwise they can keep flying A333s until there's no life left in them and maybe even replace them with A330-900s.

That may be a tough negotiation when Air Canada already have options from their prior order so prices are likely already negotiated.

zkojq wrote:

Apart from everything else, this seems like a very strong message to Boeing; if you want us to order more 787s, we want the same prices HA got. Otherwise they can keep flying A333s until there's no life left in them and maybe even replace them with A330-900s.

The A333 acquisition news predates the HA announcement.

It’s AC seeing a good opportunity to pick up a few used aircraft for cheap.

lightsaber wrote:

AMollenhauer9 wrote:

JannEejit wrote:

More ex Air Berlin fleet by any chance, or were those all 332's ?

Those were all A330-200s. I've heard these aircraft will be coming from SQ.

What is the final disposition of all the Air Berlin A330s? When I look on AirFleets, it looks like all of them found new homes. Yea!

But the A330 is older and airlines that lease for 12 to 14 years should be disposing of the type. So AC should have many options for buying.
The era of 100+ per year was only 2012 thru 2015. With only 97 in the backlog, the CEO is in its sunset years of production.

Lightsaber

Posted this at another thread:
Summary for airberlin A330-223 fleet movement:
MSN 288 D-ABXA Stored at LDE 20. Oct 2017 as OE-IGD, Returned to GECAS
MSN 322 D-ABXB Stored at LDE 20. Oct 2017 as D-ABXB
MSN 403 D-ALPA Currently active with Virgin Atlantic Airways as G-VMNK
MSN 432 D-ALPB Currently active with Virgin Atlantic Airways as G-VMIK
MSN 444 D-ALPC Soon to join Aigle Azur as F-HTIC
MSN 454 D-ALPD Soon to join Wamos Air as EC-MTT
MSN 469 D-ALPE Soon to join Wamos Air as EC-MTU
MSN 476 D-ALPF Currently active with Virgin Atlantic Airways as G-VWND
MSN 493 D-ALPG Soon to join Aigle Azur as F-HTAC
MSN 665 D-ABXC Soon to join Malaysia Airlines as 9M-MTU
MSN 739 D-ALPH Soon to join TAP Air Portugal as CS-T**
MSN 802 D-ABXG Soon to join Evelop Air as EC-MTY
MSN 822 D-ABXD Soon to join Malaysia Airlines as 9M-MTV
MSN 828 D-ALPI Soon to join Malaysia Airlines as 9M-MTW
MSN 911 D-ALPJ Soon to join Malaysia Airlines as 9M-MTX
MSN 968 D-ABXE Soon to join Malaysia Airlines as 9M-MTY*
MSN 1112 D-ABXF Soon to join Malaysia Airlines as 9M-MTZ*

15 found new employment, two (2) remain in storage after airberlin ceased operation on 27 Oct 2017.
*Not confirmed for now, highly probably it may happen.

AC02 wrote:

kaitak wrote:

Good move by AC; a very fine aircraft. I doubt if they'll be the AB aircraft, as they're (mostly) -200s. I think they'll be looking for RR powered -300s. Cathay springs to mind?

SN is getting retired CX/SQ 333s currently.
Maybe AC can go for MU, because MU is retiring some 330s now (mainly 333s, some 332s). MU's 332/333s are also RR powered as well.

And TS just got 2 332s from MU.

Looks to be highly probable with MU and SQ . SQ will shed more A333 over the coming months when more B787-10 and A359 get delivered. MU is still taking new A333 delivery, some older ones will be retired in the process.

AirAsia X is also taking some ex-MU A333. They are adding six A333s this year.

Arent american offloading some of theres sometime soon ?

LXwing wrote:

I think these could be the 4 A333s that TP will retire in 2019 (replaced by A339s) which are all ex-SQ birds leased in 2017.

TP is not retiring their A333 anytime soon. These aircraft are new - less than 10yo - if there's any aircraft to be retired and replaced by A339 is the aging A343, that now has more than 23yo.

Polot wrote:

zkojq wrote:

Apart from everything else, this seems like a very strong message to Boeing; if you want us to order more 787s, we want the same prices HA got. Otherwise they can keep flying A333s until there's no life left in them and maybe even replace them with A330-900s.

The A333 acquisition news predates the HA announcement.

That doesn't mean they can't use the additional aircraft as leverage. With the additional A333s being newer builds there will still plenty of life in them if AC wants to run them to ~25-30 years.

thgsr08 wrote:

LXwing wrote:

I think these could be the 4 A333s that TP will retire in 2019 (replaced by A339s) which are all ex-SQ birds leased in 2017.

TP is not retiring their A333 anytime soon. These aircraft are new - less than 10yo - if there's any aircraft to be retired and replaced by A339 is the aging A343, that now has more than 23yo.

Yes they are. The 4 A333 ex-SQ are all on short term leases (I'd say 2 years) and they will all be returned during 2019, just as the 4 A340 and the 7 older A332. TAP is getting 17 A339 until the end of 2019.

LXwing wrote:

I think these could be the 4 A333s that TP will retire in 2019 (replaced by A339s) which are all ex-SQ birds leased in 2017.

That certainly appears to be the correct timeline.

FabienA380 wrote:

L0VE2FLY wrote:

MartijnNL wrote:

Great for economy class passengers. Personally I think 2-4-2 seating is always better than 3-3-3. And normal window shades instead of annoying dimmable ones.

I'd take the A330/767 over the 787 any day, if you enjoy looking out the window the 787 is the airliner you should always avoid unless it's a red-eye transoceanic flight! I always book a window seat and the last thing I want is the crew dimming my window in the middle of the day!

I know it's unlikely to happen but I do hope AC will eventually replace their A333s with the A339s.

Unlikely, why unlikely?... They'll have to be replaced one day anyways, oldest current ones near 20y of age.....

It's just speculation and I hope I'm wrong, the recent developments influenced me obviously. Hawaiian cancelling their A338 in favor of the 789, the rumors about AirAsia X looking at the 78J. I hope the A330neo will bounce back though, it's a very capable and great looking bird.

marcogr12 wrote:

Both the 767s and the A333s are very comfy when not in 3-3-3 configuration..

A 767 configured in 3-3-3? Yeah, that'll work if you're only carrying toddlers!

L0VE2FLY wrote:

FabienA380 wrote:

L0VE2FLY wrote:

I'd take the A330/767 over the 787 any day, if you enjoy looking out the window the 787 is the airliner you should always avoid unless it's a red-eye transoceanic flight! I always book a window seat and the last thing I want is the crew dimming my window in the middle of the day!

I know it's unlikely to happen but I do hope AC will eventually replace their A333s with the A339s.

Unlikely, why unlikely?... They'll have to be replaced one day anyways, oldest current ones near 20y of age.....

It's just speculation and I hope I'm wrong, the recent developments influenced me obviously. Hawaiian cancelling their A338 in favor of the 789, the rumors about AirAsia X looking at the 78J. I hope the A330neo will bounce back though, it's a very capable and great looking bird.

marcogr12 wrote:

Both the 767s and the A333s are very comfy when not in 3-3-3 configuration..

A 767 configured in 3-3-3? Yeah, that'll work if you're only carrying toddlers!

Yes, HA A338 cancellation was a bummer, but from business point of view, there is not much choice HA has, when they may ended up has the only customer for A338. This will affect their resale/ remarketing value in future. All in all, it is not all loss for Airbus since HA will soon have a huge fleet of Airbus narrowbody in their fleet, and I guess the 787 will operate along with current A330ceo for quite some time before the latter goes into retirement.

beechnut wrote:

FedEx747 wrote:

Rouge I think won't retire their 767s until they can find a better long range wide body airliner (are they getting 787s)?

I hope so, the 767s are getting long in the tooth. I've flown Rouge internationally on 3 round trips, EDI, GLA and FCO. On the outward FCO trip, and the inbound GLA trip, we incurred long technical delays, even though these were thoroughly overhauled birds. It was not confidence-inspiring.

The only bright spot is that on the homebound GLA trip I was able to invoke the European delay laws. I refused AC's initial offer of a $100 gift certificate applicable to my next flight and insisted they apply the European law entitling us to 600 Euros each (wife and I). With the exchange rate it worked out to our round trip being very nearly free...

Beech

Yes,

rouge has a very poor customer service rating from me too, I was flying on the YYZ-LAS flight and it was on a 767. Very good flight, no turbulence, even though during very harsh weather in toronto. On the return trip, they stuffed us all into a A321. Horrible idea. It was they worst flight I have ever taken. Most of the flight involved heavy turbulence, even though there was no bad weather. When we where still taxing at LAS, we saw smoke coming into the coming through the overhead bins. The crew took notice, but did not want to repair it before we took off (we had already been delayed for 3 hours).

My point about the 767 is that it is a good plane, but it is overdue to be retired. I hope they replace is with 787 or A3XX Neos. (A330 neo?) Although, for entertainment, i have looked into how many flight rouge flies with the 767. The 767 is by far the most used plane in Rouge.

Thanks,

FedEx747

FabienA380 wrote:

L0VE2FLY wrote:

MartijnNL wrote:

Great for economy class passengers. Personally I think 2-4-2 seating is always better than 3-3-3. And normal window shades instead of annoying dimmable ones.

I'd take the A330/767 over the 787 any day, if you enjoy looking out the window the 787 is the airliner you should always avoid unless it's a red-eye transoceanic flight! I always book a window seat and the last thing I want is the crew dimming my window in the middle of the day!

I know it's unlikely to happen but I do hope AC will eventually replace their A333s with the A339s.

Unlikely, why unlikely?... They'll have to be replaced one day anyways, oldest current ones near 20y of age.....

I think it unlikely because the 787 is still a better plane for trans atlantic flying. The A330 is being added instead 787 because they are used. 787 are not available yet in large amounts at same prices as A330. It would suggest they will move to 787 eventuality to replace A330 with some MoM thrown in. A330 only holds advantage over a similar 787 on missions shorter then trans atlantic. But they are available used where the 787 is not. At s price point where the cost curve is low enough to deliver a better economic out come favoring A330.

The capbility of the B787 is wasted on east coast transatlantic flying. You’re paying for a platform you use a fraction of, remember how odd it was to use the B744 on LHR-JFK once.

LXwing wrote:

Yes they are. The 4 A333 ex-SQ are all on short term leases (I'd say 2 years) and they will all be returned during 2019.

So they'll be something like 10 y.o. since manufacturing with how many hours and cycles? Still quite a good value for money and probably even more capable than the current ones at AC range/MTOW-wise, if needed.

These 4 A333s were built in 2009. The highest MTOW option available that year was 233t. So better than AC's 230t birds, but a far cry from the 242t frames rolling out of Toulouse today.

Lower MTOW variants aren't really an issue for AC, if they need more range, they will have 37 787s for those roles. By my estimation, the lower weight models are actually better for them, lower landing fees, and lower acquisition costs. Why pay more for capability they do not need.

longhauler wrote:

I loved flying the 767. It is a great aircraft to fly, but that 1970s cockpit is a little dated, although with updates still very capable

Still beats the 737 Max cockpit, in my opinion. We are in 2018, and still no EICAS on that plane....unbelievable ! That overhead panel is straight from the 60s.

Unbelievable that the FAA has approved same type for B731 all the way through to the B737Max. Doesn't make sense. Just goes to show how much pull airlines like Southwest have with aircraft manufacturers...

Thenoflyzone wrote:

longhauler wrote:

I loved flying the 767. It is a great aircraft to fly, but that 1970s cockpit is a little dated, although with updates still very capable

Still beats the 737 Max cockpit, in my opinion. We are in 2018, and still no EICAS on that plane....unbelievable ! That overhead panel is straight from the 60s.

Unbelievable that the FAA has approved same type for B731 all the way through to the B737Max. Doesn't make sense. Just goes to show how much pull airlines like Southwest have with aircraft manufacturers...

Didnt WN have problems with the pilots and the the FAA as they wouldnt let them fly classic/NG and Max all on the same type qualification so thats why they dumped the classics?

Thenoflyzone wrote:

Still beats the 737 Max cockpit, in my opinion. We are in 2018, and still no EICAS on that plane....unbelievable ! That overhead panel is straight from the 60s.

Trust me ... you're preaching to the choir!

Air Canada's first A320, FIN 201 ... msn 59, built the end of 1989, delivered January 1990 ... is in most respects more advanced than the latest MAX coming off the line right now.

longhauler wrote:

Thenoflyzone wrote:

Still beats the 737 Max cockpit, in my opinion. We are in 2018, and still no EICAS on that plane....unbelievable ! That overhead panel is straight from the 60s.

Trust me ... you're preaching to the choir!

Air Canada's first A320, FIN 201 ... msn 59, built the end of 1989, delivered January 1990 ... is in most respects more advanced than the latest MAX coming off the line right now.

Don't get me started on my end... The cabin.
What an unfortunate series of events which locked us into this deal. Worst configuration for galleys, lavs, jumpseats. Cabin is claustrophobic! And unsafe: ditching will be done at overwing exits with pax operating the exit; dragging huge rafts from overhead stowage to the tiny overwing exits. Knock on wood.
We had maintenance onboard while deplaning yesterday and he looked at us and said 'wth there is no room at all.' Don't we know it!

Thenoflyzone wrote:

These 4 A333s were built in 2009. The highest MTOW option available that year was 233t. So better than AC's 230t birds, but a far cry from the 242t frames rolling out of Toulouse today.

I see, I thought the MTOW difference was greater than that but was probably mistaken with those of TS when writing.

Thenoflyzone wrote:

These 4 A333s were built in 2009. The highest MTOW option available that year was 233t. So better than AC's 230t birds, but a far cry from the 242t frames rolling out of Toulouse today.

The extra 3ts should be beneficial for YUL-TLV.

skipness1E wrote:

The capbility of the B787 is wasted on east coast transatlantic flying. You’re paying for a platform you use a fraction of, remember how odd it was to use the B744 on LHR-JFK once.

Airbus actually put out publicity materials at one stage showing that in certain configurations and operating midhaul routes like the East Coast to Europe, the A333CEO is more efficient than the 788 once everything is taken into account.

That was for a factory fresh A333CEO as well, with the higher airframe cost.

For AC to go into this market and pluck a couple of well-loved A333s from the SQ fleet must have been compelling. As for wider availability, now that DHL is out there sourcing Pratt engined models for freighters it's certainly going to liven the price list up. All three models of engine seem to have demand.

flyingclrs727 wrote:

wave46 wrote:

OA940 wrote:

If a 788 is too expensive for a route, then an A330 can't fix it. The 787 is more fuel-efficient, plus the 788 is smaller than the 333, so I doubt if that's a problem the 333 is gonna fix it.

Purchase price figures into the economics of flying. Using an older (and by extension, cheaper) A330 to replace a 787 that is currently doing eastern Canada to Europe flying so that 787 can be subsequently used on a longer route to Asia/Oceania with more profit potential makes sense.

Otherwise, AC will have to exercise some options to purchase further 787s, which would be a more expensive solution.

But the backlog of 787's is 6 years or so? That's not really feasible in the near term. Used A330's in great condition are pretty easily obtained.

Exactly. A follow on order for 787 is immanent with AC in the next year or so, however the lift is needed sooner than later and not the backlog wait time. Makes perfect sense to lease a few frames that you already have in your fleet with the same engines and use in the interim. A330 makes money for AC. Not as efficient as the 787 but also a little cheaper to lease that keeps the true costs pretty similar until the expensive checks late in life start weighing in.

13 options.
10 purchase rights.

Unsure as to the status of either. No word on what the expiry dates are/were.

Details on these were scant in the most recent annual report. Likely a conscious effort to impress this notion of capex frugality on investors after the announced decision to acquire the 4 less expensive, used, a330s.

pnwtraveler wrote:

flyingclrs727 wrote:

wave46 wrote:

Purchase price figures into the economics of flying. Using an older (and by extension, cheaper) A330 to replace a 787 that is currently doing eastern Canada to Europe flying so that 787 can be subsequently used on a longer route to Asia/Oceania with more profit potential makes sense.

Otherwise, AC will have to exercise some options to purchase further 787s, which would be a more expensive solution.

But the backlog of 787's is 6 years or so? That's not really feasible in the near term. Used A330's in great condition are pretty easily obtained.

Exactly. A follow on order for 787 is immanent with AC in the next year or so, however the lift is needed sooner than later and not the backlog wait time. Makes perfect sense to lease a few frames that you already have in your fleet with the same engines and use in the interim. A330 makes money for AC. Not as efficient as the 787 but also a little cheaper to lease that keeps the true costs pretty similar until the expensive checks late in life start weighing in.

Don;t they have (like every and any airline ever placing an order) options or purchase rights? Those can't be able to not allocate them a few slots before the end of the waitlist.

Channex757 wrote:

skipness1E wrote:

The capbility of the B787 is wasted on east coast transatlantic flying. You’re paying for a platform you use a fraction of, remember how odd it was to use the B744 on LHR-JFK once.

Airbus actually put out publicity materials at one stage showing that in certain configurations and operating midhaul routes like the East Coast to Europe, the A333CEO is more efficient than the 788 once everything is taken into account.

That was for a factory fresh A333CEO as well, with the higher airframe cost.

For AC to go into this market and pluck a couple of well-loved A333s from the SQ fleet must have been compelling. As for wider availability, now that DHL is out there sourcing Pratt engined models for freighters it's certainly going to liven the price list up. All three models of engine seem to have demand.

While in some cases this may be true, those are Airbus press materials. Of course they show that their product is superior. My assumption is that the low purchase price cancels out the slightly higher operating costs, which aren’t much higher than the 787 due to the weight. Plus, the massive backlog of the 787 makes them much more difficult to acquire than used A330s.

Any suggestions as to where they will be deployed?

Kiss goodbye to the 13 B787 options.

https://canadianaviationnews.wordpress. ... 7-options/

Any suggestions as to where they will be deployed?

YUL-Europe.

behramjee wrote:

I remember clearly that when AC disclosed their 2017 annual results (few weeks ago), this part of adding more A333s was also revealed by them and one member on this forum on that thread, clearly stated that these were ex SQ birds.

The ex-SQ aircraft also have the Trent 700 EP2 (enhanced performance).

It’ll be YYZ/YUL-Europe. When they say YUL based, they mean the pilot crew base is YUL, but that doesn’t mean they won’t fly out of anywhere else.

zeke wrote:

behramjee wrote:

I remember clearly that when AC disclosed their 2017 annual results (few weeks ago), this part of adding more A333s was also revealed by them and one member on this forum on that thread, clearly stated that these were ex SQ birds.

The ex-SQ aircraft also have the Trent 700 EP2 (enhanced performance).

They are coming from TAP

We're getting SQ or TAP 333s?

The TAP A333s were actually from SQ.

longhauler wrote:

I think the 767 at Rouge will remain for quite a while. It is a very capable airframe and very versatile. The company is acknowledging reliability issues encountered at Rouge. But those issues were the result of tight scheduling and nothing to do with the aircraft itself. The Rouge 767 operation is moving to entirely in YYZ and YUL and scheduling will be looser ... to mitigate those issues.

The latest of many airlines to learn by experience that you can't schedule older, heterogeneous, capital-inexpensive aircraft the same way that LCCs schedule their squadron of identical brand-new 738s.

Why didn't AC go for the 787-10? Doesn't it have a better CASM than the A330s?

gilesdavies wrote:

American Airlines are looking to offload the nine former A330-300's, they are due to leave the fleet this year...

I think it is just due to the small number in the fleet, while they worked great for US Airways, but after merger with American Airlines, when you have just nine aircraft in a fleet of 900+ birds its small fry!

AA recently announced that the A333s are staying a bit longer while the B763s will leave sooner.

My perception is that the rapid international expansion has come to an end. No plans to re-start MNL, BKK or SIN, for example. No need for more B787 aircraft. The A333 makes sense for TATL flights from ON and QB. AC will be busy with narrow-body aircraft and associated planning for some time to come.

Planeyguy wrote:

Why didn't AC go for the 787-10? Doesn't it have a better CASM than the A330s?

Too expensive to buy and would take too long to be delivered.

This is an opportunistic addition that works because used A330s are readily available (by widebody standards) and a great value to buy.

Thenoflyzone wrote:

Kiss goodbye to the 13 B787 options.

https://canadianaviationnews.wordpress. ... 7-options/

Any suggestions as to where they will be deployed?

YUL-Europe.

I agree with this move because the cost to purchase 5-8 year old A333s these days is significantly less versus purchasing new B787-9s or -10s. The fixed costs attributed to these used birds per route would at the end of the day be much lower than a new aircraft.

AC is doing nothing different than what UA and DL is doing in USA as these 2 carriers also have bought many used aircraft from the marketplace over the past 3 years. In addition to them, even CX purchased 5 old B773As which were ex EK.

Kindly note that the A333s from YVR can only fly to Japan in the Pacific region nonstop with a full payload whilst across the Atlantic from YVR it can do UK maximum. Hence basing these aircraft out of YUL is good as it enables North Africa + all of EU/UK to be covered.

longhauler wrote:

zeke wrote:

behramjee wrote:

I remember clearly that when AC disclosed their 2017 annual results (few weeks ago), this part of adding more A333s was also revealed by them and one member on this forum on that thread, clearly stated that these were ex SQ birds.

The ex-SQ aircraft also have the Trent 700 EP2 (enhanced performance).

They are coming from TAP

But TAP only got those 3 or 4 A333s from SQ not even one year ago. Those birds are still "youngish".

I note further up that the Rouge 767s are coming out of YVR. I haven’t seen this mentioned elsewhere. What about the routes they fly from YVR which only a 767 has the legs for?

rbrunner wrote:

longhauler wrote:

zeke wrote:

The ex-SQ aircraft also have the Trent 700 EP2 (enhanced performance).

They are coming from TAP

But TAP only got those 3 or 4 A333s from SQ not even one year ago. Those birds are still "youngish".

The A330-300 are a stopgap. TAP is receiving its A330-900 soon. AFAIK 3 this year.

Eirules wrote:

I note further up that the Rouge 767s are coming out of YVR. I haven’t seen this mentioned elsewhere. What about the routes they fly from YVR which only a 767 has the legs for?

Are the routes also served from another Canadian airport, thus flying a W routing or simply transferring the aircraft with a domestic flight.

SpaceshipDC10 wrote:

Eirules wrote:

I note further up that the Rouge 767s are coming out of YVR. I haven’t seen this mentioned elsewhere. What about the routes they fly from YVR which only a 767 has the legs for?

Are the routes also served from another Canadian airport, thus flying a W routing or simply transferring the aircraft with a domestic flight.

Well the current seasonal YVR-DUB is now the only Rouge flight to DUB, both YUL & YYZ are mainline

marcogr12 wrote:

Both the 767s and the A333s are very comfy when not in 3-3-3 configuration..Rouge uses the 767s to ATH and Air Transat the A333s..and so does Delta with a mix of 763s/764s and A333s..I'd prefer them any day over EKs 773ER 3-4-3 seating..But still the questions remains what will AC replace the 767s with?Will some of the A333s move to Rouge division or will they replace them with some other leased type?

Well they may have been good in their prime but I'm much happier with the 789/788 flying long haul as opposed to the 763 and the 787 did really open the marker up for AC (Direct SYD, BNE,
MEL) as opposed to the 767 via HNL what a flight that was...