Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
OA940
Topic Author
Posts: 1991
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 6:18 am

Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 1:10 pm

Sorry, but did I miss something? I've seen many claim this, but where's the proof? Sure, it may be cheaper than the 787, but the latter offers better range and its seating layout is more convenient for airlines. If the A330neo was better than the 787 wouldn't the airlines have ordered it instead?
A350/CSeries = bae
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3642
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 1:12 pm

OA940 wrote:
Sorry, but did I miss something? I've seen many claim this, but where's the proof? Sure, it may be cheaper than the 787, but the latter offers better range and its seating layout is more convenient for airlines. If the A330neo was better than the 787 wouldn't the airlines have ordered it instead?


Do you have any quotes, articles, comments or factual information that you’d like to discuss? This forum is filled with exaggerated opinions

Here is a long A vs B debate that has plenty of fact and opinion

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1352139
Last edited by Newbiepilot on Sat Apr 14, 2018 1:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 4840
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 1:18 pm

What do you mean by better performance? Range on paper? That's from the MTOW increase wasn't it?
It's pointless to attempt winning internet debate. 求同存異. よく見て・よく聞いて・よく考える
(≧▽≦) Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan!
(≧▽≦) Meow Meow Meow! Meow Meow Meow Meow!
You are now at your youngest moment in your remaining life.
 
1900Driver
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:17 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 2:19 pm

I think what people are referring to is when factoring acquisition cost, 330NEO maybe be more cost effective. 787 will still have an edge on variable costs.

Probably the case over the Atlantic but doubtful for long haul routes.

https://leehamnews.com/2018/02/08/airbu ... ma-launch/

“The -800, being heavier, is about 5% more costly on a trip cost to operate on a cash basis, according to LNC’s analysis. With eight more seats, the seat-mile cost is the same. But the capital cost of some $80m vs the 787-8’s $115m offsets the small COC deficit.”
 
SPREE34
Posts: 1745
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:09 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 2:33 pm

No insult meant, but that's a pretty uniformed, simplistic position you take. Which mission for which airplane? They aren't the same airplane, but do overlap in some variants, and that's the area where they compete with each other. What's the better airplane is a question that requires multiple data points to answer.

Why aren't all of the airlines flying DC-8s, as they were built tougher and outlast everything being built today? See how how that works?
I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
 
flyguy84
Posts: 770
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:26 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 2:35 pm

Where’s the proof the 787 seating arrangement is more “convenient” for airlines?
SFO
 
trex8
Posts: 5612
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 2:35 pm

Someone who works for VS posted on another thread a year or more ago that their relatively new 233K A333ceos costs less to operate when including capital costs than their 787-9s. Except for a few routes, like LHR-HKG, they could run the A333 rather than the 789 and be ahead cost wise .
When the 788s were first out and overweight it was said up to 4000nm a A330 was burning no more fuel and hauling more payload.
The 787 has been getting 20% lower fuel burn than an early 767 as Boeing rightly predicted but late operators with newer wingletted 767s like LAN were finding they were only seeing the improvement from the new engines, ie low teens. As the neo has essentially the same engines as the 787 now we should see close to similar SFC, the 787 may still be ahead a little but likely low single digits if that and only at longer ranges.
787 lease costs are undoubtedly going to be higher than a neo, this could be one, two , hundred thousand $ a month. That could allow near parity in operating costs.
 
User avatar
ElroyJetson
Posts: 868
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:04 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:01 pm

I have not seen the claims that you state. This is what I know, The 789 has a 1%-2% fuel burn advantage over the A339 on missions around 3000nm. On missions beyond 4000nm the 789 has a 4-5% fuel burn advantage.

The claims that the capital acquisition costs of the A330 Neo are lower than the 789 is not based on any factual information I have seen. In fact Leeham and others including Airbus have implied they could not match Boeing on costs in the HA deal.

The A330 Neo is basically a a 25 year old technology with 787 engines. It is fine as an updated derivative, but it is not cutting edge technology like the 787 or A350. I don't think anyone was expecting it to surpass the 787 in fuel burn or maintenance costs. The selling points were supposed to be lower capital acquisition costs and close enough in terms of fuel burn.

The problem, Boeing has drastically redued its production costs on the 787 program and Airbus has not brought their costs down at this point in time.
707 717 727 72S 737 733 737-700 747 757 753 767-300 764 A319 A320 DC-9-10 DC-9-30 DC-9-50, MD-82 MD-88 MD-90 DC-10-10 DC-10-40 F-100
 
LTCM
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:35 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:10 pm

Why people think an a330 is cheaper to build than a 787 is beyond me. The 787 is built with a design that was created specifically to bring construction cost down. There's no reason to think a 330 is cheaper to build.
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2708
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:12 pm

ElroyJetson wrote:
I have not seen the claims that you state. This is what I know, The 789 has a 1%-2% fuel burn advantage over the A339 on missions around 3000nm. On missions beyond 4000nm the 789 has a 4-5% fuel burn advantage.

The claims that the capital acquisition costs of the A330 Neo are lower than the 789 is not based on any factual information I have seen. In fact Leeham and others including Airbus have implied they could not match Boeing on costs in the HA deal.

The A330 Neo is basically a a 25 year old technology with 787 engines. It is fine as an updated derivative, but it is not cutting edge technology like the 787 or A350. I don't think anyone was expecting it to surpass the 787 in fuel burn or maintenance costs. The selling points were supposed to be lower capital acquisition costs and close enough in terms of fuel burn.

The problem, Boeing has drastically redued its production costs on the 787 program and Airbus has not brought their costs down at this point in time.


We know that Airbus wasn't willing to match the price on these 2 specific deals, but we've equally had no other indication that the same will apply to every other deal Boeing make, because they are after all only 2 deals. When the customer is an A330 operator but not a 787 operator the picture may be different. You've also missed the selling points of commonality and availability, even if the 787 will eat into that availability advantage.
 
User avatar
speedbored
Posts: 2230
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:14 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:29 pm

OA940 wrote:
Sorry, but did I miss something? I've seen many claim this, but where's the proof? Sure, it may be cheaper than the 787, but the latter offers better range and its seating layout is more convenient for airlines. If the A330neo was better than the 787 wouldn't the airlines have ordered it instead?

What exactly do you mean by "better performance"? It's a very vague term. Airlines don't really care about which aircraft has better range, or better fuel consumption, all they really care about is which aircraft will make them the most money.

Different models of aircraft are all optimised for different missions, so it really shouldn't surprise anyone that on some missions one aircraft has better financial performance than others. Given that the neo is a simple upgrade of a frame that has been in production for a long time, and on which almost all of the development and infrastructure costs have already been repaid (i.e. it can be produced, and hence sold, at lower cost), it ought to be a better financial performer on many routes than the 787. Equally, the 787 with a more modern frame, will be a better financial performer on many other routes.

Also worth remembering that early availability can make a huge difference in the "most profitable" question.

It's not as black and white as your question seems to suggest that you think it is.
 
trex8
Posts: 5612
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:30 pm

LTCM wrote:
Why people think an a330 is cheaper to build than a 787 is beyond me. The 787 is built with a design that was created specifically to bring construction cost down. There's no reason to think a 330 is cheaper to build.

Thats why Boeing has taken charges of 25 billion + building it to date? Airbus has been printing money with the A330 for a decade +, adding new engines and some wing changes and other system changes doesn't negate the fact that they have already paid off the cost of the manufacturing and have the supply chain running well, unlike Boeing which is just starting to break even on building a 787 (if you believe they really are) but there are other threads discussing that for years.
The development costs of the neo is peanuts, someone said it may be 2 billion, even if its double its probably going to be profitable. The carbon fiber construction, bleedless engines was supposed to make a big difference too in operating costs. LAN has said they see only that improvement to be expected from the new generation engines. There was very little advantage from bleedless engine or CFRP compared to their latest build wingletted 767s. Except for maybe potential lower longterm maintenance cost, is the 787 so much more lower cost than other airframes to run or build?? The jury is still out and given the debacle in building up 787 production it will likely never show that its more cost effective than any other way of manufacturing for this particular program. At some point they may find it will be cheaper but having burned 25 billion plus to get there its a heavy weight to get off your accounting ledger. Going forward if they learnt from before they may get it right on the 797.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24997
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:33 pm

trex8 wrote:
Someone who works for VS posted on another thread a year or more ago that their relatively new 233K A333ceos costs less to operate when including capital costs than their 787-9s. Except for a few routes, like LHR-HKG, they could run the A333 rather than the 789 and be ahead cost wise .
When the 788s were first out and overweight it was said up to 4000nm a A330 was burning no more fuel and hauling more payload.
The 787 has been getting 20% lower fuel burn than an early 767 as Boeing rightly predicted but late operators with newer wingletted 767s like LAN were finding they were only seeing the improvement from the new engines, ie low teens. As the neo has essentially the same engines as the 787 now we should see close to similar SFC, the 787 may still be ahead a little but likely low single digits if that and only at longer ranges.
787 lease costs are undoubtedly going to be higher than a neo, this could be one, two , hundred thousand $ a month. That could allow near parity in operating costs.

There's clearly a cross-over point. For instance DL was able to justify both A330neo and A350 in its fleet. We were told that A330neo pencilled out better for the TATL routes that DL flies from ATL but on longer range routes A350-900 made more sense.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 11056
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:40 pm

Revelation wrote:
trex8 wrote:
Someone who works for VS posted on another thread a year or more ago that their relatively new 233K A333ceos costs less to operate when including capital costs than their 787-9s. Except for a few routes, like LHR-HKG, they could run the A333 rather than the 789 and be ahead cost wise .
When the 788s were first out and overweight it was said up to 4000nm a A330 was burning no more fuel and hauling more payload.
The 787 has been getting 20% lower fuel burn than an early 767 as Boeing rightly predicted but late operators with newer wingletted 767s like LAN were finding they were only seeing the improvement from the new engines, ie low teens. As the neo has essentially the same engines as the 787 now we should see close to similar SFC, the 787 may still be ahead a little but likely low single digits if that and only at longer ranges.
787 lease costs are undoubtedly going to be higher than a neo, this could be one, two , hundred thousand $ a month. That could allow near parity in operating costs.

There's clearly a cross-over point. For instance DL was able to justify both A330neo and A350 in its fleet. We were told that A330neo pencilled out better for the TATL routes that DL flies from ATL but on longer range routes A350-900 made more sense.

Well there is also a range difference between the two- one that has shrinked since DL first made their order.
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4379
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:40 pm

OA940 wrote:
If the A330neo was better than the 787 wouldn't the airlines have ordered it instead?


Maybe because the 787 was available first. The first A330neos are just starting to appear, the 787 has been around for quite a while. Suppose all those airlines that operate the 787 would have waited for the A330neo instead, all of those planes would not have been delivered yet. The airlines would either be without planes or still operating old outdated aircraft whilst waiting for their ordered A330neos. Boeing was able to deliver the 787, so that's what they took instead.
 
Chaostheory
Posts: 1161
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:48 pm

When fuel was still $700/ton, my employer did the sums and figured the life cycle cost of an a330-300 would be lower than the 787-900 on sectors upto about 6 hours.

The only major difference between the ceo and neo are engines. We know the A330neo is being priced significantly lower than the 789. Rolls-Royce is on record stating they've been selling the Trent 7000 at a loss as a result.

A little critical thinking isn't difficult folks. Take off the rose tinted glasses and grow the heck up.
 
JustSomeDood
Posts: 469
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2017 9:05 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:53 pm

trex8 wrote:
787 lease costs are undoubtedly going to be higher than a neo, this could be one, two , hundred thousand $ a month. That could allow near parity in operating costs.


:?: :?:

Even if the acquisition costs for a 787 is still higher than a 330neo, an increasingly questionable assumption in light of recent events, there's about a snowball's chance in hell a lessor will be willing to charge lower lease rates for a A330neo instead of a 787. Lessors greatly prefer having a viable secondary market of airlines to place their planes after initial leases are up, and thus far, the dim sales of the A330neo project something very much the opposite of a viable secondary market, they don't wanna be stuck in another A380 situation where the initial leases expire and they end up holding the bag.
 
Swadian
Posts: 562
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:56 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:57 pm

MrHMSH wrote:
ElroyJetson wrote:
I have not seen the claims that you state. This is what I know, The 789 has a 1%-2% fuel burn advantage over the A339 on missions around 3000nm. On missions beyond 4000nm the 789 has a 4-5% fuel burn advantage.

The claims that the capital acquisition costs of the A330 Neo are lower than the 789 is not based on any factual information I have seen. In fact Leeham and others including Airbus have implied they could not match Boeing on costs in the HA deal.

The A330 Neo is basically a a 25 year old technology with 787 engines. It is fine as an updated derivative, but it is not cutting edge technology like the 787 or A350. I don't think anyone was expecting it to surpass the 787 in fuel burn or maintenance costs. The selling points were supposed to be lower capital acquisition costs and close enough in terms of fuel burn.

The problem, Boeing has drastically redued its production costs on the 787 program and Airbus has not brought their costs down at this point in time.


We know that Airbus wasn't willing to match the price on these 2 specific deals, but we've equally had no other indication that the same will apply to every other deal Boeing make, because they are after all only 2 deals. When the customer is an A330 operator but not a 787 operator the picture may be different. You've also missed the selling points of commonality and availability, even if the 787 will eat into that availability advantage.


Price-matching doesn't have to do with the AA order. Even if the A330neo costs the same as a 787, AA would have ordered 787 due to fleet commonality and performance. Airbus would not only have needed to price-match, but to undercut the 787's price, which is apparently no longer possible.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12164
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 5:02 pm

Chaostheory wrote:
When fuel was still $700/ton, my employer did the sums and figured the life cycle cost of an a330-300 would be lower than the 787-900 on sectors upto about 6 hours.

The only major difference between the ceo and neo are engines. We know the A330neo is being priced significantly lower than the 789. Rolls-Royce is on record stating they've been selling the Trent 7000 at a loss as a result.

A little critical thinking isn't difficult folks. Take off the rose tinted glasses and grow the heck up.


Interesting. And now the fuel seems to be lower at $US 650/MT. That should mean that it should be more profitable at sectors of more than 6hours, 6 1/2hours perhaps? Or even more?

Image
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12164
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 5:05 pm

trex8 wrote:
LTCM wrote:
Why people think an a330 is cheaper to build than a 787 is beyond me. The 787 is built with a design that was created specifically to bring construction cost down. There's no reason to think a 330 is cheaper to build.

Thats why Boeing has taken charges of 25 billion + building it to date? Airbus has been printing money with the A330 for a decade +, adding new engines and some wing changes and other system changes doesn't negate the fact that they have already paid off the cost of the manufacturing and have the supply chain running well, unlike Boeing which is just starting to break even on building a 787 (if you believe they really are) but there are other threads discussing that for years.
The development costs of the neo is peanuts, someone said it may be 2 billion, even if its double its probably going to be profitable. The carbon fiber construction, bleedless engines was supposed to make a big difference too in operating costs. LAN has said they see only that improvement to be expected from the new generation engines. There was very little advantage from bleedless engine or CFRP compared to their latest build wingletted 767s. Except for maybe potential lower longterm maintenance cost, is the 787 so much more lower cost than other airframes to run or build?? The jury is still out and given the debacle in building up 787 production it will likely never show that its more cost effective than any other way of manufacturing for this particular program. At some point they may find it will be cheaper but having burned 25 billion plus to get there its a heavy weight to get off your accounting ledger. Going forward if they learnt from before they may get it right on the 797.


Like I said before, in the great game between the two duopolistic companies, the A330NEO biggest contribution for Airbus is keeping the price of the 787 down and thus preventing Boeing to fastly recoup the development cost of $US 25bn plus.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
neomax
Posts: 945
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2017 3:26 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 5:06 pm

You guys are overcomplicating this.

787 has better performance.
A330neo is cheaper.
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1227
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 5:12 pm

neomax wrote:
You guys are overcomplicating this.

787 has better performance.
A330neo is cheaper.


Oversimplifying is not much better.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3642
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 5:20 pm

trex8 wrote:
The carbon fiber construction, bleedless engines was supposed to make a big difference too in operating costs. LAN has said they see only that improvement to be expected from the new generation engines. There was very little advantage from bleedless engine or CFRP compared to their latest build wingletted 767s. Except for maybe potential lower longterm maintenance cost, is the 787 so much more lower cost than other airframes to run or build??


Do you mind supplying some quotes, links, articles or sources to share how you came to the conclusions that:

THere is very little advantage from bleedless engines
There is very little advantage to CFRP

I haven’t seen any reliable OEW figures for the A330neo. Empty weight is key to operating efficiency and that is the advantage of the CFRP. Compared to the 767-300, I have heard that 787-8 trip costs are relatively close. The 787-8 has more than 10% higher capacity and can carry much more payload, which for airlines that can take advantage of it has the ability to bring in more revenue. For short regional flights with lower load factors, this is where the 767 costs are equivalent since trip costs are close and the airline can’t take advantage of the higher payload and capacity
 
trex8
Posts: 5612
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 6:28 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
trex8 wrote:
The carbon fiber construction, bleedless engines was supposed to make a big difference too in operating costs. LAN has said they see only that improvement to be expected from the new generation engines. There was very little advantage from bleedless engine or CFRP compared to their latest build wingletted 767s. Except for maybe potential lower longterm maintenance cost, is the 787 so much more lower cost than other airframes to run or build??


Do you mind supplying some quotes, links, articles or sources to share how you came to the conclusions that:

THere is very little advantage from bleedless engines
There is very little advantage to CFRP

I haven’t seen any reliable OEW figures for the A330neo. Empty weight is key to operating efficiency and that is the advantage of the CFRP. Compared to the 767-300, I have heard that 787-8 trip costs are relatively close. The 787-8 has more than 10% higher capacity and can carry much more payload, which for airlines that can take advantage of it has the ability to bring in more revenue. For short regional flights with lower load factors, this is where the 767 costs are equivalent since trip costs are close and the airline can’t take advantage of the higher payload and capacity

Next time I'll scan my paper AWST/FI articles but websearching their sites is a futile exercise, I "tidied" my office this last year and some of those articles I saved are somewhere in a blackhole in my basement (or the better half tossed them out along with many of my 20 years of AWST/FI/AI/AFM I've had in our present house)!
I did find this in one of my old posts which alludes to the bleedless issue but there was an excellent article a few years ago about the 787s improved fuel burn after it had been in service for a year or two and how most of it (round about 13-14% is from the engines and the rest of the 20% almost equally between improved aerodynamics, CFRP weight savings and bleedless.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=320631&p=3650695&hilit=bleed+less+787+bleedless+787#p3650695
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3359
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:08 pm

The 787 CF construction is suppose yield lower my costs too. Saw an article. Early 787 adopters confirming this.
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Moderator
Posts: 2363
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:17 pm

MrHMSH wrote:
When the customer is an A330 operator but not a 787 operator the picture may be different.


You mean like HA?

That order was literally Airbus’s to lose, and they lost it.
I was raised by a cup of coffee.
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2708
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:23 pm

hOMSaR wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:
When the customer is an A330 operator but not a 787 operator the picture may be different.


You mean like HA?

That order was literally Airbus’s to lose, and they lost it.


HA was unhappy about being the only A338 customer, and given the changes made to the original order it's likely they had minimal cancellation fees, if any. Not a situation that can be repeated as there are only A339 orders left. Boeing saw it as an opportunity to 'kill off' the A338 and took it, the order was probably more significant than the size would suggest.
 
81819
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:03 am

I'd suggest, in general terms, with all else being equal, and no other considerations taken into account, a 787 would be cheaper and more profitable to operate over a 20-year life cycle in comparison to an A330NEO.

In contrast, again in general terms the A330NEO's availability, lower CAPEX cost, ability to integrate with existing A330 fleets, including the availability of spare parts, MRO providers and cabin staff, for many airlines would represent more opportunity than a 787 as it would allow them to take advantage of market conditions, secure financing and grow a fleet at a rate greater than if 787 aircraft were selected resulting in more profits
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3687
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:24 am

trex8 wrote:
Someone who works for VS posted on another thread a year or more ago that their relatively new 233K A333ceos costs less to operate when including capital costs than their 787-9s. Except for a few routes, like LHR-HKG, they could run the A333 rather than the 789 and be ahead cost wise .
When the 788s were first out and overweight it was said up to 4000nm a A330 was burning no more fuel and hauling more payload.
The 787 has been getting 20% lower fuel burn than an early 767 as Boeing rightly predicted but late operators with newer wingletted 767s like LAN were finding they were only seeing the improvement from the new engines, ie low teens. As the neo has essentially the same engines as the 787 now we should see close to similar SFC, the 787 may still be ahead a little but likely low single digits if that and only at longer ranges.
787 lease costs are undoubtedly going to be higher than a neo, this could be one, two , hundred thousand $ a month. That could allow near parity in operating costs.

Isn’t VS paying high lease rates for its A333s? At least the 789s have better lease rates including some sale and leasebacks, with some owned or financed leased (counting as assets for VS).
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10446
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 1:09 am

hOMSaR wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:
When the customer is an A330 operator but not a 787 operator the picture may be different.


You mean like HA?

That order was literally Airbus’s to lose, and they lost it.

AA was also an operator of the A330 and the 787, so commonality should have been a wash. Now they said they wanted to streamline their fleet, the question then is why not make the 787 a smaller fleet and go with the A330 / A350 combination, is it because it is newer tech to the A330?
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14118
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 1:19 am

The seats / aisles seem a bit wider per passenger

787 : 216.5 inch / 9 = 24.1 inch cabin width per passenger
330 : 208.5 inch / 8 = 26.1 inch cabin width per passenger

So a noticeable difference of about 2 inch width per passenger. How important that is, depends if you are an observer or a passenger.
Reduced seat/aisle width definitely influences my (& colleagues) buying decisions on long flights these days.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2708
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 3:04 am

par13del wrote:
hOMSaR wrote:
MrHMSH wrote:
When the customer is an A330 operator but not a 787 operator the picture may be different.


You mean like HA?

That order was literally Airbus’s to lose, and they lost it.

AA was also an operator of the A330 and the 787, so commonality should have been a wash. Now they said they wanted to streamline their fleet, the question then is why not make the 787 a smaller fleet and go with the A330 / A350 combination, is it because it is newer tech to the A330?


If they said they wanted to streamline their fleet, then the advantage was tilted towards the 787. 787 + A330(neo) + A350 = 3 fleets, 787 alone = 1 fleet. The 787 is already well-established there so it made the most sense to streamline around that. I don't think it's specifically that it's because it's newer tech, but the newer tech means it's more fuel-efficient and that's why.
 
User avatar
cougar15
Posts: 1447
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 6:10 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 5:29 am

I always wonder where the OPs on these threads disappear to? He/she may/will surely have very valid grounds for these question, which - all of us would like to understand & comment upon, if only they would react to the replies in the post, 16 hrs after starting the thread......
some you lose, others you can´t win!
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2130
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:05 am

787 has better fuel burn in terms of both volume and weight. So airlines can choose between better comfort or more profit at any given fuel burn.

Long term resale value would be better with the 787. So the A330NEO might have worse lease rates despite it potentially being cheaper to purchase.

So the wins on performance, comfort and on cost. This is reflected by the sales.

Increasing maximum takeoff weight of the A330NEO doesn't improve fuel burn it makes it worse. Lots of people get this wrong.
 
VV
Posts: 1994
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:38 am

cougar15 wrote:
I always wonder where the OPs on these threads disappear to? He/she may/will surely have very valid grounds for these question, which - all of us would like to understand & comment upon, if only they would react to the replies in the post, 16 hrs after starting the thread......


What is "OPs"? Thanks.
 
Mrakula
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:15 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:50 am

A330NEO has higher OEW wich make it less efficient then CEO on missions under 2000nm but in cruise NEO is more efficient then CEO due to engines nad aerodynamic improvement.

In case of AA fleet selection it was clear that A330NEO appeared in competion to offset A350 cancellation penalty and got better deal from Boeing. If they have 787 in fleet already there isnt any reason to introduce another A/C type with same performence and capacity! If Airbus couldnt match Boeing price for AA it does not matter they couldnt in other competition.
 
User avatar
gatibosgru
Posts: 1776
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:48 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:56 am

VV wrote:
cougar15 wrote:
I always wonder where the OPs on these threads disappear to? He/she may/will surely have very valid grounds for these question, which - all of us would like to understand & comment upon, if only they would react to the replies in the post, 16 hrs after starting the thread......


What is "OPs"? Thanks.


Original poster
@DadCelo
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1865
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 8:05 am

RJMAZ wrote:
So the wins on performance, comfort and on cost.

Not true about comfort. The 787 cross section enables one of the worst average comfort levels on the market. Only matched by 2 other Boeing cross sections (3 if the 797 turns out as recommended by you).

RJMAZ wrote:
Increasing maximum takeoff weight of the A330NEO doesn't improve fuel burn it makes it worse.

How much? Is it more than the 0.06% in total cost you recently claimed to play a big role (in the 797 thread, about reduced airport fees)?
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
User avatar
speedbored
Posts: 2230
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:14 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 8:38 am

RJMAZ wrote:
Increasing maximum takeoff weight of the A330NEO doesn't improve fuel burn it makes it worse. Lots of people get this wrong.

Well you got the second part right. MTOW and fuel burn are totally unrelated. MTOW is just a number on some paperwork.

An increase in MTOW only affects fuel burn if you use the extra capacity. All else being equal, it makes no difference at all to fuel burn, unless you have had to increase OEW to achieve it.

Fuel burn is affected by actual take-off weight, which is usually lower (often considerably) than MTOW.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2130
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:14 am

rheinwaldner wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
So the wins on performance, comfort and on cost.

Not true about comfort. The 787 cross section enables one of the worst average comfort levels on the market. Only matched by 2 other Boeing cross sections (3 if the 797 turns out as recommended by you).

That is not correct at all.

This reminds me of post where a A330 is more comfortable and more efficient than the 787. But the secret to that is it's more comfortable only in 8ab and more efficient only in 9ab. It can't do both at once.

You are thinking of it as a 787-8 vs A338 and 787-9 Vs A339. That would be true if you look only in cabin area.

Cabin area
787-8 - 232.2m2
A330-800 - 237.6m2
787-9 - 265.7m2
A330-900 - 265.8m2

The 787's fuel burn advantage and lighter structure means the 787-9 on a 6000nm route actually burns the same fuel with the same payload as the smaller A330-800.

So what does that mean?

The 787-9 could be fitted with a 8ab cabin and with the same number of seats as the A338. The 787-9 will burn the same amount of fuel and have the same trip cost. That's definitely more comfortable.

If an airline decides to fits 9ab into the 787 all that means is it will have a greater percentage area left for premium economy and business class seating. So once averaged out the 787 will have a more comfortable cabin while burning the same amount of fuel.


speedbored wrote:
An increase in MTOW only affects fuel burn if you use the extra capacity. All else being equal, it makes no difference at all to fuel burn, unless you have had to increase OEW to achieve it.

The extra strengthening increased empty weight, so the fuel burn would increase by a very small amount.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9593
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:23 am

LTCM wrote:
The 787 is built with a design that was created specifically to bring construction cost down.


Which never materialized. no snap together LEGO thing. ... and the .9 didn't fix some basic errors
like that "duh, obvious barrels!" stuff.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2708
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:37 am

RJMAZ wrote:
The 787-9 could be fitted with a 8ab cabin and with the same number of seats as the A338. The 787-9 will burn the same amount of fuel and have the same trip cost. That's definitely more comfortable.

If an airline decides to fits 9ab into the 787 all that means is it will have a greater percentage area left for premium economy and business class seating. So once averaged out the 787 will have a more comfortable cabin while burning the same amount of fuel.


A strange way to compare it, the 'average' comfort. Sure, if you put more premium seats in the 'average' comfort will be higher. However for most of us peasants the average means absolutely nothing. If you're an economy class passenger the best measures of comfort is the design of the seat and space. For the vast majority of people, the 8ab configuration on the A330 is more comfortable, and not just because the seats are wider, but 2-4-2 is better than 3-3-3 (only 1 seat from the aisle compared to 2 on the 787's window seats). I think 'average comfort' is close to a meaningless measure, the average is determined almost purely by what the airline decides to configure.

The difference in comfort between the premium cabins is probably more negligible.
 
Mrakula
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:15 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:07 am

RJMAZ wrote:
rheinwaldner wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
So the wins on performance, comfort and on cost.

Not true about comfort. The 787 cross section enables one of the worst average comfort levels on the market. Only matched by 2 other Boeing cross sections (3 if the 797 turns out as recommended by you).

That is not correct at all.

This reminds me of post where a A330 is more comfortable and more efficient than the 787. But the secret to that is it's more comfortable only in 8ab and more efficient only in 9ab. It can't do both at once.

You are thinking of it as a 787-8 vs A338 and 787-9 Vs A339. That would be true if you look only in cabin area.

Cabin area
787-8 - 232.2m2
A330-800 - 237.6m2
787-9 - 265.7m2
A330-900 - 265.8m2

The 787's fuel burn advantage and lighter structure means the 787-9 on a 6000nm route actually burns the same fuel with the same payload as the smaller A330-800.



So what does that mean?

The 787-9 could be fitted with a 8ab cabin and with the same number of seats as the A338. The 787-9 will burn the same amount of fuel and have the same trip cost. That's definitely more comfortable.

If an airline decides to fits 9ab into the 787 all that means is it will have a greater percentage area left for premium economy and business class seating. So once averaged out the 787 will have a more comfortable cabin while burning the same amount of fuel.


speedbored wrote:
An increase in MTOW only affects fuel burn if you use the extra capacity. All else being equal, it makes no difference at all to fuel burn, unless you have had to increase OEW to achieve it.

The extra strengthening increased empty weight, so the fuel burn would increase by a very small amount.


RJMAZ you did not disappoint me again:-) extra weight of A330NEO comper to CEO coming mostly from heavier more efficient engines.

Please tell me where did you got information 787-9 burn same amount of fuel like A330-800?

From known informations A330-900 on 4000nm missions burns around 2% more fuel then 787-9 at longer flight it could be 4-5%? So im curious how 787-9 burn same amount of fule like A330-800!
 
81819
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:24 am

Comparison of 8 and 9 seat across cabin densities with different load factors:

75% load factor

8 across: 2.passengers with vacant seats next to them
9 across: 4.5 passengers with seats vacant next to them.

85% load factor

8 across: 1.passengers with vacant seats next to them
9 across: 2.5 passengers with seats vacant next to them.

95% load factor

8 across: 0.25.passengers with vacant seats next to them
9 across: 0.5 passengers with seats vacant next to them.

If we consider load factors in the range of 75-85% for the majority of international operations, passengers flying in a 787 will more likely have a vacant seat next to them. This would somewhat negate the reduced comfort associated with having a narrower seat. So, in off-peak periods the 787 could be the more comfortable aircraft to fly, but for high peak periods or where load factors are around 95%, the A330 would likely to be more comfortable (as the likelihood of having a vacant seat in either an 787 or A330 would be negligible, but the A330 would have a wider seat).

If we consider the load factor deviation between low and high periods can be substantial (60-98%), it could be the case the 787 is the more comfortable aircraft to fly 75% of the time and the A330 25% of the time.

If we consider more passengers (~80%) are shorter and weigh less than the average male (176cm, 86kgs), the comfort level between a 17.2" and 18.0" seat would be negligible for most people.

As such, the theoretical discomfort level for passengers flying on the 787 could be as low as 5%.

If we consider the extra seat in a 9 across configuration results in higher average revenues and reduced seat mile costs, an aircraft less comfortable than the competing aircraft for 5% of passengers could be considered a reasonable trade-off between commercial operations and customer satisfaction / product.
 
StTim
Posts: 3787
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:53 am

But in your 75% load factor at 8ab you have 2 passengers with vacant seats next to them. Not true. There are 3 vacant seats in the row but these are likely not to be together so likely 3 passengers with no one next to them and at 9 an these will most likely be centre seats so at least 4 passengers and some rows 6 passengers with no one sitting next to them.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10446
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:23 pm

WIederling wrote:
LTCM wrote:
The 787 is built with a design that was created specifically to bring construction cost down.


Which never materialized. no snap together LEGO thing. ... and the .9 didn't fix some basic errors
like that "duh, obvious barrels!" stuff.

Well if you think the only way construction cost would be lowered is by LEGO then they must have done something special with the a/c because they are lowering construction cost enough to allow them to overcome billions in deferred cost and sell the a/c at prices that Airbus is unwilling to beat, so what does that mean, that they are selling at a loss to get market share?
Hmmmm.....
 
Galwayman
Posts: 929
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2017 10:20 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:28 pm

I had no idea that the 787-9 was wider than the 787-8 .... is it wider fuselage or thinner cabin walls?

Might be prepared to fly the 787-9 and give it a go
 
StTim
Posts: 3787
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:42 pm

par13del wrote:
WIederling wrote:
LTCM wrote:
The 787 is built with a design that was created specifically to bring construction cost down.


Which never materialized. no snap together LEGO thing. ... and the .9 didn't fix some basic errors
like that "duh, obvious barrels!" stuff.

Well if you think the only way construction cost would be lowered is by LEGO then they must have done something special with the a/c because they are lowering construction cost enough to allow them to overcome billions in deferred cost and sell the a/c at prices that Airbus is unwilling to beat, so what does that mean, that they are selling at a loss to get market share?
Hmmmm.....



I am not sure I am in the huge reduction of cost - yet.

From what people are saying they have made a step change on cost to produce. Over the first few hundred frames the reduction in cost (there is an academic paper that went through this I just cannot find it) followed a fairly standard learning curve. Slightly worse than the 777 learning curve actually. Now suddenly the 787-9's are cheap to produce. Such step changes or accelerations of the curve are virtually unknown.

I need to see another couple of quarters of data to understand how true it is.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2130
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:49 pm

MrHMSH wrote:
A strange way to compare it, the 'average' comfort.

There's no other way to compare it. Average seating area per passenger. Adjusting pitch to compensate for width to give equal seating area. Apple to apple comparisons.

It seems the Airbus fans don't play fair. They only use examples or configurations to make their aircraft look favourable. Then they wonder why the A330 is getting smashed in the sales department.

Let's compare two A330 and 787 configs to prove my point.

A330 had 2 rows of tight 9 abreast and 100 business class seats for a total of 118 seats

787 had 300 economy seats in 9 abreast.

By your definition the A330 has worse comfort due to its tight 9ab in economy yet each passenger on average has more than twice the seating area. The A330 is clearly more comfortable with a greater average comfort.

If you compare the aircraft fairly and allocate equal seating area for each passenger the 787 will burn less fuel per passenger. For the A330 to match the fuel burn per passenger it needs to add more passengers by reducing the seating area per passenger.

It's pretty simple.
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1865
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Since when does the A330neo have better performance than the 787?

Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:52 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
But the secret to that is it's more comfortable only in 8ab and more efficient only in 9ab.

Exactly, wonderful, you and I agree, the A330 is more comfortable (because the large majority is 8ab and I talked about average comfort levels).

This is backed anytime I take some random samples in the customer feedback sections on seatguru.com. I would bet good money that if you would average out all the feedbacks over all existing 787 configs and all existing A330 configs, the verdict would be decisive in favor of Airbus...
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!

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