tealnz
Posts: 567
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: Updated, confirmed - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:45 am

Which is why we need to see the actual numbers from Boeing. Right now we don’t know how much MFZW will increase with the higher MTOW.
 
ewt340
Posts: 784
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:51 am

Checklist787 wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:

This is wrong 9-abreast 787 is more comfortable than the 777ER and 737. The 787 seat width is 17.2 inches. Also the pitch between the knees and the seat is the most decisive factor in a trip but also the multimedia and service offered by the airline..


It's not much of an achievement isn't it? Seriously though, after flying multiple times with SQ's B787-10. I could say, my skinny asian frames feel cramped especially in the middle seat.


Middle seat has never been the best seat whether you're sitting in an 18 ", 17" or 17.2 "seat.

You're out of luck.
Maybe they need to introduce wider seats in triple blocks seats à la A220 in the futur? ..

B797 / A370 ? ?


My experienced on A330 and 9-abreast B777 said otherwise.
 
NTLDaz
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:56 am

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:55 am

ewt340 wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
ewt340 wrote:

It's not much of an achievement isn't it? Seriously though, after flying multiple times with SQ's B787-10. I could say, my skinny asian frames feel cramped especially in the middle seat.


Middle seat has never been the best seat whether you're sitting in an 18 ", 17" or 17.2 "seat.

You're out of luck.
Maybe they need to introduce wider seats in triple blocks seats à la A220 in the futur? ..

B797 / A370 ? ?


My experienced on A330 and 9-abreast B777 said otherwise.


Not sure what you are talking about. Can you elaborate ?
 
9Patch
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:19 pm

zeke wrote:
Sulfidation is a common in service issue with turbine engines, it is not unique to RR. The only way to fix components that have had excessive exposure is to replace them. Where and how the aircraft is used has a large impact on the exposure.

More straw man arguments. I never said sulfidation is not an issue or was unique to RR.

I said the RR 787 issues we're not just normal in service stuff. You say they are. The onus is on you to prove that. Linking to generic articles showing it's 'researched widely' doesn't address the specifics of the RR 787 in service issues. 'In service' being a key distinction.

Since the problems first came to light, some 15 airlines have felt some effect, most notably ANA, LATAM, Virgin Atlantic, British Airways, Norwegian, and Air New Zealand. Virgin Atlantic, for one, expects to lease four Airbus A330-200s for at least a year to compensate for a shortage of Trent engines to power its 787-9s.
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... olls-royce

Is it 'normal in service stuff' for airlines to have to lease other aircraft for at least a year to compensate for limited engine availability?

Design glitches have plagued the Trent programme since 2016, leading to about $1.7bn in charges, while eating into Rolls-Royce’s share of turbines for 787 jets against rival enginemaker General Electric.
https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/compa ... ne-blades/

Does 'normal in service stuff' typically lead to $1.7 billion in charges and reduced market share?

I don't think so.
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 1373
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

Re: Updated, confirmed - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:43 pm

RR themselves have stated that the disruptive downtime is unacceptable, so not "normal".

But it is individual airframes that have been "grounded" awaiting parts to fix a known problem. That is NZ's experience with their (early) RR789s.

The term "grounded" (per MAX currently) is more usually reserved for a fleet-wide grounding awaiting development of a solution to a problem, either known or unknown. Very different.
 
BBJ777X
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:16 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:13 pm

zeke wrote:
1- nothing has been confirmed relating to a 6t increase
2- there is no major fuel burn difference between the A350 and 787.


1 - Yes, but multiple sources point to this increase; it is very likely to be confirmed in very near future.
2 - At their respective max range maybe the fuel burn difference is small. But not all routes they operate on is at the edge of their range. On short routes the much lighter frame should benefits 781 a lot compared to the heavier A359.
 
User avatar
AECM
Posts: 208
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:52 am

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:17 pm

BBJ777X wrote:
zeke wrote:
1- nothing has been confirmed relating to a 6t increase
2- there is no major fuel burn difference between the A350 and 787.


1 - Yes, but multiple sources point to this increase; it is very likely to be confirmed in very near future.
2 - At their respective max range maybe the fuel burn difference is small. But not all routes they operate on is at the edge of their range. On short routes the much lighter frame should benefits 781 a lot compared to the heavier A359.
How much heavier is a A359 compared to a B78X?
 
BBJ777X
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:16 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:23 pm

AECM wrote:
How much heavier is a A359 compared to a B78X?


Wikipedia says 359 OEW is 134.7–145.1 t, and 781 is 135.5t. I don't have access to a better source. 359 OEW is a range, the lower end 134.7 t is very basic cabin, so the actual OEW full service airlines use should be closer to 140-145 t. 781 OEW is a single number, I think it is the average weight? I think on average 359 is 5-6 t heavier than 781?
 
zkncj
Posts: 3235
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: Updated, confirmed - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:44 pm

JerseyFlyer wrote:
But it is individual airframes that have been "grounded" awaiting parts to fix a known problem. That is NZ's experience with their (early) RR789s.
.


It’s worth nothing that it’s not just NZ’s oldest 789s that have been effected and grounded at times, it has been the entire fleet that has been grounded at some part of the last 24months.

It’s not uncommon to drive past NZ’s AKL jet base and see 3-4x parked up 789s with some missing engines. NZ’s 789s all operate decent ETOPs routes, so it has hit them hard with limitations applied e.g AKL-EZE had to return back to 77Es.

You’ll find NZ operating it’s 789s at the moment with an mix of engines eg they will take an newer engine from newish 789 and put on another 789 that has an older engine etc. They are basically cycling what they have around the 789s constantly to keep some the fleet operational.
 
User avatar
AECM
Posts: 208
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:52 am

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:59 pm

BBJ777X wrote:
AECM wrote:
How much heavier is a A359 compared to a B78X?


Wikipedia says 359 OEW is 134.7–145.1 t, and 781 is 135.5t. I don't have access to a better source. 359 OEW is a range, the lower end 134.7 t is very basic cabin, so the actual OEW full service airlines use should be closer to 140-145 t. 781 OEW is a single number, I think it is the average weight? I think on average 359 is 5-6 t heavier than 781?
If we take in consideration previous threads i think the diference is smaller
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13903
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Mon Jun 03, 2019 12:54 am

BBJ777X wrote:
1 - Yes, but multiple sources point to this increase; it is very likely to be confirmed in very near future.
2 - At their respective max range maybe the fuel burn difference is small. But not all routes they operate on is at the edge of their range. On short routes the much lighter frame should benefits 781 a lot compared to the heavier A359.


1 - a single source at this stage, behind a paywall asking for subscribers to pay up to read it
2 - we have had a long thread in tech ops on 787-9 vs A350-900 range, when carrying the same payload, at the right hand side of the range/payload curve the A350-900 burns less fuel when lifting the same payload mass (average of l as than +/- 1% across all ranges). That is from FCOM data, not guessing.

Remember that NZ was only looking at purchasing 8 aircraft to replace the 77E. It made no sense to purchase another small fleet especially when they are looking at 8 year window to introduce them. With 13 787s already adding more 787s makes sense as you already have then infrastructure, simulators, crew etc. Organisation efficiency can be made by reducing the number of types. For the A350 to have been an efficient choice in my view they would have need to look at purchasing around 15 of them and introduced them closer together to justify a simulator, spares, training etc.

BBJ777X wrote:
AECM wrote:
How much heavier is a A359 compared to a B78X?


Wikipedia says 359 OEW is 134.7–145.1 t, and 781 is 135.5t. I don't have access to a better source. 359 OEW is a range, the lower end 134.7 t is very basic cabin, so the actual OEW full service airlines use should be closer to 140-145 t. 781 OEW is a single number, I think it is the average weight? I think on average 359 is 5-6 t heavier than 781?


The range that wiki lists is just an estimate AWST made at the bottom of this table, 297-320 klb, it does not have a factual basis. The actual OEW of the airframe they flew to write the article was 135,172 kg, that does have factual basis.

Image

From https://aviationweek.com/commercial-avi ... d-airliner
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
BBJ777X
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:16 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:16 am

zeke wrote:
Wikipedia says 359 OEW is 134.7–145.1 t, and 781 is 135.5t. I don't have access to a better source. 359 OEW is a range, the lower end 134.7 t is very basic cabin, so the actual OEW full service airlines use should be closer to 140-145 t. 781 OEW is a single number, I think it is the average weight? I think on average 359 is 5-6 t heavier than 781?


The range that wiki lists is just an estimate AWST made at the bottom of this table, 297-320 klb, it does not have a factual basis. The actual OEW of the airframe they flew to write the article was 135,172 kg, that does have factual basis.
[/quote]

But the particular aircraft you cite is a test aircraft, with very minimal, if not nothing, cabin features. 135t is the OEW of a bare-bone A359 no real airline could ever operate. The real A359 with all the heavy premium seats etc. is much heavier.
 
Eyad89
Posts: 625
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:47 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Mon Jun 03, 2019 2:32 am

BBJ777X wrote:


But the particular aircraft you cite is a test aircraft, with very minimal, if not nothing, cabin features. 135t is the OEW of a bare-bone A359 no real airline could ever operate. The real A359 with all the heavy premium seats etc. is much heavier.


No, the link is presenting a chart of a default A359 with 315 seats (at the top of the table), and it is citing an OEW of 135t. This has nothing to do with the test plane they were flying.

A few examples why your figure of 140t+ is way over the top.

1) in A350 ACAP, the early WV000 variant has a MTOW of 268t, MZFW of 192t, and maximum payload of 54t.

Using the basic equation of OEW= MZFW- max payload, we get an OEW of 138t for the very early WV000 variants.

We know that Airbus has worked on reducing weight after that.

2) we got multiple members (including Zeke) who reported their actual OEMs in different airlines. They all ranged from 135-139t, with the heaviest ones being the earliest MSNs.

3) We got some data in the recent A350 vs 787 range thread that an IB A359 carried 60t of payload for a 280t MTOW frame. Those frames have MZFW of 195.7t, and that means its OEW = 195.7t - 60t = 135.7t.

OEWs are never fixed values for different airlines, but the 145t OEW we see in Wiki is too much.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13903
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Mon Jun 03, 2019 3:08 am

BBJ777X wrote:
But the particular aircraft you cite is a test aircraft, with very minimal, if not nothing, cabin features. 135t is the OEW of a bare-bone A359 no real airline could ever operate. The real A359 with all the heavy premium seats etc. is much heavier.


Test aircraft are actually heavier than production aircraft mainly due to the extra sensors, wiring, and other test specific equipment.

Our company weights for even our early aircraft are very close to the weight cited with a premium cabin, IFE, and two overhead crew rest areas installed. Each aircraft had a different weight.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
aerohottie
Posts: 809
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:52 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Mon Jun 03, 2019 5:58 am

BBJ777X wrote:
zeke wrote:
1- nothing has been confirmed relating to a 6t increase
2- there is no major fuel burn difference between the A350 and 787.


1 - Yes, but multiple sources point to this increase; it is very likely to be confirmed in very near future.
2 - At their respective max range maybe the fuel burn difference is small. But not all routes they operate on is at the edge of their range. On short routes the much lighter frame should benefits 781 a lot compared to the heavier A359.


1 - Will have to wait and see what comes out from Boeing officially.
2 - And yet it does not, which is what Singapore Air stated at the time of their order for A359R for regional services (granted they also purchased 787-10's).
What?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13903
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:22 am

aerohottie wrote:
1 - Will have to wait and see what comes out from Boeing officially.
2 - And yet it does not, which is what Singapore Air stated at the time of their order for A359R for regional services (granted they also purchased 787-10's).


1 - je suppose que ce serait du 17 au 23 juin
2 - My comment was at long range the A350 burns less fuel when the same payload is taken, that was derived from FCOM data. I do not understand what the A350R and 787-10 have to do with that, they are not operating anywhere near those ranges. SQ does not have crew rest areas installed in their 787-10s, so they are not going anywhere long distance. Do you have the source for what "Singapore Air stated" so we can have the context and not your recollection ? Emirates President Tim Clark said : “The Boeing 787-10 aircraft is the best choice for Emirates, it’s a good eight-hour aircraft.”, then they ordered the A350. Sure NZ will be able to operate the 787-10 on longer sectors up around 13 hours, but it will not take anywhere near the payload an A350 can on the same route. But that may not be important for NZ, more freight probably goes eastbound than westbound anyway, it is not like they need to import fresh produce from the US to NZ. What makes the 787-10 work for NZ does not mean it makes it will work for other airlines.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
Some1Somewhere
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:22 pm

Re: Updated, confirmed - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:40 am

From the above article:
At Toulouse-Blagnac Airport, I belted into the left seat of the second A350-900, MSN002, with Airbus chief test pilot Peter Chandler in the right seat and Christian Norden on the jump seat as safety pilot. MSN002 is unrepresentatively heavy, loaded with test equipment and wiring. With two flight-test engineers and 11 passengers, zero fuel weight was 355,383 lb.


That's 161,200kg. I think it's fairly safe to say that the 135,172kg figure in the sidebar reflects a typical (or at least 'brochure typical') airline config.
 
Jefford717
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 11:36 pm

Re: Updated, confirmed - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Mon Jun 03, 2019 9:14 am

I think this recent improve 787-10 rumors is truly incredible if true. The current 787-10 has identical payload-range to that of 268t A359. Improving -10 could be a huge sale. It could pretty much do most of the A359 missions (FYI most flight do not take off at MTOW) while being lighter frame which favors short to mid range missions while carrying about 10-30 passengers more at similar configuration (keep in mind that between door 1 and door 4, the -10 is about 10 ft longer, the a350 is wider but since all but 1 operator operates the 787 at 9 abreast economy this favors the 787 in terms of operating economics).

Lastly, this recent rumor is a start of something bigger. Boeing would not spent time and resources for only 8 frames. I think Boeing is trying to convince United (also current and future A350 operators) to drop/rethink their 45 A359 in favor of the -10 since United selected the A359 due to the fact that the current -10 lacks the range that they need, but this new variant could pretty much do what the A359 can do.
 
NZ321
Posts: 1071
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: Updated, confirmed - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Mon Jun 03, 2019 9:53 am

Jefford717 wrote:
I think this recent improve 787-10 rumors is truly incredible if true. The current 787-10 has identical payload-range to that of 268t A359. Improving -10 could be a huge sale. It could pretty much do most of the A359 missions (FYI most flight do not take off at MTOW) while being lighter frame which favors short to mid range missions while carrying about 10-30 passengers more at similar configuration (keep in mind that between door 1 and door 4, the -10 is about 10 ft longer, the a350 is wider but since all but 1 operator operates the 787 at 9 abreast economy this favors the 787 in terms of operating economics).

Lastly, this recent rumor is a start of something bigger. Boeing would not spent time and resources for only 8 frames. I think Boeing is trying to convince United (also current and future A350 operators) to drop/rethink their 45 A359 in favor of the -10 since United selected the A359 due to the fact that the current -10 lacks the range that they need, but this new variant could pretty much do what the A359 can do.


Well one thing is for sure; NZ wouldn't have gone ahead with the order if Boeing didn't assure them they could deliver. And NZ need decent payload range AKL-LAX,SFO,YVR, PVG, IAH, EZE and HKG. Have a look at those sector lengths. Factor in full pax and bags, some cargo and you have an indication why the MTOW push is in excess of the previously rumoured 2.5 tonnes. Looking forward to seeing the detail from Boeing as well :)
Plane mad!
 
Jefford717
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 11:36 pm

Re: Updated, confirmed - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Mon Jun 03, 2019 10:40 am

NZ321 wrote:
Jefford717 wrote:
I think this recent improve 787-10 rumors is truly incredible if true. The current 787-10 has identical payload-range to that of 268t A359. Improving -10 could be a huge sale. It could pretty much do most of the A359 missions (FYI most flight do not take off at MTOW) while being lighter frame which favors short to mid range missions while carrying about 10-30 passengers more at similar configuration (keep in mind that between door 1 and door 4, the -10 is about 10 ft longer, the a350 is wider but since all but 1 operator operates the 787 at 9 abreast economy this favors the 787 in terms of operating economics).

Lastly, this recent rumor is a start of something bigger. Boeing would not spent time and resources for only 8 frames. I think Boeing is trying to convince United (also current and future A350 operators) to drop/rethink their 45 A359 in favor of the -10 since United selected the A359 due to the fact that the current -10 lacks the range that they need, but this new variant could pretty much do what the A359 can do.


Well one thing is for sure; NZ wouldn't have gone ahead with the order if Boeing didn't assure them they could deliver. And NZ need decent payload range AKL-LAX,SFO,YVR, PVG, IAH, EZE and HKG. Have a look at those sector lengths. Factor in full pax and bags, some cargo and you have an indication why the MTOW push is in excess of the previously rumoured 2.5 tonnes. Looking forward to seeing the detail from Boeing as well :)

2.5t reduction of empty weight, MTOW increases from 254.5t to 260t and probably an engine PIP by 2022 which is about an additional 1.5-2 hours of flight time. Current longest 787-10 flight is TLV-EWR which clocks in about 12 hours. Boeing really needs some good news and this could be it. Definitely plenty of time to persuade customers with this new variant IF TRUE.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13903
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Updated, confirmed - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:21 am

Jefford717 wrote:
The current 787-10 has identical payload-range to that of 268t A359. Improving -10 could be a huge sale.


No it doesn't, it would have killed the 787-9 if it did. Let me remind you that NZ have said the 787-9 will be used to JFK, something the A350 could do, and the 787-10 could not.

NZ321 wrote:
And NZ need decent payload range AKL-LAX,SFO,YVR, PVG, IAH, EZE and HKG. Have a look at those sector lengths. Factor in full pax and bags, some cargo and you have an indication why the MTOW push is in excess of the previously rumoured 2.5 tonnes.


Stitch I think said he was on a 13 hr flight on a 787-10 (maybe SFO-PEK ?), it will not be carrying much if any cargo that sort of length.

Jefford717 wrote:
2.5t reduction of empty weight, MTOW increases from 254.5t to 260t and probably an engine PIP by 2022 which is about an additional 1.5-2 hours of flight time. .


I dont believe a 2.5 tonne reduction, that is equivalent to taking about 7 feet (2.2 meters) of fuselage out of the aircraft.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
WorldFlier
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:10 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:48 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:
FlyHappy wrote:


really, seriously? that's a tiny number, kinda hard to believe. I woulda thought "Flight of the Conchords" would have enticed greater numbers ;)



How much is East Coast- ANZ?

Great connection to significantly reduce travel time.

For example,

XXX-EWR-AKL-BNE versus XXX-EWR-LAX-AKL-BNE

I am sure there are plenty of business travellers willing to pay the premium to fly very far. The same way that PER-LHR works by getting people connecting on both sides of that flight instead of the added distance.


Everything that matters in the U.S. Northeast can already be flown XXX-LAX-BNE.



Maybe I should have been clearer.

How many airports does ANZ serve from AKL? Every single north-east quadrant airport - EWR - AKL - every single airport served by ANZ.

How many of the cities that go to LAX time their connection perfectly? If PIT-LAX is flown 2x daily but you have a 6 hour layover while PIT-EWR is flown alot more? You save many hours. Time is money.
 
BBJ777X
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:16 pm

Re: Updated, confirmed - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:56 pm

zeke wrote:
Jefford717 wrote:
The current 787-10 has identical payload-range to that of 268t A359. Improving -10 could be a huge sale.


No it doesn't, it would have killed the 787-9 if it did. Let me remind you that NZ have said the 787-9 will be used to JFK, something the A350 could do, and the 787-10 could not.



787-10 has identical payload-range to that of 268t A359, not all A359. Current 254t 787-9's range is similar to that of 275t A359. 260t 787-9's range is greater than 280t A359 (8500 nmi vs. 7800 nmi) assuming with respective full passengers and bags, no cargo). Only 275t A350 and 254t 787-9 can do AKL-JFK, neither 268t A359 nor 254t 787-10 can.
 
BBJ777X
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:16 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:08 pm

Eyad89 wrote:
BBJ777X wrote:


But the particular aircraft you cite is a test aircraft, with very minimal, if not nothing, cabin features. 135t is the OEW of a bare-bone A359 no real airline could ever operate. The real A359 with all the heavy premium seats etc. is much heavier.


No, the link is presenting a chart of a default A359 with 315 seats (at the top of the table), and it is citing an OEW of 135t. This has nothing to do with the test plane they were flying.

A few examples why your figure of 140t+ is way over the top.

1) in A350 ACAP, the early WV000 variant has a MTOW of 268t, MZFW of 192t, and maximum payload of 54t.

Using the basic equation of OEW= MZFW- max payload, we get an OEW of 138t for the very early WV000 variants.

We know that Airbus has worked on reducing weight after that.

2) we got multiple members (including Zeke) who reported their actual OEMs in different airlines. They all ranged from 135-139t, with the heaviest ones being the earliest MSNs.

3) We got some data in the recent A350 vs 787 range thread that an IB A359 carried 60t of payload for a 280t MTOW frame. Those frames have MZFW of 195.7t, and that means its OEW = 195.7t - 60t = 135.7t.

OEWs are never fixed values for different airlines, but the 145t OEW we see in Wiki is too much.


But the 135.5 t OEW number for 787-10 seen in the wiki is way too much as well. Is there any sources on the actual OEW of 787-10? I think we should expect it to be in the 128-130 t range.
 
ITSTours
Posts: 407
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:51 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:16 pm

BBJ777X wrote:
Eyad89 wrote:
BBJ777X wrote:


But the particular aircraft you cite is a test aircraft, with very minimal, if not nothing, cabin features. 135t is the OEW of a bare-bone A359 no real airline could ever operate. The real A359 with all the heavy premium seats etc. is much heavier.


No, the link is presenting a chart of a default A359 with 315 seats (at the top of the table), and it is citing an OEW of 135t. This has nothing to do with the test plane they were flying.

A few examples why your figure of 140t+ is way over the top.

1) in A350 ACAP, the early WV000 variant has a MTOW of 268t, MZFW of 192t, and maximum payload of 54t.

Using the basic equation of OEW= MZFW- max payload, we get an OEW of 138t for the very early WV000 variants.

We know that Airbus has worked on reducing weight after that.

2) we got multiple members (including Zeke) who reported their actual OEMs in different airlines. They all ranged from 135-139t, with the heaviest ones being the earliest MSNs.

3) We got some data in the recent A350 vs 787 range thread that an IB A359 carried 60t of payload for a 280t MTOW frame. Those frames have MZFW of 195.7t, and that means its OEW = 195.7t - 60t = 135.7t.

OEWs are never fixed values for different airlines, but the 145t OEW we see in Wiki is too much.


But the 135.5 t OEW number for 787-10 seen in the wiki is way too much as well. Is there any sources on the actual OEW of 787-10? I think we should expect it to be in the 128-130 t range.


I would suggest you to present evidence with your claim,
not to make a claim first and ask others for the evidence.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13903
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:20 pm

BBJ777X wrote:
787-10 has identical payload-range to that of 268t A359, not all A359. Current 254t 787-9's range is similar to that of 275t A359. 260t 787-9's range is greater than 280t A359 (8500 nmi vs. 7800 nmi) assuming with respective full passengers and bags, no cargo). Only 275t A350 and 254t 787-9 can do AKL-JFK, neither 268t A359 nor 254t 787-10 can.


from Boeing

787-10 6430 nm (330 pax, 254 tonne)
787-9 7635 nm (290 pax, 254 tonne)

There is presently no 260 tonne 787-9, nor is there a 787-9 that is capable of 8500 nm with its design payload.If the unconfirmed rumors are true of a 6 tonne increase to the 787 MTOW, you are looking at around 350 nm increase in range.

A 268 tonne A350-900 could do AKL-JFK, it would just do so with less payload than a 275 or 280 tonne A350-900.

BBJ777X wrote:
But the 135.5 t OEW number for 787-10 seen in the wiki is way too much as well. Is there any sources on the actual OEW of 787-10? I think we should expect it to be in the 128-130 t range.


UA actual 787-10 OEW 136359 kg (which is near identical to our A350-900), on this 11:09 flight it could only lift 43.9 tonnes. That is about 15 tonnes below that capability of an A350-900 on the same sector length.

"Take for example today's 5/29/2019 UA85 TLV-EWR flight the MTOG for the 78X is 560,000 today's TOG was 559,235. Now before you said I told you so lets take a look at what is on that aircraft. First and foremost the aircraft went out full with 318 passengers and 326 bags and 26,089 pounds of cargo. Lets break it all down the OEW is 300,563 the weight of all 318 passengers is 60,903, the weight of their 326 bags is 9780 pounds and there was 26,089 pounds of cargo add those number together we get a ZFW of 397,335 out of a MXFW of 425,000. The cleared fuel was 161,900 so when you add the cleared fuel to the ZFW you get a TOG of 559,235.

The block time for UA85 is 11 hours 9 minutes, so as you can see the 78X is a very capable aircraft it can fly 11 hour missions and take everything while going out with a full load. If this flight had a block time of 12 hours UA could still fly the route with this aircraft but would have to sacrifice some of that 26,089 pounds of cargo. "

from viewtopic.php?t=1422657
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
BBJ777X
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:16 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Tue Jun 04, 2019 11:30 pm

zeke wrote:
from Boeing

787-10 6430 nm (330 pax, 254 tonne)
787-9 7635 nm (290 pax, 254 tonne)

There is presently no 260 tonne 787-9, nor is there a 787-9 that is capable of 8500 nm with its design payload.If the unconfirmed rumors are true of a 6 tonne increase to the 787 MTOW, you are looking at around 350 nm increase in range.

A 268 tonne A350-900 could do AKL-JFK, it would just do so with less payload than a 275 or 280 tonne A350-900.


To make an apple-to-apple comparison we need to use the same standard when calculating ranges. If Airbus standard is used, all Boeing aircrafts will have a significant range boost. With A's standard 787-10's range far exceed 6430 nm,

When I said 268t A350-900 couldn't do AKL-JFK, I meant it couldn't do with full passenger payload, Blocking seats doesn't count. Using your standard, even A330-300 "could do" AKL-JFK with minimal to none payload.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13903
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 12:12 am

BBJ777X wrote:
To make an apple-to-apple comparison we need to use the same standard when calculating ranges. If Airbus standard is used, all Boeing aircrafts will have a significant range boost. With A's standard 787-10's range far exceed 6430 nm,


It is actually the other way around, you will find some slides on the internet where Airbus have used Boeing rules and the range for the Airbus aircraft is greater when using Boeing rules.

BBJ777X wrote:
When I said 268t A350-900 couldn't do AKL-JFK, I meant it couldn't do with full passenger payload, Blocking seats doesn't count. Using your standard, even A330-300 "could do" AKL-JFK with minimal to none payload.


I just ran a flight plan for today, a 268 tonne A350-900 would take full design pax load plus some cargo over AKL-JFK, flight planned distance of 7740 nm, with the tailwinds it comes back to an air distance of 7270 nm, about 500 nm below design range. Our A333s would be just short of the required amount of fuel with a usable capacity of 76.5 tonnes to do that empty.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
BBJ777X
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:16 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 4:30 am

zeke wrote:
It is actually the other way around, you will find some slides on the internet where Airbus have used Boeing rules and the range for the Airbus aircraft is greater when using Boeing rules.


What you said is true before Boeing modified their range number to "closely represent what customers are using".

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ns-415293/

The assumptions (95kg per passengers) Airbus is using now to calculate the range is similar to what Boeing's before. Using AIrbus' current standard, 787-9's range is 8300 nmi, greater than 280t A359's 8100 nmi (see the article before).

Image
 
BBJ777X
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:16 pm

Re: Updated, confirmed - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 4:40 am

Jefford717 wrote:
Lastly, this recent rumor is a start of something bigger. Boeing would not spent time and resources for only 8 frames. I think Boeing is trying to convince United (also current and future A350 operators) to drop/rethink their 45 A359 in favor of the -10 since United selected the A359 due to the fact that the current -10 lacks the range that they need, but this new variant could pretty much do what the A359 can do.


^^^ This. :checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:

Giving how close United and Boeing are I think UA knew the new 260t 787 long before the public. They deferred the A350 just to wait for Boeing to announce 260t 787. IMHO they have never planned to take delivery to A350. We can expect the cancellation of UA A350 very soon.
 
Mrakula
Posts: 122
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:15 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 9:09 am

BBJ777X wrote:
zeke wrote:
It is actually the other way around, you will find some slides on the internet where Airbus have used Boeing rules and the range for the Airbus aircraft is greater when using Boeing rules.


What you said is true before Boeing modified their range number to "closely represent what customers are using".

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ns-415293/

The assumptions (95kg per passengers) Airbus is using now to calculate the range is similar to what Boeing's before. Using AIrbus' current standard, 787-9's range is 8300 nmi, greater than 280t A359's 8100 nmi (see the article before).

Image


Omg Boeing recalculate theirs marketing ranges because it wer not acurate and oudated. They need make it closer to actual standart and it was join with change of seat configuration.Airbus standart are not acurate but not less than Boeing old ones. So why Airbus has to do that? Marketing ranges does nean nothing for airline operations!
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1673
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 10:58 am

BBJ777X wrote:
What you said is true before Boeing modified their range number to "closely represent what customers are using".

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ns-415293/

The assumptions (95kg per passengers) Airbus is using now to calculate the range is similar to what Boeing's before. Using AIrbus' current standard, 787-9's range is 8300 nmi, greater than 280t A359's 8100 nmi (see the article before).

Image



Do you have a link to where Boeing confirms what assumptions on weight they are using now? What were the assumptions they used before they revised their marketing material? The article you linked doesn't say anything about what the new assumptions are other than they have changed their seating to a more realistic layout and you would assume the extra added weight of the heavier premium seats that would affect range calculations. What I can see in the 767 ACAPs that they use around 95kg per passenger as well if I have worked it out correctly.

Also, your picture that you use you in your post shows that the range with Airbus assumptions is on the right. You will need to show how you worked this out because the original picture does not assert that and we would hate to think you have just changed a picture without any numbers to back that up.
 
Checklist787
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 1:58 pm

zeke wrote:

Emirates President Tim Clark said : “The Boeing 787-10 aircraft is the best choice for Emirates, it’s a good eight-hour aircraft.”, then they ordered the A350.




It's not really what happened...

Tim Clark / EK was never really interested in the A350 and A330neo but really interested in the 787-10 despite it would be a "good 8-hour aircraft".

EK then proceed to a MOU to acquire 787-10 that has expired without confirming this order.

Others say, Emirates had A380 options they can not honor so they ordered the A350 and A330neo for settle the dispute with Airbus since the A380neo did not succeed for EK ...
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13903
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 2:38 pm

enzo011 wrote:
Do you have a link to where Boeing confirms what assumptions on weight they are using now? What were the assumptions they used before they revised their marketing material? The article you linked doesn't say anything about what the new assumptions are other than they have changed their seating to a more realistic layout and you would assume the extra added weight of the heavier premium seats that would affect range calculations. What I can see in the 767 ACAPs that they use around 95kg per passenger as well if I have worked it out correctly.

Also, your picture that you use you in your post shows that the range with Airbus assumptions is on the right. You will need to show how you worked this out because the original picture does not assert that and we would hate to think you have just changed a picture without any numbers to back that up.


It’s obvious they just changed the picture from flight global without doing anything else.

Boeing did not change the range numbers, they changed the cabin configuration by changing the pitch on the seats to be more realistic.

The Boeing 2 class seating at the time for example on the 747, first class had a 39” pitch, and economy 32”. Airbus on the A380 in 2 class configuration had a seat pitch of 60” and economy of 32”.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13903
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 2:40 pm

Checklist787 wrote:
It's not really what happened...


So they didn’t order the A330neo and A350 and did order the 787-10 ?

You got a source for that ?
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
frigatebird
Posts: 1668
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 7:02 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 3:06 pm

zeke wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
It's not really what happened...


So they didn’t order the A330neo and A350 and did order the 787-10 ?

You got a source for that ?

EK hasn't ordered the 787-10, nor the A350/A330neo.

They reached an agreement with Airbus to cancel part of their A380 order, taking 40x A330neo and 30x A350 instead. It was thought the 40x A330neo would supplace the 40x 787-10 MoU, but Tim Clark said recently they still want the 787s too. But neither order is firm yet, formally the A380 order is still in Airbus' orderbook.

When firmed, the A350 will be used to open up long thin routes for EK, the 787-10 will have a different role, more like a regional aircraft.
146,318/19/20/21, AB6,332,333,343,345,388, 722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9, 742,74E,744,752,762,763, 772,77E,773,77W,788 AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E75/90,F50/70
 
Mrakula
Posts: 122
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:15 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 3:37 pm

frigatebird wrote:
zeke wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
It's not really what happened...


So they didn’t order the A330neo and A350 and did order the 787-10 ?

You got a source for that ?

EK hasn't ordered the 787-10, nor the A350/A330neo.

They reached an agreement with Airbus to cancel part of their A380 order, taking 40x A330neo and 30x A350 instead. It was thought the 40x A330neo would supplace the 40x 787-10 MoU, but Tim Clark said recently they still want the 787s too. But neither order is firm yet, formally the A380 order is still in Airbus' orderbook.

When firmed, the A350 will be used to open up long thin routes for EK, the 787-10 will have a different role, more like a regional aircraft.


In Emirates 2019 report 781 was not mentioned while A330neo A350 yes.

I would like know when T. Clark said that?
 
ITSTours
Posts: 407
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:51 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 3:37 pm

Mrakula wrote:
frigatebird wrote:
zeke wrote:

So they didn’t order the A330neo and A350 and did order the 787-10 ?

You got a source for that ?

EK hasn't ordered the 787-10, nor the A350/A330neo.

They reached an agreement with Airbus to cancel part of their A380 order, taking 40x A330neo and 30x A350 instead. It was thought the 40x A330neo would supplace the 40x 787-10 MoU, but Tim Clark said recently they still want the 787s too. But neither order is firm yet, formally the A380 order is still in Airbus' orderbook.

When firmed, the A350 will be used to open up long thin routes for EK, the 787-10 will have a different role, more like a regional aircraft.


In Emirates 2019 report 781 was not mentioned while A330neo A350 yes.

I would like know when T. Clark said that?


http://m.atwonline.com/iata-agm-2019/ia ... l-year-end

A few days ago at IATA GM.
 
Checklist787
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 5:15 pm

zeke wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
t's not really what happened...



EK then proceed to a MOU to acquire 787-10 that has expired without confirming this order.


So they didn’t order the A330neo and A350 and did order the 787-10 ?

You got a source for that ?


No need for sources,
Everyone knows EK had a MOU about 787-10's.

Where have you been in recent years?
MOU = "Memorandum Of Understanding"
Last edited by Checklist787 on Wed Jun 05, 2019 5:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
ITSTours
Posts: 407
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:51 pm

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 5:32 pm

Checklist787 wrote:
zeke wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:



EK then proceed to a MOU to acquire 787-10 that has expired without confirming this order.


So they didn’t order the A330neo and A350 and did order the 787-10 ?

You got a source for that ?


No need for sources,
Everyone knows EK had a MOU about 787-10's.

Where have you been in recent years?
MOU = "Memorundum Of Understanding"


MOU alone does nothing, period.
Until Tim Clark said he would stick to the 787 order, people were assuming EK were not going to finalize the order.
The basis was that 787 was not in their fleet plan in the recent annual report.
Because MOU is a "menorandum of understanding", not a binding contract.
 
Checklist787
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 5:55 pm

zeke wrote:
enzo011 wrote:
Do you have a link to where Boeing confirms what assumptions on weight they are using now? What were the assumptions they used before they revised their marketing material? The article you linked doesn't say anything about what the new assumptions are other than they have changed their seating to a more realistic layout and you would assume the extra added weight of the heavier premium seats that would affect range calculations. What I can see in the 767 ACAPs that they use around 95kg per passenger as well if I have worked it out correctly.

Also, your picture that you use you in your post shows that the range with Airbus assumptions is on the right. You will need to show how you worked this out because the original picture does not assert that and we would hate to think you have just changed a picture without any numbers to back that up.


It’s obvious they just changed the picture from flight global without doing anything else.

Boeing did not change the range numbers, they changed the cabin configuration by changing the pitch on the seats to be more realistic.

The Boeing 2 class seating at the time for example on the 747, first class had a 39” pitch, and economy 32”. Airbus on the A380 in 2 class configuration had a seat pitch of 60” and economy of 32”.


Also Airbus shows the A330 and A350 ACAPS at 60 in pitch for Business Seats and Boeing shows the 787 Dreamliner and 777-X ACAPS at 85 in pitch for Business Seats (Lie-flat) .

Note that for the Airbus A350-XWB does not show the "Overhead-Flight Crew Rest / -Flight Attendant Rest" while Boeing yes.

Does this mean that the aircraft does not "fly far" with a 2-class 315 seat?
 
Checklist787
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Report - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 6:00 pm

ITSTours wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
zeke wrote:

So they didn’t order the A330neo and A350 and did order the 787-10 ?

You got a source for that ?


No need for sources,
Everyone knows EK had a MOU about 787-10's.

Where have you been in recent years?
MOU = "Memorundum Of Understanding"


MOU alone does nothing, period.
Until Tim Clark said he would stick to the 787 order, people were assuming EK were not going to finalize the order.
The basis was that 787 was not in their fleet plan in the recent annual report.
Because MOU is a "menorandum of understanding", not a binding contract.


It's wrong.

90% of cases, MOU's become firm orders... :banghead:
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Posts: 8779
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Updated, confirmed - Air NZ picks Boeing for wide-body order

Wed Jun 05, 2019 6:03 pm

Thread has drifted off topic and will be locked
Forum Moderator

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