Page 2 of 3

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Wed May 22, 2019 6:20 pm
by KFLLCFII
Airbus initially counters the 787 with the A350 mk1.

Airbus initially counters the 797 with the...A350 mk1.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Wed May 22, 2019 6:26 pm
by ikolkyo
KFLLCFII wrote:
Airbus initially counters the 787 with the A350 mk1.

Airbus initially counters the 797 with the...A350 mk1.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:


That seems to be their plan, haha.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Wed May 22, 2019 6:26 pm
by Revelation
par13del wrote:
Revelation wrote:
The money to pay for the MAX screw up has to come from somewhere, and launching an expensive clean sheet targeted at a challenging area of the market is not likely to happen in the near term, IMHO.

If, as per A.Net wisdom, the USA Congress is in Boeing's pocket, they could use the MAX issue to make a case for Launch Aid to allow them to remain competitive with Airbus and preserve USA jobs. The financial liabilities created by the crash and the groundings and the perceived notion that folks will shy away from purchasing or travelling on a MAX a/c can be used to create a case, and if you are already preaching to the choir.......

Sure, just do it all at market rates and it'll all pass muster.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Wed May 22, 2019 6:59 pm
by JayinKitsap
The NMA is the entry to doing the NSA, the new product can probably only do 10 per month for a few years, gradually raising into the 60/month over a decade, but with huge investment. They will need a lot of commonality to reduce the certification costs. This commonality pushes the NMA to be no more than a 4,000 nm aircraft and the NSA initially a 2,500 nm range with 200 pax.

There seems to be a limit on NB somewhere around 200 seats (the 1FA:50pax constraint), it might be availability of the larger, but the A320 is selling 2:1 to the A321 and the 737-8 is like 3:1 over the -10. By around 240 seats or so the market dries up. The 753 came out late but was more efficient as a stretch, it only sold 55 of a total 1,049. This 200 seat barrier came into effect.

Both the 737 and 320 have lots of parts that are the same as the initial versions, it is a nightmare and not worth the effort to redesign those parts to be lighter. But a clean sheet can design each part for the lightest weight meeting the design envelope. The future NB should be a max 200 pax and 2,500 mile range to capture that 6 to 7% reduction in fuel burn compared to 3,500 nm. It should be noted the A321 neo now has a 4,000 nm range.

The best aspect for sales is it would place this NB in a unique spot in the payload / range chart, with excellent efficiency. For those 5% of routes that need more, the existing planes can satisfy. Twenty years out with upgraded engines it would cover those, as the current planes reach their end of life

Image

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Wed May 22, 2019 7:24 pm
by InsideMan
727200 wrote:
Both the 321 and 330 are old technology that Airbus is trying to pass off as newest and greatist. Lets see how fast the sales trickle once the 797 is launched.

At the end of the day, you can put lipstick on a pig, but its still a pig.

you mean like the MAX lipstick on the 60s design aircraft? That seems to sell quite well....

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Wed May 22, 2019 7:26 pm
by InsideMan
(double post, please delete)

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Wed May 22, 2019 7:30 pm
by InsideMan
again, who says the A321XLR or A330NEO have to come close to the capabilities of the NMA?
That is not achievable with the A330NEO as it is too big.

You look at the routes and frequency the NMA shall cover and offer a mix of both aircraft to be able to do the same.
Then you calculate the total cost of ownership of buying and operating the full fleet over 25 years of a theoretical NMA
and offer the same capacity and capability at equal or lower TOC. I am 100% convinced this will still be profitable for Airbus
and eat into any margin of any campain Boeing wants to win with the NMA.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Wed May 22, 2019 8:32 pm
by Devilfish
ikolkyo wrote:
That seems to be their plan, haha.

This is their plan.....

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... er-458365/


But where is the NMA both are supposed to counter :confused:

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Wed May 22, 2019 9:00 pm
by seabosdca
The A321neo is a very real threat to NMA as currently imagined, not because it can do all the same things, but because it can shrink the market just enough to imperil the business case.

The A330-800 is not a threat. It's too big, too heavy, and too optimized for near-ULH range.

The "pincer strategy" is really a strategy of chipping away at the market from the bottom and forcing the 797 upmarket, which is a perfectly good strategy; we just shouldn't expect increased 338 sales as a result. (Or any of the fanciful scenarios of a shortened or re-winged 338 mooted above.)

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 5:35 pm
by Devilfish
seabosdca wrote:
we just shouldn't expect increased 338 sales as a result. (Or any of the fanciful scenarios of a shortened or re-winged 338 mooted above.)

Agreed. I think the A338 is there mainly to prevent the 789 from undercutting the A359 too much...and also to head off the 788 running away with campaigns for aircraft just under that capacity by default.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 6:31 pm
by frmrCapCadet
And underlying problem for both Airbus and Boeing is that the 8s (350 and 787) were not so economically efficient over the 9s, to the point that one disappeared and the other needs very competitive pricing against the 330NEO. It made the gap grow.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 6:58 pm
by marcogr12
SelseyBill wrote:
WeatherPilot wrote:
Airbus should just bring back the A310 with a new engine creating the A310neo.


..........or a A330-200 shrink with de-rated engine and weight loss programme.........I call it the A330-100CEO.........

That was the original and splendid A300B/-600R..Why did they kill it? It was such a "multifunctional" a/c on short/medium/long-haul

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 8:47 pm
by beertrucker
WeatherPilot wrote:
Airbus should just bring back the A310 with a new engine creating the A310neo.



I have been saying this ever since the NMA talk started. If It a NEO, then a new version of this. The 310 fits almost every single thing an airline wants in the NMA. It just would need the newest and best technology and maybe better aerodynamics. The the blue print was already there.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 11:52 pm
by seabosdca
marcogr12 wrote:
SelseyBill wrote:
WeatherPilot wrote:
Airbus should just bring back the A310 with a new engine creating the A310neo.


..........or a A330-200 shrink with de-rated engine and weight loss programme.........I call it the A330-100CEO.........

That was the original and splendid A300B/-600R..Why did they kill it? It was such a "multifunctional" a/c on short/medium/long-haul


The 767-300 outcompeted it, once available.

The A330 fuselage, even with a much smaller/lighter wing, is a bit too big and heavy for this requirement. An "A300 Mk 2" would be at an economic disadvantage versus both NMA as currently imagined and the A321neo.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 12:02 am
by strfyr51
flee wrote:
If Boeing is having a hard time justifying the business case for NMA, Airbus will find it even harder to do so. As it is Airbus already has a competitive product at the lower end of the market and only needs to listen to their customers' requirements to optimise the A321Neo further to suit their needs.

I am not sure about the upper end of the NMA market, though. The A338Neo is probably less optimised than the A321Neo and needs major modifications to meet the needs of the NMA markets. Airbus will not need to spend as much on these modifications - both the A321 and the A330 feature mature technology and the technical risks are lower.

Boeing's NMA is not going to feature new technology either - it will borrow from the 777X, 787 and Max. That is how Boeing plans to keep costs down to make it a better business proposition.

Boeing Is NOT having a hard tim Justifying the B797, I'll bet they're waiting for the Engines or some new flight control system to come to fruition..

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 1:42 am
by WayexTDI
strfyr51 wrote:
flee wrote:
If Boeing is having a hard time justifying the business case for NMA, Airbus will find it even harder to do so. As it is Airbus already has a competitive product at the lower end of the market and only needs to listen to their customers' requirements to optimise the A321Neo further to suit their needs.

I am not sure about the upper end of the NMA market, though. The A338Neo is probably less optimised than the A321Neo and needs major modifications to meet the needs of the NMA markets. Airbus will not need to spend as much on these modifications - both the A321 and the A330 feature mature technology and the technical risks are lower.

Boeing's NMA is not going to feature new technology either - it will borrow from the 777X, 787 and Max. That is how Boeing plans to keep costs down to make it a better business proposition.

Boeing Is NOT having a hard tim Justifying the B797, I'll bet they're waiting for the Engines or some new flight control system to come to fruition..

Sure they don't. There is so much a market for the 797 (whatever it ends up being) that they've launched it years ago and sold 5,000+ copies already.
Wait... no they have not....

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 2:17 am
by flee
beertrucker wrote:
WeatherPilot wrote:
Airbus should just bring back the A310 with a new engine creating the A310neo.

I have been saying this ever since the NMA talk started. If It a NEO, then a new version of this. The 310 fits almost every single thing an airline wants in the NMA. It just would need the newest and best technology and maybe better aerodynamics. The the blue print was already there.

The A310 fuselage is just a shorter version of the A330's - even the nose gear is the same.

What is needed is a new smaller and lighter CFRP wing optimised for short-medium range flights plus a 50K PW GTF engine and we have an A310-800.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 2:25 am
by TTailedTiger
I don't think Boeing will significantly delay the NMA. They need to move on from the 737Max issues quickly. Couple new 737Max orders with conversion rights to the NMA.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 5:18 am
by caoimhin
lightsaber wrote:
luckyone wrote:
I realize we’re discussing different market spaces—but didn’t we already see this play out with the 787 vs. re-engined A330?
somewhere a mall is missing its Ninja.

Lightsaber


Haha. Well said, my man. Favourite comment of the year so far.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 7:33 am
by scbriml
Elementalism wrote:
Right now for me the obvious business case is being made by Airbus releasing new extended range options for the A321. The airlines are clamoring for this MOM and the A321 is the only current plane capable of trying to fill the void.


The business case seems somewhat less obvious to Boeing, despite all the 'clamouring'.

Devilfish wrote:
But where is the NMA both are supposed to counter


Hmmm...
marcogr12 wrote:
That was the original and splendid A300B/-600R..Why did they kill it? It was such a "multifunctional" a/c on short/medium/long-haul


For the same reason Boeing killed the 757 and 767-200 (pax) - airlines stopped buying them.

strfyr51 wrote:
Boeing Is NOT having a hard tim Justifying the B797, I'll bet they're waiting for the Engines or some new flight control system to come to fruition..


Well, they've been 'mulling' it for years now and Boeing's senior execs say exactly that - they haven't been able to close the business case. What do you know that they don't?

TTailedTiger wrote:
I don't think Boeing will significantly delay the NMA.


They've already been talking about it for years. Lots of people were adamant it would be launched at Farnborough last year. Maybe next year, or the year after that?

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 10:59 am
by keesje
ikolkyo wrote:
KFLLCFII wrote:
Airbus initially counters the 787 with the A350 mk1.

Airbus initially counters the 797 with the...A350 mk1.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:


That seems to be their plan, haha.


:checkmark: 1100 A330s sold after the 2003 launch of 787 Dreamliner.
:checkmark: 3000 A321NEO's will have entered into service by the time any 797 shows up.


If Airbus develops a "simple" A322NEO trading capacity for range, 101t would still provide a very good range, maybe 3700NM.
For real long flight the slightly smaller A321XLR could be used, up to 4700NM.

http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=&R=3700NM%40BOS,+3700NM%40BKK&MS=wls2&MR=1800&MX=720x360&PM=*
3700NM ranges from BOS, BKK.

IMO up to 250 seats for 5-6 hours at NEO, NB cost levels could be a significant bigger market than 4000NM+ with a similar capacity aircraft..
Think Leisure, US transcon, Intra Europe, Intra Asia... leave 4000-5000nm for the 787s/A330s ..

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 11:17 am
by lightsaber
keesje wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
KFLLCFII wrote:
Airbus initially counters the 787 with the A350 mk1.

Airbus initially counters the 797 with the...A350 mk1.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:


That seems to be their plan, haha.


:checkmark: 1100 A330s sold after the 2003 launch of 787 Dreamliner.
:checkmark: 3000 A321NEO's will have entered into service by the time any 797 shows up.


If Airbus develops a "simple" A322NEO trading capacity for range, 101t would still provide a very good range, maybe 3700NM.
For real long flight the slightly smaller A321XLR could be used, up to 4700NM.

http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=&R=3700NM%40BOS,+3700NM%40BKK&MS=wls2&MR=1800&MX=720x360&PM=*
3700NM ranges from BOS, BKK.

IMO up to 250 seats for 5-6 hours at NEO, NB cost levels could be a significant bigger market than 4000NM+ with a similar capacity aircraft..
Think Leisure, US transcon, Intra Europe, Intra Asia... forget 4000-5000nm..

The a330 has 1736 form orders, first order in 1987. I couldn't find a source, but I recall good sales prior to 2003. There were more than 600 sales in 16 years...

There is no nice for the A333N between the 797 and 787.

For shorter missions the 797 or 787-10 has better economics. For longer missions, Airlines will buy the A350 or 789.

I agree the A321 will do well.

The A330 did well in an era when widebodies were in short supply. Now with 168 787s coming off the line, perhaps the market has changed.

Lightsaber

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 11:50 am
by keesje
lightsaber wrote:
keesje wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:

That seems to be their plan, haha.


:checkmark: 1100 A330s sold after the 2003 launch of 787 Dreamliner.
:checkmark: 3000 A321NEO's will have entered into service by the time any 797 shows up.


If Airbus develops a "simple" A322NEO trading capacity for range, 101t would still provide a very good range, maybe 3700NM.
For real long flight the slightly smaller A321XLR could be used, up to 4700NM.

http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=&R=3700NM%40BOS,+3700NM%40BKK&MS=wls2&MR=1800&MX=720x360&PM=*
3700NM ranges from BOS, BKK.

IMO up to 250 seats for 5-6 hours at NEO, NB cost levels could be a significant bigger market than 4000NM+ with a similar capacity aircraft..
Think Leisure, US transcon, Intra Europe, Intra Asia... forget 4000-5000nm..

The a330 has 1736 form orders, first order in 1987. I couldn't find a source, but I recall good sales prior to 2003. There were more than 600 sales in 16 years...

There is no nice for the A333N between the 797 and 787.

For shorter missions the 797 or 787-10 has better economics. For longer missions, Airlines will buy the A350 or 789.

I agree the A321 will do well.

The A330 did well in an era when widebodies were in short supply. Now with 168 787s coming off the line, perhaps the market has changed.

Lightsaber


I agree the A330NEO hardly is a "medium" aircraft, however we define medium.

I discussed the semi-automatic assumption the 787 beats the A330NEO a while ago. https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1352139. It doesn't add up. They have the same engines, the NEO is slightly lighter, has slightly leaner wings & got a string of aero improvements.
https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/A330neo-flight-tests-5.png

So what exactly make the 787 stand out? It's our Boeing? It's more electric ? It's more composites? How does that translate into direct operating costs, any numbers? If the A330NEO provides better commonality, lower purchase costs, an existing, uncontained MRO playing field and can be had in 2-3 years from today, that weighs in too for operators.

Image
Source: https://airwaysmag.com/airlines/photo-first-delta-airbus-a330-900neo-takes-off/

Soon Delta will implement NEO's to continue their fully packed, 300 seat, cargo heavy TATL hubs operations with KLM/AF.
2 packed flights / 24hrs per aircraft. That proved a hard to beat operation over the last 20 years. Would that be the 797's market?
Maybe a sub topic..

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 11:55 am
by Armadillo1
keesje wrote:
If Airbus develops a "simple" A322NEO trading capacity for range, 101t would still provide a very good range, maybe 3700NM.
For real long flight the slightly smaller A321XLR could be used, up to 4700NM.

753 have +12t OEW 52=>64 (+23%)

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 12:26 pm
by tealnz
seabosdca wrote:
The A330 fuselage, even with a much smaller/lighter wing, is a bit too big and heavy for this requirement. An "A300 Mk 2" would be at an economic disadvantage versus both NMA as currently imagined and the A321neo.

Do we really know that? Or is it dependent on use? We keep being told that Asian carriers want serious freight capacity on their regional routes, which an A300neo would offer. It doesn’t sound as if there’s a big difference in fuselage weight between aluminium and CFRP. An A300neo would presumably be built with A330 cockpit and systems. And a new CFRP wing/wingbox would strip out a lot of weight.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 12:54 pm
by keesje
tealnz wrote:
seabosdca wrote:
The A330 fuselage, even with a much smaller/lighter wing, is a bit too big and heavy for this requirement. An "A300 Mk 2" would be at an economic disadvantage versus both NMA as currently imagined and the A321neo.

Do we really know that? Or is it dependent on use? We keep being told that Asian carriers want serious freight capacity on their regional routes, which an A300neo would offer. It doesn’t sound as if there’s a big difference in fuselage weight between aluminium and CFRP. An A300neo would presumably be built with A330 cockpit and systems. And a new CFRP wing/wingbox would strip out a lot of weight.


The A310 & A330 share little but the fuselage cross sections. The A330 wing, wingbox, landing gear etc were optimized for A330/A340 medium-long haul mission and related MTOW's and MLW's The A310 is reasonable light weight. Maybe it would look good today, but it's 30-40 yr old systems, materials technology today.

Image

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 1:15 pm
by planecane
InsideMan wrote:
727200 wrote:
Both the 321 and 330 are old technology that Airbus is trying to pass off as newest and greatist. Lets see how fast the sales trickle once the 797 is launched.

At the end of the day, you can put lipstick on a pig, but its still a pig.

you mean like the MAX lipstick on the 60s design aircraft? That seems to sell quite well....


The MAX is competing with the A320NEO series. The A320 is a 1980's design with a 1980's wing. The 737MAX uses the 737NG wing which is a 1990s design. Both fuselages are conventional aluminum construction. The only advantage in design that the A320NEO series has over the max (from an efficiency perspective) is tha that the A320 has longer landing gear which allows for larger engines and a larger angle of rotation. The combination of these factors is why the A321NEO has better performance and higher capacity than the 737MAX9 and MAX10.

If the A320NEO was a new and significantly different design, the 737MAX would have difficulty competing.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 1:48 pm
by keesje
planecane wrote:
The only advantage in design that the A320NEO series has over the max (from an efficiency perspective) is tha that the A320 has longer landing gear which allows for larger engines and a larger angle of rotation. The combination of these factors is why the A321NEO has better performance and higher capacity than the 737MAX9 and MAX10.
If the A320NEO was a new and significantly different design, the 737MAX would have difficulty competing.


Agree the only advantage the A320NEO series has over the max is a wider, quieter cabin & cockpit, full AKH container capability options, a choice of bigger better engines, US / Euro / China assembly lines, established FBW / load elevation and a 220 passenger/4000NM off the shelf option with excellent runway performance. For the rest they are pretty even. Somehow the 737MAX has difficulty competing. As sales figures (pre-crashes) show.

Hell will freeze twice, before Boeing admits, but they might be looking at plan B's as we speak.
Only Boeing knows what AA, UA, SUV, GECAS and the CAAC are telling them behind closed doors.
It might be behind the current paralysation. https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1415977

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 1:49 pm
by Weatherwatcher1
keesje wrote:

:checkmark: 1100 A330s sold after the 2003 launch of 787 Dreamliner.
:checkmark: 3000 A321NEO's will have entered into service by the time any 797 shows up.
..


Do you have a source for those statements?

I’m curious since the 787 was not launched in 2003. The A321neo doesn’t even have 3000 orders, so it is speculation that 3000 A321neos will enter service before the 797 enters service.

A320neo production rate is 63 a month. That means there will be around than 5,000 built in the next 6 years. Sounds like you are assuming a significant number of conversions (over 60% will be A321s despite the backlog representing closer to 35%) or that the 797 will be a failure and years late. Sounds like you are assuming everything will go great for Airbus and terrible for Boeing.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 2:15 pm
by KlimaBXsst
I kind of like this Airbus strategy cause non-US airlines seem to be all over the place in terms of what size capacity and range the new Boeing Middle Market aircraft should be.

Too me the Boeing 797 keeps getting too big.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 2:39 pm
by VictorKilo
The market isn’t just new vs new. If current generation WB are more efficient than new generation at sub two hour flights, and there are a bunch of them in the market since they aren’t as competitive at long flights, putting older WB on shorter flights with less capital cost may be the best way to fill the market need.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 3:35 pm
by planecane
keesje wrote:
planecane wrote:
The only advantage in design that the A320NEO series has over the max (from an efficiency perspective) is tha that the A320 has longer landing gear which allows for larger engines and a larger angle of rotation. The combination of these factors is why the A321NEO has better performance and higher capacity than the 737MAX9 and MAX10.
If the A320NEO was a new and significantly different design, the 737MAX would have difficulty competing.


Agree the only advantage the A320NEO series has over the max is a wider, quieter cabin & cockpit, full AKH container capability options, a choice of bigger better engines, US / Euro / China assembly lines, established FBW / load elevation and a 220 passenger/4000NM off the shelf option with excellent runway performance. For the rest they are pretty even. Somehow the 737MAX has difficulty competing. As sales figures (pre-crashes) show.

Hell will freeze twice, before Boeing admits, but they might be looking at plan B's as we speak.
Only Boeing knows what AA, UA, SUV, GECAS and the CAAC are telling them behind closed doors.
It might be behind the current paralysation. https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1415977


I'm speaking of the ability of the MAX to compete with NEO. If the MAX had the landing gear of the NEO and could fit the same engines, it would be very close to 50/50 in sales all the way through the largest variants. The slightly queiter cabin, quieter cockpit and container capability of the NEO are nice but do not drive purchase decisions (maybe a few airlines might be pushed by the container capability but more likely that would just be a reason for a lower price from Boeing).

My intent was not to start a 737 vs. A320 discussion. I was simply illustrating that the fact that the 737MAX is somewhat competitive with the A320NEO does not mean that the A321NEO and A330NEO will be competitive with the 797. They might be or they might not be, depending on what the 797 turns out to be.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 3:35 pm
by keesje
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
keesje wrote:

:checkmark: 1100 A330s sold after the 2003 launch of 787 Dreamliner.
:checkmark: 3000 A321NEO's will have entered into service by the time any 797 shows up.
..


Do you have a source for those statements?

I’m curious since the 787 was not launched in 2003. The A321neo doesn’t even have 3000 orders, so it is speculation that 3000 A321neos will enter service before the 797 enters service.

A320neo production rate is 63 a month. That means there will be around than 5,000 built in the next 6 years. Sounds like you are assuming a significant number of conversions (over 60% will be A321s despite the backlog representing closer to 35%) or that the 797 will be a failure and years late. Sounds like you are assuming everything will go great for Airbus and terrible for Boeing.


I expect Boeing to do a little better on 797 development than took place the 787, so 2027 seems a reasonable EIS date. Taking 2025 as EIS for 797 at this stage seems to be based on nothing but hope & stock boosting.

I think 7.5 years of A320 production will lead to around 6000-6500 deliveries (firm in the backlog today btw). A321 production share is climbing up to 50%. Boeing has been helpfull to Airbus in rushing a less capable MAX & endleslly delaying a 797. https://leehamnews.com/2018/09/17/assessing-a320-production-rate-interest-in-70-mo/

If you would count in same capacility A321CEO's, you end up with ~4500 A321's delivered by the time any 797 shows up.

:arrow: Is Boeing late to the party in this segment, that they used to dominate? Yes, maybe they were too self confident & deliberate.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 4:14 pm
by Revelation
KlimaBXsst wrote:
I kind of like this Airbus strategy cause non-US airlines seem to be all over the place in terms of what size capacity and range the new Boeing Middle Market aircraft should be.

Too me the Boeing 797 keeps getting too big.

I think airlines have range anxiety in the same way potential electric vehicle purchasers have charge anxiety.

You can give them clear data like Jay gave us in #55 showing significantly better economics if the airplane is designed for less range:

Image

... yet they'll always ask for extra range to cover those one-off situations where the range is needed.

And more range for an airliner means bigger, because more range means more fuel, which means stronger/bigger/heavier gear, stronger/bigger/heavier fuse and wing and empennage, stronger/bigger/heavier engines with more thrust, etc.

Of course bizjets show you can have long range in small aircraft, but only if you're willing to pay for it, which most pax aren't.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 6:15 pm
by YIMBY
Revelation wrote:
Image


Nice picture.

Anyone to explain the non-continuous behaviour and inconsistency between upper and lower graph.

There seems to be a big peak at 300 nm, another smaller at 600 and a third at 900 nm. Some specific routes on those distances?

Typically 200 nm is where normal train or even bus is competitive to airlines, 400 nm is for HST. Moreover, 300 nm range is and should be turbo-prop domain. Indeed a turbo-prop with 500 nm range and 150 seats would cover almost 50 % of all narrow-body flights.

Should note that the graph is 11 years old and may not predict the future that well. It bases more on the availability of planes then than the true needs if all parameters were continuously selectable.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 7:01 pm
by lightsaber
YIMBY wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Image


Nice picture.

Anyone to explain the non-continuous behaviour and inconsistency between upper and lower graph.

There seems to be a big peak at 300 nm, another smaller at 600 and a third at 900 nm. Some specific routes on those distances?

Typically 200 nm is where normal train or even bus is competitive to airlines, 400 nm is for HST. Moreover, 300 nm range is and should be turbo-prop domain. Indeed a turbo-prop with 500 nm range and 150 seats would cover almost 50 % of all narrow-body flights.

Should note that the graph is 11 years old and may not predict the future that well. It bases more on the availability of planes then than the true needs if all parameters were continuously selectable.

A chart 11 years old missed the transformation of US TCON, US West coast to Hawaii, and other similar range routes. It also doesn't show the collapse of sub 250nm flying in the USA or results if increased HSR service in the EU.

Such charts are always hindsight. You make a good point in that the capabilities of aircraft determine what routes they are flown.

All of the new aircraft have more range. For example, before DEN to Hawaii was widebody only. Now that is in range of the MAX or NEO. I'm thinking that DEN, PHX, SLC and others will improve connections with the new cheap range. Same with hubs around the world.

Lightsaber

Lightsaber

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 7:07 pm
by beertrucker
keesje wrote:
tealnz wrote:
seabosdca wrote:
The A330 fuselage, even with a much smaller/lighter wing, is a bit too big and heavy for this requirement. An "A300 Mk 2" would be at an economic disadvantage versus both NMA as currently imagined and the A321neo.

Do we really know that? Or is it dependent on use? We keep being told that Asian carriers want serious freight capacity on their regional routes, which an A300neo would offer. It doesn’t sound as if there’s a big difference in fuselage weight between aluminium and CFRP. An A300neo would presumably be built with A330 cockpit and systems. And a new CFRP wing/wingbox would strip out a lot of weight.


The A310 & A330 share little but the fuselage cross sections. The A330 wing, wingbox, landing gear etc were optimized for A330/A340 medium-long haul mission and related MTOW's and MLW's The A310 is reasonable light weight. Maybe it would look good today, but it's 30-40 yr old systems, materials technology today.

Image


Yes it is old. However it would be a good blueprint to start with. Yes you make modern changes and materials. I just think they have had a plane that fits what the airlines want around the world. Why not use this as a starting point for a plane that could have great range but fit in the market that is needed.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 7:46 pm
by seabosdca
tealnz wrote:
Do we really know that? Or is it dependent on use? We keep being told that Asian carriers want serious freight capacity on their regional routes, which an A300neo would offer. It doesn’t sound as if there’s a big difference in fuselage weight between aluminium and CFRP. An A300neo would presumably be built with A330 cockpit and systems. And a new CFRP wing/wingbox would strip out a lot of weight.


A321XLR, if it is as expected, will have a 101 t MTOW, which it will use to carry 180 passengers about 4500 nm.
A300-600R had a 172 t MTOW which, if configured with similar density, it could use to carry around 250 passengers over a bit less than 4000 nm.

Modern engine and wing technology would make up more than the range difference, but would not cut out much weight (if any) from the already very light A300. Modern engines would likely be heavier, not lighter, and the new wing would likely need to be a bit longer (i.e., not lighter) to be competitive. You'd have a 172 t MTOW aircraft that could carry 250 passengers over probably 5000-5500 nm, or 250 passengers plus a few tonnes of freight (not nearly enough to fill up the big hold) over 4500 nm.

A larger aircraft that is heavier per pax, all else equal, is not going to compete well with a smaller aircraft on the same mission. To compete, it needs to be flying farther, or to add either pax or cargo payload.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 10:17 pm
by Weatherwatcher1
keesje wrote:
A321 production share is climbing up to 50%.


No it is not. Currently 31% of A320neo family deliveries have been A321neos this year. 35% of the backlog is for A321neos.

Airbus is encouraging airlines to upgauge to A321neos since they are higher profit margin planes and wants 50% of deliveries to be A321neos, but so far neither production rate nor the backlog support it.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 10:51 pm
by strfyr51
with Airbus freaking out over an airplane that hasn't even seen sheet metal cut? They're projecting what they Hope. Not what they know, Boeing will DO what they DO . And no matter what Airbus will do something stupid to counter whatever Boeing comes up with. If Airbus would just put out their Product kine regardless of what Boeing does, they'd meet with Much Better 'success Ovrerall.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 2:54 am
by RJMAZ
The 787-8 is slightly smaller, lighter and more fuel efficient than the A330-800. How can Airbus use the A330-800 in the MOM role?

Airbus has sold only 10 A330-800's. Boeing has sold 400+ 787-8's. If the market wants something slightly larger than the 797 it looks like the 787-8 will be the next size up.

Airbus should kill the A330 ASAP. I was saying they should have killed the A380 for years on this forum. The A330NEO is now a net financial drain on Airbus.

They are winning A330 orders simply by selling it extremely cheap. The profit is small. The cheap price is also hurting A350-900 profit margin and stealing sales slowing A350 production ramp up. So the profit being lost on the A350 exceeds the profit gained on the A330NEO.

Airbus could simply cede half of potential A330NEO orders to Boeing but if the other half goes to the A350 they will be winning.

Airbus should stop marketing the A330NEO try and upsell existing orders to the A350-900. Then Airbus should produce a cleansheet aircraft half way between the A321 and A350-900 in terms of range and size. The A330-900 sits extremely close to the A350 in terms of range and size, what is the point?

Spec wise the cleansheet would be like a A310NEO/A300NEO

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 3:20 am
by gatibosgru
strfyr51 wrote:
with Airbus freaking out over an airplane that hasn't even seen sheet metal cut?


I'm sure they're distraught.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 3:20 am
by RickNRoll
keesje wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
keesje wrote:

:checkmark: 1100 A330s sold after the 2003 launch of 787 Dreamliner.
:checkmark: 3000 A321NEO's will have entered into service by the time any 797 shows up.


If Airbus develops a "simple" A322NEO trading capacity for range, 101t would still provide a very good range, maybe 3700NM.
For real long flight the slightly smaller A321XLR could be used, up to 4700NM.

http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=&R=3700NM%40BOS,+3700NM%40BKK&MS=wls2&MR=1800&MX=720x360&PM=*
3700NM ranges from BOS, BKK.

IMO up to 250 seats for 5-6 hours at NEO, NB cost levels could be a significant bigger market than 4000NM+ with a similar capacity aircraft..
Think Leisure, US transcon, Intra Europe, Intra Asia... forget 4000-5000nm..

The a330 has 1736 form orders, first order in 1987. I couldn't find a source, but I recall good sales prior to 2003. There were more than 600 sales in 16 years...

There is no nice for the A333N between the 797 and 787.

For shorter missions the 797 or 787-10 has better economics. For longer missions, Airlines will buy the A350 or 789.

I agree the A321 will do well.

The A330 did well in an era when widebodies were in short supply. Now with 168 787s coming off the line, perhaps the market has changed.

Lightsaber


I agree the A330NEO hardly is a "medium" aircraft, however we define medium.

I discussed the semi-automatic assumption the 787 beats the A330NEO a while ago. https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1352139. It doesn't add up. They have the same engines, the NEO is slightly lighter, has slightly leaner wings & got a string of aero improvements.
https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/A330neo-flight-tests-5.png

So what exactly make the 787 stand out? It's our Boeing? It's more electric ? It's more composites? How does that translate into direct operating costs, any numbers? If the A330NEO provides better commonality, lower purchase costs, an existing, uncontained MRO playing field and can be had in 2-3 years from today, that weighs in too for operators.

Image
Source: https://airwaysmag.com/airlines/photo-first-delta-airbus-a330-900neo-takes-off/

Soon Delta will implement NEO's to continue their fully packed, 300 seat, cargo heavy TATL hubs operations with KLM/AF.
2 packed flights / 24hrs per aircraft. That proved a hard to beat operation over the last 20 years. Would that be the 797's market?
Maybe a sub topic..
The prices you quoted had the A330N costing more than a 787 while offering significantly less range.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 3:23 am
by JayinKitsap
lightsaber wrote:
YIMBY wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Image


Nice picture.

Anyone to explain the non-continuous behaviour and inconsistency between upper and lower graph.

There seems to be a big peak at 300 nm, another smaller at 600 and a third at 900 nm. Some specific routes on those distances?

Typically 200 nm is where normal train or even bus is competitive to airlines, 400 nm is for HST. Moreover, 300 nm range is and should be turbo-prop domain. Indeed a turbo-prop with 500 nm range and 150 seats would cover almost 50 % of all narrow-body flights.

Should note that the graph is 11 years old and may not predict the future that well. It bases more on the availability of planes then than the true needs if all parameters were continuously selectable.

A chart 11 years old missed the transformation of US TCON, US West coast to Hawaii, and other similar range routes. It also doesn't show the collapse of sub 250nm flying in the USA or results if increased HSR service in the EU.

Such charts are always hindsight. You make a good point in that the capabilities of aircraft determine what routes they are flown.

All of the new aircraft have more range. For example, before DEN to Hawaii was widebody only. Now that is in range of the MAX or NEO. I'm thinking that DEN, PHX, SLC and others will improve connections with the new cheap range. Same with hubs around the world.

Lightsaber

Lightsaber


Yes this is a chart of the 717, the 737NG, and the A320 as well as others around 150 seats. All of those started as 2,000 to 2,500 nm models, but grew to 3,500 nm capable with the NG era, now over 4,000 with the NEO/MAX. So the previous often was limited to the full payload range in operation, usually the most economical. There are now more capable planes, but all of those shorter routes still exist. The big point is new models tailored to the most flown ranges will have killer economics.

25 years ago there were few choices for long range wide bodies and a relatively little fleet size. Now we have A380 B744, B77W B772ER 773 787 A350 and A330. It is saturated enough that the A340, the non 77W 777's, 744 and 767 being pushed out of the active fleet. But the A300 A310 and 767 middle market range planes have or are leaving, the market is currently abusing planes. Best to be offering product that is the most efficient at the most frequent ranges. A decade ago if the route was too short or small for a 777 a 767 was sent, sure the 777 could do it easily but might cost $5K more for the flight.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 5:32 am
by astuteman
RJMAZ wrote:
Airbus has sold only 10 A330-800's. Boeing has sold 400+ 787-8's.


Only 36 of which have been sold since the July 2014 launch of the A330 NEO

RJMAZ wrote:
The A330NEO is now a net financial drain on Airbus.


There's no evidence to back that up, at all. Which, according to forum rules you should provide if you wish to state it as a fact.

Rgds

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 5:53 am
by RJMAZ
astuteman wrote:
There's no evidence to back that up, at all.

My track record is pretty good. Unfortunately when I get proven right and I start quoting myself from years prior my posts get deleted.

If you searched my username you might think I am a time traveller.

People called me paranoid about grandfathering.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 6:45 am
by marcelh
RJMAZ wrote:

They are winning A330 orders simply by selling it extremely cheap.

And they lost the HA order. Both OEM sell planes dirt cheap when it’s in their interest.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 8:25 am
by keesje
marcelh wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:

They are winning A330 orders simply by selling it extremely cheap.

And they lost the HA order. Both OEM sell planes dirt cheap when it’s in their interest.


Let's assume HA paid a high price to be allowed to order the 787 & cancel their A330NEO.. or Boeing offered 787s at a price they just couldn't refuse.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 12:27 pm
by trex8
[list=][/list]
keesje wrote:
marcelh wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:

They are winning A330 orders simply by selling it extremely cheap.

And they lost the HA order. Both OEM sell planes dirt cheap when it’s in their interest.


Let's assume HA paid a high price to be allowed to order the 787 & cancel their A330NEO.. or Boeing offered 787s at a price they just couldn't refuse.

Let's also not forget HA originally chose the A350-800. They had to eventually settle for the A330-800neo.

Re: Reuters : Airbus to counter the "NMA"by the existing 330neo and the A21N

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 4:31 pm
by astuteman
RJMAZ wrote:
astuteman wrote:
There's no evidence to back that up, at all.

My track record is pretty good. Unfortunately when I get proven right and I start quoting myself from years prior my posts get deleted.

If you searched my username you might think I am a time traveller.

People called me paranoid about grandfathering.



It's nice that you can be so self satisfied with your own modesty.... I'm pleased for you.

Meanwhile, back on topic, where's the evidence that Airbus are losing financially on the A330NEO?

Rgds