• 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 16
 
Absynth
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2019 5:37 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Sun Jun 30, 2019 12:14 pm

SteelChair wrote:
I continue to believe that the 777x program is in trouble. Its too big and too heavy for most "real" airlines. Most of its orders are from ME3 and they're in trouble financially. What a tragedy Boeing did 777x and the 747-8 instead of MOM and a 737 replacement.


Yes they got their priority / timeline wrong with the 777X. The move away from VLAs and the cancellation of the A380neo combined means a much smaller market even for a 777 without competition in the 400+ pax range. Etihad is mostly out, The ME2 are looking for replacing their 777/A380's, which means a slower production ramp / lower volumes which start to kick in 10 years from now. I can see the 777-10X becoming a popular choice to replace the A380's and as a growth path for popular 787 / A350 routes. The 777-8X OTOH has too much competition from the 350.

And about this quote:
Clark said he’s discussing with Boeing “a combination of the 150 777Xs and the 40 787s, essentially looking to keep the numbers in place, but substituting and spacing them out over a longer timeline.”


Pushing them further into the future makes them essentially a (partial) replacement for the A380's, so I can see those moved further away eventually becoming 10X orders.

The bolded part is something a few people in this thread seem to gloss over but actually is by far the most interesting part of the article. It's clear they want to keep that overall 190 figure, but with those 30 A350's on order, it's clear they are looking to replace their 777-8X orders for 787-9 or -10s. They might up the 777-9X to 120-125 to keep the total value of both orders the same.

But I'm hoping we see the formal announcement of the 10X (and cancellation of the 8X) at Dubai Airshow for something along the line off:
60 777-9X
60 777-10X (at later dates)
60 787-9/10
 
ewt340
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Sun Jun 30, 2019 1:51 pm

Absynth wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
I continue to believe that the 777x program is in trouble. Its too big and too heavy for most "real" airlines. Most of its orders are from ME3 and they're in trouble financially. What a tragedy Boeing did 777x and the 747-8 instead of MOM and a 737 replacement.


Yes they got their priority / timeline wrong with the 777X. The move away from VLAs and the cancellation of the A380neo combined means a much smaller market even for a 777 without competition in the 400+ pax range. Etihad is mostly out, The ME2 are looking for replacing their 777/A380's, which means a slower production ramp / lower volumes which start to kick in 10 years from now. I can see the 777-10X becoming a popular choice to replace the A380's and as a growth path for popular 787 / A350 routes. The 777-8X OTOH has too much competition from the 350.

And about this quote:
Clark said he’s discussing with Boeing “a combination of the 150 777Xs and the 40 787s, essentially looking to keep the numbers in place, but substituting and spacing them out over a longer timeline.”


Pushing them further into the future makes them essentially a (partial) replacement for the A380's, so I can see those moved further away eventually becoming 10X orders.

The bolded part is something a few people in this thread seem to gloss over but actually is by far the most interesting part of the article. It's clear they want to keep that overall 190 figure, but with those 30 A350's on order, it's clear they are looking to replace their 777-8X orders for 787-9 or -10s. They might up the 777-9X to 120-125 to keep the total value of both orders the same.

But I'm hoping we see the formal announcement of the 10X (and cancellation of the 8X) at Dubai Airshow for something along the line off:
60 777-9X
60 777-10X (at later dates)
60 787-9/10


No, it doesn't make sense. Airlines doesn't need direct A380 replacement. They need to get rid of those excess capacity and replace it with smaller widebodies.

I don't think it would provide any financial benefits for Boeing to build -10X. The -9X is the largest widebody aircraft out here. They have no competitions at all after Airbus kill A380. So it's not like they need to gain the market share when they got 100% rate for it.

Besides, It doesn't seem like Airlines are keen on aircraft larger than -9X anyway. It's not like the -9X sell as well as -300ER.

What I see is Emirates cancelation for all their -8X order, and then reduction for their -9X order which would be converted into combinations of B787-9 and the -10 with higher mtow. But there is no way they would get -10X.
 
User avatar
Kindanew
Posts: 159
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 11:07 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Sun Jun 30, 2019 2:04 pm

ewt340 wrote:
Absynth wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
I continue to believe that the 777x program is in trouble. Its too big and too heavy for most "real" airlines. Most of its orders are from ME3 and they're in trouble financially. What a tragedy Boeing did 777x and the 747-8 instead of MOM and a 737 replacement.


Yes they got their priority / timeline wrong with the 777X. The move away from VLAs and the cancellation of the A380neo combined means a much smaller market even for a 777 without competition in the 400+ pax range. Etihad is mostly out, The ME2 are looking for replacing their 777/A380's, which means a slower production ramp / lower volumes which start to kick in 10 years from now. I can see the 777-10X becoming a popular choice to replace the A380's and as a growth path for popular 787 / A350 routes. The 777-8X OTOH has too much competition from the 350.

And about this quote:
Clark said he’s discussing with Boeing “a combination of the 150 777Xs and the 40 787s, essentially looking to keep the numbers in place, but substituting and spacing them out over a longer timeline.”


Pushing them further into the future makes them essentially a (partial) replacement for the A380's, so I can see those moved further away eventually becoming 10X orders.

The bolded part is something a few people in this thread seem to gloss over but actually is by far the most interesting part of the article. It's clear they want to keep that overall 190 figure, but with those 30 A350's on order, it's clear they are looking to replace their 777-8X orders for 787-9 or -10s. They might up the 777-9X to 120-125 to keep the total value of both orders the same.

But I'm hoping we see the formal announcement of the 10X (and cancellation of the 8X) at Dubai Airshow for something along the line off:
60 777-9X
60 777-10X (at later dates)
60 787-9/10


No, it doesn't make sense. Airlines doesn't need direct A380 replacement. They need to get rid of those excess capacity and replace it with smaller widebodies.

I don't think it would provide any financial benefits for Boeing to build -10X. The -9X is the largest widebody aircraft out here. They have no competitions at all after Airbus kill A380. So it's not like they need to gain the market share when they got 100% rate for it.

Besides, It doesn't seem like Airlines are keen on aircraft larger than -9X anyway. It's not like the -9X sell as well as -300ER.

What I see is Emirates cancelation for all their -8X order, and then reduction for their -9X order which would be converted into combinations of B787-9 and the -10 with higher mtow. But there is no way they would get -10X.



Agreed.

I have no idea why so many are convinced the x-10 will be built. The 8 and 9 are hardly flying off the shelves.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26314
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Sun Jun 30, 2019 2:07 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
The 787-10 weighs 6,650kg more than the 787-9. The 787-9 burns 5600kg of fuel per hour. So the empty weight difference is only 70 minutes worth of fuel. At a cruise speed of 490knots it means the 787-10 range should be 600nm shorter. But in the real world the range difference is twice that. The 787-10 fuel burn per hour is around 10% higher than the 787-9.


chaostheory, who works for an airline that operates the 787-9 and 787-10, noted that fuel burn calculations for both models is similar (at around 5200 to 5400kg per hour average on a 3000nm sector).
 
musman9853
Posts: 740
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:30 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Sun Jun 30, 2019 2:07 pm

Vladex wrote:
justloveplanes wrote:
I think the difference is A) The 777x is a twin, B) it is a potent cargo hauler C) It has leadership engine tech D) Trip costs are substantially lower than an A380.

So the tech re: economics or market re: aircraft size/configuration don't parallel. Some similarities to the A380, but also fundamental differences.


A380 has way better ground clearance to put on big engine like GTF and Ultrafan and good luck doing that on any twins especially 787. Twin engines are actually maxed out for space and big engines is where all the efficiency is made nowadays so twins are actually deficient for the future even if it's not obvious to some. GE9X isn't that great either so why are you boasting?


youre saying that not a single twin will get gtf or ultrafan? you're joking right? there's no way, for example, that the a350 doesnt get ultrafan.
Welcome to the City Beautiful.
 
musman9853
Posts: 740
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:30 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Sun Jun 30, 2019 2:09 pm

ELBOB wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
For years smaller planes have got bigger (and more capable) and big planes have got fewer.


There are more 250+tonne airliners flying today than at any time in history...


that's because aviation is getting bigger. but look at the ratio of nb/wb. the best selling wb rn is the 787 with like 600 orders unfilled rn. the a320 has over 6k orders unfilled.
Welcome to the City Beautiful.
 
Eyad89
Posts: 613
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:47 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Sun Jun 30, 2019 2:25 pm

Stitch wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
The 787-10 weighs 6,650kg more than the 787-9. The 787-9 burns 5600kg of fuel per hour. So the empty weight difference is only 70 minutes worth of fuel. At a cruise speed of 490knots it means the 787-10 range should be 600nm shorter. But in the real world the range difference is twice that. The 787-10 fuel burn per hour is around 10% higher than the 787-9.


chaostheory, who works for an airline that operates the 787-9 and 787-10, noted that fuel burn calculations for both models is similar (at around 5200 to 5400kg per hour average on a 3000nm sector).


They must have had different payloads then.

If both had similar payloads, then the 78X will always be heavier at a given point of time, and the needed thrust at any point in cruise is linked directly to weight, and so will fuel consumption.

Then, there is the difference of wetted area.
 
Absynth
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2019 5:37 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Sun Jun 30, 2019 4:07 pm

Kindanew wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
No, it doesn't make sense. Airlines doesn't need direct A380 replacement. They need to get rid of those excess capacity and replace it with smaller widebodies.

I don't think it would provide any financial benefits for Boeing to build -10X. The -9X is the largest widebody aircraft out here. They have no competitions at all after Airbus kill A380. So it's not like they need to gain the market share when they got 100% rate for it.

Besides, It doesn't seem like Airlines are keen on aircraft larger than -9X anyway. It's not like the -9X sell as well as -300ER.

What I see is Emirates cancelation for all their -8X order, and then reduction for their -9X order which would be converted into combinations of B787-9 and the -10 with higher mtow. But there is no way they would get -10X.



Agreed.

I have no idea why so many are convinced the x-10 will be built. The 8 and 9 are hardly flying off the shelves.


Because the only clients for VLA's are basically ME2 and they stopped building extra capacity. They dont need these VLA's now but they will need them 10 years from now to replace the A380 fleet.

The VLA-market is for 50% an Emirates market so their wishes are what Boeing will be building. If Emirates needs a larger version of 777X to replace the 380, guess what plane Boeing will design and build?

A slower rollout and focus on the 747 then 777 then 380 replacement market will be the main purpose to the 777X for the foreseeable future. And to replace the 380 they'll deliver the type of plane that Emirates and Qatar want to replace it with.
Last edited by Absynth on Sun Jun 30, 2019 4:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1375
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Sun Jun 30, 2019 4:17 pm

Vladex wrote:
justloveplanes wrote:
I think the difference is A) The 777x is a twin, B) it is a potent cargo hauler C) It has leadership engine tech D) Trip costs are substantially lower than an A380.

So the tech re: economics or market re: aircraft size/configuration don't parallel. Some similarities to the A380, but also fundamental differences.


A380 has way better ground clearance to put on big engine like GTF and Ultrafan and good luck doing that on any twins especially 787. Twin engines are actually maxed out for space and big engines is where all the efficiency is made nowadays so twins are actually deficient for the future even if it's not obvious to some. GE9X isn't that great either so why are you boasting?

The A380 is dead, even if it's not obvious to some, so why persist with this line of commentary?
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Sun Jun 30, 2019 4:27 pm

Vladex wrote:
justloveplanes wrote:
I think the difference is A) The 777x is a twin, B) it is a potent cargo hauler C) It has leadership engine tech D) Trip costs are substantially lower than an A380.

So the tech re: economics or market re: aircraft size/configuration don't parallel. Some similarities to the A380, but also fundamental differences.


A380 has way better ground clearance to put on big engine like GTF and Ultrafan and good luck doing that on any twins especially 787. Twin engines are actually maxed out for space and big engines is where all the efficiency is made nowadays so twins are actually deficient for the future even if it's not obvious to some. GE9X isn't that great either so why are you boasting?


Well, curious about your comment on the GE9X. GE9X mission thrust is targeted at 105K lbs. Per lightsaber, at 103% overspeed testing it should max out at 120K lbs.

It produced a whopping 134K lbs or 14K(!)lbs more than mission design. The mission thrust was only(?) 105K because the goal of this engine was better mission SFC than the GE90-115.

I believe the GE9X is meeting SFC (at least) due to their test updates. Published/validated excess power > combustion performance seems to indicate that as well. So this engine is moving the goal posts two ways. It seems GE is hitting it out of the park on this.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17699
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Sun Jun 30, 2019 7:32 pm

Stitch wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
The 787-10 weighs 6,650kg more than the 787-9. The 787-9 burns 5600kg of fuel per hour. So the empty weight difference is only 70 minutes worth of fuel. At a cruise speed of 490knots it means the 787-10 range should be 600nm shorter. But in the real world the range difference is twice that. The 787-10 fuel burn per hour is around 10% higher than the 787-9.


chaostheory, who works for an airline that operates the 787-9 and 787-10, noted that fuel burn calculations for both models is similar (at around 5200 to 5400kg per hour average on a 3000nm sector).

We know UA is doing well in runs the 787-10 shouldn't be competitive on. ANZ is buying them for rather long missions. If the fuel burn was as bad as proposed, airlines wouldn't be buying more.

That said, the 787-10 is a Combi. It will be loaded up. It has the volume but not the MTOW for fuel.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
sciing
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:54 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Sun Jun 30, 2019 8:04 pm

Stitch wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
The 787-10 weighs 6,650kg more than the 787-9. The 787-9 burns 5600kg of fuel per hour. So the empty weight difference is only 70 minutes worth of fuel. At a cruise speed of 490knots it means the 787-10 range should be 600nm shorter. But in the real world the range difference is twice that. The 787-10 fuel burn per hour is around 10% higher than the 787-9.


chaostheory, who works for an airline that operates the 787-9 and 787-10, noted that fuel burn calculations for both models is similar (at around 5200 to 5400kg per hour average on a 3000nm sector).

Fuel consumption depends on drag and (induced) drag depends on produced lift and produced lift is defined weight.
If you look in any payload range chart the last curve is the fuel limited range. This is a curve depending on weight and not a single value.
 
Vladex
Posts: 338
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:44 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Sun Jun 30, 2019 9:19 pm

musman9853 wrote:
Vladex wrote:
justloveplanes wrote:
I think the difference is A) The 777x is a twin, B) it is a potent cargo hauler C) It has leadership engine tech D) Trip costs are substantially lower than an A380.

So the tech re: economics or market re: aircraft size/configuration don't parallel. Some similarities to the A380, but also fundamental differences.


A380 has way better ground clearance to put on big engine like GTF and Ultrafan and good luck doing that on any twins especially 787. Twin engines are actually maxed out for space and big engines is where all the efficiency is made nowadays so twins are actually deficient for the future even if it's not obvious to some. GE9X isn't that great either so why are you boasting?


youre saying that not a single twin will get gtf or ultrafan? you're joking right? there's no way, for example, that the a350 doesnt get ultrafan.


Consider that the first iteration UltraFan is 355 cm /140" wide in fan diameter. I have a hard time seeing it on A350 and certainly not on A330, 787 nor 777.
This is in relation to A320
Image
 
musman9853
Posts: 740
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:30 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Mon Jul 01, 2019 12:58 am

Vladex wrote:
musman9853 wrote:
Vladex wrote:

A380 has way better ground clearance to put on big engine like GTF and Ultrafan and good luck doing that on any twins especially 787. Twin engines are actually maxed out for space and big engines is where all the efficiency is made nowadays so twins are actually deficient for the future even if it's not obvious to some. GE9X isn't that great either so why are you boasting?


youre saying that not a single twin will get gtf or ultrafan? you're joking right? there's no way, for example, that the a350 doesnt get ultrafan.


Consider that the first iteration UltraFan is 355 cm /140" wide in fan diameter. I have a hard time seeing it on A350 and certainly not on A330, 787 nor 777.
This is in relation to A320
Image


the ge9x has a 135 inch fan size. do you really think that boeing couldn't find a way to fit an extra 5 inches under a 777x? and that's assuming that there's not miniaturization.
Welcome to the City Beautiful.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1528
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Mon Jul 01, 2019 3:26 am

Vladex wrote:
Consider that the first iteration UltraFan is 355 cm /140" wide in fan diameter. I have a hard time seeing it on A350 and certainly not on A330, 787 nor 777.
This is in relation to A320
Image

That 140" fan size is for a 100,000lb thrust engine to power the heaviest A350 models which are already at 97,000lb of thrust.

The 787 uses 64,000lb to 76,000lb thrust engines. Scaling down the utrafan would mean a 120" fan on the 787. Only 9inch bigger than the current engine. At most the engine would be 12inch wider than the current 787 engines. This should fit fairly easy.
 
Mrakula
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 2:15 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Mon Jul 01, 2019 5:22 am

RJMAZ wrote:
Vladex wrote:
Consider that the first iteration UltraFan is 355 cm /140" wide in fan diameter. I have a hard time seeing it on A350 and certainly not on A330, 787 nor 777.
This is in relation to A320
Image

That 140" fan size is for a 100,000lb thrust engine to power the heaviest A350 models which are already at 97,000lb of thrust.

The 787 uses 64,000lb to 76,000lb thrust engines. Scaling down the utrafan would mean a 120" fan on the 787. Only 9inch bigger than the current engine. At most the engine would be 12inch wider than the current 787 engines. This should fit fairly easy.



I don`t think so. 787 is already low on ground and engine high on the wing.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1528
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:30 am

Mrakula wrote:
I don`t think so. 787 is already low on ground and engine high on the wing.

The 787 has 42inch of ground clearance under the engine. The 737MAX has 17inch clearance by comparison.

30inch engine ground clearance would be the limit on the 787. An engine 12inchs bigger in diameter would then be absolutely no problem. This doesn't even include lifting the engine slightly or straightening the bottom of the engine cowl.

The 787 engine is no where near as close to the wing as the 737MAX. Even if the ultrafan engine was raised the full 12inch upwards it wouldn't be as close as the MAX and would not need to move forward.

120inch diameter engines would be absolutely zero problem on the 787. I estimate the engines would have to be as big as 130inch in diameter to end up like the 737MAX with a straightened cowl and the engines moved forward.

So the 787 will be able to comfortably take the next generation 14:1 ultra high bypass engines and so will the A350. That is the next 50 years covered.
 
h1fl1er
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 5:58 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Mon Jul 01, 2019 5:49 pm

lightsaber wrote:
Stitch wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
The 787-10 weighs 6,650kg more than the 787-9. The 787-9 burns 5600kg of fuel per hour. So the empty weight difference is only 70 minutes worth of fuel. At a cruise speed of 490knots it means the 787-10 range should be 600nm shorter. But in the real world the range difference is twice that. The 787-10 fuel burn per hour is around 10% higher than the 787-9.


chaostheory, who works for an airline that operates the 787-9 and 787-10, noted that fuel burn calculations for both models is similar (at around 5200 to 5400kg per hour average on a 3000nm sector).

We know UA is doing well in runs the 787-10 shouldn't be competitive on. ANZ is buying them for rather long missions. If the fuel burn was as bad as proposed, airlines wouldn't be buying more.

That said, the 787-10 is a Combi. It will be loaded up. It has the volume but not the MTOW for fuel.

Lightsaber


agree this burn is too high for such a sector.

at near MTOW on ULH segments, both QF and UAL have seen 5.4t/hr over 17hrs. granted fuel burns off so if you have fixed payload the avg will go up. this 3000nm segment must be highly loaded to produce a burn that high

in addition, in reply to the previous poster, the 78X's nominal range of 6400nm is at a higher pax count than the 789s. Boeing lists them at 330 and 290 passengers, so 4t increased fixed payload. that raises the differential to almost 11t on a loaded mission
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Mon Jul 01, 2019 7:18 pm

h1fl1er wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
Stitch wrote:

chaostheory, who works for an airline that operates the 787-9 and 787-10, noted that fuel burn calculations for both models is similar (at around 5200 to 5400kg per hour average on a 3000nm sector).

We know UA is doing well in runs the 787-10 shouldn't be competitive on. ANZ is buying them for rather long missions. If the fuel burn was as bad as proposed, airlines wouldn't be buying more.

That said, the 787-10 is a Combi. It will be loaded up. It has the volume but not the MTOW for fuel.

Lightsaber


agree this burn is too high for such a sector.

at near MTOW on ULH segments, both QF and UAL have seen 5.4t/hr over 17hrs. granted fuel burns off so if you have fixed payload the avg will go up. this 3000nm segment must be highly loaded to produce a burn that high

in addition, in reply to the previous poster, the 78X's nominal range of 6400nm is at a higher pax count than the 789s. Boeing lists them at 330 and 290 passengers, so 4t increased fixed payload. that raises the differential to almost 11t on a loaded mission


A B789 on a ULH mission would be burning over 6 tons the first few hours and less than 5 tons the last few hours.
A B787-10 flying out on a 8 hour mission will be the same as the first half of a B789's 16 hour mission and hence have a much higher average fuel burn.

The B787-10 works better than the A359 on some short missions, but beyond 9-10 hours, the A359 and the A35J achieve parity and/or superiority.

In EK's case, the B787-10 can cover a lot of routes in Europe and Asia where the stage length is about 6 hours.
But at the same time, they already have the A339 on the way in, and that is already covering that part of the mission range.

At this point, it doesn' t make sense to take in B787-10's, the case for the B789 is also very marginal.
So if they take B787's anyway, it will be a desperate move to get out of the B777X commitment. Then we can also see the A330/A350 order as a desperate move to get out of the A380 commitment and a massive downsizing effort of EK will become apparent.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6468
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Mon Jul 01, 2019 7:41 pm

The 339 is a fine aircraft, but it is quite a bit smaller than a 787-10 (unless configured 9Y, which EK won't do). The 787-10 has significant additional revenue potential for a volume-oriented airline like EK, which is why it originally won the contest, until the intensifying A380 economic crisis came into play.

At the same time, the 777X is a heavy airplane decidedly optimized for 10+ hour missions, and a newly rationalizing EK may not be able to rationalize its extra weight compared with the 787-10 on shorter sectors.

I could see this turning into a win/win for everyone: what were originally planned to be 150 77X for straight 77L/77W replacement turns into more aircraft -- say, 20 778 for the farthest ULH, 80 779 for high-capacity long haul (with 359s flying lighter routes of similar length) and the very biggest short routes, 60 787-10 for other Europe and subcontinent routes (which they would fly together with 339s), and 30 787-9 as flexible route openers.
 
h1fl1er
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 5:58 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Mon Jul 01, 2019 10:53 pm

Waterbomber2 wrote:
h1fl1er wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
We know UA is doing well in runs the 787-10 shouldn't be competitive on. ANZ is buying them for rather long missions. If the fuel burn was as bad as proposed, airlines wouldn't be buying more.

That said, the 787-10 is a Combi. It will be loaded up. It has the volume but not the MTOW for fuel.

Lightsaber


agree this burn is too high for such a sector.

at near MTOW on ULH segments, both QF and UAL have seen 5.4t/hr over 17hrs. granted fuel burns off so if you have fixed payload the avg will go up. this 3000nm segment must be highly loaded to produce a burn that high

in addition, in reply to the previous poster, the 78X's nominal range of 6400nm is at a higher pax count than the 789s. Boeing lists them at 330 and 290 passengers, so 4t increased fixed payload. that raises the differential to almost 11t on a loaded mission


A B789 on a ULH mission would be burning over 6 tons the first few hours and less than 5 tons the last few hours.
A B787-10 flying out on a 8 hour mission will be the same as the first half of a B789's 16 hour mission and hence have a much higher average fuel burn.

The B787-10 works better than the A359 on some short missions, but beyond 9-10 hours, the A359 and the A35J achieve parity and/or superiority.

In EK's case, the B787-10 can cover a lot of routes in Europe and Asia where the stage length is about 6 hours.
But at the same time, they already have the A339 on the way in, and that is already covering that part of the mission range.

At this point, it doesn' t make sense to take in B787-10's, the case for the B789 is also very marginal.
So if they take B787's anyway, it will be a desperate move to get out of the B777X commitment. Then we can also see the A330/A350 order as a desperate move to get out of the A380 commitment and a massive downsizing effort of EK will become apparent.


the 78x will burn roughly the same as the 789 on any mission, plus the fuel needed for the extra approximately 7t it weighs vs the 789 and a small amount for extra surface drag.

at no point did I mention the 350 or 330 series, so I do not know why you quoted me
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13044
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Mon Jul 01, 2019 10:57 pm

I would assume the 777-8 is on the way out with Emirates, maybe all together.

Too heavy & expensive for EK long routes like LAX.

787-9s, A350’s can do the job at (significant) lower costs, risks

Smith said that Boeing is “looking at the timing and demand for the 777-8. the next variant, to see if that still makes sense and do we want to push that out? And how do we want to manage that? So it's kind of managing the whole mix within that portfolio, along with market demand.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan ... 4fc4063e67

Too much plane for everybody?

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
h1fl1er
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 5:58 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Mon Jul 01, 2019 11:06 pm

keesje wrote:
I would assume the 777-8 is on the way out with Emirates, maybe all together.

Too heavy & expensive for EK long routes like LAX.

787-9s, A350’s can do the job at (significant) lower costs, risks

Smith said that Boeing is “looking at the timing and demand for the 777-8. the next variant, to see if that still makes sense and do we want to push that out? And how do we want to manage that? So it's kind of managing the whole mix within that portfolio, along with market demand.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan ... 4fc4063e67

Image


ek hasn't shown any serious interest in the 350 and even when they had to swap 380 cancellations for other airbus jets, pretty resoundingly went with the 339 and just resigned to use those on their more regional routes.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13044
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Mon Jul 01, 2019 11:11 pm

h1fl1er wrote:
keesje wrote:
I would assume the 777-8 is on the way out with Emirates, maybe all together.

Too heavy & expensive for EK long routes like LAX.

787-9s, A350’s can do the job at (significant) lower costs, risks

Smith said that Boeing is “looking at the timing and demand for the 777-8. the next variant, to see if that still makes sense and do we want to push that out? And how do we want to manage that? So it's kind of managing the whole mix within that portfolio, along with market demand.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan ... 4fc4063e67

Image


ek hasn't shown any serious interest in the 350 and even when they had to swap 380 cancellations for other airbus jets, pretty resoundingly went with the 339 and just resigned to use those on their more regional routes.


Are you sure ? :wink2:
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
trex8
Posts: 5327
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Mon Jul 01, 2019 11:58 pm

h1fl1er wrote:
keesje wrote:
I would assume the 777-8 is on the way out with Emirates, maybe all together.

Too heavy & expensive for EK long routes like LAX.

787-9s, A350’s can do the job at (significant) lower costs, risks

Smith said that Boeing is “looking at the timing and demand for the 777-8. the next variant, to see if that still makes sense and do we want to push that out? And how do we want to manage that? So it's kind of managing the whole mix within that portfolio, along with market demand.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan ... 4fc4063e67

Image


ek hasn't shown any serious interest in the 350 and even when they had to swap 380 cancellations for other airbus jets, pretty resoundingly went with the 339 and just resigned to use those on their more regional routes.

30 A359s isnt exactly an insignificant order
https://www.emirates.com/media-centre/e ... -a350-900s
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2450
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 12:30 am

h1fl1er wrote:
keesje wrote:
I would assume the 777-8 is on the way out with Emirates, maybe all together.

Too heavy & expensive for EK long routes like LAX.

787-9s, A350’s can do the job at (significant) lower costs, risks

Smith said that Boeing is “looking at the timing and demand for the 777-8. the next variant, to see if that still makes sense and do we want to push that out? And how do we want to manage that? So it's kind of managing the whole mix within that portfolio, along with market demand.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan ... 4fc4063e67

Image


ek hasn't shown any serious interest in the 350 and even when they had to swap 380 cancellations for other airbus jets, pretty resoundingly went with the 339 and just resigned to use those on their more regional routes.


If 30 orders isn’t ‘serious interest’ then I would really have to question your thought process: the order was placed at the same time as the A330neos.
 
DCA350
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 12:40 am

h1fl1er wrote:
keesje wrote:
I would assume the 777-8 is on the way out with Emirates, maybe all together.

Too heavy & expensive for EK long routes like LAX.

787-9s, A350’s can do the job at (significant) lower costs, risks

Smith said that Boeing is “looking at the timing and demand for the 777-8. the next variant, to see if that still makes sense and do we want to push that out? And how do we want to manage that? So it's kind of managing the whole mix within that portfolio, along with market demand.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan ... 4fc4063e67

Image


ek hasn't shown any serious interest in the 350 and even when they had to swap 380 cancellations for other airbus jets, pretty resoundingly went with the 339 and just resigned to use those on their more regional routes.


An order 30 says otherwise, but EK doesn't have a large appetite for smaller WBs. I'm sure these 30 will be delivered as 280t models and be used as route starters or additional flights to existing routes in the same way they use the 777-200LRs. A339s will be part of the regional fleet assuming they also add 787-10s for that role.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26314
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 12:55 am

keesje wrote:
I would assume the 777-8 is on the way out with Emirates, maybe all together. Too heavy & expensive for EK long routes like LAX.


Routes like LAX was what EK wanted the 777-8 for to begin with. Could be the 777-9's performance projections today are better than they were in 2013 and it could carry an -8's payload on that mission.
 
DylanHarvey
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 2:04 am

MrHMSH wrote:
h1fl1er wrote:
keesje wrote:
I would assume the 777-8 is on the way out with Emirates, maybe all together.

Too heavy & expensive for EK long routes like LAX.

787-9s, A350’s can do the job at (significant) lower costs, risks


https://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan ... 4fc4063e67

Image


ek hasn't shown any serious interest in the 350 and even when they had to swap 380 cancellations for other airbus jets, pretty resoundingly went with the 339 and just resigned to use those on their more regional routes.


If 30 orders isn’t ‘serious interest’ then I would really have to question your thought process: the order was placed at the same time as the A330neos.

This dude also said the A350 could be coming to the end of its life with the proposed 78X MTOW increase. So yea we will question the thought process
 
h1fl1er
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 5:58 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 3:27 am

trex8 wrote:
h1fl1er wrote:
keesje wrote:
I would assume the 777-8 is on the way out with Emirates, maybe all together.

Too heavy & expensive for EK long routes like LAX.

787-9s, A350’s can do the job at (significant) lower costs, risks


https://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan ... 4fc4063e67

Image


ek hasn't shown any serious interest in the 350 and even when they had to swap 380 cancellations for other airbus jets, pretty resoundingly went with the 339 and just resigned to use those on their more regional routes.

30 A359s isnt exactly an insignificant order
https://www.emirates.com/media-centre/e ... -a350-900s


you do understand that this only occurred because the 380 was cancelled, right? and they bought FORTY 339s.

EK would not have ordered any of these frames unless they had deposits they had to deal with. They showed no interest in the 350 and only ordered them (and the 339) due to the 380 situation. It was that or throw the money overboard.

This dude also said the A350 could be coming to the end of its life with the proposed 78X MTOW increase. So yea we will question the thought process


it's going to be even harder to sell than it has been, which is a total sales drought since boeing slashed 787 prices due to cost cuts. I said the 350 was too expensive for what it offered and I got, true to anet form, dog piled on. Then Airbus executives themselves come out and say exactly the same thing and I watch people argue that these execs do not know their own business.

look at the sales numbers...who cares what I say? Look at orders. 5.5 years running of poor sales versus even the 330 Neo. If airbus cannot find massive cost reductions, the jet won't sell.

EK's decision on the 778- look, boieng sold like 50 77Ls. They'll sell about the same number of 78s. an airline wanting to haul massive cargo, which is basically what the L is used for now, over long distances, for ex DL, is a potential customer. But nobody is beating down the door to preorder them. Everyone is in wait and see mode. The 79 offers most of what EK currently uses 7Ws for. There's a place for 78s in their portfolio but they aren't in any hurry, nor is anyone else, to sign on to expensive planes with this much capacity
 
sciing
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:54 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 5:15 am

h1fl1er wrote:
Waterbomber2 wrote:
h1fl1er wrote:

agree this burn is too high for such a sector.

at near MTOW on ULH segments, both QF and UAL have seen 5.4t/hr over 17hrs. granted fuel burns off so if you have fixed payload the avg will go up. this 3000nm segment must be highly loaded to produce a burn that high

in addition, in reply to the previous poster, the 78X's nominal range of 6400nm is at a higher pax count than the 789s. Boeing lists them at 330 and 290 passengers, so 4t increased fixed payload. that raises the differential to almost 11t on a loaded mission


A B789 on a ULH mission would be burning over 6 tons the first few hours and less than 5 tons the last few hours.
A B787-10 flying out on a 8 hour mission will be the same as the first half of a B789's 16 hour mission and hence have a much higher average fuel burn.

The B787-10 works better than the A359 on some short missions, but beyond 9-10 hours, the A359 and the A35J achieve parity and/or superiority.

In EK's case, the B787-10 can cover a lot of routes in Europe and Asia where the stage length is about 6 hours.
But at the same time, they already have the A339 on the way in, and that is already covering that part of the mission range.

At this point, it doesn' t make sense to take in B787-10's, the case for the B789 is also very marginal.
So if they take B787's anyway, it will be a desperate move to get out of the B777X commitment. Then we can also see the A330/A350 order as a desperate move to get out of the A380 commitment and a massive downsizing effort of EK will become apparent.


the 78x will burn roughly the same as the 789 on any mission, plus the fuel needed for the extra approximately 7t it weighs vs the 789 and a small amount for extra surface drag.

You play down the induced drag effects by higher weight but invent new ones!
There is no surface drag, parasitic drag can become smaller by length due better shape effect, lower Cw value.
Everybody know that longer is better.
Higher weight needs more lift, more lift means higher induced drag.
 
User avatar
FrenchPotatoEye
Posts: 205
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2017 1:20 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 5:30 am

Stitch wrote:
keesje wrote:
I would assume the 777-8 is on the way out with Emirates, maybe all together. Too heavy & expensive for EK long routes like LAX.


Routes like LAX was what EK wanted the 777-8 for to begin with. Could be the 777-9's performance projections today are better than they were in 2013 and it could carry an -8's payload on that mission.


Could we extend the same to the 777-8 performance projections being better too if the 9 is looking better also?

Just a thought :)

Does Emirates do ok with freight to LAX with the A380? I would imagine so.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17276
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 6:27 am

DylanHarvey wrote:
This dude also said the A350 could be coming to the end of its life with the proposed 78X MTOW increase. So yea we will question the thought process


Was that the MTOW increase that was announced at Paris?
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13044
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 6:44 am

Well Boeing says they look if the 777-8 still makes sense. That must be based on somethin, EK? Hard to ignore.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6468
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 6:49 am

We've been over this before, but the most plausible reading of Boeing's comments is that they are looking at whether the currently planned timing for the 778 makes sense, not whether the variant as a whole makes sense. If they don't make it eventually they will have no upgrade path for high-utilization cargo operators.
 
CHRISBA35X
Posts: 86
Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:40 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 7:55 am

I could see EK walking away from the 778X as they have a load of 77Ls which have just been refurbished, 779Xs on the way and some very new 77Ws which are very capable too. Between the three, and of course the A380, they have their ULH segment covered nicely. AKL and SCL are possible non-stop, and the only pair I can think of that would require a 778X over the aforementioned types would be MEX non-stop.

Can anyone think of any other city pairs that the 77L cannot do non-stop for them that the 778X can?

MEX, HNL, PPT, CHC, NAN? Latter two I think the 77L can probably do non-stop, former three no.

Of those how many are even remotely likely?
 
User avatar
Kindanew
Posts: 159
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 11:07 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 8:14 am

Unlucky 8. First the A330 now the 777.
 
sibibom
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 7:04 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 8:27 am

Kindanew wrote:
Unlucky 8. First the A330 now the 777.


Not to mention B787-8, B 737-8, A380-800. and A350-800
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13044
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 8:49 am

777-8 orders
- Emirates : 35
- Qatar : 10
- Ethihad :8
That's it, nobody else over the last (booming) 5 years.

If you have A359s on order, SQ flies 20 hour flights with them. QF does PER-LHR with a 787-9, what the usp?

Unless breaking world range records is a company strategy, the 777-8 is more a risk than an assett.

If Emirates takes their A350-900s as a HGW variant, the added value / business case for the 777-8 seem a tough one.

Ethihad is in dire straits & Qatar has a ton of A350's / 789's and it is looking a cost reductions.

I fully understand Boeing's CFO Smith is looking at the timing and demand for the 777-8. the next variant, to see if that still makes sense.

Image

Other topics might be just more imporant at this stage, now the free cash flow days are over: NMA, KC46, MAX, 777-9, Embraer, NSA.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6468
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 9:51 am

We can assume Etihad's orders are done.

Qatar will take delivery of some sort of aircraft for geopolitical reasons, but there's no reason any given aircraft has to be a 777-8 rather than a 777-9 or a 787.

Emirates had been looking at an Americas strategy that went beyond what its 77L fleet or its current fleet of HGW 77Ws could do. But now that they are retrenching it's hard to say what parts of that strategy will survive. MEX is probably not enough by itself to justify the -8, but I suspect they will still want the flexibility. and will eventually take at least 20 frames. The A350 currently on order will be needed as a lower-capacity alternative to the 777 on regular old long-haul flights and won't likely be delivered as ULH frames.

Other wildcards that could influence the future of the 777-8:

- Project Sunrise, of course.
- Southeast Asian airlines with dreams of serving major US markets nonstop, like VN or PR. (Although PR seems to find the A350 sufficient for those needs for now.)
- ET. They recently indicated that they will stick with the A350 in this size class, but they are also very opportunistic and will take the right deal on hot-and-high capable aircraft.
- DL. They are by far the most effective user of the 77L in the world, with their cargo business. At the right price (but it would have to be the right price) a 778 order might be helpful to them. It would have a payload advantage over a HGW A350 on a number of their missions.

But... many other airlines that need to fly these kinds of missions are already doing it, or planning to do it, on A350s.
 
B777LRF
Posts: 2434
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 10:20 am

h1fl1er wrote:
the 78x will burn roughly the same as the 789 on any mission, plus the fuel needed for the extra approximately 7t it weighs vs the 789 and a small amount for extra surface drag.


That will only be the case if the -10 carries the exact same payload as the -9 on that *mission*. And if that is indeed the case, why on earth spend the extra money buying a -10?

If you load both up to x% of their maximum payload capacity of any given flight, the -10 will burn more as it's carrying more payload. Which is a far more realistic view on how the aircraft will be operated, lest you're suggesting the airlines of the world who bought the -10s are all blithering idiots.

The -10 will burn more because it's a bit heavier, a bit bigger and - most importantly of all - because it's carrying a bigger payload. They're clever lads at Boeing (well, some of the time at least) but they can't bend the laws of nature.
Signature. You just read one.
 
B777LRF
Posts: 2434
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 10:27 am

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:
Does Emirates do ok with freight to LAX with the A380? I would imagine so.


They do, but only provided the A380 is followed closely by a 777F :)
Signature. You just read one.
 
StTim
Posts: 3406
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 10:31 am

B777LRF wrote:
h1fl1er wrote:
the 78x will burn roughly the same as the 789 on any mission, plus the fuel needed for the extra approximately 7t it weighs vs the 789 and a small amount for extra surface drag.


That will only be the case if the -10 carries the exact same payload as the -9 on that *mission*. And if that is indeed the case, why on earth spend the extra money buying a -10?

If you load both up to x% of their maximum payload capacity of any given flight, the -10 will burn more as it's carrying more payload. Which is a far more realistic view on how the aircraft will be operated, lest you're suggesting the airlines of the world who bought the -10s are all blithering idiots.

The -10 will burn more because it's a bit heavier, a bit bigger and - most importantly of all - because it's carrying a bigger payload. They're clever lads at Boeing (well, some of the time at least) but they can't bend the laws of nature.


Once you load up the -10 beyond the -9 you must reduce fuel by the same amount as the MTOW of the frames are the same. The -10 trades range for payload.

So you can carry the same load a similar range (slightly less as heavier etc) but a greater payload over a shorter range. I thought this was a given.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 1:20 pm

There will eventually be a -8 for very long haul and freighter purposes IMO.

However I'm not sure why we have to decide today that their will or will not be a -8 in the future.

Airbus had a few A358 orders before they pulled the plug, they just moved the customers to other models.

Boeing had a few 783 orders before they pulled the plug, they just moved the customers to other models.

Airbus has a tiny number of A338 orders, they've built the thing and it's now in flight test.

Either way it goes won't impact the vendor, the airline or the market much if at all.

Seems we're making a mountain out of a mole hill.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
h1fl1er
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 5:58 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 1:21 pm

keesje wrote:
777-8 orders
- Emirates : 35
- Qatar : 10
- Ethihad :8
That's it, nobody else over the last (booming) 5 years.

If you have A359s on order, SQ flies 20 hour flights with them. QF does PER-LHR with a 787-9, what the usp?



SQ isn't doing 20 hour flights.

EK needs payload haul as does DL. QF needs the jets for range and haul on Sunrise. That's about 50. There's no other real market for the 78.

the plane is effectively a more efficient 77L. Same target market.
 
Checklist787
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 1:31 pm

Kindanew wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
Absynth wrote:

Yes they got their priority / timeline wrong with the 777X. The move away from VLAs and the cancellation of the A380neo combined means a much smaller market even for a 777 without competition in the 400+ pax range. Etihad is mostly out, The ME2 are looking for replacing their 777/A380's, which means a slower production ramp / lower volumes which start to kick in 10 years from now. I can see the 777-10X becoming a popular choice to replace the A380's and as a growth path for popular 787 / A350 routes. The 777-8X OTOH has too much competition from the 350.

And about this quote:


Pushing them further into the future makes them essentially a (partial) replacement for the A380's, so I can see those moved further away eventually becoming 10X orders.

The bolded part is something a few people in this thread seem to gloss over but actually is by far the most interesting part of the article. It's clear they want to keep that overall 190 figure, but with those 30 A350's on order, it's clear they are looking to replace their 777-8X orders for 787-9 or -10s. They might up the 777-9X to 120-125 to keep the total value of both orders the same.

But I'm hoping we see the formal announcement of the 10X (and cancellation of the 8X) at Dubai Airshow for something along the line off:
60 777-9X
60 777-10X (at later dates)
60 787-9/10


No, it doesn't make sense. Airlines doesn't need direct A380 replacement. They need to get rid of those excess capacity and replace it with smaller widebodies.

I don't think it would provide any financial benefits for Boeing to build -10X. The -9X is the largest widebody aircraft out here. They have no competitions at all after Airbus kill A380. So it's not like they need to gain the market share when they got 100% rate for it.

Besides, It doesn't seem like Airlines are keen on aircraft larger than -9X anyway. It's not like the -9X sell as well as -300ER.

What I see is Emirates cancelation for all their -8X order, and then reduction for their -9X order which would be converted into combinations of B787-9 and the -10 with higher mtow. But there is no way they would get -10X.



Agreed.

I have no idea why so many are convinced the x-10 will be built. The 8 and 9 are hardly flying off the shelves.


Like when people thought there would be an A350-1100 / -2000. I do not believe in the 777-10XX concept too..

.. Maybe not before 2030
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26314
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 1:40 pm

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:
Could we extend the same to the 777-8 performance projections being better too if the 9 is looking better also?


Yes, but that arguably makes it even more a niche frame with even less market appeal.


FrenchPotatoEye wrote:
Does Emirates do ok with freight to LAX with the A380? I would imagine so.


They should be able to take a pretty fair load - more than the 777-300ER.


keesje wrote:
If you have A359s on order, SQ flies 20 hour flights with them. QF does PER-LHR with a 787-9, what the usp?


SQ does it with 100 less passengers than EK's 777-200LRs and more than that compared to their 777-300ERs, even with blocked seats. It would be close to 200 less seats than a 777-8.


keesje wrote:
Unless breaking world range records is a company strategy, the 777-8 is more a risk than an asset.


They already hold the record with the 777-200LR so...


keesje wrote:
If Emirates takes their A350-900s as a HGW variant, the added value / business case for the 777-8 seem a tough one.


Not really when you consider what EK wanted it for - a 777-300ER load with a 777-200LR range. Even a 280,000kg A350-900 won't get you that.


Mind you, I am on record that EK is likely having second thoughts about the 777-8, but it is not because of the A350-900. Lest we forget, they cancelled A350-900s to order 777-8s back in 2013 and the A350-900 still looked mighty capable then.

I have a feeling EK is liking what they are seeing with the 777-9 and are starting to think they might not need the 777-8 (or are willing to block seats on the 777-9 while still carrying more passengers overall then a 777-8 just as they did with their 777-300ERs vis-a-vis their 777-200LRs).
 
Checklist787
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 1:43 pm

keesje wrote:
h1fl1er wrote:
keesje wrote:
I would assume the 777-8 is on the way out with Emirates, maybe all together.

Too heavy & expensive for EK long routes like LAX.

787-9s, A350’s can do the job at (significant) lower costs, risks


https://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan ... 4fc4063e67

Image


ek hasn't shown any serious interest in the 350 and even when they had to swap 380 cancellations for other airbus jets, pretty resoundingly went with the 339 and just resigned to use those on their more regional routes.


Are you sure ? :wink2:



Unfortunately EK has for years rejected the A350-900 as a lame duck ..

Sorry but that's the story.

;)

Regarding the 777-8X, I think it will depend on the choice of Qantas for his Sunrise project

Not sure Boeing wins this time.. :roll:
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13044
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 2:41 pm

Stitch wrote:

keesje wrote:
Unless breaking world range records is a company strategy, the 777-8 is more a risk than an asset.


They already hold the record with the 777-200LR so...

keesje wrote:
If Emirates takes their A350-900s as a HGW variant, the added value / business case for the 777-8 seem a tough one.


Not really when you consider what EK wanted it for - a 777-300ER load with a 777-200LR range. Even a 280,000kg A350-900 won't get you that.

Mind you, I am on record that EK is likely having second thoughts about the 777-8, but it is not because of the A350-900. Lest we forget, they cancelled A350-900s to order 777-8s back in 2013 and the A350-900 still looked mighty capable then.

I have a feeling EK is liking what they are seeing with the 777-9 and are starting to think they might not need the 777-8 (or are willing to block seats on the 777-9 while still carrying more passengers overall then a 777-8 just as they did with their 777-300ERs vis-a-vis their 777-200LRs).


I know,
- Airbus had to trash the A350-800 because it was destroyed in the market by the 787-9.
- Boeing might have the opportunity to skip the great 777-8, because the 777-9 is so much better
than expected, airlines want to upgrade at any cost :cloudnine:

:rotfl:

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3719
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Emirates renegotiating 777X order

Tue Jul 02, 2019 3:51 pm

Stitch wrote:
FrenchPotatoEye wrote:
Could we extend the same to the 777-8 performance projections being better too if the 9 is looking better also?

Yes, but that arguably makes it even more a niche frame with even less market appeal.


Or increase it's appeal by carrying more payload at extreme range.
At what range would it carry more payload than 779? I'd guess that a fairly limited market.
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 16

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