Air Greenland has ordered an A330-800!

https://check-in.dk/airbus-a330neo-til- ... S9NNMaXkS8



From the sounds of it, they are purchasing and not leasing it. It will replace the existing A330-200.

Wouldn’t surprise me if they took the -800 currently being used for testing/certification.

Lol, a single A330-800.

This will boost the program for sure.

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

PepeTheFrog wrote:

Lol, a single A330-800.

This will boost the program for sure.

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

A sale is a sale? Don't think what there is to "lol" about. The NEO program continues its steady course.

PepeTheFrog wrote:

Lol, a single A330-800.

This will boost the program for sure.

Well, one more order is nice, especially with that variant.

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

Since it isn't remotely the first A330neo build I don't see why it should be especially cheap, beyond discount for the hours already flown. It's not like it's a prototype hauling 80 pax worth of excess weight, likely it is one that has no differences to later build ones... and Airbus is going to keep one neo around as test plattform in any case.
And the article says they get it in a few years.....

Best regards
Thomas

PepeTheFrog wrote:

Lol, a single A330-800.

This will boost the program for sure.

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

It will for sure boost the program: one more customer, one more frame sold, uplifts the program (even so slightly) and overall makes it more less orphan and more attractive to future potential customers.

PepeTheFrog wrote:

Lol, a single A330-800.

This will boost the program for sure.

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

Did you expect them to take 25 A330neos to replace the single A330-200 in their fleet ?

PepeTheFrog wrote:

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

How many A330-800 flight test vehicles are there?

I'd reckon Airbus would want to keep at least one for any future MRTT or dedicated freighter based on the 330neo.

PepeTheFrog wrote:

Lol, a single A330-800.

This will boost the program for sure.

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

the 200 is too good to be replaced yet, when its time 800 will sell in masses or airlines might purchase the airplane you are designing

Amiga500 wrote:

PepeTheFrog wrote:

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

How many A330-800 flight test vehicles are there?

I'd reckon Airbus would want to keep at least one for any future MRTT or dedicated freighter based on the 330neo.

There's only one A330-800 test aircraft.

The Airbus A330-800 test and certification programme began on 6 November and will involve a single aircraft and up to 350h of flight-trials.

https://www.flightglobal.com/programmes/airbus-details-plan-for-a330-800s-350h-flight-test-programme/130199.article

Amiga500 wrote:

PepeTheFrog wrote:

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

How many A330-800 flight test vehicles are there?

I'd reckon Airbus would want to keep at least one for any future MRTT or dedicated freighter based on the 330neo.

There's 1 Flight Test /Prototype 330-800

Was the A300-200 the aircraft used in the movie "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty"?

HIA350 wrote:

the 200 is too good to be replaced yet

It's getting on towards 22 years old and will be older when they eventually get their -800. I think the existing frame is leased.

One less order for the 787 programme, airbus would see it as a small win.

Amiga500 wrote:

PepeTheFrog wrote:

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

How many A330-800 flight test vehicles are there?

I'd reckon Airbus would want to keep at least one for any future MRTT or dedicated freighter based on the 330neo.

I doubt they would convert any future MRTT or dedicated freighter from a test pax A338 and use that for testing. They would just use the first one they build like with the A332F or current MRTT.

I’m not sure why Airbus would want to keep the A338neo, they still have the A339neo for testing general A330neo improvements.

So, they’re not behind the UFO order for 40 after all....

Seriously though, I like the all red livery. Hope they keep it, won’t replace with the umpteenth IB, EI, SU etc eurowhite and colored tail variant

canyonblue17 wrote:

Was the A300-200 the aircraft used in the movie "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty"?

Beautiful colors! In the movie there were not so many passengers

scbriml wrote:

It's getting on towards 22 years old and will be older when they eventually get their -800. I think the existing frame is leased.

Would GL also take their A338 from KU's batch of eight, like UR as rumored? I wonder who would disclose an A338 order next.

Polot wrote:

I doubt they would convert any future MRTT or dedicated freighter from a test pax A338 and use that for testing. They would just use the first one they build like with the A332F or current MRTT.

I’m not sure why Airbus would want to keep the A338neo, they still have the A339neo for testing general A330neo improvements.

There was a photo on here before showing the prototype A338 interior with test instrumentation. It isn't as if that frame was purposely configured for a particular mission. I imagine they would want the A338 test frame to establish how exactly it would handle for the very specialized MRTT role.

frigatebird wrote:

Seriously though, I like the all red livery. Hope they keep it, won’t replace with the umpteenth IB, EI, SU etc eurowhite and colored tail variant

For a carrier named Air Greenland, the all-red scheme seems quite contradictory. Besides, it goes against the current "green" mantra.

So, does that give Airbus 100% of the widebody market so far in 2020?

One more A330-800 means one less 787-8.

Congrats Airbus and Air Greenland!

I know they need space for cargo but wouldn't have been better to buy second hand or to buy 2 or 3 A321

Devilfish wrote:

For a carrier named Air Greenland, the all-red scheme seems quite contradictory. Besides, it goes against the current "green" mantra.

The red has been the livery for Air Greenland for quite a while. The flag of Greenland is red and white.

PM wrote:

So, does that give Airbus 100% of the widebody market so far in 2020?

If you ask me for a straight answer, then I should say that as far as we can see, looking at it, by and large, taking one time with another in terms of the average of announcements, then in the final analysis, it is probably true to say that at the end of the day in general terms, you’d probably find that, not to put too fine a point on it, there wasn’t probably much weight in it in one way or the other (as far as one can see at this stage).

zeke wrote:

PM wrote:

So, does that give Airbus 100% of the widebody market so far in 2020?

If you ask me for a straight answer, then I should say that as far as we can see, looking at it, by and large, taking one time with another in terms of the average of announcements, then in the final analysis, it is probably true to say that at the end of the day in general terms, you’d probably find that, not to put too fine a point on it, there wasn’t probably much weight in it in one way or the other (as far as one can see at this stage).

Very droll

Nice, with the A330-800 they will get the cargo capacities (as prior with the A330-200) and this greener as prior. And they will get the chance for more tourism to fill the jet; also the A330-800 has not so many seats. A321 Xlr will not work, the cargo capacity is for them essential.

Polot wrote:

Wouldn’t surprise me if they took the -800 currently being used for testing/certification.

I agree with you, otherwise I don't think they'd be getting it as soon as next year if they are buying it outright. If they are leasing one in then it may not be the case.
Either way a great choice for Air Greenland and it will serve them well.

HIA350 wrote:

PepeTheFrog wrote:

Lol, a single A330-800.

This will boost the program for sure.

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

the 200 is too good to be replaced yet, when its time 800 will sell in masses or airlines might purchase the airplane you are designing

I Agree 100% with this staement. I think with the A330-800's it's very much a case of watch this space. Remember what a slow burn the A330 programme was when it first came out in the mid 90's?

mjoelnir wrote:

Devilfish wrote:

For a carrier named Air Greenland, the all-red scheme seems quite contradictory. Besides, it goes against the current "green" mantra.

The red has been the livery for Air Greenland for quite a while. The flag of Greenland is red and white.

No doubt goes back to the early settlers in Greenland led by Viking explorer, Erik the Red. The red also makes the aircraft highly visible against a largely arctic tundra should the worst happen and one go down. I believe Northwest Orient's tails were painted red for similar visibility reasons.

gatibosgru wrote:

PepeTheFrog wrote:

Lol, a single A330-800.

This will boost the program for sure.

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

A sale is a sale? Don't think what there is to "lol" about. The NEO program continues its steady course.

First thing I learned in business is that it's better to have no sales than to have too few sales.

Great decision and wonderful livery.
Am a bit surprised that they didn't go for the 321neo though but definitely prefer the 338

Swadian wrote:

First thing I learned in business is that it's better to have no sales than to have too few sales.

That's an interesting hypothesis where does that come from?

I was always amazed they even needed that many seats! But that is one hot livery .... love that!

LH748 wrote:

Great decision and wonderful livery.
Am a bit surprised that they didn't go for the 321neo though but definitely prefer the 338

Population in Greenland is just 56.000. Air Greenland has now only two international routes, one to Denmark and one to Iceland. There is just no demand for more than one jet for international routes. For 58.000 neither UPS or FedEx or Amazon will regular send an cargo jet to Greenland, just not enough cargo.
This is the reason, why they have ordered a small A330-800 (and not a -900). for PAX service, possibly one or two A321 Neo would be more than enough, but they additional essential need the cargo capacity of the A330 family, to regular/daily transport their limited but essential demand of cargo together with the PAX.

Greenland is now building two new international airports, so we will see, if Air Greenland will additional to their one A330-800 and their few turboprops and helicopters will order some additional jets. Greenland is hoping for some more tourists, especially with the climate change is getting again a Green Land. And I have to say, perhaps I am interested to visit once Greenland and/or Iceland so....

LH748 wrote:

Great decision and wonderful livery.
Am a bit surprised that they didn't go for the 321neo though but definitely prefer the 338

The A321Neo have never been a true candidate for them. It was either a 788, 338 or a used A330-200/-300. They need the cargo capacity. If they had ordered an A321 or 7M9 they would need 3-4 aircraft to satisfy the demand. That however would need a lot more crew, a lot more maintainance, re-training the current crews etc. things that GL wouldn't be able to afford. Also in the low season for passengers they still need the cargo, that would mean that 2-3 A321's would need to fly pretty much with cargo only.

This a horribly far-fetched idea, but what if they go a 747-400M or got a 777 with a side cargo door?

Love it in that livery! It'd be great to see the prototype aircraft have a long service life.

scbriml wrote:

HIA350 wrote:

the 200 is too good to be replaced yet

It's getting on towards 22 years old and will be older when they eventually get their -800. I think the existing frame is leased.

He means in general.

They'll have to get a move on with the expansion of Nuuk (and another couple of airport expansion / replacements planned).

opticalilyushin wrote:

They'll have to get a move on with the expansion of Nuuk (and another couple of airport expansion / replacements planned).

The two new international airports in Nuuk and Ilulissat are scheduled to open in Autumn 2023. Can't be done that much faster.

PM wrote:

So, does that give Airbus 100% of the widebody market so far in 2020?

Well considering it’s only the 2nd week in 2020, give it time

An interesting sale.

As noted, no sales are better than few sales as resources are better spent elsewhere. I do think the A338F and tankers will sell.

Widebodies have a 2022/2023 deficit in general. I believe the market is over sold.

Actively competing:
779 (778 less so, I do expect a 778F) at most 60/yr
A35K/A359 at 105/yr
787-10/9 (-8 is nearly done) at 144 yr
A339 (-8 will be limited demand) at ~50/yr for all A330

So 299+777 production, or 330 to 350 widebodies per year.

I see demand for 300 to 320, so tough years ahead.

Polot wrote:

Amiga500 wrote:

PepeTheFrog wrote:

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

How many A330-800 flight test vehicles are there?

I'd reckon Airbus would want to keep at least one for any future MRTT or dedicated freighter based on the 330neo.

I doubt they would convert any future MRTT or dedicated freighter from a test pax A338 and use that for testing. They would just use the first one they build like with the A332F or current MRTT.

I’m not sure why Airbus would want to keep the A338neo, they still have the A339neo for testing general A330neo improvements.

Airframers do not want to keep prototypes as that is an expense. Usually the first won't sell, so it must be expensed.

No airline wants a test article at new pricing as it is a used aircraft with some added weight. But for the right price, it sells.

PM wrote:

So, does that give Airbus 100% of the widebody market so far in 2020?

Well played. True, but a small truth.

Lightsaber

Swadian wrote:

gatibosgru wrote:

PepeTheFrog wrote:

Lol, a single A330-800.

This will boost the program for sure.

The first prototype would be a nice and cheap candidate.

A sale is a sale? Don't think what there is to "lol" about. The NEO program continues its steady course.

First thing I learned in business is that it's better to have no sales than to have too few sales.

Sounds successful.

lightsaber wrote:

An interesting sale.

As noted, no sales are better than few sales as resources are better spent elsewhere. I do think the A338F and tankers will sell.

Widebodies have a 2022/2023 deficit in general. I believe the market is over sold.

Actively competing:
779 (778 less so, I do expect a 778F) at most 60/yr
A35K/A359 at 105/yr
787-10/9 (-8 is nearly done) at 144 yr
A339 (-8 will be limited demand) at ~50/yr for all A330

So 299+777 production, or 330 to 350 widebodies per year.

I see demand for 300 to 320, so tough years ahead.

Polot wrote:

Amiga500 wrote:

How many A330-800 flight test vehicles are there?

I'd reckon Airbus would want to keep at least one for any future MRTT or dedicated freighter based on the 330neo.

I doubt they would convert any future MRTT or dedicated freighter from a test pax A338 and use that for testing. They would just use the first one they build like with the A332F or current MRTT.

I’m not sure why Airbus would want to keep the A338neo, they still have the A339neo for testing general A330neo improvements.

Airframers do not want to keep prototypes as that is an expense. Usually the first won't sell, so it must be expensed.

No airline wants a test article at new pricing as it is a used aircraft with some added weight. But for the right price, it sells.

PM wrote:

So, does that give Airbus 100% of the widebody market so far in 2020?

Well played. True, but a small truth.

Lightsaber

In regards to prototypes there is a huge difference between Boeing and Airbus.

Airbus just books the cost to produce the prototype on development cost, so a sale does only bring in the reduced sales price, sometimes the refurbishing cost and the downside of not selling a spanking new frame are just not worth it.

The program for cost accounting, allows Boeing to handle a prototype that is sold like a production frame. The cost to produce it is not written to development cost, but deferred as an early production cost. So Boeing will sell a frame that is more expensive to refurbish, than the sale brings in. It allows them to defer a billion and some change down the line.
The two 787 prototypes that could not be sold, had to be written off and booked to development cost, to the tune of around 2.5 billion USD. It would have much nicer to be able to defer those billions.

For the right price, could this be a candidate for replacement frames for Delta 763? Especially if Boeing delays or abandons NMA project.

Airbus could offer a deal too good to pass up.

global1 wrote:

For the right price, could this be a candidate for replacement frames for Delta 763?

Not likely, as it's significantly larger/heavier.... and if that's going to be taken, they may as well get a -900 and have the extra seats at almost no cost, seeing as they wouldn't need the -800's range for anything they fly within that seating category.

dstblj52 wrote:

Swadian wrote:

First thing I learned in business is that it's better to have no sales than to have too few sales.

That's an interesting hypothesis where does that come from?

As with many things in business there are different ways to achieve similar outcomes. Instead of not selling your product you can also adopt the modern practice of having lots of sales, producing them until your storage capacity is at maximum capacity, and then not delivering them to the end customer.

fessor wrote:

I know they need space for cargo but wouldn't have been better to buy second hand or to buy 2 or 3 A321

GL usually haul around 20 to 25 tons of cargo on every single flight between CPH and SFJ. You'd need a fleet of 5 or more A321s to do the same, and would still leave a considerable amount of cargo behind that's too big to fit. So, no, in no conceivable way would a fleet of A321s be able to replace a single A330.

That's not to say a small fleet of A320/A321 could not be operated alongside the A330 when the new airports open. I very much expect them to place such an order, which would allow them to offer direct flights to the places where people actually wish to go (SFJ is basically an airport and nothing more, nearly 100% of all pax and cargo transfer from there onto smaller DHC-8 or helicopters for onward to final destination) and would enable Greenland to further expand on its tourists ambitions. But the A330 will continue to play a major role as a big passenger/cargo hauler.

LAX772LR wrote:

global1 wrote:

For the right price, could this be a candidate for replacement frames for Delta 763?

Not likely, as it's significantly larger/heavier.... and if that's going to be taken, they may as well get a -900 and have the extra seats at almost no cost, seeing as they wouldn't need the -800's range for anything they fly within that seating category.

With the same load the -800 will have less trip cost, so if you do not have the extra passengers, why fly empty seats. The -800 starts out 5 t lighter.

mjoelnir wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

global1 wrote:

For the right price, could this be a candidate for replacement frames for Delta 763?

Not likely, as it's significantly larger/heavier.... and if that's going to be taken, they may as well get a -900 and have the extra seats at almost no cost, seeing as they wouldn't need the -800's range for anything they fly within that seating category.

With the same load the -800 will have less trip cost, so if you do not have the extra passengers, why fly empty seats. The -800 starts out 5 t lighter.

Because in real-world scenarios, you're not going to see that stark of a contrast.
If you did, then this model wouldn't sell so terribly even relative to its slow-selling longer sibling.

I mean, it's not like we haven't seen that play out in almost every single-stretch widebody versus its smaller variant, for the past half-century or so.

B777LRF wrote:

fessor wrote:

I know they need space for cargo but wouldn't have been better to buy second hand or to buy 2 or 3 A321

GL usually haul around 20 to 25 tons of cargo on every single flight between CPH and SFJ. You'd need a fleet of 5 or more A321s to do the same, and would still leave a considerable amount of cargo behind that's too big to fit. So, no, in no conceivable way would a fleet of A321s be able to replace a single A330.

That's not to say a small fleet of A320/A321 could not be operated alongside the A330 when the new airports open. I very much expect them to place such an order, which would allow them to offer direct flights to the places where people actually wish to go (SFJ is basically an airport and nothing more, nearly 100% of all pax and cargo transfer from there onto smaller DHC-8 or helicopters for onward to final destination) and would enable Greenland to further expand on its tourists ambitions. But the A330 will continue to play a major role as a big passenger/cargo hauler.

I always wondered if the A321P2F would be an option for them, or do you mean some of the cargo carried is physically too large to fit on a cargo narrowbody?

When SFJ closes I guess the new A330 will split it's time flying directly from CPH to both GOH and JAV?